What drives people to prefer health-related misinformation? The viewpoint of motivated reasoning

Abstract

Introduction. This paper examines the potential of the motivated reasoning approach as a framework explaining why people prefer and use health-related misinformation.<br/>Method. Conceptual analysis of a sample of 41 studies drawing on the motivated reasoning approach examine the selection and use of information and misinformation.<br/>Results. Preferring and using health-related misinformation occur most likely when people are primarily driven by directional goals. They tend to give rise to confirmation bias which favours the adherence to existing beliefs about the relevance of information sources of certain types, for example, websites advocating anti-vaccination ideas. Moreover, disconfirmation bias results in the rejection of information that challenges the existing beliefs about an issue. Directional goals seldom appear in a pure form because motivated reasoning is also driven by accuracy goals motivating people to select and use information that enables them to support, justify and defend their beliefs against critique.<br/>Conclusion. Motivated reasoning offers a relatively robust psychological approach to the study of reasons by which people prefer and use misinformation in order to confirm their existing beliefs and to protect their identities. There is a need to explore further the potential and limitations of the motivated reasoning approach by conducting empirical research focusing on controversial and politicized issues such as climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic.