Motivated reasoning, fast and slow

Abstract Are people more likely to (mis)interpret information so that it aligns with their ideological identity when relying on feelings compared engaging in analytical thinking? Or is the other way around: Does deliberation increase propensity confirm existing political views? In a behavioral experiment, participants ( n = 1207, Swedish sample) assessed numerical concerning effects of gender quotas and immigration either under time pressure or no pressure. To measure trait differences cognitive sophistication, we also collected data numeric ability. We found clear evidence motivated reasoning assessing both companies’ financial results effect refugee intake crime rates. Subjects who prioritized equality over liberty labor market were 13 percentage points less correctly assess depicting companies used hiring made profit. classified themselves as ‘Swedes’ rather than ‘World citizens’ 14 rates decreased following immigration. Time did not affect likelihood engage reasoning, while subjects higher ability analyzing intake, but regarding quotas. Together these indicate primarily driven by individual thinking at level situational factors such pressure, whether analysis depends topic hand.