Abstract
AbstractDo differences in worldview ideology hinder people from objectively interpreting the effect of immigration? In an experiment with Swedish adults (n= 1015), we investigate whether people display motivated reasoning when interpreting numerical information about the effects of refugee intake on crime rate. Our results show clear evidence of motivated reasoning along the lines of worldview ideology (i.e., whether people identify themselves primarily as nationally oriented or globally oriented). In scenarios where refugee intake was associated with higher crime rate, nationally oriented people were 18 percentage points more likely to make the correct assessment compared to globally oriented people. Likewise, in scenarios where refugee intake was associated with lower crime rate, nationally oriented people were 20 percentage points less likely to make the correct assessment compared to globally oriented people. Individuals with higher numeric ability were less likely to engage in motivated reasoning, suggesting that motivated reasoning more commonly is driven by feelings and emotional cues rather than deliberate analytical processes.
Highlights
We all sometimes believe what we want to believe
We explore whether people engage in motivated reasoning when they assess numerical information about the effects of refugee intake on crime rates
The ability to correctly assess the numerical information clearly differed depending on worldview ideology
Summary
Parents often think that their own children are amazing in all areas. The authors of this paper think the same about themselves, even though their “brilliant” paper keeps getting rejected. Most of us would consider this type of motivated reasoning a rather harmless – and sometimes even endearing – feature of human behavior. We explore whether people engage in motivated reasoning when they assess numerical information about the effects of refugee intake on crime rates. We investigate the role of numeric ability on motivated reasoning. We show that motivated reasoning asserts itself as polarized assessments in line with people’s worldview ideology (i.e., whether people identify themselves primarily as Swedes [i.e., nationally oriented] or primarily as world citizens [i.e., globally oriented]). Our results provide suggestive evidence that numeric ability can serve as a buffer against motivated reasoning
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
