IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2012.01663.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Fake News Effect: Experimentally Identifying Motivated Reasoning Using Trust in News

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Thaler

Abstract

Motivated reasoning posits that people distort how they process information in the direction of beliefs they find attractive. This paper creates a novel experimental design to identify motivated reasoning from Bayesian updating when people have preconceived beliefs. It analyzes how subjects assess the veracity of information sources that tell them the median of their belief distribution is too high or too low. Bayesians infer nothing about the source veracity, but motivated beliefs are evoked. Evidence supports politically-motivated reasoning about immigration, income mobility, crime, racial discrimination, gender, climate change, and gun laws. Motivated reasoning helps explain belief biases, polarization, and overconfidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Thaler, 2020. "The Fake News Effect: Experimentally Identifying Motivated Reasoning Using Trust in News," Papers 2012.01663, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2012.01663
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2012.01663
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alberto Alesina & Armando Miano & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2023. "Immigration and Redistribution," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(1), pages 1-39.
    2. Emily Oster & Ira Shoulson & E. Ray Dorsey, 2013. "Optimal Expectations and Limited Medical Testing: Evidence from Huntington Disease," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(2), pages 804-830, April.
    3. Matthew S. Levendusky, 2013. "Why Do Partisan Media Polarize Viewers?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(3), pages 611-623, July.
    4. Kai Barron, 2021. "Belief updating: does the ‘good-news, bad-news’ asymmetry extend to purely financial domains?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 31-58, March.
    5. 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.
    6. Francesca Gino & Michael I. Norton & Roberto A. Weber, 2016. "Motivated Bayesians: Feeling Moral While Acting Egoistically," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 189-212, Summer.
    7. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth, 2023. "Beliefs about Racial Discrimination and Support for Pro-Black Policies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(1), pages 40-53, January.
    8. Emily Oster & Ira Shoulson & E. Ray Dorsey, 2016. "Optimal Expectations and Limited Medical Testing: Evidence from Huntington Disease: Corrigendum," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(6), pages 1562-1565, June.
    9. Juan D. Carrillo & Thomas Mariotti, 2000. "Strategic Ignorance as a Self-Disciplining Device," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 67(3), pages 529-544.
    10. Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2020. "Labor market concerns and support for immigration," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    11. David Eil & Justin M. Rao, 2011. "The Good News-Bad News Effect: Asymmetric Processing of Objective Information about Yourself," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 114-138, May.
    12. Shanto Iyengar & Sean J. Westwood, 2015. "Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(3), pages 690-707, July.
    13. Jason Dana & Roberto Weber & Jason Kuang, 2007. "Exploiting moral wiggle room: experiments demonstrating an illusory preference for fairness," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 33(1), pages 67-80, October.
    14. James N. Druckman & Matthew S. Levendusky & Audrey McLain, 2018. "No Need to Watch: How the Effects of Partisan Media Can Spread via Interpersonal Discussions," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(1), pages 99-112, January.
    15. Gerber, Alan S. & Huber, Gregory A., 2009. "Partisanship and Economic Behavior: Do Partisan Differences in Economic Forecasts Predict Real Economic Behavior?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(3), pages 407-426, August.
    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. Hagenbach, Jeanne & ,, 2022. "Motivated Skepticism," CEPR Discussion Papers 17478, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Otálvaro-Ramírez, Susana & Scartascini, Carlos & Streb, Jorge M., 2025. "Transparency and Government Reputation: An Experiment on Signaling," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 13970, Inter-American Development Bank.
    3. Chopra, Felix & Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2022. "Do people demand fact-checked news? Evidence from U.S. Democrats," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    4. Michael Thaler, 2021. "The Supply of Motivated Beliefs," Papers 2111.06062, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    5. Thaler, Michael, 2021. "Gender differences in motivated reasoning," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 501-518.
    6. Hagenbach, Jeanne & Jacquemet, Nicolas & Sternal, Philipp, 2025. "The motivated memory of noise," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 257-275.
    7. Diego Marino Fages, 2024. "Motivated Forecasts: Experimental Evidence from the Presidential Elections in Argentina," Discussion Papers 2024-08, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    8. Schwarz, Anna & Warum, Philipp, 2024. "Don’t stop believin’: Income group heterogeneity in updating of social mobility beliefs," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 1-19.
    9. Ester Faia & Andreas Fuster & Vincenzo Pezone & Basit Zafar, 2024. "Biases in Information Selection and Processing: Survey Evidence from the Pandemic," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 106(3), pages 829-847, May.
    10. Brownback, Andy & Burke, Nathaniel & Gagnon-Bartsch, Tristan, 2024. "Inference from biased polls," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 449-486.
    11. Chopra, Felix & Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2021. "The Demand for Fact-Checking," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1357, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    12. Bandiera, Antonella & , Rojas Daniel, 2024. "Misinformation among Migrants: Evidence from Mexico and Colombia," OSF Preprints md42a, Center for Open Science.
    13. Jordi Brandts & Isabel Busom & Cristina Lopez-Mayan, 2024. "Do giving voice and social information help in revising a misconception about rent–control?," Working Papers wpdea2404, Department of Applied Economics at Universitat Autonoma of Barcelona.
    14. Michael Thaler, 2020. "Good News Is Not a Sufficient Condition for Motivated Reasoning," Papers 2012.01548, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    15. Mira Frick & Ryota Iijima & Yuhta Ishii, 2021. "Welfare Comparisons for Biased Learning," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2274R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Mar 2021.
    16. Barron, Kai & Becker, Anna & Huck, Steffen, 2025. "Motivated political reasoning: On the emergence of belief-value constellations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    17. repec:osf:osfxxx:md42a_v1 is not listed on IDEAS

    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. Shimon Kogan & Florian H. Schneider & Roberto A. Weber, 2021. "Self-Serving Biases in Beliefs about Collective Outcomes," CESifo Working Paper Series 8975, CESifo.
    2. Daniel J. Benjamin, 2018. "Errors in Probabilistic Reasoning and Judgment Biases," NBER Working Papers 25200, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Barron, Kai & Gravert, Christina, 2022. "Confidence and career choices: an experiment," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 124(1), pages 35-68.
    4. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    5. Katharina Momsen & Sebastian O. Schneider, 2022. "Motivated Reasoning, Information Avoidance, and Default Bias," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2022_03, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    6. Michael Thaler, 2021. "The Supply of Motivated Beliefs," Papers 2111.06062, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    7. Thomas Neuber, 2021. "Egocentric Norm Adoption," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 116, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    8. Ryan Oprea & Sevgi Yuksel, 2022. "Social Exchange of Motivated Beliefs," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 667-699.
    9. Silvia Saccardo & Marta Serra-Garcia, 2020. "Cognitive Flexibility or Moral Commitment? Evidence of Anticipated Belief Distortion," CESifo Working Paper Series 8529, CESifo.
    10. Huck, Steffen & Szech, Nora & Wenner, Lukas M., 2025. "More effort with less pay: On information avoidance, optimistic beliefs, and performance," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    11. Petrishcheva, Vasilisa, 2023. "Willful Ignorance and Reference Dependence of Self-Image Concerns," VfS Annual Conference 2023 (Regensburg): Growth and the "sociale Frage" 277591, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Coutts, Alexander, 2019. "Testing models of belief bias: An experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 549-565.
    13. Johannes Maier & Clemens König, 2016. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Belief Updating," CESifo Working Paper Series 6156, CESifo.
    14. Banerjee, Ritwik & Gupta, Nabanita Datta & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2020. "Feedback spillovers across tasks, self-confidence and competitiveness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 127-170.
    15. Stoetzer, Lasse S. & Zimmermann, Florian, 2024. "A note on motivated cognition and discriminatory beliefs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 554-562.
    16. Hagenbach, Jeanne & Jacquemet, Nicolas & Sternal, Philipp, 2025. "The motivated memory of noise," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 257-275.
    17. Daniele Pennesi, 2020. "Identity and information acquisition," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 610, Collegio Carlo Alberto, revised 2021.
    18. Roy-Chowdhury, V., 2022. "Self-Confidence and Motivated Memory Loss: Evidence from Schools," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2213, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    19. Barron, Kai & Becker, Anna & Huck, Steffen, 2025. "Motivated political reasoning: On the emergence of belief-value constellations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    20. Schwardmann, Peter, 2019. "Motivated health risk denial and preventative health care investments," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 78-92.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • L82 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Entertainment; Media

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2012.01663. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.