The practice of motivated reasoning: observing knowledge use in real-world policy processes

Abstract

Motivated reasoning theory is a psychological theory that reads that policymakers interpret evidence in ways that fit their preferences rather than assessing it neutrally. The theory is increasingly used to explain policy processes as part of a behavioural approach to public administration, but it has limitations. As psychological research relies on experiments, the question remains what role motivated reasoning plays in real-world policy processes. Based on ethnographic observations collected during the planning phase of a large infrastructure project, this study confirms that motivated reasoning explains how people interpret information. However, it also shows that peoples’ context has a great impact on their reasoning. Ultimately, we suggest that a focus on time and real-world context is essential in understanding processes of reasoning, for which methodological diversification is needed.

Points for practitioners

People are inclined to interpret information in light of existing attitudes, rather than approach it neutrally. They read it in such a way that it confirms their attitudes, or are critical of it when it does not.

Conflicts caused by differentiating views can be better understood by looking at the attitudes that inform these views.

Discussions that might seem aimless at first might have secondary functions such as building trust amongst participants.