Feeling Validated Versus Being Correct: A Meta-Analysis of Selective Exposure to Information

Psychological Bulletin, 135, pg. 555-588.

William Hart, Dolores Albarracín, Alice H. Eagly, Inge Brechan, Matthew J. Lindberg, Lisa Merrill

A meta-analysis assessed whether exposure to information is guided by defense or accuracy motives. The
studies examined information preferences in relation to attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors in situations that
provided choices between congenial information, which supported participants’ pre-existing attitudes,
beliefs, or behaviors, and uncongenial information, which challenged these tendencies. Analyses indicated
a moderate preference for congenial over uncongenial information (d  0.36). As predicted, this
congeniality bias was moderated by variables that affect the strength of participants’ defense motivation
and accuracy motivation. In support of the importance of defense motivation, the congeniality bias was
weaker when participants’ attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors were supported prior to information selection;
when participants’ attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors were not relevant to their values or not held with
conviction; when the available information was low in quality; when participants’ closed-mindedness
was low; and when their confidence in the attitude, belief, or behavior was high. In support of the
importance of accuracy motivation, an uncongeniality bias emerged when uncongenial information was
relevant to accomplishing a current goal.

Read the article.