Skip to main content
NCBI home page
SAGE - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to SAGE - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2023 Mar 8:00332941231161789. doi: 10.1177/00332941231161789

Perceived Government Transparency and COVID-19 Conspiracy Beliefs: The Mediating Role of Conspiracy Mentality

Tomasz Besta 1,✉, Julia Nęcka 1, Michał Jaśkiewicz 1
PMCID: PMC10009001  PMID: 36891636

Abstract

As transparency is believed to be a key factor linked to trust in the government, we explore the link between the perceived lack of transparency and COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs. Two studies were conducted (N1 = 264 and N2 = 113) using both correlational (Study 1) and experimental (Study 2) designs. The results show a positive relationship between the perception of a lack of transparencies in the context of pandemic policies (Study 1), general lack of transparency in the decision-making process (Study 2), and belief in conspiracy theories about the emergence of the COVID-19 virus and vaccines’ related fake news. This effect was mediated by a general conspiracy mentality. That is, people who evaluated policies as non-transparent presented a higher conspiracy mentality, and this, in turn, was related to belief in specific COVID-19 conspiracy theories.

Keywords: COVID-19 conspiracy theories, transparency, intergroup relations

A conspiracy mentality could be understood as an individual difference in generalized political attitudes toward powerful social groups (Imhoff & Bruder, 2014). Researchers argue that its primary role is to help people interpret threatening social events (Swami et al., 2011) or achieve a sense of control by combining random events into one cause-and-effect sequence (Sullivan et al., 2010). Douglas et al. (2017) distinguished three motives that guide people who use conspiracy thinking. The first group of motives is epistemic themes, which are aimed at satisfying the individual’s curiosity, understanding the surrounding reality, and protecting their professed beliefs. The second group, i.e. existential motives, is meant to provide control and ensure a sense of security. The purpose of the third group, known as social motives, is to maintain a positive image of oneself, as well as of the group to which a person belongs.

Studies show that conspiracy mentality is indeed associated with prejudices against powerful groups (Imhoff & Bruder, 2014), as well as with negative attitudes towards authorities, political cynicism, and a higher sense of anomie, demonstrated by greater dissatisfaction with the current political system (Swami et al., 2011). In line with these research, conspiracy thinking was also related to anti-science attitudes (i.e., rejection of scientific innovations; Marques et al., 2021), as science experts could be seen as having an influence on policy makers and are part of a global “power elite” (Harambam & Aupers, 2015). Moreover, trust is positively associated with higher conspiracy beliefs, and moderates the relationship between social media news use and conspiracy beliefs (Xiao et al., 2021). That is, people who frequently rely on social media news, greater trust toward the news outlets was linked to higher general conspiracy beliefs as well as specific conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 pandemic. Based on this reasoning, the main goal of the studies was to investigate whether the factor that can lower the social trust, i.e., perceived lack of transparency of the government’s decision-making, can lead to a stronger general conspiracy mentality and translate into a belief in specific conspiracy theories related to COVID-19.

Moreover, conspiracy beliefs were linked to the political worldview. Grzesiak-Feldman and Irzycka showed an association between conspiracy views and right-wing authoritarianism (Grzesiak-Feldman & Irzycka, 2009). Other studies supported the role of political preferences in shaping conspiratorial thinking. For example, Imhoff and Lamberty (2018), found a linear relationship between right-wing political orientation and conspiratorial thinking. Imhoff et al. (2022), based on cross-cultural studies in 26 countries, showed that conspiracy mentality is linked to both extreme left- and extreme right-wing beliefs. However, association with extreme right-wing worldview was stronger. They also found evidences for the role of political control. That is supporters of opposition parties and movements (i.e., people with deprivation of political control), where more willing to endorse conspiracies (vs. supporters of parties currently in power). Thus, in Study 1, we also aimed at answering an exploratory question on the role of political preferences in COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs.

COVID-19 Pandemic and Conspiracy Endorsement

The coronavirus pandemic is the time of many conspiracy theories regarding the emergence of the covid-19 virus. Van Prooijen and Douglas (2017) showed that a crisis is a particularly abundant period in the formation of conspiracy theories, which may affect how a person remembers a situation and mentally processes it. Similarly previous research on the reactions to the 2015–2016 Zika epidemic shows the link between perceived risk that virus will affect close ones and endorsement of conspiracy beliefs (Piltch-Loeb et al., 2019). Many conspiracy theories related to the genesis of the coronavirus have emerged (e.g., that the virus was created as a biological weapon; Imhoff & Lamberty, 2020). Multiple studies have shown a relationship between conspiracy beliefs and a lower intended healthcare-seeking behavior, greater mistrust in healthcare workers and lower willingness to adhere to social distancing interventions (see Majid et al., 2020 for overview). Conspiracy thinking is related also to the abandonment of traditional medicine in favor of the use of alternative medicine (Oliver & Wood, 2014) and exposure to conspiracy theories decreases prosocial behaviors and science acceptance (Van der Linden, 2015). Moreover, people who considered the coronavirus a hoax showed a reduced willingness to follow the rules of hygiene and social distance, while individuals believing that the virus had arisen in the laboratory displayed stronger egocentric preparatory behaviors, characterized by the accumulation of food, hygiene items, and weapons (Imhoff & Lamberty, 2020).

Consequences of the Lack of Political Transparency

Grimmelikhuijsen (2012) argues that transparency is the key to trusting the government. The concept of transparency is understood as the disclosure of information about an organization or person, which enables society to supervise the results and activities of that organization or person (Grimmelikhuijsen & Welch, 2012). The degree of transparency of an organization determines to what extent the group allows members to monitor their own performance as well as participate in political processes (Grimmelikhuijsen, 2012). Ball (2009) also notes that transparency manifests itself in public decision-making by governments as well as non-profit organizations. Transparency is starting to play an important role in the public debate about good governance. This is because in democratic countries, society has the right to access government information (Pasquier & Villeneuve, 2007), and the transparency itself has a positive effect on the responsibility of the rulers and on the social trust in general (Heald, 2006). It should be mentioned that, currently, the Internet plays a very important role in providing information about the results of government activities (Grimmelikhuijsen, 2012). Thanks to social media and open data movements, citizens have access to up-to-date data presented in an understandable way (Meijer, 2007). However, it should be remembered that in the multitude of information, people can easily be misinformed (Ecker et al., 2022).

The Current Studies

The main goal of two studies was to investigate whether the perceived lack of transparency in decision making can lead to a stronger belief in COVID-19 conspiracies. Moreover, we explore if general conspiracy mentality is a mediator of this relationship. Study 1, correlational in design, was aimed at exploring the relationship between perceived lack of transparency, conspiracy mentality, and adherence to conspiracy theories on COVID-19 among Polish Internet users. In the experimental Study 2, lack of transparency was primed (i.e., participants read an article on historical accounts of untransparent actions conducted by various governments). We measured adherence to conspiracy theories on COVID-19 (as a dependent variable), and conspiracy mentality (as a mediator). Based on previous research, we tested the prediction that perceived lack of transparency of decision is associated with general conspiracy mentality, and this in turn is correlated with COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs. Thus, we predicted that conspiracy mentality would mediate the relationship between perceived lack of transparency and beliefs in COVID-19 conspiracies. Moreover, we stated exploratory question on the role of political preferences in conspiracy beliefs. We examined, if supporters of far-right political groups would more strongly endorse COVID-19 conspiracies. Research was conducted during the end of a first wave of covid-19 (11.2020-01.2021) and during the fourth wave (01.2022).

Study 1

Participants

The data were collected online via Ariadna survey platform, among Polish participants. Ariadna panel recruits participants from registered users, who then receive rewards for participation. We only included people that passed the attention checking question. We aimed to recruit people from various backgrounds and generations. Our final sample consisted of 264 people (133 men, 131 women, Mage = 46.69, SD = 14.96). As for the age distribution, our sample consisted of 3.8% people of age 18–24; 20.8% of age 25–34; 25% of age 35–44; 18.6% of age 45–54, 18.6% of age 45–54, and 31.4% of age over 55. The number of participants recruited allowed us to reach at least 99% power (with confidence level of 90%) for tested indirect effect, according to Monte Carlo power analysis for indirect effects (Schoemann et al., 2017).

Measures and procedure

Participants completed the following measures as a part of a larger online questionnaire. The survey was conducted with unlimited time to answer. In addition to demographic questions, we also asked about political preferences. Participants answered all questions on the Likert type scale from 1 - totally disagree to 7 - totally agree.

Lack of government transparency

Based on public discussions on implementation of health-related polities during pandemic, we constructed a 7-item scale to measure the perception of the transparency in managing COVID-19 virus. Items were as follows: ‘The government did not explain who advised it on the restriction related to COVID-19, and on the basis of what data they were introduced’; ‘The government provided information on subsequent restrictions (including wearing masks, banning public assemblies) in a transparent and understandable manner’ (reversed coded); ‘The government’s decisions to temporarily close various areas of the economy during the pandemic (e.g., schools, restaurants, movie theaters) were not justified by the situation in Poland, but were due to the fact that those in power and their friends wanted to cash in on the plight themselves’; ‘The government has not withheld any important information regarding the harmfulness of the virus’ (reversed coded); ‘The government has not withheld any important information regarding the number of illnesses and deaths caused by COVID-19’ (reversed coded); ‘I believe that decisions regarding restrictions during the pandemic may have been dictated by collusion between the governments of different countries’; ‘The government’s decisions on bans and restrictions on movement were not justified by the situation in Poland, but were the result of those in power taking advantage of the pandemic to restrict civil liberties’ (Cronbach’s alpha = .85).

Conspiracy mentality

We used a five items abbreviated version of the Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire (Bruder et al., 2013; Kofta & Soral, 2020) with items as ‘I think that apparently unrelated events are often the result of secret activities’, ‘I believe there are secret organizations that have a huge influence on political decisions’ (Cronbach’s alpha = .85).

Adherence to conspiracy theories about covid-19 and vaccines

We ask to what degree participants agree with the various theories related to the origin of COVID-19 and to vaccines for COVID-19 (eight items as follows: ‘The virus originated in American laboratories and was used as a biological weapon against China’; ‘The virus originated in Chinese laboratories as a bioweapon, but was accidentally found outside the lab’; ‘The virus originated as a bioweapon, we don’t know by whom it was developed, and is being spread by cell phone masts (5G transmitters)’; ‘The virus was created by an accidental mutation in the body of some animal and jumped to humans’ (reversed coded); ‘The COVID-19 virus is definitely less harmful than presented by mainstream media’; ‘The virus was created so that certain groups of corporations and wealthy people could profit from the economic shock caused by the pandemic’; ‘The vaccines from Pfizer, Oxford AstraZeneca, Moderna against the COVID-19 virus can do more damage to the body than the coronavirus itself’; ‘Vaccines from Pfizer, Oxford AstraZeneca, Moderna against the COVID-19 virus are mostly safe and protect those vaccinated’ (reversed coded)). Measure was reliable with Cronbach’s alpha = .84.

Results

Preliminary analysis revealed that there are no gender differences when it comes to belief in COVID-19 conspiracies (F(262) = .18, p = .67), conspiracy mentality (F(262) = .53, p = .47), or perception of government transparency (F(262) = .04, p = .84). There was also no relationship between the age of participants and belief in COVID-19 conspiracies (r = −.07, p = .26), conspiracy mentality (r = .10, p = .11), or perception of government transparency (r = −.06, p = .37). All variables were moderately correlated, with a lack of transparency associated with the general conspiracy mentality (r = .42) and COVI-19 conspiracies (r = .38), and conspiracy mentality linked to COVID-19 conspiracies (r = .43) (all p’s < .001).

In terms of political preferences, the highest mean scores on COVID-19 conspiracy measure was obtained by participants willing to vote for far-right Konfederacja (The Confederation) coalition (M = 4.44), the lowest by the voters for the left-wing Lewica (The Left) coalition (M = 2.38). As for the perception of a lack of transparency in decision making, the highest mean result was obtained by participants willing to vote for far-right Konfederacja (The Confederation) coalition (M = 5.10), the lowest by the voters for the currently governing Zjednoczona Prawica (United Right) coalition (M = 3.06). The highest mean result on the general conspiracy scale was again scored by participants willing to vote for far-right Konfederacja (The Confederation) coalition (M = 5.62), the lowest by the voters for the left-wing Lewica (The Left) coalition (M = 4.57).

To test our main goal, we conducted mediation analysis using PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2022; version 4; model 4, 10,000 bootstraps, a heteroscedasticity consistent standard error and covariance matrix estimator was used). This analysis revealed that perception of the lack of transparency in managing the COVID-19 pandemic was related to the COVID-19 conspiracy, and this effect was mediated by a higher conspiracy mentality (R2 for the model .23). That is, people who evaluated pandemic policies as non-transparent also presented a higher conspiracy mentality (Ba = .37, p < .001), and this, in turn, was related to belief in specific COVID-19 conspiracy theories (Ba = .32, p < .001). The indirect effect (Bab = .12) was significant (95% CI [.07, .20]). The mediation effect was partial, and when accounted for the general conspiracy mentality, the link between the perception of a lack of government transparency and COVID-19 conspiracies remains significant (Bc’ = .21, p < .001) (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Results of mediation analyses for study 1, with perception of the lack of government transparency as a predictor, conspiracy mentality as mediator and beliefs in COVID-19 conspiracies as depended variable.

Discussion

In line with our prediction, people who perceive a country’s policies during COVID-19 as non-transparent are more likely to believe in COVID-19 conspiracies. This effect was mediated by a general conspiracy mentality. However, Study 1 was a correlational one, so the casual relationship is hard to establish. Possibly, people with a conspiracy mindset could both perceive the government as non-transparent and believe in specific COVID-19 conspiracies. For this reason, we conducted Study 2, with an experimental priming of governmental non-transparency.

Study 2

Participants

The data were collected online. This time participants were recruited through invitation on social medias asking to be involved in the research on social belief and attitudes. Our final convenient sample consisted of 113 persons (19 self-declared men, 92 self-declared women, and 2 people chose the “other” option; Mage = 26.19, SD = 8.26). The number of participants recruited allowed us to reach at least 77% power (with confidence level of 90%) for tested indirect effect, according to Monte Carlo power analysis for indirect effects (Schoemann et al., 2017).

Measures and procedure

Participants were randomly assigned to the experimental (vs. control) condition. In experimental conditions, articles on the previous cases of lack of government transparency (i.e., USA’s secret programs kept from the public for a long time; e.g., Paperclip operation, MKUltra program, and others). In the control condition, participants read life-style article. Manipulation was dummy coded with 1 for the experimental group and 0 for the control group. After some control questions linked to the article, participants completed the following measures as a part of a larger online questionnaire.

Conspiracy mentality

As in Study 1, We use a five item abbreviated version of the Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire (Kofta & Soral, 2020; Cronbach’s alpha = .81).

Adherence to conspiracy theories about covid-19

We ask to what degree participants agree with the various theories related to the origin of COVID-19 (four items; ‘The virus originated in American laboratories and was used as a biological weapon against China’; ‘The virus originated in Chinese laboratories as a bioweapon, but was accidentally found outside the lab’; ‘The virus originated as a bioweapon, we don’t know by whom it was developed, and is being spread by cell phone masts (5G transmitters)’; ‘The virus was created by an accidental mutation in the body of some animal and jumped to humans’ (reversed coded)). Measure was acceptable with Cronbach’s alpha = .68.

Results and discussion

One-way ANOVA revealed that experimental manipulation indeed influenced conspiracy mentality. That is, after reading about and reflecting on the lack of transparency presented by other countries’ governments, participants exhibit a stronger conspiracy mentality (M = 5.10, SD = 1.21) than people in the control group (M = 4.58, SD = 1.10; F = 5.50, p = .02).

As in Study 1, conspiracy mentality was associated with COVID-19 conspiracies (r = .47, p = .001). We conducted mediation analysis using PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2022; version 4; model 4, 10,000 bootstraps, a heteroscedasticity consistent standard error and covariance matrix estimator was used). Priming the lack of transparency presented by the governments was related to the COVID-19 conspiracy, and this effect was mediated by the higher conspiracy mentality (R2 for the model .23). That is, people who reflected on the lack of transparency and secret actions of their governments declared more conspiratorial thinking (Ba = .51, p = .02), and this, in turn, was related to belief in specific COVID-19 conspiracy theories (Bb = .41, p < .001). The indirect effect (Bab = .21) was significant (95% CI [.03, .47]). The lack of transparency was not directly related to the COVID-19 conspiracies when conspiracy mentality was included in the model (Bc’ = .19, p = .34) (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Results of mediation analyses for study 2, with perception of the lack of government transparency as a predictor (dummy coded, priming lack of transparency = 1, control group = 0), conspiracy mentality as mediator and beliefs in COVID-19 conspiracies as depended variable.

General Discussion

The main objective of the study was to examine whether the lack of transparency in decision-making could lead to a stronger general conspiracy mentality and whether this belief could be translated into specific conspiracies related to COVID-19. The results of the correlation study showed a statistically significant relationship between the perception of the lack of transparency in pandemic policy and belief in conspiracy theories about the emergence of the COVID-19 virus and vaccines. It should be noted that this effect was mediated by a heightened conspiracy mentality. This means that people who perceived the pandemic policies as untransparent were more likely to believe in COVID-19 conspiracies. Accordingly, the results of the experimental study showed that reminding people of the untransparent actions of the past governments increased the conspiracy mentality among the participants, which in turn resulted in greater acceptance of the COVID-19 conspiracy theories. Those results support the notion that the lack of transparency could be an important ground for conspiratorial thinking. The results of both studies clearly show the relationship between the lack of transparency in pandemic politics and the general conspiracy mentality and belief in specific conspiratorial theories regarding COVID-19.

The first study showed that political preferences are related to the perception of the lack of transparency in government decisions, as well as the acceptance of COVID-19 conspiracies. Individuals supporting the extreme-right party, characterized by radically conservative views, more often considered government decisions to be devoid of transparency. Supporters of the extreme right also scored the highest on the beliefs in COVID-19 conspiracy. These results are consistent with the previous research by Imhoff and Bruder (2014). Specifically, they showed that individuals who are highly prejudiced against high-status groups are characterized by stronger general conspiracy mentality. More recently, Imhoff et al. (2022) provided evidence that conspiracy mentality is associated with extreme left- and especially extreme right-wing beliefs, as well as with supporting opposition parties and movements (i.e. deprivation of political control). This means that citizens who are unfavorable to the government are more likely to believe in conspiratorial theories linked to government actions. Our study indeed shows that supporters of far-right oppositional party were the most willing to believe in conspiracy.

It should be noted that the limitation of this study was the specific context of the pandemic, which could have had a decisive impact on the responses of the study’s participants. In addition, the study was conducted only in the Polish cultural context, so more cross-cultural research is needed to strengthen the reasoning that links untransparent political actions to specific conspiracies. Moreover, Study 2 conducted on social media included predominantly female participants of relatively young age. We have constructed new measures for presented research. Although they generally present acceptable reliability, the psychometric soundness of the scales should be confirmed in the future studies.

Limitation notwithstanding, we showed the connection between conspiracy beliefs during COVID-19 pandemic and government transparency. These findings have practical implications in times of social crises. When lack of transparency of decision-makers is salient, people are more willing to endorse specific conspiracies, and this association is mediated by their stronger general conspiracy mentality.

Author Biographies

Tomasz Besta works as associate professor at the Institute of Psychology of the University of Gdańsk. He is involved in research in the area of personality and social psychology. His main research interests are intergroup relations, collective action, radicalization, and group dynamics.

Julia Nęcka completed her MA at the Institute of Psychology of the University of Gdańsk. Her research interests include social movements, youths, and clinical psychology.

Michał Jaśkiewicz works as associate professor at the Institute of Psychology of the University of Gdańsk. He is involved in research in the area of environmental psychology, nature connectedness and social psychology. His main research interests are quality of life, urban identify, intergroup relations, collective action.

Footnotes

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Tomasz Besta https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6209-3677

References

  1. Ball C. (2009). What is transparency? Public Integrity, 11(4), 293–308. 10.2753/pin1099-9922110400 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bruder M., Haffke P., Neave N., Nouripanah N., Imhoff R. (2013). Measuring individual differences in generic beliefs in conspiracy theories across cultures: Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 225. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00225 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Douglas K. M., Sutton R. M., Cichocka A. (2017). The psychology of conspiracy theories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 538–542. 10.1177/0963721417718261 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Ecker U. K. H., Lewandowsky S., Cook J., Schmid P., Fazio L. K., Brashier N., Kendeou P., Vraga E. K., Amazeen M. A. (2022). The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1, 13–29. 10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Grimmelikhuijsen S. (2012). Linking transparency, knowledge and citizen trust in government: An experiment. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(1), 50–73. 10.1177/0020852311429667 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Grimmelikhuijsen S. G., Welch E. W. (2012). Developing and testing a theoretical framework for computer-mediated transparency of local governments. Public Administration Review, 72(4), 562–571. 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02532.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Grzesiak-Feldman M., Irzycka M. (2009). Right-Wing Authoritarianism and conspiracy thinking in a Polish sample. Psychological Reports, 105(2), 389–393. 10.2466/PR0.105.2.389-393 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Harambam J., Aupers S. (2015). Contesting epistemic authority: Conspiracy theories on the boundaries of science. Public Understanding of Science, 24(4), 466–480. 10.1177/0963662514559891 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Hayes A. F. (2022). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis (3rd ed.). The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  10. Heald D. (2006). Varieties of transparency. Oxford University Press for the British Academy. [Google Scholar]
  11. Imhoff R., Bruder M. (2014). Speaking (un–)truth to power: Conspiracy mentality as a generalised political attitude. European Journal of Personality, 28(1), 25–43. 10.1002/per.1930 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Imhoff R., Lamberty P. (2018). How paranoid are conspiracy believers? Toward a more fine‐grained understanding of the connect and disconnect between paranoia and belief in conspiracy theories. European Journal of Social Psychology, 48(7), 909–926. 10.1002/ejsp.2494 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Imhoff R., Lamberty P. (2020). A bioweapon or a hoax? The link between distinct conspiracy beliefs about the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak and pandemic behavior. Social Psychological and Personality Science 11(8), 1110–1118. 10.1177/1948550620934692 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Imhoff R., Zimmer F., Klein O., António J. H. C., Babinska M., Bangerter A., Bilewicz M., Blanuša N., Bovan K., Bužarovska R., Cichocka A., Delouvee S., Douglas K. M., Dyrendal A., Etienne T., Gjoneska B., Graf S., Gualda E., Hirschberger G., van Prooijen J.-W., et al. (2022). Conspiracy mentality and political orientation across 26 countries. Nature Human Behaviour, 6(3), 392–403. 10.1038/s41562-021-01258-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Kofta M., Soral W. (2020). Belief in the round table conspiracy and political division in Poland. Social Psychological Bulletin, 14(4), 1–19. 10.32872/spb.v14i4.2435 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Majid U., Wasim A., Bakshi S., Truong J. (2020). Knowledge,(mis-) conceptions, risk perception, and behavior change during pandemics: A scoping review of 149 studies. Public Understanding of Science, 29(8), 777–799. 10.1177/0963662520963365 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Marques M. D., Kerr J. R., Williams M. N., Ling M., McLennan J. (2021). Associations between conspiracism and the rejection of scientific innovations. Public Understanding of Science, 30(7), 854–867. 10.1177/09636625211007013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Meijer A. J. (2007). Publishing public performance results on the Internet: Do stakeholders use the Internet to hold Dutch public service organizations to account? Government Information Quarterly 24(1), 165–185. 10.1016/j.giq.2006.01.014 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Oliver J. E., Wood T. (2014). Medical conspiracy theories and health behaviors in the United States. JAMA Internal Medicine, 174(5), 817–818. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.190 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Pasquier M., Villeneuve J. P. (2007). Organizational barriers to transparency: A typology and analysis of organizational behaviour tending to prevent or restrict access to information. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73(1), 147–162. 10.1177/0020852307075701 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Piltch‐Loeb R., Zikmund‐Fisher B. J., Shaffer V. A., Scherer L. D., Knaus M., Fagerlin A., Abramson D. M., Scherer A. M., Scherer A. M. (2019). Cross‐sectional psychological and demographic associations of Zika knowledge and conspiracy beliefs before and after local Zika transmission. Risk Analysis: An Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 39(12), 2683–2693. 10.1111/risa.13369 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Schoemann A. M., Boulton A. J., Short S. D. (2017). Determining power and sample size for simple and complex mediation models. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(4), 379–386. 10.1177/1948550617715068 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Sullivan D., Landau M. J., Rothschild Z. K. (2010). An existential function of enemyship: Evidence that people attribute influence to personal and political enemies to compensate for threats to control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(3), 434–449. 10.1037/a0017457 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Swami V., Coles R., Stieger S., Pietschnig J., Furnham A., Rehim S., Voracek M. (2011). Conspiracist ideation in britain and Austria: Evidence of a monological belief system and associations between individual psychological differences and real-world and fictitious conspiracy theories. British Journal of Psychology, 102(3), 443–463. 10.1111/j.2044-8295.2010.02004.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Van der Linden S. (2015). The conspiracy-effect: Exposure to conspiracy theories (about global warming) decreases pro-social behavior and science acceptance. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 171–173. 10.1016/j.paid.2015.07.045 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Van Prooijen J. W., Douglas K. M. (2017). Conspiracy theories as part of history: The role of societal crisis situations. Memory Studies, 10(3), 323–333. 10.1177/1750698017701615 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Xiao X., Borah P., Su Y. (2021). The dangers of blind trust: Examining the interplay among social media news use, misinformation identification, and news trust on conspiracy beliefs. Public Understanding of Science, 30(8), 977–992. 10.1177/0963662521998025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Psychological Reports are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES