Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-plnhv Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-08-09T02:13:28.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Motivated Reasoning and Democratic Accountability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 November 2021

ANDREW T. LITTLE Open the ORCID record for ANDREW T. LITTLE [Opens in a new window] ,
KEITH E. SCHNAKENBERG Open the ORCID record for KEITH E. SCHNAKENBERG [Opens in a new window]  and
IAN R. TURNER Open the ORCID record for IAN R. TURNER [Opens in a new window]
ANDREW T. LITTLE*
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley, United States
KEITH E. SCHNAKENBERG*
Affiliation:
Washington University in St. Louis, United States
IAN R. TURNER*
Affiliation:
Yale University, United States
*
Andrew T. Little, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley, United States, andrew.little@berkeley.edu.
Keith E. Schnakenberg, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Washington University in St. Louis, United States, keschnak@wustl.edu.
Ian R. Turner, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Yale University, United States, ian.turner@yale.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Does motivated reasoning harm democratic accountability? Substantial evidence from political behavior research indicates that voters have “directional motives” beyond accuracy, which is often taken as evidence that they are ill equipped to hold politicians accountable. We develop a model of electoral accountability with voters as motivated reasoners. Directional motives have two effects: (1) divergence—voters with different preferences hold different beliefs, and (2) desensitization—the relationship between incumbent performance and voter beliefs is weakened. While motivated reasoning does harm accountability, this is generally driven by desensitized voters rather than polarized partisans with politically motivated divergent beliefs. We also analyze the relationship between government performance and vote shares, showing that while motivated reasoning always weakens this relationship, we cannot infer that accountability is also harmed. Finally, we show that our model can be mapped to standard models in which voters are fully Bayesian but have different preferences or information.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 116 , Issue 2 , May 2022 , pp. 751 - 767
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Acharya, Avidit, Blackwell, Matthew, and Sen, Maya. 2018. “Explaining Preferences from Behavior: A Cognitive Dissonance Approach.” The Journal of Politics 80 (2): 400–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Achen, Christopher H., and Bartels, Larry M.. 2017. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Adida, Claire, Gottlieb, Jessica, Kramon, Eric, and McClendon, Gwyneth. 2017. “Reducing or Reinforcing In-Group Preferences? An Experiment on Information and Ethnic Voting.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 12 (4): 437–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albertson, Bethany, and Gadarian, Shana Kushner. 2015. Anxious Politics: Democratic Citizenship in a Threatening World. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashworth, Scott. 2012. “Electoral Accountability: Recent Theoretical and Empirical Work.” Annual Review of Political Science 15: 183–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashworth, Scott, and Fowler, Anthony. 2019. “Electorates vs. Voters.” Unpublished Manuscript. University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Ashworth, Scott, and de Mesquita, Ethan Bueno. 2014. “Is Voter Competence Good for Voters? Information, Rationality, and Democratic Performance.” American Political Science Review 108 (3): 565–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 2002. “Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions.” Political Behavior 24 (2): 117–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bendor, Jonathan, Diermeier, Daniel, Siegel, David A., and Ting, Michael M.. 2011. A Behavioral Theory of Elections. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benjamin, Daniel J. 2019. “Errors in Probabilistic Reasoning and Judgment Biases.” Chap. 2 in Handbook of Behavioral Economics: Applications and Foundations 1, eds. Douglas Bernheim, B., DellaVigna, Stefano, and Laibson, David. Princeton, NJ: North–Holland.Google Scholar
Bisgaard, Martin. 2019. “How Getting The Facts Right Can Fuel Partisan-Motivated Reasoning.” American Journal of Political Science 63 (4): 824–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolsen, Toby, Druckman, James N., and Cook, Fay Lomax. 2014. “The Influence of Partisan Motivated Reasoning on Public Opinion.” Political Behavior 36 (2): 235–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, John G., Gerber, Alan S., Hill, Seth J., and Huber, Gregory A.. 2015. “Partisan Bias in Factual Beliefs about Politics.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 10 (4): 519–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, John G., and Lenz, Gabriel. 2019. “Partisan Bias in Surveys.” Annual Review of Political Science 22: 325–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coughlin, Peter J. 1992. Probabilistic Voting Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Benedictis-Kessner, Justin, and Warshaw, Christopher. 2020. “Accountability for the Local Economy at All Levels of Government in United States Elections.” American Political Science Review 114 (3): 660–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Vries, Catherine E., Hobolt, Sara B., and Tilley, James. 2018. “Facing up to the Facts: What Causes Economic Perceptions?” Electoral Studies 51: 115–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Keeter, Scott. 1996. What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Diermeier, Daniel, and Li, Christopher. 2017. “Electoral Control with Behavioral Voters.” The Journal of Politics 79 (3): 890–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diermeier, Daniel, and Li, Christopher. 2019. “Partisan Affect and Elite Polarization.” American Political Science Review 113 (1): 277–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donovan, Kathleen, Kellstedt, Paul M, Key, Ellen M., and Lebo, Matthew J.. 2020. “Motivated Reasoning, Public Opinion, and Presidential Approval.” Political Behavior 42: 1201–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, James N., Peterson, Erik, and Slothuus, Rune. 2013. “How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation.” American Political Science Review 107 (1): 57–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, James N., and McGrath, Mary C.. 2019. “The Evidence for Motivated Reasoning in Climate Change Preference Formation.” Nature Climate Change 9 (2): 111–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duggan, John, and Martinelli, César. 2017. “The Political Economy of Dynamic Elections: Accountability, Commitment, and Responsiveness.” Journal of Economic Literature 55 (3): 916–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunning, Thad, Grossman, Guy, Humphreys, Macartan, Hyde, Susan D., McIntosh, Craig, and Nellis, Gareth. 2019. Information, Accountability, and Cumulative Learning: Lessons from Metaketa I. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, Robert S. 1989. “Economic Conditions and the Presidential Vote.” American Political Science Review 83 (2): 567–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fair, Ray C. 1996. “The Effect of Economic Events on Votes for President: 1992 Update.” Political Behavior 18 (2): 119–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James D. 1999. “Electoral Accountability and the Control of Politicians: Selecting Good Types versus Sanctioning Poor Performance.” In Democracy, Accountability, and Representation, eds. Przeworski, Adam, Stokes, Susan C., and Manin, Bernard, 55–97. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferraz, Claudio, and Finan, Frederico. 2008. “Exposing Corrupt Politicians: The Effects of Brazil’s Publicly Released Audits on Electoral Outcomes.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 123 (2): 703–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeder, Sean. 2019. “It’s No Longer the Economy, Stupid: Selective Perception and Attribution of Economic Outcomes.” Unpublished Manuscript. University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Gerber, Alan, and Green, Donald. 1999. “Misperceptions about Perceptual Bias.” Annual Review of Political Science 2: 189–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glaeser, Edward L., and Ponzetto, Giacomo A. M.. 2017. “Fundamental Errors in the Voting Booth.” NBER Working Paper 23683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Donald P., Palmquist, Bradley, and Schickler, Eric. 2004. Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Groenendyk, Eric W. 2013. Competing Motives in the Partisan Mind: How Loyalty and Responsiveness Shape Party Identification and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groenendyk, Eric W., and Krupnikov, Yanna. 2020. “What Motivates Reasoning? A Theory of Goal-Dependent Political Evaluation.” American Journal of Political Science 65 (1): 180–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guess, Andrew, and Coppock, Alexander. 2020. “Does Counter-Attitudinal Information Cause Backlash? Results from Three Large Survey Experiments.” British Journal of Political Science 50(4): 1497–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, Andrew, and Lenz, Gabriel S.. 2017. “Presidential Voting and the Local Economy: Evidence from Two Population-Based Data Sets.” The Journal of Politics 79 (4): 1419–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, Andrew, and Malhotra, Neil. 2013. “Retrospective Voting Reconsidered.” Annual Review of Political Science 16: 285–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, Andrew J., Malhotra, Neil, and Mo, Cecilia Hyunjung. 2010. “Irrelevant Events Affect Voters’ Evaluations of Government Performance.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107 (29): 12804–809.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hill, Seth J. 2017. “Learning Together Slowly: Bayesian Learning about Political Facts.” The Journal of Politics 79 (4): 1403–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, Daniel J., and Pettingill, Lindsay M.. 2018. “Retrospective Voting in Big-City US Mayoral Elections.” Political Science Research and Methods 6 (4): 697–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddy, Leonie, Mason, Lilliana, and Aarøe, Lene. 2015. “Expressive Partisanship: Campaign Involvement, Political Emotion, and Partisan Identity.” American Political Science Review 109 (1): 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 2010. “Perception, Memory, and Partisan Polarization on the Iraq War.” Political Science Quarterly 125 (1): 31–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuklinski, James H., Quirk, Paul J., Jerit, Jennifer, Schwieder, David, and Rich, Robert F.. 2000. “Misinformation and the Currency of Democratic Citizenship.” The Journal of Politics 62 (3): 790–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunda, Ziva. 1990. “The Case for Motivated Reasoning.” Psychological Bulletin 108 (3): 480–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lau, Richard R., and Redlawsk, David P.. 2006. How Voters Decide: Information Processing in Election Campaigns. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, Gilat, and Razin, Ronny. 2015. “Correlation Neglect, Voting Behavior, and Information Aggregation.” American Economic Review 105 (4): 1634–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, Andrew T. 2019. “The Distortion of Related Beliefs.” American Journal of Political Science 63 (3): 675–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockwood, Ben. 2017. “Confirmation Bias and Electoral Accountability.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 11 (4): 471–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodge, Milton, and Taber, Charles S.. 2013. The Rationalizing Voter. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupia, Arthur, and McCubbins, Mathew D.. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know? New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Markus, Gregory B. 1992. “The Impact of Personal and National Economic Conditions on Presidential Voting, 1956-1988.” American Journal of Political Science 36 (3): 829–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayraz, Guy. 2019. “Priors and Desires: A Bayesian Model of Wishful Thinking and Cognitive Dissonance.” Unpublished Manuscript. University of Sydney. http://mayraz.com/papers/PriorsAndDesires.pdf.Google Scholar
Minozzi, William. 2013. “Endogenous Beliefs in Models of Politics.” American Journal of Political Science 57 (3): 566–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, Stephen, and Shin, Hyun Song. 2003. Global Games: Theory and Applications. In Advances in Economics and Econometrics: Theory and Applications, 8th World Congress of the Econometric Society, eds. Dewatripont, Mathias, Hansen, Lars Peter, and Turnovsky, Stephen J., 56–114. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nunnari, Salvatore, and Zápal, Jan. 2017. “A Model of Focusing in Political Choice.” CEPR Discussion Paper DP12407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyhan, Brendan, and Reifler, Jason. 2010. “When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions.” Political Behavior 32 (2): 303–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogden, Benjamin. 2016. “An Imperfect Beliefs Voting Model.” Unpublished Manuscript. Texas A&M University. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2431447.Google Scholar
Payson, Julia A. 2017. “When Are Local Incumbents Held Accountable for Government Performance? Evidence from US School Districts.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 42 (3): 421–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prior, Markus, Sood, Gaurav, and Khanna, Kabir. 2015. “You Cannot Be Serious: The Impact of Accuracy Incentives on Partisan Bias in Reports of Economic Perceptions.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 10 (4): 489–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabin, Matthew, and Schrag, Joel L.. 1999. “First Impressions Matter: A Model of Confirmatory Bias.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 114 (1): 37–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redlawsk, David P. 2002. “Hot Cognition or Cool Consideration? Testing the Effects of Motivated Reasoning on Political Decision Making.” The Journal of Politics 64 (4): 1021–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roush, Carolyn E., and Sood, Gaurav. 2020. “A Gap in Our Understanding? Reconsidering the Evidence for Partisan Knowledge Gaps.” Unpublished Manuscript. Florida State University. https://www.gsood.com/research/papers/partisan_gap.pdf.Google Scholar
Taber, Charles S., and Lodge, Milton. 2006. “Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs.” American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 755–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thaler, Michael. 2020. “The Fake News Effect: An Experiment on Motivated Reasoning and Trust in News.” Unpublished Manuscript. Harvard University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tufte, Edward R. 1976. Political Control of the Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Woon, Jonathan. 2012. “Democratic Accountability and Retrospective Voting: A Laboratory Experiment.” American Journal of Political Science 56 (4): 913–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Little et al. supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Little et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 133.5 KB
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.