A fundamental challenge in the dissemination of information is individuals’ tendency to disbelieve in any information incongruent with their existing ideology. Individuals perceive new information posing a threat to one’s individual or group identities as a personal threat, and therefore engage in defense-motivated biased processing to rationalize dismissal of this information, thereby protecting their identity. Consequently, their beliefs, however wrong or dangerous, generally persist even in the face of countervailing evidence. Past research has proposed three models which include strategies that have been shown to reduce biased processing of information: the first emphasizes accuracy goals, the second is the self-affirmation model, the other is the common ingroup identity model. I plan to collect experimental data in which I utilize strategies from the three models presented above to determine which strategy possesses the greatest effectiveness in discouraging biased information processing. Establishing which strategy works best, and the conditions under which that strategy holds, could prove invaluable in enhancing the effectiveness of strategies aimed at discouraging biased processing of information.