{"id":"bb8318c7-0cca-401a-a73a-1b7d4e91bb35","authors":[{"author":{"id":"38dccda3-dc2e-4068-a39e-1fb77ac825c6","openalex_id":"https://openalex.org/A5109031955","orcid":null,"display_name":"Milton Lodge","works_count":2,"cited_by_count":0,"h_index":0,"last_institution":"Stony Brook University","country_code":null},"position":"last"},{"author":{"id":"7da6d597-fd4b-46f1-a762-e030401f5fde","openalex_id":"A5046572196","orcid":null,"display_name":"Charles S. Taber","works_count":2,"cited_by_count":0,"h_index":0,"last_institution":"Stony Brook University","country_code":"US"},"position":"first"}],"concepts":[{"concept":{"id":"05656ee6-5d4a-4767-9e8e-2561656daaa5","openalex_id":"C15744967","display_name":"Psychology","display_name_tr":null,"display_name_ar":null,"level":0,"works_count":1365},"score":0.5885924},{"concept":{"id":"12e70453-f1c7-4b3c-91da-aac4783d6063","openalex_id":"C2776325391","display_name":"Motivated reasoning","display_name_tr":null,"display_name_ar":null,"level":3,"works_count":3},"score":0.6542987},{"concept":{"id":"227a5c9d-385c-4420-87b8-21dd78b5b5cf","openalex_id":"C17744445","display_name":"Political science","display_name_tr":"Din Bilimleri","display_name_ar":"علوم الدين","level":1,"works_count":2741},"score":0.28738624},{"concept":{"id":"3463c1bd-6309-4c58-8f0c-afbb37a08f2b","openalex_id":"C144024400","display_name":"Sociology","display_name_tr":null,"display_name_ar":null,"level":0,"works_count":1157},"score":0.15720925},{"concept":{"id":"5355124d-5e23-45a9-89ef-e4984494499c","openalex_id":"C94625758","display_name":"Politics","display_name_tr":null,"display_name_ar":null,"level":2,"works_count":329},"score":0.56393266},{"concept":{"id":"8c29c004-86cf-4741-b9f7-f5c79fd35ae9","openalex_id":"C18296254","display_name":"Skepticism","display_name_tr":null,"display_name_ar":null,"level":2,"works_count":10},"score":0.79911906},{"concept":{"id":"af078e51-edc3-4604-8927-39e07785ee95","openalex_id":"C77805123","display_name":"Social psychology","display_name_tr":null,"display_name_ar":null,"level":1,"works_count":540},"score":0.5519075},{"concept":{"id":"b924fa75-598a-4537-b494-0a69ee0709d9","openalex_id":"C118084267","display_name":"Positive economics","display_name_tr":null,"display_name_ar":null,"level":1,"works_count":105},"score":0.39846656},{"concept":{"id":"bc269bd2-bf91-42c8-b3b8-517b2e95b879","openalex_id":"C162324750","display_name":"Economics","display_name_tr":null,"display_name_ar":null,"level":0,"works_count":707},"score":0.14705864},{"concept":{"id":"d34b94e8-4bd5-416c-a615-7397c5177082","openalex_id":"C111472728","display_name":"Epistemology","display_name_tr":"İlahiyat","display_name_ar":"علم اللاهوت","level":2,"works_count":931},"score":0.32984543},{"concept":{"id":"d759dad0-1d02-4dea-8a80-b1bb31465888","openalex_id":"C44725695","display_name":"Normative","display_name_tr":null,"display_name_ar":null,"level":2,"works_count":49},"score":0.5866426},{"concept":{"id":"dc629660-b15f-4ac9-b220-f21eb85f5af9","openalex_id":"C168725872","display_name":"Sophistication","display_name_tr":null,"display_name_ar":null,"level":2,"works_count":3},"score":0.5173861},{"concept":{"id":"f14ac034-fb8a-4431-8e31-a512d16f3bd3","openalex_id":"C199539241","display_name":"Law","display_name_tr":null,"display_name_ar":null,"level":1,"works_count":519},"score":0.13823214}],"publisher_name":null,"publisher_website_url":null,"publisher_info":null,"bib_extra":[],"journal_info":{"id":"de2c0ffc-213f-4503-a24e-9ce0e06c583c","slug":"american-journal-of-political-science-00925853","sjr_quartile":"Q1","sjr_score":6.539,"sjr_year":2025,"sjr_history":{"2024":{"score":6.28,"quartile":"Q1","categories":["Political Science and International Relations (Q1)","Sociology and Political Science (Q1)"]},"2025":{"score":6.539,"quartile":"Q1","categories":["Political Science and International Relations (Q1)","Sociology and Political Science (Q1)"]}},"jif":5.6,"jif_quartile":"Q1","jif_year":2025,"doaj_seal":false,"is_curated":false,"ulke":"US","url":null,"h_index":332},"raw_data":{"abstract_tr":"Vatandaşların ne zaman ve neden önyargılı bilgi işlemcisi olduğunu açıklamaya yardımcı olan motive bir şüphecilik modeli öneriyoruz. İki deneysel çalışma, vatandaşların pozitif ayrımcılık ve silah kontrolü argümanlarını nasıl değerlendirdiğini inceler; tutum olarak uyumlu argümanların tutum olarak uyumsuz argümanlardan daha güçlü olarak değerlendirildiğine dair güçlü kanıtlar bulur. Olumlu ve olumsuz argümanları okurken, katılımcılar (P) zıt argümanları karşı çıkarır ve eleştirel olmadan destekleyici argümanları, yani bir onaylamaya dayalı yanlılığın kanıtını kabul ederler. Ayrıca, P'lerin okudukları argümanların kaynağını kendileri seçmekte özgür olmasıyla bir onay yanlılığı — doğrulayıcı kanıt aramaları — buluyoruz. Hem onay hem de reddetme önyargıları, özellikle en güçlü önceliklere ve en yüksek siyasi sofistike seviyelere sahip olanlar arasında, t2'nin t1 üzerinde güçlenmesine neden olan tutum kutuplaşmasına—yani t. 1'e karşı güçlenmesine yol açar. Bu bulguların demokraside rasyonel davranış üzerindeki normatif etkilerini tartışmakla sonlandırıyoruz.","title_en":"Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs","abstract_source":"harvest"},"openalex_id":"W2132490153","doi":"10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x","title":"Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs","publication_year":2006,"type":"article","cited_by_count":3605,"is_open_access":false,"pdf_url":null,"abstract":"We propose a model of motivated skepticism that helps explain when and why citizens are biased‐information processors. Two experimental studies explore how citizens evaluate arguments about affirmative action and gun control, finding strong evidence of a prior attitude effect such that attitudinally congruent arguments are evaluated as stronger than attitudinally incongruent arguments. When reading pro and con arguments, participants (Ps) counterargue the contrary arguments and uncritically accept supporting arguments, evidence of a disconfirmation bias. We also find a confirmation bias—the seeking out of confirmatory evidence—when Ps are free to self‐select the source of the arguments they read. Both the confirmation and disconfirmation biases lead to attitude polarization—the strengthening of t 2 over t 1 attitudes—especially among those with the strongest priors and highest levels of political sophistication. We conclude with a discussion of the normative implications of these findings for rational behavior in a democracy.","source_name":"American Journal of Political Science","source_issn":"0092-5853","volume":"50","issue":"3","first_page":"755","last_page":"769","language":"en","url":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x","is_relevant":true,"thesis_level":null,"title_tr":"Siyasi İnançların Değerlendirilmesinde Motive Şüphecilik","license_code":null,"license_url":null,"doi_status":"unknown","doi_last_checked":null,"merged_at":null,"lens_id":"015-475-547-173-305","patent_cited_by_count":null,"oa_colour":null,"created_at":"2026-04-14T17:15:47.578003+03:00","updated_at":"2026-05-20T18:32:21.002421+03:00","publisher":null,"merged_into":null}