User:Calebdroush/sandbox

Section I want to edit

Caleb: Mechanisms;Goal orientated reasoning-last paragraph

Research[edit]
Neuroscience research suggest that "motivated reasoning is qualitatively distinct from reasoning when people do not have a strong emotional stake in the conclusions reached. " However, if there is a strong emotion attached to their reasoning from previous interactions with the information, motivated reasoning is much more likely to occur. This can create pathways within the neural network that further ingrains the reasoned beliefs of that individual. This causes the strong emotion to reoccur when confronted with contradictory information. This is what is referred to by Lodge and Taber as the affective contagion [9]  (can find more sources to expound upon the differences and the specific neurological structures and systems involved).

Social science research suggests that reasoning away contradictions is psychologically easier than revising feelings. In this sense, emotions are shown to color how "facts" are perceived. Feelings come first, and evidence is used mostly in service of those feelings. Evidence that supports what is already believed is accepted, that which contradicts it is not.

With the advancements of technology and the amount of information, both accurate and inaccurate available. More research will need to be done to see how it affects motivated reasoning.

Outcomes[edit]
The outcomes of motivated reasoning derive from "a biased set of cognitive processes—that is, strategies for accessing, constructing, and evaluating beliefs. The motivation to be accurate enhances use of those beliefs and strategies that are considered most appropriate, whereas the motivation to arrive at particular conclusions enhances use of those that are considered most likely to yield the desired conclusion." There are recent studies that have shown that when people are presented and forced to think analytically about something more complex, and have limited background with i.e. climate sciences, there is no directional shift and motivated reasoning is more likely to occur. Conversely, if there are presented with a more simplistic test of analytical thinking that confronts their beliefs, motivated reasoning is less likely to occur. [2] This pathway of decision making

Research on motivated reasoning tested accuracy goals (i.e., reaching correct conclusions) and directional goals (i.e., reaching preferred conclusions). Factors such as these affect perceptions; and results confirm that motivated reasoning affects decision-making and estimates. However, recent studies have shown that motivated reasoning can be overcome. "When the amount of incongruency is relatively small, the heightened negative affect does not necessarily override the motivation to maintain [belief]." There is evidence shown of a theoretical "tipping point" where the amount on incongruent information that is received by the motivated reasoner can turn certainty into anxiety, which may lead to a change of opinion. [1] This, however was done in a controlled environment where the time between preconcieved notions where severely limited.

Can talk to how the advancement of technology and the availability of information from many sources have made this problem exponentially worse). (look for sources that speak to the outcomes and how that effects and further entrenches people within their reasoning regardless of accuracy). How it affects confrontation with accuracy.


 * 1) Redlawsk, D. P., Civettini, A. J. W., & Emmerson, K. M. (2010). The affective tipping point: Do motivated reasoners ever “get it.” Political Psychology, 31(4), 563–593. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uvu.edu/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00772.x
 * 2) Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2019). Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition, 188, 39-50.

Sources to Refer back to.

Jain, S. P., & Maheswaran, D. (2000). Motivated reasoning: A depth-of-processing perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(4), 358–371. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uvu.edu/10.1086/209568

GIves hard evidence and an example of how motivated reasoning occurs in a real-life example

Ditto, P. H., Pizarro, D. A., & Tannenbaum, D. (2009). Motivated moral reasoning. In D. M. Bartels, C. W. Bauman, L. J. Skitka, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), Moral judgment and decision making. (Vol. 50, pp. 307–338). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uvu.edu/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)00410-6

It's one chapter of this book and it gives a good explanation that expounds on Kunda’s work that is featured heavily in the wiki article.

Winkielman, P., Berridge, K. C., & Wilbarger, J. L. (2005). Emotion, Behavior, and Conscious Experience: Once More without Feeling. In L. F. Barrett, P. M. Niedenthal, & P. Winkielman (Eds.), Emotion and consciousness. (pp. 335–362). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.uvu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2005-08637-014&site=ehost-live

This is also a chapter of a book that has a good section on unconscious motivation that needs more emphasis in the article as when read it seems implicit that motivated reasoning is mostly conscious. If we need to make an arguement this is a good place to start.

Pronin, Emily, Thomas Gilovich, and Less Ross. 2004. “Objectivity in the Eye of the Beholder: Divergent Perceptions of Bias in Self versus Others.” Psychological Review 111(3): 781–99

-This doesn't talk as much about mechanism's but what adds to motivational reasoning before and after acts are done by an individual.

Epley, Nicholas, and Thomas Gilovich. 2016. "The Mechanics of Motivated Reasoning." Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30 (3): 133-40.

-gives a different perspective on motivational reasoning mechanisms, talks about goal orientated mechanisms, but talks much about gathering preferred information as a way to meet the goal of one's own reasoning. Could add, might help flesh out that paragraph

Gilovich, T. (1991). How we know what isn't so: The fallibility of human reason in everyday life. New York, NY, US: Free Press.

-talks about the human need to put order where random entropy exists. Could be used as an introduction as to why humans engage in motivated reasoning, instead of just focusing the 'how.'

Kraft, P. W., Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2015). Why People “Don’t Trust the Evidence”: Motivated Reasoning and Scientific Beliefs. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 658(1), 121–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716214554758

Herrmann, R. (2017). How Attachments to the Nation Shape Beliefs About the World: A Theory of Motivated Reasoning. International Organization, 71(S1), S61-S84. doi:10.1017/S0020818316000382

West, R. F., Meserve, R. J., & Stanovich, K. E. (2012). Cognitive sophistication does not attenuate the bias blind spot. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(3), 506-519.

Dusso, A., &amp;amp; Kennedy, S.S., (2015) Does Ignorance Matter? The Relative Importance of Civic

Knowledge and the Human Tendency to Engage in Motivated Reasoning, Journal of Public &amp;amp;

Nonprofit Affairs. 1 (1): p.59-72 DOI 10.20899/jpna.1.1.59-72. Found at:

http://doaj.org/article/0409eac8ae96498497c3f2a279b3bca9 (Links to an external site.)

Jilke, S., (2018) Citizen Satisfaction under changing Political Leadership: The role of Partisan

Motivated Reasoning, Governance, Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey. 31(3) p.515-533.

Located ar: http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uvu.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=7&amp;amp ;...

Noval, L., The Unwitting Accomplice: How Organizations Enable Motivated Reasoning and

Self-Serving Behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 157 (3) p.699-713. Found at:

http://eds.a.egscohost.com. ezproxy.uvu.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=20…

Topics associated with Research and Outcomes.