![[Adobe Stock]](https://sp-ao.shortpixel.ai/client/to_webp,q_glossy,ret_img,w_750,h_375/https://www.psypost.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/conspiracy-theorist-750x375.jpg)
A new study published in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin has found that the connection between our basic psychological needs and belief in conspiracy theories is not static, but can shift over time within individuals. Researchers found that changes in feelings of control and belongingness showed a relationship with later changes in conspiracy beliefs, suggesting a dynamic link between these factors.
Conspiracy theories have long been a subject of psychological interest, as they can influence political behavior, health choices, and even acts of violence. Researchers have suggested that conspiracy beliefs may arise when individuals experience threats to their psychological well-being.
However, previous research on this topic has mostly relied on cross-sectional data, meaning it only captured a single moment in time. This makes it difficult to determine whether unmet psychological needs lead people to believe in conspiracy theories or whether conspiracy beliefs, in turn, affect psychological well-being. To address this gap, the researchers examined these relationships over multiple years, allowing them to track how psychological needs and conspiracy beliefs evolve over time.
“With conspiracy belief receiving increasing research attention, a key question is what makes people believe in conspiracy theories. Karen Douglas and colleagues proposed that conspiracy belief can be triggered when specific needs (existential, epistemic, social) are unfulfilled. Our study aimed to test whether fluctuations in basic psychological needs predict conspiracy belief over time and whether conspiracy belief, in turn, affects needs such as control or belonging,” said study author Elianne Albath, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Basel.
The new study used data from the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study, a large-scale, long-term survey that tracks social attitudes among adults. The researchers focused on four psychological needs: control, belonging, self-esteem, and meaning in life. Participants completed annual surveys from 2019 to 2022, rating their satisfaction with these psychological needs and their agreement with a statement reflecting conspiracy belief. The researchers applied a statistical method that separated long-term personality traits from temporary shifts in feelings, allowing them to determine how changes in psychological need satisfaction predicted changes in conspiracy belief over time.
The results revealed two key patterns. First, people who generally felt less satisfied in their psychological needs—particularly in their sense of control and belonging—were more likely to hold conspiracy beliefs across all four years of the study. This suggests that individuals with consistently lower well-being in these areas are more prone to believing that powerful groups are hiding the truth from the public.
Second, the study examined temporary shifts within individuals. It found that when people experienced a decrease in their sense of control or belonging, they were slightly more likely to report increased conspiracy belief the following year. This supports the idea that conspiracy beliefs may serve as a coping mechanism when people feel powerless or socially excluded.
“Our findings suggest that chronic unmet psychological needs are linked to stronger conspiracy beliefs,” Albath told PsyPost. “Further, people with lower belonging or control were more likely to endorse conspiracy theories in the following assessment. This supports the idea that conspiracy beliefs may serve as a way to restore control or make sense of the world by attributing events to powerful bad actors.”
However, the study also found an unexpected result: people who experienced a temporary increase in meaning in life were also more likely to report stronger conspiracy beliefs a year later. This contradicts the common assumption that only unmet needs contribute to conspiracy belief and suggests that some people may find a sense of purpose in believing that they are uncovering hidden truths.
“We expected that lower need satisfaction would predict higher conspiracy belief, but surprisingly, meaning in life showed a positive association—those with higher meaning in life were more likely to endorse conspiracy theories in the following year,” Albath said. “This challenges the assumption that only unmet psychological needs drive conspiracy beliefs and opens up new research questions.”
The study did not find a strong relationship between self-esteem and conspiracy belief. Although people with lower overall self-esteem tended to report higher conspiracy beliefs, temporary changes in self-esteem did not predict shifts in conspiracy belief over time. This suggests that self-esteem may be less central to the development of conspiracy beliefs than the other psychological needs.
As with all research, there are some caveats to consider. “First, while we used longitudinal data, the study remains observational, so we cannot establish definitive causal effects,” Albath explained. “Second, the sample is from New Zealand, which may limit generalizability to other cultural contexts. Third, because we analyzed annual data, the observed relationships may look different over shorter timeframes, such as weeks or months.”
The study, “Does Lower Psychological Need Satisfaction Foster Conspiracy Belief? Longitudinal Effects Over 3 Years in New Zealand,” was authored by Elianne A. Albath, Rainer Greifeneder, Karen M. Douglas, Aleksandra Cichocka, Mathew D. Marques, Marc S. Wilson, John R. Kerr, Chris G. Sibley, and Danny Osborne
