Partisan Bias in Political Judgment.

IF 23.6 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY
Peter H Ditto, Jared B Celniker, Shiri Spitz Siddiqi, Mertcan Güngör, Daniel P Relihan
{"title":"Partisan Bias in Political Judgment.","authors":"Peter H Ditto, Jared B Celniker, Shiri Spitz Siddiqi, Mertcan Güngör, Daniel P Relihan","doi":"10.1146/annurev-psych-030424-122723","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article reviews empirical data demonstrating robust ingroup favoritism in political judgment. Partisans display systematic tendencies to seek out, believe, and remember information that supports their political beliefs and affinities. However, the psychological drivers of partisan favoritism have been vigorously debated, as has its consistency with rational inference. We characterize decades-long debates over whether such tendencies violate normative standards of rationality, focusing on the phenomenon of motivated reasoning. In light of evidence that both motivational and cognitive factors contribute to partisan bias, we advocate for a descriptive approach to partisan bias research. Rather than adjudicating the (ir)rationality of partisan favoritism, future research should prioritize the identification and measurement of its predictors and clarify the cognitive mechanisms underlying motivated political reasoning. Ultimately, we argue that political judgment is best evaluated by a standard of ecological rationality based on its practical implications for individual well-being and functional democratic governance.</p>","PeriodicalId":8010,"journal":{"name":"Annual review of psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":23.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual review of psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-030424-122723","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article reviews empirical data demonstrating robust ingroup favoritism in political judgment. Partisans display systematic tendencies to seek out, believe, and remember information that supports their political beliefs and affinities. However, the psychological drivers of partisan favoritism have been vigorously debated, as has its consistency with rational inference. We characterize decades-long debates over whether such tendencies violate normative standards of rationality, focusing on the phenomenon of motivated reasoning. In light of evidence that both motivational and cognitive factors contribute to partisan bias, we advocate for a descriptive approach to partisan bias research. Rather than adjudicating the (ir)rationality of partisan favoritism, future research should prioritize the identification and measurement of its predictors and clarify the cognitive mechanisms underlying motivated political reasoning. Ultimately, we argue that political judgment is best evaluated by a standard of ecological rationality based on its practical implications for individual well-being and functional democratic governance.

政治判断中的党派偏见。
本文回顾的实证数据表明,在政治判断中存在着强烈的内群体偏好。党派人士在寻找、相信和记忆支持其政治信仰和亲和力的信息时表现出系统性倾向。然而,党派偏爱的心理驱动因素及其与理性推断的一致性一直备受争议。数十年来,人们一直在争论这种倾向是否违反了理性的规范标准,我们通过对动机推理现象的研究,对这一争论进行了归纳。有证据表明,动机和认知因素都会导致党派偏见,有鉴于此,我们主张对党派偏见研究采用描述性方法。未来的研究不应评判党派偏见的(非)合理性,而应优先识别和测量其预测因素,并阐明动机政治推理的认知机制。最终,我们认为,政治判断的最佳评价标准是基于其对个人福祉和功能性民主治理的实际影响的生态理性标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annual review of psychology
Annual review of psychology 医学-心理学
CiteScore
47.30
自引率
0.80%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: The Annual Review of Psychology, a publication that has been available since 1950, provides comprehensive coverage of the latest advancements in psychological research. It encompasses a wide range of topics, including the biological underpinnings of human behavior, the intricacies of our senses and perception, the functioning of the mind, animal behavior and learning, human development, psychopathology, clinical and counseling psychology, social psychology, personality, environmental psychology, community psychology, and much more. In a recent development, the current volume of this esteemed journal has transitioned from a subscription-based model to an open access format as part of the Annual Reviews' Subscribe to Open initiative. As a result, all articles published in this volume are now freely accessible to the public under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信