Abstract:Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the world witnessed a partisan segregation of beliefs toward the global health crisis and its management. Politically motivated reasoning, the tendency to interpret information in accordance with individual motives to protect valued beliefs rather than objectively considering the facts, could represent a key process involved in the polarization of attitudes. The objective of this study was to explore politically motivated reasoning when participants assess information regarding COVID-19. Design: We carried out a preregistered online experiment using a diverse sample (N = 1,500) from the United States. Both Republicans and Democrats assessed the same COVID-19-related information about the health effects of lockdowns, social distancing, vaccination, hydroxychloroquine, and wearing face masks. Results: At odds with our prestated hypothesis, we found no evidence in line with politically motivated reasoning when interpreting numerical information about COVID-19. Moreover, we found no evidence supporting the idea that numeric ability or cognitive sophistication bolster politically motivated reasoning in the case of COVID-19. Instead, our findings suggest that participants base their assessment on prior beliefs of the matter. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that politically polarized attitudes toward COVID-19 are more likely to be driven by lack of reasoning than politically motivated reasoning-a finding that opens potential avenues for combating political polarization about important health care topics. Highlights: Participants assessed numerical information regarding the effect of different COVID-19 policies.We found no evidence in line with politically motivated reasoning when interpreting numerical information about COVID-19.Participants tend to base their assessment of COVID-19-related facts on prior beliefs of the matter.Politically polarized attitudes toward COVID-19 are more a result of lack of thinking than partisanship.

Affective partisan polarization and moral dilemmas during the COVID-19 pandemic

Pandemic Culture Wars: Partisan Differences in the Moral Language of COVID-19 Discussions

Asymmetric affective polarization regarding COVID-19 vaccination in six European countries

COVID-19 and Politically Motivated Reasoning

Polarization and public health: Partisan differences in social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic

Responses to political partisans are shaped by a COVID-19-sensitive disease avoidance psychology: A longitudinal investigation of functional flexibility.

Partisanship and the trolley problem: Partisan willingness to sacrifice members of the other party

Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries

Emotion Regulation and Dynamics of Moral Concerns During the Early COVID-19 Pandemic

Regional and Temporal Patterns of Partisan Polarization during the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States and Canada

Dynamics of Affective Polarization: From Consensus to Partisan Divides

Moral decision-making and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic

Polarized opinions on Covid-19 and environmental policy measures. The role of social media use and personal concerns in German-speaking countries.

Partisanship, health behavior, and policy attitudes in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic

Political affiliation as a moderator of the relationship between organizational climate and COVID-19 vaccine readiness

Political polarization and health

Partisanship and the Pandemic: How and Why Americans Followed Party Cues on COVID-19

Political identity and risk politics: Evidence from a pandemic

The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic in a polarized political system: Lessons from the 2020 election

How perceived polarization predicts attitude moralization (and vice versa): A four-wave longitudinal study during the 2020 U.S. election.

Explicit discrimination and ingroup favoritism, but no implicit biases in hypothetical triage decisions during COVID-19