Author: Vignesh Subramanian, Class of 2024

Figure 1: Heightened paranoia and feelings of antagonism towards others are among the strongest indicators of conspiratorial ideation.

Conspiracy theories are generally unsubstantiated explanations for specific events or circumstances that attribute said events to powerful individuals or groups secretly working in tandem. It remains disputed that either the number of conspiracy theories or the extent of public belief in them have been on the rise in recent decades. However, the emergence and popularization of certain conspiracy theories – particularly those of a politically extreme nature that perceive social threats – have raised questions among social scientists about the underlying psychology of conspiratorial ideation. Determining how one’s personality or their motivations weigh into their willingness to endorse conspiracy theories may help establish what causes such ideation.

Researchers at Emory University sought to examine the interplay between personological (goal- or trait-oriented thinking) and motivational (the reward or need-oriented driving force behind actions) correlates in their combined contribution to conspiratorial ideation. The researchers compiled a meta-analytic review of 170 studies involving more than 158,000 participants, whose psychological needs were categorized into three motivational domains: epistemic (understanding one’s environment), existential (feeling safe in one’s environment), and social (feeling superior in one’s position and group). Their psychological needs were also categorized into two personological domains: psychopathology (emotional and cognitive disorders) and general/normal-range personality (anticipating how one will normally behave). All of these domains were statistically analyzed to determine the extent of heterogeneity in subjects’ beliefs and traits. 

The researchers found that a mix of specific motivational and personological correlates were the strongest predictors of conspiratorial ideation. Participants who perceived threats from others, had odd beliefs and experiences, or behaved antagonistically or felt superior to others – all traits that fall within the motivational domains and demonstrate low agreeableness (a personological trait) – were most likely to adopt and endorse conspiracy theories. The researchers also found a considerable hetereogeneity between participants in the extent to which they display these types of relations with others, suggesting that conspiracy theorists’ underlying psychology is not uniform and that some boundary conditions (such as the type of conspiracy they believe in) exist. Overall, the study likely presented the most comprehensive quantitative review of the frameworks for conspiratorial ideation to date, laying the groundwork for future research to examine causality and the implications for believers’ social distress and impairment in greater depth. 

Works Cited:

[1] Bowes, S. M., Costello, T. H., & Tasimi, A. (2023). The conspiratorial mind: A meta-analytic review of motivational and personological correlates. Psychological Bulletin, 149(5–6), 259–293. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000392 

[2] Image retrieved from: https://www.istockphoto.com/photo/mysterious-male-peering-out-from-opening-behind-blinds-gm157675549-14259770