What Is: The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories, Weaponization, and Societal Impact

Scientific Frontline: Extended "At a Glance" Summary

The Core Concept: Conspiracy theories are alternative explanatory narratives that attribute complex events to the malevolent, secret actions of powerful groups. Rather than fringe delusions, they are now recognized as a significant driver of sociopolitical behavior, public health outcomes, and modern statecraft.

Key Distinction/Mechanism: Unlike healthy skepticism, conspiracy ideation is a maladaptive cognitive feature driven by "teleological thinking" (assuming all events have a purpose) and "proportionality bias" (believing major events must have major causes). It functions as a psychological defense mechanism to satisfy unmet epistemic (need to know), existential (need for safety), and social (need to belong) needs in a chaotic world.

Origin/History: While conspiratorial thinking is rooted in the "ancestral threat environment" of early human history (where detecting hostile coalitions was a survival trait), the current study highlights the modern weaponization of these narratives. The text specifically cites the January 6th Capitol attack as a primary case study of how these theories can mobilize mass action against the state.

Major Frameworks/Components:

• Adaptive Conspiracism Hypothesis: The evolutionary theory that paranoid pattern recognition is a selected survival trait (Error Management Theory).
• Compensatory Control Theory: The psychological framework suggesting individuals adopt conspiracy beliefs to regain a sense of agency during times of societal loss or chaos.
• The Dark Tetrad: A personality cluster (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadism) strongly correlated with conspiracy belief.
• Parasite Stress Theory: A biological model linking high pathogen prevalence to increased authoritarianism and in-group loyalty, fueling conspiratorial distrust of outsiders.

Branch of Science: Psychology, Evolutionary Biology, Sociology, and Political Science.

Future Application: Insights from this field are being used to develop "epistemic resilience" strategies to inoculate populations against disinformation. This includes regulatory frameworks for algorithmic amplification and educational tools to counter "informational autocracy."

Why It Matters: Conspiracy theories have created a global "epistemic crisis," eroding institutional trust and catalyzing political violence. Understanding their psychological architecture is critical for preserving democratic stability and preventing the fragmentation of shared objective reality.

Considering COVID a hoax is ‘gateway’ to belief in conspiracy theories

Data showed one strong trend suggesting that financial distress during the lockdown could have been a factor in adopting conspiracy theory beliefs about the pandemic – even among those who started off with low levels of conspiracist ideation.
Photo Credit: Lara Jameson

Belief that the COVID-19 pandemic was a hoax – that its severity was exaggerated or that the virus was deliberately released for sinister reasons – functions as a “gateway” to believing in conspiracy theories generally, new research has found.

In the two-survey study, people who reported greater belief in conspiracy theories about the pandemic – for which there is no evidence – were more likely to later report they believed that the 2020 presidential election had been stolen from Donald Trump through widespread voter fraud, which is also not true. Participants’ overall inclination to believe in conspiracy theories also increased more among those who reported believing COVID-19 was a hoax.

Based on the results, the Ohio State University researchers have proposed the “gateway conspiracy” hypothesis, which argues that conspiracy theory beliefs prompted by a single event lead to increases in conspiratorial thinking over time.

Preliminary evidence suggests a sense of distrust may function as one trigger.

“It’s speculative, but it appears that once people adopt one conspiracy belief, it promotes distrust in institutions more generally – it could be government, science, the media, whatever,” said senior author Russell Fazio, professor of psychology at Ohio State. “Once you start viewing events through that distrustful lens, it’s very easy to adopt additional conspiracy theories.”

COVID-19 conspiracy theories that spread fastest focused on evil, secrecy

Covid 19 Conspiracy Initiated
Image Credit: Dr StClaire

In the early pandemic, conspiracy theories that were shared the most on Twitter highlighted malicious purposes and secretive actions of supposed bad actors behind the crisis, according to an analysis of nearly 400,000 posts. 

In the study, researchers identified commonalities in five of the most popular conspiracy theories: those related to Bill Gates, 5G Networks, vaccinations, QAnon and Agenda 21.

While each theory appears to have a different subject, the social media narratives often overlapped, said Porismita Borah, associate professor in Washington State University’s Murrow College of Communications.

“The conspiracy theories might be using different strategies, but the narratives are often connected,” said Borah, the corresponding author on the study published in the journal New Media and Society. “These theories have a lot in common in that they try to make the stories part of a bigger conspiracy so that if people believe in one conspiracy, then they tend to believe in the other.”

Misinformation about COVID-19 spreads faster on social media

New research has found that the amount of misinformation related to COVID-19 is disproportionately higher than content produced by fact-checkers on Twitter. COVID misinformation also maintains attention and engagement for longer online than fact-based content.

The research, led by Open University academics, aimed to examine misinformation about COVID-19 online as a means of improving the effectiveness of the response to the pandemic.

Over 350,000 tweets that shared misinforming or fact-checking content related to COVID-19 between December 2019 to January 2021 were studied.

It was found that fact-checking may not be as successful as expected in reducing misinformation spread on Twitter. The amount of misinformation on COVID-19 was shared on Twitter around 3.5 times more than content trying to correct misinformation.

This highlighted the importance of fact-checkers making their content attractive and eye-catching to social media users – thereby more shareable and likely to gain traction on platforms.

Misinformation is also more often re-published or re-shared after some time than fact-checking. This is particularly observable in relation to conspiracy theories and COVID origins or causes as these are often much harder to debunk based on known facts (i.e. conspiracy theories are ‘beyond’ factual content and COVID causes still remain unclear).

Nebraska-led study first to define anxiety spiraling from national election

Illustration Credit: Clint Chapman / University of Nebraska–Lincoln / University Communication

Researchers are beginning to better understand the toll of polarized politics on mental and physical health, and a new study in Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties suggests that Americans’ political anxiety crescendos before a major election.

Led by University of Nebraska–Lincoln political scientist Kevin Smith, with Aaron Weinschenk of the University of Wisconsin–Green Bay and Costas Panagopoulos of Northeastern University, the study is the first to examine anxiety tethered to a specific political event — the 2020 presidential election, touted as the most consequential in recent history by both sides.

Using a two-wave panel survey measuring political anxiety, given two weeks prior and two weeks following the 2020 election, the study found that overall Americans were more anxious before the election, as researchers had hypothesized. Further, following the election, it was those who specifically voted for Donald Trump, conservatives and African Americans who reported lower levels of anxiety.

“We found a lot of political anxiety right before the election, and that the election was an intervention to treat some of that anxiety — how much, we don’t know because of some of the craziness around the election,” Smith, chair and Olson Professor in political science, said. “But, pretty much across the board, political anxiety went down following the election, and it went down surprisingly in some groups.