When beliefs and evidence collide: psychological and ideological predictors of motivated reasoning about climate change

Publication Date

10-28-2021

Document Type

Article

Publication Title

Thinking & Reasoning

Volume

28

Issue

3

DOI

10.1080/13546783.2021.1994009

First Page

428

Last Page

464

Abstract

Motivated reasoning occurs when we reason differently about evidence that supports our prior beliefs than when it contradicts those beliefs. Adult participants (N = 377) from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk) system completed written responses critically evaluating strengths and weaknesses in a vignette on the topic of anthropogenic climate change (ACC). The vignette had two fictional scientists present prototypical arguments for and against anthropogenic climate change that were constructed with equally flawed and conflicting reasoning. The current study tested and found support for three main hypotheses: cognitive style, personality, and ideology would predict both motivated reasoning and endorsement of human caused climate change; those who accept human-caused climate change will be less likely to engage in biased reasoning and more likely to engage in objective reasoning about climate change than those who deny human activity as a cause of climate change.

Keywords

Motivated reasoning, climate change, personality, cognitive style, ideology

Department

Psychology

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS