Motivated Reasoning and Public Opinion Perception
In: The public opinion quarterly: POQ, Band 75, Heft 3, S. 504-532
ISSN: 1537-5331
106 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: The public opinion quarterly: POQ, Band 75, Heft 3, S. 504-532
ISSN: 1537-5331
In: Public opinion quarterly: journal of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Band 75, Heft 3, S. 504-504
ISSN: 0033-362X
In: APSA 2012 Annual Meeting Paper
SSRN
Working paper
In: Political psychology: journal of the International Society of Political Psychology, Band 35, Heft S1, S. 129-156
ISSN: 1467-9221
A key characteristic of democratic politics is competition between groups, first of all political parties. Yet, the unavoidably partisan nature of political conflict has had too little influence on scholarship on political psychology. Despite more than 50 years of research on political parties and citizens, we continue to lack a systematic understanding of when and how political parties influence public opinion. We suggest that alternative approaches to political parties and public opinion can be best reconciled and examined through a richer theoretical perspective grounded in motivated reasoning theory. Clearly, parties shape citizens' opinions by mobilizing, influencing, and structuring choices among political alternatives. But the answer to when and how parties influence citizens' reasoning and political opinions depends on an interaction between citizens' motivations, effort, and information generated from the political environment (particularly through competition between parties). The contribution of motivated reasoning, as we describe it, is to provide a coherent theoretical framework for understanding partisan influence on citizens' political opinions. We review recent empirical work consistent with this framework. We also point out puzzles ripe for future research and discuss how partisan‐motivated reasoning provides a useful point of departure for such work.
In: The journal of politics: JOP, Band 72, Heft 3, S. 630-646
ISSN: 0022-3816
In: Kopko, K.C., Bryner, S.M., Budziak, J. et al. In the Eye of the Beholder? Motivated Reasoning in Disputed Elections. Polit Behav 33, 271–290 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9133-x
SSRN
In: Judgment and Decision Making, 8, 407-24 (2013)
SSRN
In: Political psychology: journal of the International Society of Political Psychology, Band 35, Heft 1, S. 129-156
ISSN: 0162-895X
In: The journal of politics: JOP, Band 72, Heft 3, S. 630-645
ISSN: 1468-2508
In: Political behavior, Band 36, Heft 2, S. 235-262
ISSN: 1573-6687
Political parties play a vital role in democracies by linking citizens to their representatives. Nonetheless, a longstanding concern is that partisan identification slants decision-making. Citizens may support (oppose) policies that they would otherwise oppose (support) in the absence of an endorsement from a political party-this is due in large part to what is called partisan motivated reasoning where individuals interpret information through the lens of their party commitment. We explore partisan motivated reasoning in a survey experiment focusing on support for an energy law. We identify two politically relevant factors that condition partisan motivated reasoning: (1) an explicit inducement to form an 'accurate' opinion, and (2) cross-partisan, but not consensus, bipartisan support for the law. We further provide evidence of how partisan motivated reasoning works psychologically and affects opinion strength. We conclude by discussing the implications of our results for understanding opinion formation and the overall quality of citizens' opinions. Adapted from the source document.
In: Political behavior, Band 33, Heft 2, S. 271-290
ISSN: 1573-6687
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. Adapted from the source document.
In: Political behavior, Band 36, Heft 2, S. 235-262
ISSN: 0190-9320
In: Political behavior, Band 36, Heft 2, S. 235-262
ISSN: 1573-6687
In: Political behavior, Band 33, Heft 2, S. 271-291
ISSN: 0190-9320
In: Political behavior, Band 33, Heft 2, S. 271-290
ISSN: 1573-6687