10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Conspiratorial Thinking During COVID-19: The Roles of Paranoia, Delusion-Proneness, and Intolerance of Uncertainty

      brief-report

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The COVID-19 global pandemic has left many feeling a sense of profound uncertainty about their world, safety, and livelihood. Sources espousing misinformation and conspiracy theories frequently offer information that can help make sense of this uncertainty. Individuals high in intolerance of uncertainty (IU) may be particularly impacted by the impoverished epistemic environment and may thus be more drawn to conspiratorial thinking (CT). In the present work, we show across 2 studies ( N = 519) that COVID-19-specific CT is associated with higher levels of IU as well as delusion-proneness, and paranoia. Furthermore, delusion-proneness and paranoia explained the relationship between IU and CT and emerged as independent partial correlates of CT even when controlling for other facets of schizotypy. In contrast, anxiety did not explain the relationship between IU and CT. Overall, our findings highlight the importance of individual differences in IU, delusion-proneness and paranoia in the development of CT in the context of the acute uncertainty of a global crisis, in which conspiracy theories are more prevalent and salient. Informational intervention designs may benefit from leveraging the body of work demonstrating the efficacy of targeting IU to incite meaningful changes in thinking.

          Related collections

          Most cited references65

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book: not found

          ggplot2

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

            The COVID-19 pandemic represents a massive global health crisis. Because the crisis requires large-scale behaviour change and places significant psychological burdens on individuals, insights from the social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behaviour, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. We identify several insights for effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Required sample size to detect the mediated effect.

              Mediation models are widely used, and there are many tests of the mediated effect. One of the most common questions that researchers have when planning mediation studies is, "How many subjects do I need to achieve adequate power when testing for mediation?" This article presents the necessary sample sizes for six of the most common and the most recommended tests of mediation for various combinations of parameters, to provide a guide for researchers when designing studies or applying for grants.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychiatry
                Front Psychiatry
                Front. Psychiatry
                Frontiers in Psychiatry
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-0640
                18 August 2021
                2021
                18 August 2021
                : 12
                : 698147
                Affiliations
                Neuroscience of Emotion, Cognition, and Psychopathology Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Stony Brook University , Stony Brook, NY, United States
                Author notes

                Edited by: Wulf Rössler, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany

                Reviewed by: Joachim Kowalski, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland; Wan-jun Guo, Sichuan University, China

                This article was submitted to Public Mental Health, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychiatry

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyt.2021.698147
                8416269
                34483993
                14c11add-5de5-447d-a774-34beabce201b
                Copyright © 2021 Larsen, Donaldson, Liew and Mohanty.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 20 April 2021
                : 29 June 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 2, Equations: 0, References: 67, Pages: 10, Words: 6978
                Categories
                Psychiatry
                Brief Research Report

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                conspiracy,conspiracy theory,schizotypy,anxiety,individual differences,epistemic

                Comments

                Comment on this article