Finding Someone to Blame: The Link Between COVID-19 Conspiracy Beliefs, Prejudice, Support for Violence, and Other Negative Social Outcomes

The role of worldviews, radicalization risk factors, and personality in harassment of scientists

Anti-science movements brought more than public distrust in science. Perhaps even more worryingly, these movements are also associated with instances of harassment of-and violence against-scientists. However, virtually nothing is known about individuals likely to harass or harm scientists. Across two pre-registered studies (total N = 749), we investigated the role of worldviews (e.g., political ideology, conspiracy mentality, science cynicism), radicalization risk factors (relative deprivation and threat), and personality traits and how these relate to harassment of scientists (both attitudes and behavior). We found that science cynicism-the perception that scientists are incompetent and corrupt-drives approval of scientists' harassment (attitudes), as well as harmful behavior (e.g., refusing to donate money, not signing a petition). Additionally, perceiving scientists as threatening, as well as dark personality traits (psychopathy and narcissism), contributed to approving scientists' harassment. Overall, the present research takes a first step in identifying predictors of the willingness to harm scientists.

Pandemic or "Plandemic"?: The Mediating Role of Epistemic Justification Strategies in the Relationship Between COVID-19 Conspiracy Beliefs and COVID-19 Vaccine Conspiracy Beliefs

BACKGROUND

In today's post-truth times, where personal feelings and beliefs have become increasingly important, determining what is accurate knowledge has become an important skill. This is especially important during uncertainty crises (e.g., epidemics and pandemics) because alternative explanations other than scientific knowledge may be disseminated vigorously. Epistemic justification concerns how and in what way the truth of knowledge claims is justified and the criteria for knowledge to be true and/or a fact. Given this backdrop, the present study examined how individuals reacted to conspiracies in an uncertainty crisis (using the COVID-19 pandemic as an example).

AIM

The mediating role of epistemic justification was investigated regarding its relationship between COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy beliefs.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted incorporating a multifactorial correlational design. Using convenience sampling, 690 participants (55.7% females, Mage = 32.24 years, SD = 9.75) from different regions of Türkiye completed an online survey via Google Forms.

RESULTS

The results demonstrated a strong and statistically significant correlation between beliefs in COVID-19 conspiracy theories and beliefs in COVID-19 vaccination conspiracy theories. The mediating effects of justification by authority and personal justification were statistically significant between COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy theories.

CONCLUSION

Using the COVID-19 pandemic as an example, the present results indicated the complex relationships between conspiracy beliefs and epistemic justification. The present results indicate the importance of authorities in taking early action to provide scientific evidence and information to the public to avoid individuals believing false information.

Unfounded beliefs, distress and powerlessness: A three-wave longitudinal study

The aim of the study was to examine the relationships between unfounded COVID-19 beliefs and distress and powerlessness, specifically, whether distress and powerlessness are causes or consequences of unfounded COVID-19 beliefs represented by conspiracy beliefs and pseudoscientific beliefs regarding treatment and measures. Unfounded beliefs were assessed using the COVID-19 Unfounded Beliefs Scale; distress was measured with the Symptom Checklist-10, and powerlessness was measured with four items measuring the feeling of losing control. Data collection took place during three phases of the pandemic in Slovakia (October 2021, N = 1838; July 2022, N = 1,420; April 2023, N = 925). Results suggest that individuals with stronger unfounded beliefs about COVID-19 reported greater powerlessness longitudinally, and individuals with stronger COVID-19 unfounded beliefs treatment and measures reported greater distress longitudinally (notably, beliefs about COVID-19 measures in the first wave were associated with distress in the second wave, and beliefs about COVID-19 treatment in the second wave were associated with distress in the third wave). The present findings corroborate an existential threat model of conspiracy theories that says the relationship between unfounded beliefs and indicators of well-being is bidirectional, so interventions should be focused both on eliminating the unfounded beliefs and strengthening well-being.

Conspire to one's own detriment: Strengthening HPV Program Support Through Debunking Epistemically Suspect Beliefs

The study experimentally tested an intervention that debunks epistemically suspect beliefs about vaccines. After answering questions about pre-existing epistemically suspect beliefs (irrational health beliefs and conspiracy mentality), 565 participants were randomly assigned into one of three conditions and exposed either to neutral information about domestic animals, salient epistemically suspect content about vaccination or an intervention that debunks epistemically suspect beliefs about vaccination. Afterwards, the participants answered questions about vaccination-related conspiracy narratives (manipulation check), vaccination attitudes, intentions to vaccinate against HPV, support for an HPV vaccination programme and intentions to seek health guidance. Although the intervention demonstrated the potential to inhibit the endorsement of conspiracy narratives, we found no differences in the other outcome variables. Nevertheless, across the conditions, pre-existing epistemically suspect beliefs were associated with less favourable attitudes towards vaccination, lower intentions to vaccinate against HPV, less support for the vaccination programme and lower intentions to seek health guidance. The results indicate that debunking may be futile in curbing long-term negative impacts associated with epistemically suspect beliefs, and they contribute to the debate about assessing the effectiveness of interventions related to highly controversial topics such as vaccination. The study enhances understanding of persistent adverse impacts that epistemically suspect beliefs may have on public health outcomes.

Watching for a snake in the grass: Objectification increases conspiracy beliefs

Objectification, being treated as a tool to achieve someone's instrumental goals, is a common phenomenon. A workplace supervisor may view employees solely in terms of their output; likewise, friends may be seen only for their potential for personal and social advancement. We conducted five studies (N = 1209) to test whether objectification increases conspiracy beliefs through thwarted trust and whether postobjectification increases in conspiracy beliefs carry behavioural implications. While conspiracy beliefs may have evolved as a strategy for survival, they may be considered maladaptive in the modern world. Therefore, understanding the antecedents, underlying mechanisms, and implications of conspiracy beliefs is essential. We measured (Study 1) and manipulated objectification (Studies 2-5), consistently finding that objectification decreased trust, thereby increasing conspiracy beliefs (Studies 1-5). This effect remained after considering negative emotions (Study 2). Increased conspiracy beliefs following objectification positively predicted unethical tendencies, and the effect of objectification on unethical tendencies was serially mediated by trust and conspiracy beliefs (Study 4). Restoring objectified people's trust weakened their conspiracy beliefs and unethical tendencies (Study 5). We discussed the implications of our findings, proposing directions for researchers, practitioners, managers, and policymakers for theoretical advancement, healthier coping, and promotion of well-being.

Alike but not the same: Psychological profiles of COVID-19 vaccine skeptics

One of the challenges of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was a widespread skepticism about vaccination. To elucidate the underlying mental and emotional predispositions, we examined a sample of 1428 participants using latent profile analysis (LPA) on selected personality trait variables, mental health status, and measures of irrational beliefs. LPA revealed five distinct profiles: two classes of non-skeptics and three of skeptics. The smaller non-skeptic class reported the highest rates of mental health problems, along with high levels of neuroticism, hostility, interpersonal sensitivity, and external locus of control. The larger non-skeptic class was psychologically well-balanced. Conversely, the skeptic groups shared strong distrust of COVID-19 vaccination but differed in emotional and mental profiles, leading to graded differences in endorsing extreme conspiracy beliefs. This suggests that vaccine skepticism is not solely a result of mental illness or emotional instability; rather extreme skepticism manifests as a nuanced, graded phenomenon contingent on personality traits and conspirational beliefs.

Insomnia is associated with conspiracy mentality, psychological distress, and psychological well-being

RATIONALE

Conspiracy theories are frequently encountered as they exist across all domains of life, from interpersonal issues in the workplace to global events. Research has primarily focused on uncovering the antecedents of conspiracy beliefs; meanwhile, little research has examined the impacts of possessing a conspiracy mentality.

OBJECTIVE

In the current research, we examined the relationships of conspiracy mentality with perceived control, insomnia, psychological well-being (i.e., positive emotions, engagement, relationships, meaning, and achievement), and psychological distress (i.e., anxiety and depression).

METHODS

Participants (N = 388) reported their conspiracy mentality at Time 1 and then completed measures assessing perceived control, insomnia, psychological well-being, and psychological distress 1 month later at Time 2. We conducted regression analyses, structural equation modeling, and bootstrapping analyses to test our predictions that conspiracy mentality predicts insomnia through thwarted perceived control and that this relationship carries direct implications for psychological well-being and distress.

RESULTS

As predicted, regression analyses showed that conspiracy mentality is negatively associated with perceived control and indicators of psychological well-being, and positively associated with insomnia and indicators of psychological distress 1 month later. The results of structural equation modeling and bootstrapping analyses provided empirical support to our theoretical model that perceived control and insomnia serially mediate the relationship between conspiracy mentality and both psychological well-being and psychological distress.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings offer important contributions to the literature on conspiracy beliefs. Practically, they offer potential routes of intervention to weaken insomnia and psychological distress and enhance psychological well-being.

Belief in COVID-19 related conspiracy theories around the globe: A systematic review

Conspiracy theories have been widespread in public discourses about COVID-19. Belief in conspiracy theories has negative effects on COVID-19 protective and preventive behaviour. However, evidence on the prevalence of belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories, remains fragmented. We conducted a systematic review on the adult general population prevalence of belief in different COVID-19 conspiracy theories at country and regional level around the globe. Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar databases (end of search: March 22, 2022). We followed guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We identified 1637 potentially relevant titles in our search and included 33 studies in our review, reflecting conspiracy theory endorsement between March 2020 and August 2021. We found high belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories in most studies: 29 studies measured at least one conspiracy theory belief prevalence ≥20%. For several conspiracy theories, e.g. "Lab origin" or "Destabilization and power gain", prevalence was often between 20 and 50%. Our findings call for increased awareness about COVID-19 conspiracy theories and the need for tailored, context specific conspiracy theory preparedness, prevention and control. Development and integration of a public health oriented communication and infodemic management strategy, alongside the implementation of conspiracy theory endorsement risk assessments are essential for supporting public health policy in future health emergencies.

Validating a German Version of the Conspiracy Mentality Scale (CMS)

Increased scientific interest in conspiracy beliefs raises the need for validated individual difference measures in the general tendency to believe in conspiracy theories, otherwise referred to as conspiracy mentality. In this article, we present a German language version of the Conspiracy Mentality Scale (CMS). A representative sample of German-speaking Swiss residents (N = 468) filled in the scale, along with measures of trust in several sources of information, need for social validation, compliance with Covid-19 preventive measures, perceived severity of the pandemic, loneliness, functional literacy and interpersonal conflict. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the two-dimensional structure of the original scale. Positive correlations between conspiracy theory ideation and trust in friends and the need for social validation on the one hand, and negative correlations with trust in scientific publications and scientific experts, perceived severity of the pandemic and functional literacy on the other hand supported construct validity. We conclude that our German language version of the scale is a valid measure of conspiracy theory ideation and skepticism.

Moral foundations are better predictors of belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories than the Big Five personality traits

Upon the sudden outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, various conspiracy theories regarding the virus proliferated in the social media. This study focused on the sociodemographic, personality, and moral predictors of these beliefs. More specifically, we asked whether moral values predict belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories over and above sociodemographic variables and the Big Five personality traits. According to Moral Foundations Theory, five cross-cultural moral foundations are more broadly categorized under individualizing (Care & Fairness) and binding (Loyalty, Authority, & Sanctity) foundations. A sixth moral foundation was Liberty which we included along with binding and individualizing foundations. Participants were 227 Iranians (mean age = 31.43, SD = 12.61, 75.3% female) who responded to Moral Foundations Questionnaire and Liberty items, a range of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, and the 10-Item Personality Measure of the Big Five. Among demographic variables, religiosity and socioeconomic status were the strongest determinants of conspiracy beliefs regarding the origin of Coronavirus. Among the Big Five, only extraversion predicted these beliefs in a positive direction. Moral foundations, most notably Authority and Sanctity, showed incremental predictive power over both demographic variables and the Big Five personality traits. Findings are discussed in light of the role of social media in dissemination of conspiracy beliefs regarding the pandemic. They point to the more relevance of moral foundations, particularly binding foundations, than the Big Five in the context of pandemic-related conspiracy beliefs, and add to the literature on the unique contribution of moral foundations to socio-political attitudes across cultures.

Perception of Hate Speech by the Public and Experts: Insights into Predictors of the Perceived Hate Speech Towards Migrants

Online hate speech is a matter of concern for social media platforms, regulators, researchers, and the public. Despite its widespread prevalence and contentious nature, little research has been done on the perception of hate speech and its psychosocial predictors. To address this gap, we conducted a study on the perception of hate speech toward migrants in online comments, analyzing the differences between a public group (NPublic = 649) and an expert group (NExperts = 27) and exploring the correlation between the proposed hate speech indicators and perceived hate speech in both groups. Additionally, we explored various predictors of hate speech perception, including demographic and psychological variables such as human values, prejudice, aggression, impulsiveness, social media behavior, attitudes toward migrants and migration, and trust in institutions. Our results show that the public and experts have differing sensitivities toward hate speech, with the expert group perceiving comments as more hateful and emotionally harmful compared with the general population, who tend to agree more with antimigrant hateful comments. The proposed hate speech indicators and especially their total scores have a strong correlation with both groups' perceptions of hate speech. Psychological predictors, such as the human values of universalism, tradition, security, and subjective social distance, were significant predictors of online hate speech sensitivity. Our findings emphasize the need for public and scholarly discussions, more robust educational policies, and intervention programs with specific measures to counter hate speech online.

Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic

Scientific reasoning and trust in science are two facets of science understanding. This paper examines the contribution of science understanding, over and above analytic thinking, to the endorsement of conspiracy and pseudoscientific beliefs about COVID-19 and behavioral intentions to engage in the recommended preventive behavior. We examined the direct and indirect effects of science understanding on normative health behavior in a representative sample of the Slovak population (N = 1024). The results showed more support for the indirect pathway: individuals with a better understanding of science generally had fewer epistemically suspect beliefs and as a consequence tended to behave more in line with the evidence-based guidelines and get vaccinated. Neither scientific reasoning nor trust in science directly predicted non-compliance with preventive measures, but analytic thinking correlated positively with non-compliance with preventive measures. The strongest predictor of epistemically suspect beliefs was trust in science, which also directly predicted the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Therefore, reasoning about which experts or sources to believe (second-order scientific reasoning) has become more important than directly evaluating the original evidence (first-order scientific reasoning).

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-023-04284-y.

Political ideology predicts preventative behaviors and infections amid COVID-19 in democracies

Can one's political ideology predict his or her testing positive for COVID-19 and how? The present study leveraged a recent (April–May 2020) survey of 27,260 individuals across 27 democracies to investigate the associations between political ideology and coronavirus infections. Our individual-level data and mediation analyses allow us to tease out different correlational paths according to which one's political ideology affects his or her infection. We found a more right-leaning attitude to be associated with a higher probability of testing positive both directly and indirectly through conspiracy theory beliefs and physical distancing. Moreover, our cross-national investigation also found that becoming more right-leaning in ideology was associated with a higher level of perceived risk of COVID-19 infection, which made one less likely to test positive. Combined, we provide a more nuanced understanding of the role played by political ideology in the current pandemic, on which the design of a more effective risk communication strategy can be based.

Knowledge of Human Monkeypox and Its Relation to Conspiracy Beliefs among Students in Jordanian Health Schools: Filling the Knowledge Gap on Emerging Zoonotic Viruses

Background and Objective: The recent multi-country outbreak of human monkeypox (HMPX) in non-endemic regions poses an emerging public health concern. University students in health schools/faculties represent a core knowledgeable group that can be helpful to study from a public health point of view. As future healthcare workers, assessment of their knowledge and attitude towards emerging zoonotic viral infections can be helpful to assess their taught material and courses with potential improvement if gaps in knowledge were identified. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the level of HMPX knowledge, conspiracy beliefs regarding emerging virus infections, as well as their associated determinants among university students studying Medicine, Nursing, Dentistry, Pharmacy, Medical Laboratory Sciences, and Rehabilitation in Jordanian health schools/faculties. In addition, we sought to evaluate the correlation between HMPX knowledge and the extent of holding conspiracy beliefs regarding emerging viral infection. Materials and Methods: A convenient sample of university students was obtained through an electronic survey distributed in late May 2022 using the chain-referral approach. Assessment of HMPX knowledge and general attitude towards emerging virus infections was based on survey items adopted from previously published literature. Results: The study sample comprised 615 students with a mean age of 20 years and a majority of females (432, 70.2%) and medical students (n = 351, 57.1%). Out of eleven monkeypox knowledge items, three were identified correctly by >70% of the respondents. Only 26.2% of the respondents (n = 161) knew that vaccination to prevent monkeypox is available. Age was significantly associated with better HMPX knowledge for a majority of items. Older age, females, and affiliation to non-medical schools/faculties were associated with harboring higher levels of conspiracy beliefs regarding emerging virus infections. Our data also indicate that lower levels of HMPX knowledge were associated with higher levels of conspiracy beliefs. Conclusion: The current study pointed to generally unsatisfactory levels of knowledge regarding the emerging HMPX among university students in Jordanian health schools/faculties. Conspiracy beliefs regarding emerging virus infections were widely prevalent, and its potential detrimental impact on health behavior should be evaluated in future studies.

COVID-19 Related Stresses, Conspiracy Beliefs, Uncertainty, and Non-adherence to Safety Guidelines

INTRODUCTION

Inconsistent use of protective preventive measures and nonadherence of the guidelines set by the World Health Organization regarding the coronavirus are associated with increased morbidity and mortality, as well as increased health care costs.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the role of COVID-19 related worries, conspiracy beliefs, and uncertainty in adherence to preventative measures in Iran.

METHOD

In a large survey with data collected online from a volunteer sample of 599 individuals, assessments were made of the distress associated with the anticipated potential consequences associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown, extent of agreement with conspiracy beliefs, level of situation-specific uncertainty, and self-reports of compliance with preventive measures. Data were analyzed to explore paths leading to nonadherence to safety guidelines proposed by the medical authorities.

RESULTS

A large majority of individuals report significant distress and worry associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Results indicate that increasing levels of situation-specific uncertainty intolerance, as well as conspiracy beliefs regarding the coronavirus, are associated with non-compliance with the advised protocols. Specifically, the results show that worries related to the COVID-19 pandemic are linked to non-compliance with preventive measures through conspiracy beliefs and feelings of uncertainty associated with the COVID-19 situation even after gender, education, and perceived socioeconomic status were controlled.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings imply that emotional exhaustion is likely to have set in and become counterproductive as people choose to violate safety guidelines. The authors discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these results.

Diverse Experiences and Coping During the COVID-19 Lockdown and Unlock in India

In response to the coronavirus pandemic, the Government of India imposed a nationwide lockdown of 21 days on May 25, 2020, which was extended thrice to a total of 68 days. Mandatory quarantine could hamper mental well-being, trust in the government, and compliance with guidelines. This study looks in-depth at individual accounts during the lockdown (phase A) and after the “unlock” (lifting of the nationwide lockdown; phase B) using telephonic interviews. Mass job loss and the exodus of migrant workers from major cities highlighted the need to include low-income groups in research; hence, purposive sampling was used. We interviewed 45 participants in phase A and 35 participants in phase B; the latter was drawn from the phase A pool based on availability and willingness. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Analysis revealed four themes of participants’ experiences, namely: (1) transitioning from a disrupted normal to a “new normal”; (2) accountability and lack of trust; (3) fear and uncertainty; and (4) perceived lack of control. Within the themes, coping with stressors was observed in six broad categories: (1) distraction, (2) escape/avoidance, (3) positive cognitive restructuring, (4) problem solving, (5) seeking support, and (6) religious coping. Results enabled the drawing of parallels and contrasts between various socioeconomic, religious, and sexual/gender groups and were discussed from the lens of cognitive appraisal theory and coping. The implications of these findings in psychological crisis intervention and policy are discussed, pointing toward the need to allow a collaborative effort and mutual trust to build a resilient society.

Antecedents and consequences of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs: A systematic review

RATIONALE

Belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories can have severe consequences; it is therefore crucial to understand this phenomenon, in its similarities with general conspiracy belief, but also in how it is context-dependent.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the available research on COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and to synthesise this research to make it widely accessible.

METHODS

We present a synthesis of COVID-19 conspiracy belief research from 85 international articles, identified and appraised through a systematic review, in line with contemporary protocols and guidelines for systematic reviews.

RESULTS

We identify a number of potential antecedents of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs (individual differences, personality traits, demographic variables, attitudes, thinking styles and biases, group identity, trust in authorities, and social media use), their consequences (protective behaviours, self-centred and misguided behaviours such as hoarding and pseudoscientific health practices, vaccination intentions, psychological wellbeing, and other negative social consequences such as discrimination and violence), and the effect sizes of their relations with the conspiracy beliefs.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that understanding both the potential antecedents and consequences of conspiracy beliefs and how they are context-dependent is highly important to tackle them, whether in the COVID-19 pandemic or future threats, such as that of climate change.