Spite May Drive Both Science Denial And Belief In Conspiracy Theories

Conspiracy theories can be understood as beliefs about important events that reject strongly evidenced or simple explanations in favor of complicated, implausible, illogical, or even fantastical ones. These alternative ideas often involve secret plots masterminded by suspicious, improbably powerful, and malevolent groups.

Those who believe in conspiracies can also exhibit tendencies towards science denialism. For instance, they may reject ideas like anthropogenic climate change or the value and efficacy of vaccines, while also rejecting the views of “experts” as biased or ultimately false.

It is not hard to appreciate why science denial is often wrapped up with such ideas. Science plays an important role in society and is represented within existing power structures. At the same time, the scientific method does not always lend itself to intuitive explanations or emotional appeal, which can make it feel distant and removed from everyday experiences. But science is nevertheless present in the everyday lives of most people, so its findings cannot be simply dismissed as hearsay or an opinion.

“[T]o reject findings without engaging in valid scientific endeavours oneself,” Dr David Gordon and Dr Megan Birney, two psychologists from the University of Staffordshire and the University of Birmingham write in their new study, “one recourse is to accuse the scientists of acting on behalf of a sinister all-powerful conspiracy.”

This means that, to understand science denialism conspiracy theories, we also need to understand conspiracy theory beliefs in general. At present, researchers have identified three broad drivers that predict conspiracy beliefs. These include a need to explain the world (what are called epistemic motives), a need for security (known as an existential motive), and a need to feel valued in society (social motives).

In their new study, Gordon and Birney examine how spite may be a key factor underpinning the psychology of conspiracy theory beliefs as well.

“Spiteful psychological motives tend to emerge when people feel at a competitive disadvantage, often when we feel uncertain, threatened or undervalued,” explained lead researcher,” Gordon explained in a statement.

The researchers conducted three studies involving 1,000 participants that explored how spitefulness interacted with the three motivations for conspiracy theories mentioned above.

They found that, as may have been expected, higher levels of spite were associated with a stronger belief in conspiracy theories. They also found that spite mediated the relationship between conspiracy theory beliefs and the three predictive factors.

“We are not suggesting that people consciously choose to be spiteful when believing and spreading conspiracy theories,” Birney clarified. “Instead, our findings suggest that feelings of disadvantage in those three areas can provoke a common psychological – spiteful – response, one that makes individuals more receptive to believing conspiracy theories.”

The strongest relationships the psychologists identified were between belief, spite, and uncertainty about the world. Effective science communication and media literacy concerning complex topics that are aimed at combating misinformation could be used to tackle the latter, the researchers propose.

It is clear from this work that efforts to address beliefs in conspiracy theories need to move beyond countering misinformation on its own; it is suggested that action should also be taken to address the social and political conditions that create feelings of disenfranchisement, competition, and uncertainty.

“If we understand conspiracy beliefs as a manifestation of spite – a reaction to real or perceived social and economic disadvantage – then tackling misinformation is inseparable from addressing broader societal issues such as financial insecurity and inequality,” Gordon concluded.

The study is published in the Journal of Social Issues.