“Ideology” or “Situation Sense”? www.culturalcognition.net “Ideology” or “Situation Sense”? An Experimental Investigation of Motivated Reasoning and Professional Judgment

Does political ideology trump legal reasoning?

Does political ideology trump legal reasoning? I. Identity-protective cognition Study overview & hypotheses Results Judicial studies & the validity question

Does political ideology trump legal reasoning? I. Identity-protective cognition Study overview & hypotheses Results Judicial studies & the validity question

Identity-protective cognition & political polarization: policy-consequential facts

Identity-protective cognition & political polarization: legally consequential facts

Identity-protective cognition & political polarization: judicial decisionmaking?

Does political ideology trump legal reasoning? I. Identity-protective cognition Study overview & hypotheses Results Judicial studies & the validity question

Does political ideology trump legal reasoning? I. Identity-protective cognition Study overview & hypotheses Results Judicial studies & the validity question

They saw a statutory ambiguity . . . . subjects: judges, public, lawyers, law students (N = 1554)

They saw a statutory ambiguity . . . . subjects: judges, public, lawyers, law students (N = 1554)

They saw a statutory ambiguity . . . . subjects: judges, public, lawyers, law students (N = 1554)

They saw a statutory ambiguity . . . . subjects: judges, public, lawyers, law students (N = 1554)

They saw a statutory ambiguity . . . . subjects: judges, public, lawyers, law students (N = 1554)

They saw a statutory ambiguity . . . . subjects: judges, public, lawyers, law students (N = 1554) Conditions 1 2 Littering: placing water dispensers in desert = “depositing ... junk ... debris ...”? Disclosure: “knowingly violate” nondisclosure regulation = know that disclosure violates law?

They saw a statutory ambiguity . . . . subjects: judges, public, lawyers, law students (N = 1554) Conditions 1 2 Littering: placing water dispensers in desert = “depositing ... junk ... debris ...”? Construction workers Disclosure: “knowingly violate” nondisclosure regulation = know that disclosure violates law?

They saw a statutory ambiguity . . . . subjects: judges, public, lawyers, law students (N = 1554) Conditions 1 2 Littering: placing water dispensers in desert = “depositing ... junk ... debris ...”? Construction workers Immigrant aid group Disclosure: “knowingly violate” nondisclosure regulation = know that disclosure violates law?

They saw a statutory ambiguity . . . . subjects: judges, public, lawyers, law students (N = 1554) Conditions 1 2 Littering: placing water dispensers in desert = “depositing ... junk ... debris ...”? Construction workers Immigrant aid group Disclosure: “knowingly violate” nondisclosure regulation = know that disclosure violates law? Prolife counseling

They saw a statutory ambiguity . . . . subjects: judges, public, lawyers, law students (N = 1554) Conditions 1 2 Littering: placing water dispensers in desert = “depositing ... junk ... debris ...”? Construction workers Immigrant aid group Disclosure: “knowingly violate” nondisclosure regulation = know that disclosure violates law? Prolife counseling Prochoice counseling

Cultural Cognition Worldviews Hierarchy Individualism Communitarianism Egalitarianism

Gays military/gay parenting Cultural Cognition Worldviews Risk Perception Key Low Risk High Risk Hierarchy Environment: climate, nuclear Gays military/gay parenting hierarchical individualists hierarchical communitarians Abortion procedure Guns/Gun Control cats/stupid birds HPV Vaccination Individualism Communitarianism Gays military/gay parenting Environment: climate, nuclear Abortion procedure Guns/Gun Control egalitarian individualists egalitarian communitarians HPV Vaccination cats/stupid birds Egalitarianism

Cultural Cognition Worldviews subject means

Marijuana legalization Marijuana legalization Cultural Cognition Worldviews Risk Perception Key Low Risk High Risk Hierarchy climate change nuclear power air & water pollution Marijuana legalization Abortion procedure Anti-terrorism Individualism Communitarianism Marijuana legalization Abortion procedure Anti-terrorism climate change nuclear power air & water pollution Egalitarianism

Societal risk perceptions CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence for mean

Societal risk perceptions CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence for mean

Societal risk perceptions CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence for mean

Societal risk perceptions CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence for mean

Societal risk perceptions CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence for mean

Societal risk perceptions CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence for mean

They saw a statutory ambiguity . . . . subjects: public, students, lawyers, judges (N = 1554) Conditions 1 2 Littering: placing water dispensers in desert = “depositing ... junk ... debris ...”? Construction workers Immigrant aid group Disclosure: “knowingly violate” nondisclosure regulation = know that disclosure violates law? Prolife counseling Prochoice counseling

Predicted results for public Predispositions No violation Violation Hierarchy hierarchical individualists hierarchical communitarians Individualism Communitarianism egalitarian individualists egalitarian communitarians Egalitarianism

Predicted results for public Predispositions No violation Violation Hierarchy hierarchical individualists Pro-choice clinic Pro-life clinic Individualism Communitarianism Pro-choice clinic egalitarian communitarians Pro-life clinic Egalitarianism

Predicted results for public Predispositions No violation Violation Hierarchy Immigrant aid group Pro-choice clinic Construction workers Pro-life clinic Individualism Communitarianism Pro-choice clinic Immigrant aid group Pro-life clinic Construction workers Egalitarianism

Predicted results for public Predispositions No violation Violation Hierarchy Immigrant aid group Pro-choice clinic Construction workers Pro-life clinic Individualism Communitarianism Pro-choice clinic Immigrant aid group Pro-life clinic Construction workers Egalitarianism

Competing hypotheses for judges: Equivalence thesis General immunity thesis Domain-specific immunity thesis Lawyers & students: mechanisms?

Does political ideology trump legal reasoning? I. Identity-protective cognition Study overview & hypotheses Results Judicial studies & the validity question

Does political ideology trump legal reasoning? I. Identity-protective cognition Study overview & hypotheses Results Judicial studies & the validity question

Disclosure Littering

Littering Hierarch individ Egal commun Disclosure

Significant results!!

Littering Disclosure

Littering HI construction 40% Disclosure

Littering HI construction 40% ± 7% Disclosure

Littering HI construction 40% ± 7% 75% ± 6% HI imm rts Disclosure

Littering 34% ± 9% HI construction HI imm rts Disclosure

Littering 27% ± 14% HI construction HI imm rts EC imm rts Disclosure

Littering Disclosure 22% ± 12% HI construction EC construction HI imm rts EC imm rts Disclosure

Littering Disclosure HI construction EC construction HI imm rts EC imm rts Disclosure

Littering Disclosure HI construction EC construction HI imm rts EC imm rts Disclosure 63% ± 9% EI prolife

Littering Disclosure HI construction EC construction HI imm rts EC imm rts Disclosure 17% ± 13% EI prochoice EI prolife

Littering Disclosure HI construction EC construction HI imm rts EC imm rts Disclosure EI prochoice EI prolife

Littering Disclosure HI construction EC construction HI imm rts EC imm rts Disclosure EI prochoice HC prolife EI prolife

Littering Disclosure HI construction EC construction HI imm rts EC imm rts Disclosure 15% ± 10% HC prochoice EI prochoice HC prolife EI prolife

Littering Disclosure HI construction EC construction HI imm rts EC imm rts Disclosure HC prochoice EI prochoice HC prolife EI prolife

Littering Disclosure EC construction HI construction EC construction HI imm rts EC imm rts EC imm rts HI construction HI imm rts Disclosure HC prochoice EI prochoice HC prolife EI prolife

Littering Disclosure EC construction HI construction EC construction HI imm rts EC imm rts EC imm rts HI construction HI imm rts Disclosure HC prochoice HC prolife EI prochoice HC prolife HC prochoice EI prolife EI prolife EI prochoice

“IPCI”: judges vs. public 22%, ± 6% Identity protective cognition impact

“IPCI”: judges vs. public 27%, ± 14% Public 22%, ± 6% Judge -5%, ± 12% Identity protective cognition impact

Competing hypotheses for judges: Equivalence thesis General immunity thesis Domain-specific immunity thesis

Competing hypotheses for judges: Equivalence thesis General immunity thesis Domain-specific immunity thesis Lawyers & students: mechanisms?

Disclosure Littering Hierarch individ Egal commun

Avg. IPCIs Judge Public

Avg. IPCIs Judge Public Lawyer Student

“Weight of the evidence” observed data 4.5x less consistent with IPCI = 0 than with IPCI = 10% observed student IPCI 1.3 2 3 4 5.4 6 -.3 -.2 -.1 .1 .2 .3 H3: IPCI = 0.10 H1: IPCI = 0 Identity protective cognition impact Students

“Weight of the evidence” observed data 2x more consistent with IPCI = 0 than with IPCI = 10% observed lawyer IPCI 1.3 2 2.8 4 5.6 6 -.3 -.2 -.1 .1 .2 .3 H3: IPCI = 0.10 H1: IPCI = 0 Identity protective cognition impact Lawyers

“Weight of the evidence” observed data 20x more consistent with IPCI = 0 than with IPCI = 10% .25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 -.3 -.2 -.1 .1 .2 .3 H3: IPCI = 0.10 H1: IPCI = 0 observed judge IPCI Identity protective cognition impact Judges

What about judges? Lawyers & students: mechanisms? Equivalence thesis General immunity thesis Domain-specific immunity thesis Lawyers & students: mechanisms?

Identity-protective cognition & dual process reasoning: “Motivated system 2 reasoning”

Pattern recognition & professional judgment

Gays military/gay parenting Cultural Cognition Worldviews Risk Perception Key Low Risk High Risk Hierarchy Environment: climate, nuclear Gays military/gay parenting Abortion procedure Guns/Gun Control cats/stupid birds HPV Vaccination Individualism Communitarianism Gays military/gay parenting Environment: climate, nuclear Abortion procedure Guns/Gun Control HPV Vaccination cats/stupid birds Egalitarianism

Pattern recognition & professional judgment

Pattern recognition & “situation sense”

McCullen v. Coakley, No. 12-1168, (U.S. S. Ct. June 26, 2014)

Does political ideology trump legal reasoning? I. Identity-protective cognition Study overview & hypotheses Results Judicial studies & the validity question

Does political ideology trump legal reasoning? I. Identity-protective cognition Study overview & hypotheses Results Judicial studies & the validity question

The validity question: Experimental studies without judges

The validity question: Observational studies with biased outcome measures & no predictive power

Human vs. Computer: Supreme Court Showdown! The result: Experts: 59% Lexy: 75%!!!!!!!!!! P(Z > .75-.59 ) = 0.007** √(.59*.41)/68 Nonexpert: 72% (49 of 68) P(Z > .75-.72 ) = 0.58! √(.72*.28)/68

The validity question: Experimental studies of judges w/o “ideology”

The validity question: Do experiments “model” judicial decisionmaking

Societal risk perceptions CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence for mean

The validity question: Do experiments “model” judicial decisionmaking

The validity question: How to answer it Wrong way: pissing contest “whose study is right? whose method is correct?” Right way: rational empirical inquiry “what additional studies can we do that will give us more reason than we’d otherwise have to view one hypothesis as closer to true than another and generate convergent validity?”

New data: shame & critical reasoning! www.culturalcognition.net