Motivated reasoning, fast and slow

Abstract

Are people more likely to (mis)interpret information so that it aligns with their ideological identity when relying on feelings compared to when engaging in analytical thinking? Or is it the other way around: Does deliberation increase the propensity to (mis)interpret information to confirm existing political views? In a behavioral experiment, participants (n = 1207, Swedish sample) assessed numerical information concerning the effects of gender quotas and immigration either under time pressure or under no time pressure. To measure trait differences in cognitive sophistication, we also collected data on numeric ability. We found clear evidence of motivated reasoning when assessing both the effects of gender quotas on companies’ financial results and the effect of refugee intake on crime rates. Subjects who prioritized equality over liberty on the labor market were 13 percentage points less likely to correctly assess numerical information depicting that companies that used gender quotas when hiring made less profit. Subjects who classified themselves as ‘Swedes’ rather than ‘World citizens’ were 14 percentage points less likely to correctly assess numerical information depicting that crime rates decreased following immigration. Time pressure did not affect the likelihood to engage in motivated reasoning, while subjects with higher numeric ability were less likely to engage in motivated reasoning when analyzing information concerning refugee intake, but more likely to engage in motivated reasoning when analyzing information regarding the effect of gender quotas. Together these results indicate that motivated reasoning is primarily driven by individual differences in analytical thinking at the trait level and not by situational factors such as time pressure, and that whether motivated reasoning is primarily driven by analysis or feelings depends on the topic at hand.

A framework for understanding reasoning errors: From fake news to climate change and beyond

“…This experiment revealed that deliberation did not increase political polarization (i.e., disagreement between Democrats and Republicans, Bago et al, 2020; for further evidence indicating that deliberation manipulations do not increase motivated reasoning, see Strömbäck et al, 2021). Instead, deliberation increased overall accuracy (i.e., agreement with pro-climate change arguments) (Bago et al, 2020b).…”

COVID-19 and Politically Motivated Reasoning

“…Previous studies have argued that the effect of politically motivated reasoning is exacerbated by cognitive sophistication and numeric ability, as people with high reasoning capacity will use that capacity selectively to process information in a manner that protects their own valued beliefs. 27 A recent preregistered replication did, however, fail to find evidence in support of this pattern. 43 Moreover, engagement in conspiracy theories has also been linked to motivated reasoning.…”

“…19 The cognitive route to motivated reasoning can broadly be conceptualized as either motivated reasoning as analysis or motivated reasoning as feeling. 26,27 Motivated reasoning as analysis refers to the idea that identity-protective cognition is primarily driven by analytical, system 2 processing, in which people with a high cognitive ability are better equipped to reason their way around information that threatens valued beliefs. On the contrary, motivated reasoning as feelings refers to the idea that identity-protective cognition is primarily driven by intuitive, system 1 processing, in which people base their assessment of information on emotional cues to feel good.…”

Motivated Cognition in Cooperation

“…Specifically, it has been argued that young children could benefit from motivated cognition because it maintains their motivation while learning despite initial failures (Habicht et al, 2021). This adaptive function of motivated cognition might also explain why some studies have found that higher cognitive abilities go along with a higher, not lower, propensity to display biased belief updating (Da Silva et al, 2019;Kahan, 2012;Kahan et al, 2012;Knobloch-Westerwick et al, 2020;Saunders, 2017;Strömbäck et al, 2021;Szebeni et al, 2021). However, others who tested this link between cognitive abilities and motivated cognition found no evidence of this relationship (Fischer et al, 2022;Pennycook, 2022;Pennycook & Rand, 2019).…”

“…Motivated cognition may be influenced by a variety of individual and situational factors or an interaction thereof. For example, characteristics of the situation may interact with prior beliefs and influence processing ( Caddick & Feist, 2021 ; Enke et al, 2021 ; Golman & Loewenstein, 2018 ; Jain & Maheswaran, 2000 ; Kahan et al, 2012 ; Strömbäck et al, 2021 ). The resulting motivated beliefs then feed into decision-making, but might trigger subsequent distorted information search, adding to the cognitive processes.…”