REFF - Faculty of Philosophy Repository
University of Belgrade - Faculty of Philosophy
    • English
    • Српски
    • Српски (Serbia)
  • English 
    • English
    • Serbian (Cyrillic)
    • Serbian (Latin)
  • Login
View Item 
  •   REFF
  • Psihologija / Psychology
  • Radovi istraživača / Researcher's publications - Odeljenje za psihologiju
  • View Item
  •   REFF
  • Psihologija / Psychology
  • Radovi istraživača / Researcher's publications - Odeljenje za psihologiju
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Both a bioweapon and a hoax: the curious case of contradictory conspiracy theories about COVID-19

No Thumbnail
Authors
Petrović, Marija
Žeželj, Iris
Article (Published version)
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
Amidst the flow of conspiracy theories (CTs) about the COVID-19 pandemic, many were logically incompatible. We aimed to map the psychological profile of their endorsers. Upon pretesting for familiarity and logical incompatibility, we choose eight pairs of contradictory COVID-19 CTs. Across three studies, a substantial portion of respondents (40%–42%) endorsed at least one pair. In Study 1 (N = 290), conspiracy mentality and doublethink, but not preference for consistency, meaningfully related to endorsement of contradictory CTs; doublethink contributed over and above other predictors. In two following studies we introduced indicators of superficial (Study 2; N = 281) and analytical (Study 3; N = 170) information-processing as predictors. The endorsers of contradictory CTs were more intuitive, prone to ontological confusions and pseudo-profound bullshit, less rational and less actively open-minded; doublethink again added to the prediction. We end by suggesting how the interventions sho...uld be tailored to address people with such distinct information-processing style.

Keywords:
covid19 conspiracy theories / inconsistent beliefs / doublethink / superficial information processing / thinking styles
Source:
Thinking & Reasoning, 2022
Publisher:
  • Taylor & Francis
Note:
  • This work is a part of Marija Petrović's PhD thesis entitled “Consistently inconsistent: predictivity and validity of doublethink” at the University of Belgrade, supervised by Dr. Iris Žeželj.

DOI: 10.1080/13546783.2022.2088618

ISSN: 1354-6783; e1464-0708

[ Google Scholar ]
URI
http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/4596
Collections
  • Radovi istraživača / Researcher's publications - Odeljenje za psihologiju
Institution/Community
Psihologija / Psychology
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Petrović, Marija
AU  - Žeželj, Iris
PY  - 2022
UR  - http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/4596
AB  - Amidst the flow of conspiracy theories (CTs) about the COVID-19 pandemic, many were logically incompatible. We aimed to map the psychological profile of their endorsers. Upon pretesting for familiarity and logical incompatibility, we choose eight pairs of contradictory COVID-19 CTs. Across three studies, a substantial portion of respondents (40%–42%) endorsed at least one pair. In Study 1 (N = 290), conspiracy mentality and doublethink, but not preference for consistency, meaningfully related to endorsement of contradictory CTs; doublethink contributed over and above other predictors. In two following studies we introduced indicators of superficial (Study 2; N = 281) and analytical (Study 3; N = 170) information-processing as predictors. The endorsers of contradictory CTs were more intuitive, prone to ontological confusions and pseudo-profound bullshit, less rational and less actively open-minded; doublethink again added to the prediction. We end by suggesting how the interventions should be tailored to address people with such distinct information-processing style.
PB  - Taylor & Francis
T2  - Thinking & Reasoning
T1  - Both a bioweapon and a hoax: the curious case of contradictory conspiracy theories about COVID-19
DO  - 10.1080/13546783.2022.2088618
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Petrović, Marija and Žeželj, Iris",
year = "2022",
abstract = "Amidst the flow of conspiracy theories (CTs) about the COVID-19 pandemic, many were logically incompatible. We aimed to map the psychological profile of their endorsers. Upon pretesting for familiarity and logical incompatibility, we choose eight pairs of contradictory COVID-19 CTs. Across three studies, a substantial portion of respondents (40%–42%) endorsed at least one pair. In Study 1 (N = 290), conspiracy mentality and doublethink, but not preference for consistency, meaningfully related to endorsement of contradictory CTs; doublethink contributed over and above other predictors. In two following studies we introduced indicators of superficial (Study 2; N = 281) and analytical (Study 3; N = 170) information-processing as predictors. The endorsers of contradictory CTs were more intuitive, prone to ontological confusions and pseudo-profound bullshit, less rational and less actively open-minded; doublethink again added to the prediction. We end by suggesting how the interventions should be tailored to address people with such distinct information-processing style.",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
journal = "Thinking & Reasoning",
title = "Both a bioweapon and a hoax: the curious case of contradictory conspiracy theories about COVID-19",
doi = "10.1080/13546783.2022.2088618"
}
Petrović, M.,& Žeželj, I.. (2022). Both a bioweapon and a hoax: the curious case of contradictory conspiracy theories about COVID-19. in Thinking & Reasoning
Taylor & Francis..
https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2022.2088618
Petrović M, Žeželj I. Both a bioweapon and a hoax: the curious case of contradictory conspiracy theories about COVID-19. in Thinking & Reasoning. 2022;.
doi:10.1080/13546783.2022.2088618 .
Petrović, Marija, Žeželj, Iris, "Both a bioweapon and a hoax: the curious case of contradictory conspiracy theories about COVID-19" in Thinking & Reasoning (2022),
https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2022.2088618 . .

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
About REFF | Send Feedback

OpenAIRERCUB
 

 

All of DSpaceInstitutions/communitiesAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis institutionAuthorsTitlesSubjects

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
About REFF | Send Feedback

OpenAIRERCUB