IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ecinqu/v63y2025i1p181-205.html

Political ideology, emotion response, and confirmation bias

Author

Listed:
  • David L. Dickinson

Abstract

Motivated reasoning can serve to help resolve emotional discomfort, which suggests emotion as a likely moderator of such reasoning. This paper addresses a gap in the literature by examining emotion and confirmation bias in the political domain. Results from two preregistered studies, which involved over 900 unique participants, document a confirmation bias across distinct dimensions of belief and preference formation. Also, ideologically dissonant information significantly worsens self‐reported emotion. With some exceptions, the evidence generally supports the hypothesis that negative emotion moderates the strength of the bias, which highlights the importance of emotion response in understanding and potentially counteracting confirmation bias.

Suggested Citation

  • David L. Dickinson, 2025. "Political ideology, emotion response, and confirmation bias," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 63(1), pages 181-205, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ecinqu:v:63:y:2025:i:1:p:181-205
    DOI: 10.1111/ecin.13253
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.13253
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ecin.13253?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles S. Taber & Milton Lodge, 2006. "Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 755-769, July.
    2. Eugen Dimant, 2024. "Hate Trumps Love: The Impact of Political Polarization on Social Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(1), pages 1-31, January.
    3. Dickinson, David L., 2020. "Deliberation Enhances the Confirmation Bias: An Examination of Politics and Religion," IZA Discussion Papers 13241, IZA Network @ LISER.
    4. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 211-236, Spring.
    5. Jan B. Engelmann & Maël Lebreton & Nahuel A. Salem-Garcia & Peter Schwardmann & Joël J. van der Weele, 2024. "Anticipatory Anxiety and Wishful Thinking," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 114(4), pages 926-960, April.
    6. Holt, Charles A. & Smith, Angela M., 2009. "An update on Bayesian updating," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 125-134, February.
    7. D. Andrew Austin & Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2007. "Believing In Economic Theories: Sex, Lies, Evidence, Trust, And Ideology," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(3), pages 502-518, July.
    8. Martin Jones & Robert Sugden, 2001. "Positive confirmation bias in the acquisition of information," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 59-99, February.
    9. David L. Dickinson, 2020. "Deliberation Enhances the Confirmation Bias in Politics," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-25, November.
    10. Alexander Coutts, 2019. "Good news and bad news are still news: experimental evidence on belief updating," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 369-395, June.
    11. Christoph Drobner & Sebastian J. Goerg, 2024. "Motivated Belief Updating and Rationalization of Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(7), pages 4583-4592, July.
    12. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," NBER Working Papers 23089, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Knight, Kathleen, 2006. "Transformations of the Concept of Ideology in the Twentieth Century," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 100(4), pages 619-626, November.
    14. Thaler, Michael, 2021. "Gender differences in motivated reasoning," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 501-518.
    15. Charles A. Holt & Angela M. Smith, 2016. "Belief Elicitation with a Synchronized Lottery Choice Menu That Is Invariant to Risk Attitudes," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 110-139, February.
    16. Claire E. Robertson & Nicolas Pröllochs & Kaoru Schwarzenegger & Philip Pärnamets & Jay J. Bavel & Stefan Feuerriegel, 2023. "Negativity drives online news consumption," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(5), pages 812-822, May.
    17. M. Keith Chen & Ryne Rohla, 2017. "The Effect of Partisanship and Political Advertising on Close Family Ties," Papers 1711.10602, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2018.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David L Dickinson & Marie Claire Villeval, 2025. "Belief Updating about Moral Norms: Does Group Identity Matter?," Working Papers hal-05060901, HAL.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dickinson, David L., 2024. "Deliberation, mood response, and the confirmation bias in the religious belief domain," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Dickinson, David L., 2022. "Political Ideology, Mood Response, and the Confirmation Bias," IZA Discussion Papers 15428, IZA Network @ LISER.
    3. David L. Dickinson, 2020. "Deliberation Enhances the Confirmation Bias in Politics," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-25, November.
    4. Dickinson, David L., 2020. "Deliberation Enhances the Confirmation Bias: An Examination of Politics and Religion," IZA Discussion Papers 13241, IZA Network @ LISER.
    5. Assenza, Tiziana, 2021. "The Ability to 'Distill the Truth'," TSE Working Papers 21-1280, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Mar 2022.
    6. Michael Thaler, 2021. "The Supply of Motivated Beliefs," Papers 2111.06062, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    7. Bolte, Lukas & Fan, Tony Q., 2024. "Motivated mislearning: The case of correlation neglect," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 647-663.
    8. Tetsuro Kobayashi & Fumiaki Taka & Takahisa Suzuki, 2021. "Can “Googling” correct misbelief? Cognitive and affective consequences of online search," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-16, September.
    9. Barrera, Oscar & Guriev, Sergei & Henry, Emeric & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2020. "Facts, alternative facts, and fact checking in times of post-truth politics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    10. Hagenbach, Jeanne & Jacquemet, Nicolas & Sternal, Philipp, 2025. "The motivated memory of noise," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 257-275.
    11. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/1dhd1b1s319fbai85khk40fudc is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Buser, Thomas, 2024. "Adversarial Economic Preferences Predict Right-Wing Voting," IZA Discussion Papers 16711, IZA Network @ LISER.
    13. Edson C. Tandoc Jr. & Ryan J. Thomas & Lauren Bishop, 2021. "What Is (Fake) News? Analyzing News Values (and More) in Fake Stories," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 110-119.
    14. Mohamed Mostagir & James Siderius, 2022. "Learning in a Post-Truth World," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2860-2868, April.
    15. Alessandro Nai, 2020. "The Trump Paradox: How Cues from a Disliked Source Foster Resistance to Persuasion," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 122-132.
    16. Thomas Buser, 2025. "Economic preferences, personality, and voting," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 25-035/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    17. Michele Coscia & Luca Rossi, 2022. "How minimizing conflicts could lead to polarization on social media: An agent-based model investigation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(1), pages 1-23, January.
    18. Ro’i Zultan & Aniol Llorente-Saguer & Santiago Oliveros, 2024. "Beyond Value: on the Role of Symmetryin Demand for Information," Working Papers 2411, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    19. Edson C. Tandoc Jr. & Ryan J. Thomas & Lauren Bishop, 2021. "What Is (Fake) News? Analyzing News Values (and More) in Fake Stories," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 110-119.
    20. Theresa Kuchler & Johannes Stroebel, 2022. "Social Interactions, Resilience, and Access to Economic Opportunity: A Research Agenda for the Field of Computational Social Science," CESifo Working Paper Series 9606, CESifo.
    21. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/1dhd1b1s319fbai85khk40fudc is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Felix Chopra & Ingar K. Haaland & Christopher Roth, 2019. "Do People Value More Informative News?," CESifo Working Paper Series 8026, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ecinqu:v:63:y:2025:i:1:p:181-205. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.