The Motivated Processing of Political Arguments

Taber, Charles S.; Cann, Damon M.; Kucsova, Simona

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1274028

Cited by 73 publications

(112 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

105

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In an effort to determine if people engaged in motivated reasoning and if there was evidence of counter arguing, participants rated the effectiveness of arguments (See Taber et al 2009). Participants were asked ''How effective or ineffective did you find the main argument in favor of…(and the argument opposed to…)'' from (1 very ineffective) to 7 (very effective).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although tested in different ways, partisan motivated reasoning is often evident in analyses of how people process and respond to information in the presence or absence of party endorsements (Bolsen et al 2014;Druckman et al 2013). 2 While much attention is given to individual-level variables that condition the effects of motivations (Arceneaux and Wielen 2013;Lavine et al 2012;Taber and Lodge 2006;Taber et al 2009), research also highlights the moderating role of political contexts. It has been argued that a salient feature of the contemporary American political landscape-elite partisan polarization-alters the influence of partisanship in preference formation in the mass public in at least two ways.…”

Section: Partisan Motivated Reasoning and Elite Polarizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To assess whether people engage in motivated reasoning and reveal evidence of counter-arguing and disconfirmation bias, respondents rated the effectiveness of arguments in favor and opposed to each proposal (see Taber et al 2009). When motivations pull in the same direction (traditional endorsements), people should rate their party's argument as more effective than baseline conditions, and this should be accentuated by high polarization and issue importance.…”

Section: Additional Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Partisanship and Preference Formation: Competing Motivations, Elite Polarization, and Issue Importance

Mullinix

2015

Polit Behav

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An enduring and increasingly acute concern-in an age of polarized parties-is that people's partisan attachments distort preference formation at the expense of relevant information. For example, research suggests that a Democrat may support a policy proposed by Democrats, but oppose the same policy if proposed by Republicans. However, a related body of literature suggests that how people respond to information and form preferences is distorted by their prior issue attitudes. In neither instance is information even-handedly evaluated, rather, it is interpreted in light of partisanship or existing issue opinions. Both effects are well documented in isolation, but in most political scenarios individuals consider both partisanship and prior opinions-yet, these dynamics may or may not pull toward the same preference. Using nationally representative experiments focused on tax and education policies, I introduce and test a theory that isolates when: partisanship dominates preference formation, partisanship and issue opinions reinforce or offset each other, and issue attitudes trump partisanship. The findings make clear that the public does not blindly follow party elites. Depending on elite positions, the level of partisan polarization, and personal importance of issues, the public can be attentive to information and shirk the influence of party elites. The results have broad implications for political parties and citizen competence in contemporary democratic politics.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Partisan Motivated Reasoning and Elite Polarizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Additional Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Partisanship and Preference Formation: Competing Motivations, Elite Polarization, and Issue Importance

Mullinix

2015

Polit Behav

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…''Disconfirmation bias,'' in a similar vein, occurs when people cannot discount their original beliefs when evaluating policies. This has been found to occur across policy areas, and even when individuals are knowledgeable about the policies to begin with (Taber et al 2009). …”

Section: Motivated Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

In the Eye of the Beholder? Motivated Reasoning in Disputed Elections

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study uses an experimental design to simulate the ballot counting process during a hand-recount after a disputed election. Applying psychological theories of motivated reasoning to the political process, we find that ballot counters' party identification conditionally influences their ballot counting decisions. Party identification's effect on motivated reasoning is greater when ballot counters are given ambiguous, versus specific, instructions for determining voter intent. This study's findings have major implications for ballot counting procedures throughout the United States and for the use of motivated reasoning in the political science literature.

show abstract

“…7 However, for further development of the model in yet to be published papers, seeTaber et al (2009). Also, seeBraman and Nelson (2007), which was published after 2006, the cut-off year in our content analysis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Unmet Potential of Interdisciplinary Research: Political Psychological Approaches to Voting and Public Opinion

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since its founding, political science has embraced interdisciplinary research. Yet there exist few, if any, systematic assessments of the success of these endeavors. We assess what is often seen as a paradigm of interdisciplinary collaboration: political psychological research on voting and public opinion. Surprisingly, we find little evidence of true interdisciplinary work; instead, we uncover misused concepts and scant evidence of conceptual or disciplinary integration. We conclude with suggestions for how to improve interdisciplinary research on voting and public opinion, and more generally.Keywords Interdisciplinary research Á Voting Á Public opinion Á Political psychology Interdisciplinary thinking is rapidly becoming an integral feature of research as a result of… the inherent complexity of nature and society, the desire to explore problems and questions that are not confined to as single discipline, the need to solve societal problems, and the power of new technologies (Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research 2005, p. 2).

show abstract

The Motivated Processing of Political Arguments

Cited by 73 publications

References 20 publications

Partisanship and Preference Formation: Competing Motivations, Elite Polarization, and Issue Importance

Partisanship and Preference Formation: Competing Motivations, Elite Polarization, and Issue Importance

In the Eye of the Beholder? Motivated Reasoning in Disputed Elections

The Unmet Potential of Interdisciplinary Research: Political Psychological Approaches to Voting and Public Opinion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About