, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE ONLY
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CONSPIRACY BELIEFS
1. Introduction
Conspiracy beliefs have become a pervasive feature of contemporary social and political life,
influencing everything from public health behaviours to democratic engagement. These beliefs are
not merely fringe phenomena but represent structured cognitive and motivational responses to
perceived threats, uncertainty, and social dynamics (Douglas, Sutton, & Cichocka, 2017). The
psychological study of conspiracy beliefs has grown substantially over the past decade, revealing
that such beliefs emerge from complex interactions among personality traits, cognitive biases,
emotional states, and socio-cultural contexts. Importantly, conspiracy beliefs also exert significant
causal effects on trust, prosocial behaviour, prejudice, and mental well-being, creating bidirectional
relationships that can perpetuate and amplify conspiracist thinking over time (van Prooijen &
Douglas, 2018).
This literature review synthesises contemporary research on the psychology of conspiracy beliefs,
organised around five key areas. First, the review conceptualises conspiracy beliefs as a
multidimensional psychological experience, drawing on common definitions and theoretical
frameworks. Second, it examines psychological factors that predict or influence the development of
conspiracy beliefs, including personality, cognition, emotion, and socio-cultural variables. Third, it
explores the psychological and behavioural outcomes that are influenced by holding conspiracy
beliefs, focusing on trust, prosocial behaviour, prejudice, and mental health. Fourth, it analyses
bidirectional relationships, particularly concerning anxiety and social trust, which create
self-perpetuating cycles. Finally, the review considers the importance of studying conspiracy beliefs
within specific socio-political contexts, using South Africa as a case study to illustrate the real-world
consequences of both legitimate conspiracies and unfounded conspiracy theories. Throughout, the
review emphasises that conspiracy beliefs exist on a continuum from benign to harmful and that
distinguishing between adaptive scepticism and maladaptive conspiracism is essential for both
research and intervention.
2. Conceptualising Conspiracy Beliefs as a Psychological Experience
The psychological conceptualisation of conspiracy beliefs has been approached from multiple
theoretical perspectives, with scholars generally agreeing that these beliefs are not random or merely
delusional but rather structured cognitive and motivational responses to perceived threats and social
dynamics (Douglas et al., 2017). A review of the literature reveals several commonalities across
definitions. Most researchers concur that conspiracy beliefs involve an explanation for significant
events that appeals to the secret actions of powerful and malevolent groups (Brotherton, French, &
Pickering, 2013). Additionally, there is broad consensus that these beliefs serve psychological
functions related to satisfying a need for understanding, control, and security (van Prooijen &
Douglas, 2018). Common features include a rejection of official accounts, an assumption that
nothing happens by accident, and a tendency to attribute events to deliberate, hidden agendas (Wood,
Douglas, & Sutton, 2012).
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CONSPIRACY BELIEFS
1. Introduction
Conspiracy beliefs have become a pervasive feature of contemporary social and political life,
influencing everything from public health behaviours to democratic engagement. These beliefs are
not merely fringe phenomena but represent structured cognitive and motivational responses to
perceived threats, uncertainty, and social dynamics (Douglas, Sutton, & Cichocka, 2017). The
psychological study of conspiracy beliefs has grown substantially over the past decade, revealing
that such beliefs emerge from complex interactions among personality traits, cognitive biases,
emotional states, and socio-cultural contexts. Importantly, conspiracy beliefs also exert significant
causal effects on trust, prosocial behaviour, prejudice, and mental well-being, creating bidirectional
relationships that can perpetuate and amplify conspiracist thinking over time (van Prooijen &
Douglas, 2018).
This literature review synthesises contemporary research on the psychology of conspiracy beliefs,
organised around five key areas. First, the review conceptualises conspiracy beliefs as a
multidimensional psychological experience, drawing on common definitions and theoretical
frameworks. Second, it examines psychological factors that predict or influence the development of
conspiracy beliefs, including personality, cognition, emotion, and socio-cultural variables. Third, it
explores the psychological and behavioural outcomes that are influenced by holding conspiracy
beliefs, focusing on trust, prosocial behaviour, prejudice, and mental health. Fourth, it analyses
bidirectional relationships, particularly concerning anxiety and social trust, which create
self-perpetuating cycles. Finally, the review considers the importance of studying conspiracy beliefs
within specific socio-political contexts, using South Africa as a case study to illustrate the real-world
consequences of both legitimate conspiracies and unfounded conspiracy theories. Throughout, the
review emphasises that conspiracy beliefs exist on a continuum from benign to harmful and that
distinguishing between adaptive scepticism and maladaptive conspiracism is essential for both
research and intervention.
2. Conceptualising Conspiracy Beliefs as a Psychological Experience
The psychological conceptualisation of conspiracy beliefs has been approached from multiple
theoretical perspectives, with scholars generally agreeing that these beliefs are not random or merely
delusional but rather structured cognitive and motivational responses to perceived threats and social
dynamics (Douglas et al., 2017). A review of the literature reveals several commonalities across
definitions. Most researchers concur that conspiracy beliefs involve an explanation for significant
events that appeals to the secret actions of powerful and malevolent groups (Brotherton, French, &
Pickering, 2013). Additionally, there is broad consensus that these beliefs serve psychological
functions related to satisfying a need for understanding, control, and security (van Prooijen &
Douglas, 2018). Common features include a rejection of official accounts, an assumption that
nothing happens by accident, and a tendency to attribute events to deliberate, hidden agendas (Wood,
Douglas, & Sutton, 2012).
