Motivated Reasoning and Risk Governance: What Risk Scholars and Practitioners Need to Know

Abstract

AbstractEmpirical research in psychology and political science shows that individuals collect, process, and interpret information in a goal-driven fashion. Several theorists have argued that rather than striving for accuracy in their conclusions, individuals are motivated to arrive at conclusions that align with their previous beliefs, values, or identity commitments. The literature refers to this phenomenon broadly as ‘motivated reasoning’. In the context of risk governance, motivated reasoning can help to explain why people vary in their risk perceptions, evaluations, and preferences about risk management. But our current understanding of the phenomenon is incomplete, including the degree to which motivated reasoning should be considered rational and reasonable. Further, the research on motivated reasoning is largely unknown among risk practitioners. This chapter identifies key theoretical models of motivated reasoning, discusses the conceptual differences between them, and explores the implications of motivated reasoning for risk governance. Motivated reasoning is often labeled as ‘irrational’ and thus seen to prevent effective decision-making about risk, but this chapter challenges this assessment. The chapter concludes by identifying theoretical and empirical implications for researchers studying motivated reasoning and risk, as well as practical implications for policymakers and regulators involved in risk governance.