The Casual Effect of Motivated Reasoning on Interpersonal Persuasion

• In Event: Poster Session: Political Communication 2

Abstract

Motivated reasoning is a fundamental theory in political psychology, offering insights into the way individuals select information, process it, and shape their political attitudes (Bayes et al., 2020; Druckman, 2012; Winter et al., 2016). The main premise of the theory asserts that when processing political information, one's cognitive strategies are strongly influenced by preexisting motivations (Kunda, 1990).

While a vast majority of studies in the political domain argue that motivation plays a key role in political reasoning, only a few have experimentally manipulated motivations. This lack of experimental manipulation in many studies limits the validity of their causal claims (Tappin et al., 2020). Moreover, among those that did employ experimental manipulation, the focus was mainly on how motivation affects the processing of information from political elites or the media (Bayes et al., 2020; Brenes-Peralta et al., 2021). However, the effect of motivated reasoning on the outcomes of interpersonal communication, an essential source of political information (Carlson, 2019) and persuasion (Huckfeldt et al., 2004), has been largely unexplored.

This study aims to fill these gaps by investigating the causal effect of preexisting motivations on the outcomes of conversations on political issues. The study will employ an experimental design wherein participants will be randomly assigned to one of two experimental groups or a control group. We will use established techniques for manipulating participants' motivation, as outlined in previous studies (Bayes et al., 2020; Brenes-Peralta et al., 2021) and as discussed below. Following the manipulation, participants will engage in a synchronous video conversation with an individual opposing their attitude on a preselected political issue.

This study seeks to make two main contributions. First, by investigating the causal effect of motivation on political attitudes, we can better understand what triggers political persuasion and deepen our understanding of the dynamics of public opinion. Second, the study is innovative because it examines a foundational theory (i.e., motivated reasoning) in a communicative context that, as far as we know, has not yet been explored: interpersonal communication. Furthermore, understanding the role of pre-existing motivations in political conversations can help political actors, such as campaigners and politicians. If we discover that individuals prioritizing accuracy are more open to persuasion, these actors might refine their communication approaches to either target or nurture such motivations in their audience.

Authors

• Omer Ben Simhon, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

• Eran Amsalem, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem