Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Public Opinion Formation

By Thomas J. Leeper, Rune Slothuus. 2014

557 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Political Science and International Relations, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b6b3d4e2c82b15a654c420ec55cce908298a4404

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

In Political Science and International Relations

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Does Counter-Attitudinal Information Cause Backlash? Results from Three Large Survey Experiments (2018, background): “…aftermath of what was at the time the largest 1Our findings are distinct from those in the partisan motivated reasoning literature, in which cues can induce in- and outpartisans to update policy preferences in opposite directions (Druckman et al. 2018; Leeper and Slothuus 2014; Levendusky 2013).”
Bias Will Find a Way: Economic Perceptions, Attributions of Blame, and Partisan-Motivated Reasoning during Crisis (2015, background): “…their party is performing relatively well, they tend to reject and counterargue information that does not conform to their predefined conclusions, and to seek out as well as uncritically accept information that does (Kunda 1990; Leeper and Slothuus 2014; Lodge and Taber 2013; Taber and Lodge 2006).”
Believing and sharing misinformation, fact-checks, and accurate information on social media: The role of anxiety during COVID-19 (2021, background): ““Partisan motivated reasoning” specifically defends political identities (Leeper and Slothuus, 2014) and can occur for issues at the intersection of politics, science, and risk.”
Thinking clearly about causal inferences of politically motivated reasoning: why paradigmatic study designs often undermine causal inference (2019, background): “While precise definition of the concept has proved elusive [1], the common working conception is that it is a mode of reasoning in which the person’s goal is to reach a particular, politically congenial conclusion when reasoning [1–3,4 ,5].”
Identity concerns drive belief: The impact of partisan identity on the belief and dissemination of true and false news (2018, background): “Some authors explain this effect through heuristics processes: people use party positions as cues to guide their own position because they think it will help them achieve accuracy (Cohen, 2003; Leeper & Slothuus, 2014).”
Mapping Cultural Schemas: From Theory to Method (2019, background): “…al. 1960; Converse 1964; Kinder and Kalmoe 2017; Lenz 2013; Zaller 2012), or whether political partisanship leads people to actively engage in fundamentally different reasoning that structures their political preferences (Goren 2013; Goren, Federico, and Kittilson 2009; Leeper and Slothuus 2014).”
Does Engagement in Advocacy Hurt the Credibility of Scientists? Results from a Randomized National Survey Experiment (2017, background): “Research on motivated reasoning suggests that individuals are predisposed to selectively process and reject statements that are inconsistent with their prior beliefs or ideology (Kunda, 1990; Leeper & Slothuus, 2014; Taber & Lodge, 2006).”
Public opinion on energy development: the interplay of issue framing, top-of-mind associations, and political ideology (2015, background): “Although political ideology is a key driver of views on energy and other contentious issues (see Boudet et al., 2014), perhaps partisan differences do not emerge without polarized elite cues as well (see Leeper and Slothuus, 2014).”