The European Journal of Psychology Open published a study suggesting that neither real nor invented scandals significantly influence people’s beliefs in conspiracy theories. The research, conducted with university students, further revealed a nuanced perspective on how individuals discern between fact and fiction.
The realm of conspiracy theories has long been a subject of academic interest — especially in the age of internet and social media where misinformation can spread rapidly. Conspiracy theories typically propose that significant events are orchestrated secretly by a small, malevolent group.
This concept sharply contrasts with real-life scandals, such as the Watergate affair or the tobacco industry’s deceptions — which were uncovered through professional investigation and solid evidence. The question that the study aimed to answer was whether knowledge of actual scandals or exposure to fabricated ones affects an individual’s likelihood to believe in conspiracy theories.
The motivation behind this research was to unpack the claim often made by conspiracy theory believers: that their beliefs stem from real historical scandals and conspiracies. Researchers aimed to understand if and how the awareness of real or fabricated scandals impacts one’s belief in conspiracy theories and their ability to distinguish between the two.
The study involved 483 first-year university students, recruited across various disciplines, who were divided into four groups. Each group either first learned about real or invented scandals and then had their conspiracy theory beliefs measured, or vice versa.
The real scandals included instances like the sentencing of former French President Nicolas Sarkozy for illegal funding, the whistleblowing of Edward Snowden, the denial of carcinogenicity of tobacco by the industry, etc. — while the invented scandals were scenarios like a Swiss bank investing sustainable funds in fossil fuels. The researchers’ methodology was thorough, ensuring that participants engaged with the material before measuring their beliefs.
The findings surprisingly revealed that reminding people of real or invented scandals had no short-term effect on their conspiracy theory beliefs. It was observed that participants with a stronger belief in conspiracy theories were slightly better at identifying fabricated scandals, but less adept at recognizing real ones.
This challenges the common perception that awareness of actual scandals can enhance the ability to discern between fact and fiction in the world of conspiracies. “Our results suggest that the better way to identify real political, scientific, and economic scandals is not to believe in conspiracy theories,” the researchers noted.
However, the study is not without its caveats — one such being the homogeneity of the sample, as all participants were university students who may not represent the general population’s views. Moreover, the real and invented scandals presented were not perfectly identical in nature, which could have influenced the results. Despite these considerations, the research offers valuable insights into the complex dynamics of conspiracy belief and skepticism in contemporary society.
Pascal Wagner-Egger, Daniel de Oliveira Fernandes, Joana Carrel, and Sylvain Delouvée at the University of Fribourg and University of Rennes authored this study, titled as “Do Real and Invented Scandals Fuel Beliefs in Conspiracy Theories?”.
