No association between numerical ability and politically motivated reasoning in a large US probability sample

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Psychology
• Political Psychology
• Behavioral Economics

Background:

• The Motivated System 2 Reasoning theory posits that analytical reasoning is biased by political identity on ideological issues.
• This theory suggests individuals with higher reasoning capacity may become more polarized, not accurate, when their beliefs are challenged.

Purpose of the Study:

• To empirically test the core predictions of the Motivated System 2 Reasoning theory.
• To investigate the influence of analytical reasoning and political identity on accuracy regarding ideologically charged information.

Main Methods:

• Utilized a large, nationally representative probability sample of American adults.
• Assessed participants' analytical reasoning abilities (numeracy) and political beliefs.
• Examined participants' accuracy in evaluating contingency tables related to contentious issues.

Main Results:

• Failed to replicate key empirical support for the Motivated System 2 Reasoning theory across five contentious issues.
• While political alignment showed a slight effect on accuracy, higher numeracy consistently predicted greater accuracy in evaluating information, irrespective of political alignment.
• Found that individuals with higher numeracy were more accurate in assessing data, regardless of whether it supported their political views.

Conclusions:

• The findings challenge the notion that political identity fundamentally hijacks analytical reasoning (System 2 Reasoning).
• Numeracy appears to be a more robust predictor of accurate analytical reasoning than political identity in the context of ideological issues.
• Suggests a need to reconsider the pervasive influence of identity on analytical reasoning processes.