Polarization, Trust, and Institutions
Paper Session
Friday, Jan. 3, 2025 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM (PST)
- Chair: Guglielmo Briscese, University of Chicago
Sorting Fact from Fiction in a Complex World under the Shadow of Motivated Reasoning
Abstract
We present a comprehensive framework combining theory and a survey-experimental study conducted in Austria, Germany, and the UK to investigate how the ability to sort fact from fiction as well as updating from new information are influenced by cognitive ability, motivated reasoning, and overconfidence. Our study involves news themes that are politically charged (and more complex than everyday politics): immigration, climate change, science, and inequality. We predict and find that the ability to discern correct and false news increases in cognitive ability (in particular, in both IQ and educational attainment). We show that the positive effect of cognitive ability is robust and immune to motivated reasoning. That is, the ability to give correct answers that counter one’s existing issue opinions and biases increases in cognitive ability. These novel results are good news, suggesting the malleability of the ability to sort fact from fiction. However, we also document that motivated reasoning plays a highly significant role in explaining respondent decision making. Thus, our results differ from the extant literature (e.g., Pennycook and Rand, 2019; Angelucci and Prat, 2024): in complex themes, motivated reasoning has a strong influence on assessments and thus may play a significant role in the evolution of opinions, making polarization easier. On the aggregate, cognitive ability is not associated with the magnitude of motivated reasoning. However, when we disaggregate data by news theme, we find that higher cognitive ability may boost motivated reasoning. Our findings suggest that the quality of institutions and trust in institutions matter. On the aggregate, Germany performs better than Austria and the UK in the news quiz, which is what we expected as Germany ranks higher than the other two countries in most governance rankings. We also find that trust in institutions reduces the magnitude of motivated reasoning, which likely helps limit opinion polarization.Cognitive Skills and the Demand for Bad Policy
Abstract
Voting theories are predicated on the belief that citizens accurately assess the comparative advantages of different policy options. However, many policies produce outcomes through indirect or equilibrium effects, such as lifting the minimum wage, expanding or constructing roads, implementing Pigouvian taxes, and monetizing fiscal deficits. The average citizen might not fully appreciate these equilibrium effects, leading to misjudgments about the efficacy of certain policies. Recent research by Dal Bo, Dal Bo, and Eyster (2018) demonstrates that individuals often vote against policies that, despite imposing direct costs, would resolve social dilemmas and enhance overall welfare. This raises an important research question: How do cognitive abilities influence preference formation regarding policies? Specifically, what is the underlying mechanism? Our study proposes a simple theoretical framework and an experimental approach to explore a potential pathway and shows that enhanced cognitive skills and beliefs about the cognitive skills of the other voters lead to a better choice of untested policies. We complement the experiment with a textual analysis of two open questions of policy evaluations, where we show that cognitive skills positively correlate with the identified number of indirect effects of the policy.Trust and Health-Care Seeking Behaviors
Abstract
We present results from a nationally representative survey of American adults, guided by a simple theoretical model expressing health care-seeking behavior as a function of economic and behavioral fundamentals and highlighting the role of trust. We report several findings. First, we document a strong association between higher levels of trust in the health care system and reported care-seeking behavior, both retrospective and anticipated. This relationship holds across several care scenarios, from routine check-ups to vaccinations. Second, the impact of trust on health care utilization is similar in magnitude to that of factors such as income and education, long recognized as crucial in the existing literature. Third, the relationship between trust and care seeking behavior appears to be mediated by key mechanisms from our theoretical framework, notably individuals’ beliefs about the system's effectiveness in managing their health and their personal disutility tied to medical visits. Fourth, we ask respondents about trust in specific health care system sectors, and we find important heterogeneity in the associations between trust and care-seeking behavior, notably between trust in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the likelihood to receive flu and COVID-19 vaccinations. Finally, we find no differential relationship between trust and care-seeking for Black respondents, but we find important differences by age and political affiliation. Our findings hold significant implications for policy, particularly given that trust in medical and, more broadly, scientific expertise is increasingly difficult to establish.Rebuilding Trust in Institutions
Abstract
This study investigates the causal relationship between exposure to public institution information and trust levels. We hypothesize that a lack of understanding breeds susceptibility to misinformation, hindering trust and adherence to recommended behaviors. We leverage a longitudinal survey tracking a representative sample of Americans during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the fourth wave, we implemented an experiment where half the respondents received easy access to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) information. Three months later, we assessed their trust in the CDC, perception of politicization, and knowledge about the pandemic. We provide several novel findings: trust in public health institutions positively correlates with compliance with preventive measures. We also document a concerning decline in trust during the pandemic, with partisan media consumption as the strongest predictor. Those consuming Republican-leaning news exhibited lower trust and a different perception of the pandemic's severity. The experiment demonstrates that reducing search costs for public health information increases knowledge and trust in the CDC, particularly among those who normally wouldn't seek it out (consumers of Republican-leaning news). This finding suggests information accessibility can mitigate the partisan gap in trust and compliance. Our ongoing research explores the underlying mechanisms of this effect.Discussant(s)
Victoria Prowse
,
Purdue University
Patricia Fearon Andrews
,
Stanford University
Viktoria Cologna
,
University of Zurich and ETH Zurich
Cuimin Ba
,
University of Pittsburgh
Galina Zudenkova
,
TU Dortmund University
JEL Classifications
- D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
- H1 - Structure and Scope of Government