Researchers have identified specific psychological traits that indicate whether someone is likely to follow conspiracy theories. The results suggest that those who believe the world is fundamentally unjust and those who have a lower tolerance for ambiguity are more likely to hold to conspiracy ideas.
Conspiracy theories are not new. Historically, such beliefs – which hold that specific events are caused by secretive or otherwise hidden parities with selfish or evil agendas – existed on the fringes of public opinion. However, they have become increasingly prominent in recent years as social media and the internet have allowed disparate groups to share ideas more easily.
Rather than being the odd ideas entertained by a few people, many modern conspiracy theories are now influencing public discourse and policymaking.
As conspiracy theories have become more common over the last decade, so too have studies that have attempted to understand them. Previous work has explored everything from the targets of modern conspiracy theories (e.g. medicine, science, politics, commerce) to the nature of such beliefs or the common attitudes, values, and personality trains shared by believers. There has even been a large body of work exploring different ways to challenge these ideas or the people who hold them.
Despite these efforts, less work has examined the broader mindset that may lead someone to accept these ideas and to hold onto them even when they’re contradicted by empirical facts.
In order to address this, a new study led by Adrian Furnham, a professor at the Norwegian Business School, has examined the “cover ups” part of many conspiracy beliefs. This is the belief that organizations or powerful individuals are deliberately hiding the truth (whatever it is) from the public. With this perspective, those who hold conspiracy theories can argue that skeptics are actually the ones being misguided.
Furnham and colleagues surveyed 253 people (57 percent female, 43 percent male) from the US, the UK, Canada, Australia, and South Africa, among others. Each participant had already completed psychometric tests prior to being recruited.
They were then asked to rate statements such as: “I think that many very important things happen in the world, which the public is never informed about”; “I think that government agencies closely monitor all citizens”; and “I think that many health agencies are in the pay of organizations and don’t tell the public the truth.”
The team then conducted a statistical assessment of 14 variables, including participants’ age, sex, religious beliefs, political views, sense of injustice, optimism, self-esteem, and so on. The aim was to see if any of them may explain why people develop a conspiracy mentality. They found three factors that stood out from the rest.
The first was a low tolerance for ambiguity. Those with this trait struggle to handle stories or situations that not completely clear. In other words, they find it hard to handle “shades of gray”. This can lead them to feel anxious when situations become complex or random. Conspiracy theories remove this ambiguity by offering simple narratives.
The second factor related to the participant’s sense of injustice. People who see the world as inherently unjust often exhibit cynicism and sometime paranoia which can lead them to endorse conspiracy theories. The belief that there is someone out there creating this state of injustice helps make sense of complex or random events.
This, the team observed, was particularly evident among young males, especially those with religious and right-wing leanings.
“The present research offers deeper insight into the traits associated with [conspiracy theory] beliefs. Individuals who endorse these beliefs tend to be younger males with stronger religious convictions and right-wing political orientations. Additionally, they often perceive the world as unfair and unjust – a perspective that may warrant both explanation and potential intervention,” the team explain in their paper.
“Furthermore, they exhibit an authoritarian mindset, characterized by an intolerance for ambiguity.”
The team were surprised that intolerance for ambiguity was a better predicter of conspiracy thinking than demographic factors, such as age or education. This, Furnham told IFLScience, suggests its “an important variable” that is “much overlooked”.
While the sample size for this study was relatively small and the participants were mostly well-educated and middle-aged, the research still demonstrates the significance of intolerance for ambiguity and a sense that the world is unjust as factors for predicting conspiracy beliefs. In particular, the “cover up” perspective is an important part of any such belief.
Conspiracy theories are not a monolith. “You need to understand their ‘cover up’ perspectives”, Furnham said. “They are not all the same” and “you need to understand the function of the conspiracy theory for the individual”.
The study is published in Applied Cognitive Psychology.
Source Link: A Conspiracy Theory Mindset Can Be Predicted By These Two Psychological Traits
