Martin Baekgaard et al in British Journal of Political Science: “Does evidence help politicians make informed decisions even if it is at odds with their prior beliefs? And does providing more evidence increase the likelihood that politicians will be enlightened by the information? Based on the literature on motivated political reasoning and the theory about affective tipping points, this article hypothesizes that politicians tend to reject evidence that contradicts their prior attitudes, but that increasing the amount of evidence will reduce the impact of prior attitudes and strengthen their ability to interpret the information correctly. These hypotheses are examined using randomized survey experiments with responses from 954 Danish politicians, and results from this sample are compared to responses from similar survey experiments with Danish citizens. The experimental findings strongly support the hypothesis that politicians are biased by prior attitudes when interpreting information. However, in contrast to expectations, the findings show that the impact of prior attitudes increases when more evidence is provided….(More)“.
How to contribute:
Did you come across – or create – a compelling project/report/book/app at the leading edge of innovation in governance?
Share it with us at info@thelivinglib.org so that we can add it to the Collection!
About the Curator
Get the latest news right in your inbox
Subscribe to curated findings and actionable knowledge from The Living Library, delivered to your inbox every Friday
Related articles
Citizen Engagement
PEOPLE
Democracy in Practice: A Report on Innovations in Participatory Governance
Posted in August 25, 2026 by Stefaan Verhulst
Democracy
INSTITUTIONAL INNOVATION
Rebuilding Democracy: Why Large-Scale Reform Requires a New Institutional Model
Posted in August 25, 2026 by Stefaan Verhulst
DATA
Data Collaboratives
Open Data
Who counts in Trump’s America?
Posted in August 25, 2026 by Stefaan Verhulst