HIV conspiracy theory beliefs mediates the connection between HIV testing attitudes and HIV prevention self-efficacy

Contemporary trends in psychological research on conspiracy beliefs. A systematic review

Background

The number of psychological studies on conspiracy beliefs has been systematically growing for about a dozen years, but in recent years, the trend has intensified. We provided a review covering the psychological literature on conspiracy beliefs from 2018 to 2021. Halfway through this period, the COVID-19 pandemic broke out, accompanied by an explosion of movements based on conspiracy theories, intensifying researchers' interest in this issue.

Methods

Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, the review systematically searched for relevant journal articles published between 2018 and 2021. A search was done on Scopus and Web of Science (only peer-reviewed journals). A study was included if it contained primary empirical data, if specific or general conspiracy belief(s) were measured and if its correlation with at least one other psychological variable was reported. All the studies were grouped for the descriptive analysis according to the methodology used, the participants' characteristics, the continent of origin, the sample size, and the conspiracy beliefs measurement tools. Due to substantial methodological heterogeneity of the studies, narrative synthesis was performed. The five researchers were assigned specific roles at each stage of the analysis to ensure the highest quality of the research.

Results

Following the proposed methodology, 308 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and 274 articles (417 studies) meeting the inclusion criteria were identified and included in the review. Almost half of the studies (49.6%) were conducted in European countries. The vast majority of the studies (85.7%) were carried out on samples of adult respondents. The research presents antecedents as well as (potential) consequences of conspiracy beliefs. We grouped the antecedents of conspiracy beliefs into six categories: cognitive (e.g., thinking style) motivational (e.g., uncertainty avoidance), personality (e.g., collective narcissism), psychopathology (e.g., Dark Triad traits), political (e.g., ideological orientation), and sociocultural factors (e.g., collectivism).

Conclusion and limitations

The research presents evidence on the links between conspiracy beliefs and a range of attitudes and behaviors considered unfavorable from the point of view of individuals and of the society at large. It turned out that different constructs of conspiracy thinking interact with each other. The limitations of the study are discussed in the last part of the article.

HIV Testing Behaviors among Black Rural Women: The Moderating Role of Conspiracy Beliefs and Partner Status Disclosure

Objective

This study investigated whether HIV testing attitudes, HIV conspiracy beliefs, and reported sexual partner disclosure of HIV/STI status related to one-month self-report HIV testing outcomes following a brief intervention among Black women aged 18-25 years residing in rural Mississippi.

Participants

Black women (N=119; M age=19.90, SD=1.81) recruited in rural Mississippi completed an online assessment before a brief HIV prevention intervention and a one month follow-up assessment during January to November 2016.

Main Outcome Measures

Self-reported HIV testing 30-days following the intervention, partner HIV/STI status disclosure, beliefs in HIV conspiracy theory, and HIV testing attitudes in pre- and post-intervention assessments. Bivariate and multivariate analyses tested associations with HIV testing behaviors following the intervention.

Results

Moderated moderation was used to examine whether HIV conspiracy beliefs and partner disclosure status both moderated the relationship between pre-intervention attitudes toward HIV testing and HIV testing at 1-month follow-up. It was found that both HIV conspiracy beliefs and partner disclosure moderated the relationship between attitudes and HIV testing at one-month follow-up. When partner disclosure was low, women with more negative attitudes toward testing and higher conspiracy beliefs were less likely to get tested than those with negative attitudes and lower conspiracy beliefs; conspiracy beliefs did not relate to testing outcomes when testing attitudes were positive.

Conclusion

Findings suggest that interventions may benefit from accounting for conspiracy beliefs and the dyadic status disclosure when encouraging young rural women to test for HIV.

Whose Responsibility Is It to Dismantle Medical Mistrust? Future Directions for Researchers and Health Care Providers

Medical mistrust persists and appears to be growing. The public health literature on medical mistrust has largely focused on mistrust among Black and African American populations due to legacies of abuse and mistreatment, such as the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Study. However, research is now emerging that explores mistrust among various populations and in varying contexts, and the literature now largely emphasizes the role of ongoing, present-day social and economic inequalities in shaping and sustaining mistrust, particularly among populations who experience staggering health disparities. This special issue showcased nine articles exploring medical mistrust among diverse populations, exploring a wide array of topics and spanning myriad methodologies. In addition to a rigorous systematic review of the literature, this issue covers several critical subareas of the health disparities literature, including preventative health screenings among Black men, discrimination and cultural factors among rural Latinx communities, health care satisfaction among Latina immigrant women, the complex relationship between HIV testing and "conspiracy beliefs" among Black populations, pre-exposure prophylaxis use among transgender women, the impacts of mass incarceration on HIV care, eHealth interventions to address chronic diseases among sexual minority men of color, and participatory research to engage underserved populations as co-researchers. The purpose of this article is to provide a brief summary of the nine manuscripts in this special issue and to outline some recommendations and future directions for research on medical mistrust.