Accuracy Oriented Motivated Reasoning
Kunda asserts that accuracy goals delay the process of coming to a premature conclusion, in that accuracy goals increase both the quantity and quality of processing - particularly in leading to more complex inferential cognitive processing procedures. When researchers manipulated test subjects motivation to be accurate by informing them that the target task was highly important or that they would be expected to defend their judgments, it was found that subjects utilized deeper processing, and that there was less biasing of information. This was true when accuracy motives were present at the initial processing and encoding of information. Tetlock (1983, 1985)[11][12] In reviewing a line of research on accuracy goals and bias, Kunda concludes, “several different kinds of biases have been shown to weaken in the presence of accuracy goals.”[13] She asserts that for accuracy to reduce bias the following conditions must be present.
- Subjects must possess appropriate reasoning strategies
- They must view these as superior to other strategies,
- And be capable of using them at will.
In summary, both models differentiate between accuracy goals, and goal directed processing. They differ in that Redlawsk identifies a primary role for affect in guiding cognitive processes and in maintaining bias. In contrast, Kunda identifies a primary role for cognitive processes such as memory processes, and the use of rules in determining biased information selection. At least one study in neuroscience does not support the use of cognitive processes in motivated reasoning, lending greater support to affective processing as a key mechanism in supporting bias. Of interest, neuroscience is consistent with Freud’s (1933) theory of "defensive processing" which occurred in the unconscious, and was seen as a mechanism to avoid feelings of anxiety and guilt.
No comments:
Post a Comment