(BOULDER, Colo.) — A study out of Boulder seeks to answer a timeless question: why do people continue to support politicians who blatantly fudge the facts? The answer has to do with how people define truth vs. fact—and which they think is more important.

The in-depth study examines, from a sociological and psychological perspective, the reasons people have for supporting their politicians of choice. In general, the study found that most people value the promotion of ideals above factual accuracy.

“A lot of people’s support for politicians who say things that aren’t true isn’t because they believe those statements per se, but they view that misinformation as supporting political goals that they believe in,” said Ethan Poskanzer, an assistant professor of strategy and entrepreneurship in the Leeds School of Business and co-author of the study, which will be published in the American Journal of Sociology in June.

For example, if someone supports Donald Trump’s position on immigration, the study found, they will often not care if he posts something to social media that presents a completely inaccurate or misleading view of specific events having to do with the border. This is something the study’s authors call “moral flexibility”: a politically-driven disconnect between what people believe to be factual and what they believe to be true.

The study also found that this “moral flexibility” is bi-partisan. Both Republicans and Democrats do it. Furthermore, they each tend to judge the other party’s tendency towards moral flexibility while excusing the same behavior on their side.

Even when shown incontrovertible evidence that a fact or statement from a politician is false, many supporters of a political agenda will excuse factual inaccuracy “because people know that it’s not true, but they want it to be out there and it fits their agenda,” Poskanzer said.