<p>Motivated reasoning, by which individuals evaluate information in a biased way to support desired conclusions, is a widespread phenomenon and has primarily been investigated in relation to ideological beliefs. However, the socio-psychological factors influencing opinion change during motivated reasoning tasks have received less attention. We explored motivated reasoning about policies in Spain, focusing on the socio-political climate shaped by the COVID-19 pandemic, recruiting a nationally representative sample of 1,329 participants. We used psychometric instruments to assess psychological and social predictors and evaluated motivated reasoning using an online experimental task in which participants were shown statements by politicians that were inconsistent with their ideologies, followed by exculpatory information explaining the inconsistencies. Right-wing and left-wing participants exhibited motivated reasoning in their evaluation of the statements. However, attitudinal change following exculpatory information varied according to participants’ political orientation and psychological traits, with left-wing participants showing greater flexibility. Perceived economic threat and authoritarianism were associated with lower attitudinal change, and so less flexibility in response to right-wing statements, while reflective thinking predicted greater change. Less attitudinal change in response to left-wing statements was associated with right-wing orientation, perceived economic threat, and conspiracy mentality, with political orientation emerging as the strongest predictor. Our findings underscore the importance of considering ideological, emotional, and cognitive aspects in public information campaigns designed to reduce polarization and promote openness to new information during crises.</p>