Distinguish directional from accuracy goals before you start

Before reasoning about something, ask whether you are trying to reach a specific answer or the correct one.

Why it works

Kunda’s research shows that motivation shapes reasoning primarily when a person has a "directional goal" — wanting a specific conclusion — rather than an "accuracy goal," which is wanting to be right regardless of what the answer is. Explicitly naming which goal is active before you start reasoning activates the meta-cognitive level that can notice when directional motivation is coloring the process.

How to do it

1. Before reasoning through an important question, ask: "Do I have a stake in what answer I reach?"
2. If yes, name the desired conclusion explicitly — making it visible makes it easier to monitor.
3. Set an explicit accuracy goal: "My job here is to get the right answer, even if it is uncomfortable."
4. Review your conclusion at the end and ask: "Is this the most accurate conclusion, or the most convenient one?"

Evidence

Kunda’s experimental work found that accuracy motivation led to more balanced and less biased information processing than directional motivation, even when the same information was available. (observational)

Lab studies used low-stakes tasks; in high-stakes real-world reasoning, the directional pull is stronger and the accuracy override harder to sustain.

Sources

• Kunda (1990), "The case for motivated reasoning," Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498

Common mistake

Declaring an accuracy goal verbally while secretly maintaining a directional one — the internal goal, not the stated one, determines what the reasoning engine optimizes for.