Morality justifies motivated reasoning in the folk ethics of belief

Corey Cusimano, Tania Lombrozo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

When faced with a dilemma between believing what is supported by an impartial assessment of the evidence (e.g., that one's friend is guilty of a crime) and believing what would better fulfill a moral obligation (e.g., that the friend is innocent), people often believe in line with the latter. But is this how people think beliefs ought to be formed? We addressed this question across three studies and found that, across a diverse set of everyday situations, people treat moral considerations as legitimate grounds for believing propositions that are unsupported by objective, evidence-based reasoning. We further document two ways in which moral considerations affect how people evaluate others' beliefs. First, the moral value of a belief affects the evidential threshold required to believe, such that morally beneficial beliefs demand less evidence than morally risky beliefs. Second, people sometimes treat the moral value of a belief as an independent justification for belief, and on that basis, sometimes prescribe evidentially poor beliefs to others. Together these results show that, in the folk ethics of belief, morality can justify and demand motivated reasoning.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number104513
JournalCognition
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2021

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Language and Linguistics
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Linguistics and Language
  • Cognitive Neuroscience

Keywords

  • Belief
  • Lay epistemics
  • Moral judgment
  • Motivated reasoning
  • Optimism

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Morality justifies motivated reasoning in the folk ethics of belief'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this