A 2014 study by conspiracy experts Joseph Uscinski of the University of Miami and Joseph Parent of Note Dame University surveyed 100,000 letters sent to the New York Times and the Chicago Tribune. The study found that psychological (dark triad, propensity to share false information online) and non-partisan/ideological political (populism, Manicheanism, etc.) factors contribute to people’s belief in conspiracy theories. This research breaks from much previous research and attempts to explain conspiratorial beliefs with traditional theories.
A survey showed that about 42 of people without a high school education believe in at least one conspiracy theory, compared to 23 of people with a high school education. The main objectives of the study are to examine why conspiracy theories appeal to people and affect psychological processes, and how online groups accelerate the spread of belief in these theories.
Conspiration theory expert Timothy Melley of Miami University has put it as “the implausible visions of a lunatic fringe”. The research addresses three major explanations of conspiratorial belief: informational cues, political ideology, and predispositions toward conspiratorial views. Surveys by Uscinski and Parent show that believers in conspiracies cut across gender, age, race, income, political affiliation, educational level, and more.
Conspiration theories have long been of interest to scholars, particularly those who question the truth behind conspiracy theories. President Trump has expressed his desire for a full investigation into the death of Jeffrey Epstein at a federal detention facility.
📹 The psychology of why people believe conspiracy theories – explained by experts
We speak to four conspiracy theory experts about the psychology of the people who believe them, their dangerous potential – and …
📹 Conspiracy Theories and Social Media with Joe Uscinski, University of Miami
Watching this mental gymnastics sophistry of you trying to casually dismiss “conspiracy” with a wave of the hand after already admitting that conspiracy occurs, but then never addressing the substance of any “conspiracy theory” or debunking it in any way other than to say “listen to experts to find what’s true” while not expanding on why these fallible experts should always to be trusted (for no other reason than fallacious appeal to authority), is the most disingenuous gaslighty attempt to disprove something you provided no objective substance for and it was physically painful to listen to.