scholarly journals Passionately motivated reasoning: Biased processing of passion‐threatening messages

2018 ◽  
Vol 87 (3) ◽  
pp. 518-531
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. I. Schellenberg ◽  
Daniel S. Bailis
Keyword(s):  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Biased Processing

scholarly journals Passionately Motivated Reasoning: Biased Processing of Passion-Threatening Messages

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. I. Schellenberg ◽  
Daniel Seth Bailis
Keyword(s):  
Defensive Behavior ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Sense Of Control ◽  
Total N ◽  
Harmonious Passion ◽  
Obsessive Passion ◽  
Dualistic Model Of Passion ◽  
Defensive Responses ◽  
Biased Processing ◽  
And Control

Objective: When facing setbacks and obstacles, the dualistic model of passion outlines that obsessive passion, and not harmonious passion, will predict greater levels of defensiveness (Vallerand, 2015). Our aim was to determine if these passion dimensions predicted defensiveness in the same way when confronted with threatening messages targeting the decision to pursue a passion.Method: Across four studies with passionate Facebook users, hockey fans, and runners (total N = 763), participants viewed messages giving reasons why their favorite activity should not be pursued. Participants either reported their desire to read the messages (Studies 1 and 2) or evaluated the messages after reading them (Studies 3 and 4).Results: Harmonious passion consistently predicted higher levels of avoidance or negative evaluations of the messages. These responses were attenuated for participants who had previously affirmed an important value (Study 1), or who were told that they do not control the passions they pursue (Study 4).Conclusions: Harmonious passion entails a sense of autonomy and control over activity engagement, which usually leads to non-defensive behavior. However, this sense of control may elicit more defensive responses from more harmoniously passionate individuals when the decision itself to pursue an activity is under attack.

Objective Versus Biased Processing: Consequences for Attitude Strength

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derek D. Rucker ◽  
Richard E. Petty
Keyword(s):  
Attitude Strength ◽  
Biased Processing

GEOSCIENCE EDUCATION AND MOTIVATED REASONING: LEARNING ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nan Crystal Arens ◽  
◽  
Emily Fisher
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Geoscience Education

The Motivational Power of Moral Beliefs

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua May
Keyword(s):  
Moral Identity ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Difficult Case ◽  
Moral Integrity ◽  
Normative Judgment ◽  
Moral Beliefs ◽  
Moral Hypocrisy ◽  
Moral Licensing ◽  
Self Interest

Even if we can rise above self-interest, we may just be slaves of our passions. But the motivational power of reason, via moral beliefs, has been understated, even in the difficult case of temptation. Experiments show that often when we succumb, it is due in part to a change in moral (or normative) judgment. We can see this by carefully examining a range of experiments on motivated reasoning, moral licensing, moral hypocrisy, and moral identity. Rationalization, perhaps paradoxically, reveals a deep regard for reason, to act in ways we can justify to ourselves and to others. The result is that we are very often morally motivated or exhibit moral integrity. Even when behaving badly, actions that often seem motivated by self-interest are actually ultimately driven by a concern to do what’s right.

scholarly journals Redistribution Preferences, Inequality Information, and Partisan Motivated Reasoning in the United States

Societies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 65
Author(s):  
Clem Brooks ◽  
Elijah Harter
Keyword(s):  
Party Identification ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
The United States ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Historical Time ◽  
High Quality Data ◽  
Redistributive Policies ◽  
Election Studies ◽  
New Evidence ◽  
The U.S

In an era of rising inequality, the U.S. public’s relatively modest support for redistributive policies has been a puzzle for scholars. Deepening the paradox is recent evidence that presenting information about inequality increases subjects’ support for redistributive policies by only a small amount. What explains inequality information’s limited effects? We extend partisan motivated reasoning scholarship to investigate whether political party identification confounds individuals’ processing of inequality information. Our study considers a much larger number of redistribution preference measures (12) than past scholarship. We offer a second novelty by bringing the dimension of historical time into hypothesis testing. Analyzing high-quality data from four American National Election Studies surveys, we find new evidence that partisanship confounds the interrelationship of inequality information and redistribution preferences. Further, our analyses find the effects of partisanship on redistribution preferences grew in magnitude from 2004 through 2016. We discuss implications for scholarship on information, motivated reasoning, and attitudes towards redistribution.

Sorting the File Drawer: A Typology for Describing Unpublished Studies

2021 ◽  
pp. 174569162097983
Author(s):  
David A. Lishner
Keyword(s):  
Decision Process ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Psychology Research ◽  
Research Dissemination ◽  
Unpublished Studies ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Publication Decision ◽  
Research Domains ◽  
File Drawer ◽  
Insight Into

A typology of unpublished studies is presented to describe various types of unpublished studies and the reasons for their nonpublication. Reasons for nonpublication are classified by whether they stem from an awareness of the study results (result-dependent reasons) or not (result-independent reasons) and whether the reasons affect the publication decisions of individual researchers or reviewers/editors. I argue that result-independent reasons for nonpublication are less likely to introduce motivated reasoning into the publication decision process than are result-dependent reasons. I also argue that some reasons for nonpublication would produce beneficial as opposed to problematic publication bias. The typology of unpublished studies provides a descriptive scheme that can facilitate understanding of the population of study results across the field of psychology, within subdisciplines of psychology, or within specific psychology research domains. The typology also offers insight into different publication biases and research-dissemination practices and can guide individual researchers in organizing their own file drawers of unpublished studies.

scholarly journals Winning, Losing, and the Quality of Democracy

2021 ◽  
pp. 003232172110261
Author(s):  
Richard Nadeau ◽  
Jean-François Daoust ◽  
Ruth Dassonneville
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Quality Of Democracy ◽  
Electoral Democracy ◽  
Democratic Systems ◽  
The Comparative Study

Citizens who voted for a party that won the election are more satisfied with democracy than those who did not. This winner–loser gap has recently been found to vary with the quality of electoral democracy: the higher the quality of democracy, the smaller the gap. However, we do not know what drives this relationship. Is it driven by losers, winners, or both? And Why? Linking our work to the literature on motivated reasoning and macro salience and benefiting from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems project—covering 163 elections in 51 countries between 1996 and 2018, our results show that the narrower winner–loser gap in well-established electoral democracies is not only a result of losers being more satisfied with democracy, but also of winners being less satisfied with their victory. Our findings carry important implications since a narrow winner–loser gap appears as a key feature of healthy democratic systems.

Why do business losses cause conflict?

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 219-232
Author(s):  
Henrik Lando
Keyword(s):  
Contract Theory ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Significant Loss ◽  
Self Image ◽  
Negative Reciprocity ◽  
Behavioral Theories ◽  
Full Rationality

Evidence suggests that conflicts between contracting parties are more prone to occur when a party has suffered a significant loss. It is argued that the phenomenon is difficult to understand within conventional contract theory, which assumes full rationality, while behavioral theories based on the concepts of motivated reasoning and reciprocity provide interesting explanations. Thus, losses can trigger motivated, self-serving perceptions and beliefs, which in turn are likely to induce negative reciprocity as well as counter-productive acts aimed at bolstering self-image. These explanations are demonstrated to be well supported by experiments.

scholarly journals Seeing What You Want to See: How Imprecise Uncertainty Ranges Enhance Motivated Reasoning

Risk Analysis ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 471-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan F. Dieckmann ◽  
Robin Gregory ◽  
Ellen Peters ◽  
Robert Hartman
Keyword(s):  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Imprecise Uncertainty
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document