Motivated Reasoning at Work: Evaluating and Sharing Belief‐Conflicting Information in the Context of Diversity Initiatives

ABSTRACT Due to cognitive processes such as motivated reasoning and other biases, individuals tend to reach desired conclusions rather than to carefully consider all available evidence. Using a two‐part experimental design in the context of hiring for diversity, this preliminary study examined whether employees avoid using or sharing information that conflicts with their beliefs by cognitively devaluing it, rather than simply ignoring it. Results suggest that accountability for decision‐making strategies and processes (rather than accountability for outcomes) may reduce bias in evaluating and sharing information that conflicts with beliefs about corporate diversity. These initial findings suggest that the type of accountability implemented in organizations may influence motivated reasoning in information processing and improve decision‐making.