We conduct two survey experiments to study which information people choose to consume and how it affects their beliefs. In the first experiment, respondents choose between optimistic and pessimistic article headlines related to the COVID-19 pandemic and are then randomly shown one of the articles. Respondents with more pessimistic prior beliefs tend to prefer pessimistic headlines, providing evidence of confirmation bias. Additionally, respondents assigned to the less preferred article discount its information. The second experiment studies the role of partisan views, uncovering strong source dependence: news source revelation further distorts information acquisition, eliminating the role of priors in article choice.

We use a survey experiment to generate direct evidence on how people acquire and process information. Participants can buy different information signals that could help them forecast future national home prices. We elicit their valuations and exogenously vary the cost of information. Participants put substantial value on their preferred signal and, when acquired, incorporate the signal in their beliefs. However, they disagree on which signal to buy. As a result, making information cheaper does not decrease the cross-sectional dispersion of expectations. We provide a model with costly acquisition and processing of information, which can match most of our empirical results.