Expert Consensus in a Politically-Charged Environment: Motivated Reasoning in Information Processing

Author

• Austin L. Katz, University of South Florida

Graduation Year

2024

Document Type

Thesis

Degree

M.A.

Degree Name

Master of Arts (M.A.)

Degree Granting Department

Psychology

Major Professor

Sandra Schneider, Ph.D.

Committee Member

Thomas Sanocki, Ph.D.

Committee Member

Joseph Vandello, Ph.D.

Keywords

Cognition, Confirmation Bias, Fact-Checking, Heuristic, Myside Bias, View Revision, Accuracy Motivation

Abstract

With the abundance of information online, what drives news consumption? It has been theorized that there are two distinct conflicting motivations which operate simultaneously when consumers encounter new information: the motivation to reach accurate conclusions and the directional motivation to reach conclusions that are consistent with a person’s preexisting beliefs or predispositions (e.g., Kunda 1990). This experiment tests situations in which both motivations are simultaneously made salient in the context of reading headlines to decide what news to read and how accurate the news is likely to be.

A new fact-check manipulation was used to draw attention to the accuracy motivation by introducing a 1-4 star expert fact-check system. To prime directional motivations, this new system was manipulated to include the political affiliation of the (hypothetical) established experts. One fact-check judgment is assigned from factual experts associated with a liberal-leaning group and in some cases, an additional fact-check judgment is assigned by experts associated with a conservative-leaning group. If political myside bias (i.e., predisposition to favor confirming information) is present, readers may rely more heavily on experts from their favored group.

Results indicated support for the effectiveness of the new fact-checking system. The system was effective to alter expected accuracy of the information, depending on the fact checking judgment. Evidence of the presence of directional motivations (I.e., myside bias) was found in that the effects of judgments from fact-checking experts with a favored political affiliation were stronger than the effects of fact-checking judgments from unfavored experts. Making both motivations salient was shown to be an effective method to consider the information quality more carefully in their reading decisions.

Scholar Commons Citation

Katz, Austin L., "Expert Consensus in a Politically-Charged Environment: Motivated Reasoning in Information Processing" (2024). USF Tampa Graduate Theses and Dissertations.
https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd/11186