Are Policymakers Persuaded in Parallel?: Policymakers, Evidence, and Motivated Reasoning

Policymakers are highly involved with political issues, politically polarized, and knowledgeable about politics, all traits that could contribute to biased reasoning about policy evidence. In this paper, we explore whether policymakers are influenced by compelling policy evidence from ideologically disparate viewpoints, or whether they respond to evidence in an ideologically biased fashion. We conduct an experiment in which we randomly assign a sample of local policymakers to policy-relevant evidence that varies in quality as well as in its ideological implications. We find that there is a positive, statistically significant effect of strong evidence on policymakers’ attitudes and a smaller, positive (but not statistically significant) effect of weak evidence. We find no evidence of a moderating effect of ideology on the persuasive effects of either strong or weak evidence. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings as well as avenues for future research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Politics Research
Published
2025-08-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x251367389
Primary Topic
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Are Policymakers Persuaded in Parallel?: Policymakers, Evidence, and Motivated Reasoning

Kelechi Amakoh, Dan Hiaeshutter-Rice, Daniel E. Bergan, Dustin Carnahan et al.
American Politics Research
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
article

Are Policymakers Persuaded in Parallel?: Policymakers, Evidence, and Motivated Reasoning

Kelechi Amakoh, Dan Hiaeshutter-Rice, Daniel E. Bergan, Dustin Carnahan, Lu Teinowitz
article en

Abstract

Policymakers are highly involved with political issues, politically polarized, and knowledgeable about politics, all traits that could contribute to biased reasoning about policy evidence. In this paper, we explore whether policymakers are influenced by compelling policy evidence from ideologically disparate viewpoints, or whether they respond to evidence in an ideologically biased fashion. We conduct an experiment in which we randomly assign a sample of local policymakers to policy-relevant evidence that varies in quality as well as in its ideological implications. We find that there is a positive, statistically significant effect of strong evidence on policymakers’ attitudes and a smaller, positive (but not statistically significant) effect of weak evidence. We find no evidence of a moderating effect of ideology on the persuasive effects of either strong or weak evidence. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings as well as avenues for future research.

American Politics ResearchVol. 54(1)
Madison Area Technical College (US), Michigan State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 75%
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.