Thinking clearly about causal inferences of politically motivated reasoning: why paradigmatic study designs often undermine causal inference

Tappin, Ben M; Pennycook, Gordon; Rand, David G.

doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.01.003

Cited by 107 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is consistent with recent research showing that engagement with conservative media in the U.S. (and Fox News, in particular) is associated with reduced physical distancing (Gollwitzer et al, 2020;Simonov et al, 2020). If partisans engage with different media sources, it is possible that polarization is not a result of identity-protective cognition per se, but rather differential exposure to different messaging about COVID-19 (for further discussion of the confounded nature of group difference comparisons in the context of partisan bias, see Druckman & McGrath, 2019;Tappin et al, 2020c). However, it is important to note that our media trust analyses were exploratory and it is difficult to disentangle partisanship from media trust in a highly fractured political information environment such as the United States.…”

Section: Evaluating the Evidence For Identity-protective Cognitionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Beliefs about COVID-19 in Canada, the U.K., and the U.S.A.: A novel test of political polarization and motivated reasoning

Pennycook¹,

McPhetres²,

Bagó³

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic has become more political in the U.S.A. than in similar Western countries, allowing for a novel test of attitude polarization. Furthermore, past work disagrees about the role of cognitive sophistication (relative to ideology) in the formation of science beliefs. We therefore investigated the roles of political ideology and cognitive sophistication in explaining COVID-19 attitudes across the U.S.A. (N=689), the U.K. (N=642), and Canada (N=644). Polarization was greater in the U.S. than in the U.K., but not Canada. Furthermore, in all three countries, cognitive sophistication correlated negatively with misperceptions – and in fact was a stronger predictor than political ideology. We also found no evidence that cognitive sophistication was associated with increased polarization, contrary to identity-protective cognition accounts of motivated reasoning. Thus, although there is some evidence for political polarization, accurate beliefs about COVID-19 were broadly associated with the quality of one’s reasoning regardless of political polarization.

show abstract

Section: Evaluating the Evidence For Identity-protective Cognitionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Beliefs about COVID-19 in Canada, the U.K., and the U.S.A.: A novel test of political polarization and motivated reasoning

Pennycook¹,

McPhetres²,

Bagó³

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The second goal was to provide a more direct test of several hypotheses concerning the role of motivated reasoning in people's opinions. Although motivated reasoning is a frequent explanation for partisan differences in people's beliefs about climate change (and other salient issues) (Kahan, 2017a(Kahan, , 2017b, the evidence for such reasoning is often indirect and inferred rather than conclusively demonstrated (Druckman & McGrath, 2019;Tappin, Pennycook, & Rand, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When and How Different Motives Can Drive Motivated Political Reasoning

Bayes¹,

Druckman²,

Goods³

et al. 2020

Political Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is commonly assumed that the effectiveness of political messages depends on people's motivations. Yet, studies of politically motivated reasoning typically only consider what partisans generally might want to believe and do not separately examine the different types of motives that likely underlie these wants. The present research explores the roles of distinct types of motives in politically motivated thinking and identifies the conditions under which motivated reasoners are persuaded by political messages. Results of an experiment with a large, representative sample of Republicans show that manipulations inducing motivations for either (1) forming accurate impressions, (2) affirming moral values, or (3) affirming group identity each increased beliefs in and intentions to combat human‐induced climate change, but only when also paired with political messages that are congruent with the induced motivation. We also find no evidence of a backlash effect even when individuals are provided with clearly uncongenial information and a motivation to reject it. Overall, our findings make clear that understanding when and why motivated political reasoning occurs requires a more complete understanding of both which motivations might be active among a group of partisans and how these motivations resonate with the messaging they receive.

show abstract

“…Information processing is moreover influenced by the extent to which a message is perceived to be compatible with one's pre-existing attitudes toward the object. Arguments incompatible with one's prior attitudes are judged to be weaker and interpreted in a way that allows decision makers to keep their prior position [33,34,38]. This process can render individuals insensitive to new information and even increase the belief divide among partisans [32,39].…”

Section: The Impact Of Political Ideology On Information Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ideology as Filter: Motivated Information Processing and Decision-Making in the Energy Domain

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The transition towards more renewable energy will substantially increase voters’ involvement in the political decision-making process in the energy domain. Decisions such as whether to approve or reject large-scale energy programs can be complex, especially when available information cues are numerous and conflicting. Here, we hypothesize that political ideology is a strong determinant in this process, serving as a filter that voters apply when evaluating the relevance of provided information cues. We tested this hypothesis in the context of the 2017 Public Vote on the Swiss Energy Act. A sample of n = 931 Swiss voters were presented with arguments in favor or against the Energy Act, which were framed in terms of values found to be relevant for liberal and conservative ideologies, respectively. Political ideology strongly determined individual attitudes and voting preferences. Political ideology moreover moderated the influence of information provision on decisions, in that arguments congruent with voters’ political ideology were more likely to be evaluated as personally relevant and integrated into their decisions. We discuss the implications of our findings for measures on how to address ideology-based decision-making in order to ensure a well-informed electorate.

show abstract

Thinking clearly about causal inferences of politically motivated reasoning: why paradigmatic study designs often undermine causal inference

Abstract: This article is a pre-proof version of the article published in Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences.

Cited by 107 publications

References 51 publications

Beliefs about COVID-19 in Canada, the U.K., and the U.S.A.: A novel test of political polarization and motivated reasoning

Beliefs about COVID-19 in Canada, the U.K., and the U.S.A.: A novel test of political polarization and motivated reasoning

When and How Different Motives Can Drive Motivated Political Reasoning

Ideology as Filter: Motivated Information Processing and Decision-Making in the Energy Domain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About