Cognition and policy change: the consistency of policy learning in the advocacy coalition framework

Policy actors involved in decision-making processes interact and gradually accumulate evidence about policy problems and solutions. As a result, they update their policy beliefs and preferences over time. This process of policy learning is consistent if policy preferences are aligned with any adaptations in beliefs about policy outcomes – a crucial condition of learning-induced policy changes. This article examines whether and when policy learning is consistent based on regression analyses conducted on data from a 2012 survey of 293 Belgian actors involved in the European liberalization policy process for the rail and electricity sectors. In line with the advocacy coalition framework, existing research has suggested that motivated modes of reasoning, such as selective exposure and biased assimilation, influence policy actors’ attitudes and behaviours. This study isolates the effect of biased assimilation on policy learning by demonstrating that when policy actors adapt their beliefs about policy outcomes, they do not necessarily align their policy preferences with those adaptations. Furthermore, biased assimilation is higher among politically curious actors, but their degree of commitment to the policy process does not appear to play a role. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed