A significant portion of the populace subscribes to at least one conspiratorial narrative. This inclination, however, is not inherently detrimental, as genuine conspiracies have indeed transpired.
For illustrative purposes, consider the clandestine operations undertaken by the CIA during the 1950s. In their pursuit of methods to elicit confessions from captured adversaries, the agency conducted unauthorized and ethically questionable experiments involving various pharmaceuticals and psychological techniques.
Nonetheless, a multitude of conspiracy theories persist, often without substantiation from empirical data, yet they garner a considerable following.
For instance, our prior investigation revealed that approximately 7% of individuals in New Zealand and Australia subscribed to the notion that the visible vapor trails emanating from aircraft are, in fact, “chemtrails” – chemical agents deliberately dispersed as part of an covert governmental initiative. This belief is espoused despite its unequivocal rejection by the scientific community.
The phenomenon of individuals embracing conspiracy theories, even in the absence of verifiable evidence, continues to present a quandary for researchers across psychology and related academic fields.
Indeed, the past few years have witnessed an exponential surge in research concerning conspiracy theories. Our understanding has expanded regarding the prevalence of belief and the psychological and political determinants that correlate with such convictions.
However, considerably less is understood about the frequency with which individuals alter their perspectives. Do they readily shift their viewpoints, or do they steadfastly adhere to their beliefs, irrespective of the evidence presented?
From 9/11 to COVID-19
To address this inquiry, we embarked on a longitudinal research study. We engaged 498 participants from Australia and New Zealand, who were recruited through the Prolific platform, a service dedicated to connecting researchers with individuals willing to participate in paid studies.
Each month, spanning from March to September of 2021, our cohort was presented with a survey encompassing ten distinct conspiracy theories. Participants were subsequently asked to indicate their level of agreement with each proposition.
The theories under examination pertained to events that have either recently occurred or are currently unfolding in the 21st century, including the September 11th attacks, the deployment of 5G telecommunications technology, and the COVID-19 pandemic, among others.
While a subset of our participants did express belief in some of these theories, the majority consistently disagreed with each of them.
The theory garnering the most adherents posited that “pharmaceutical corporations (‘Big Pharma’) have deliberately withheld a cure for cancer to safeguard their profitability.” Approximately 18% of the surveyed individuals endorsed this claim upon their initial assessment.
Conversely, the least prevalent theory suggested that “COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ contain microchips intended for the surveillance and control of individuals.” Merely 2% of participants agreed with this assertion.
Conspiratorial Beliefs Likely Remain Stable
Notwithstanding prevailing concerns regarding a “pandemic of misinformation” or “infodemic,” our findings yielded no empirical evidence to suggest an aggregate increase in individual belief in conspiracy theories over time.
This observation holds true despite our data collection coinciding with the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, a period marked by considerable upheaval. Both Australia and New Zealand experienced intermittent lockdown measures, and there was a discernible rise in anti-governmental sentiment.
Although our observational period spanned only six months, other longitudinal studies, extending over significantly longer durations, have similarly indicated a paucity of evidence supporting a temporal escalation in conspiratorial beliefs.
Finally, our research indicated that convictions (or lack thereof) regarding conspiracy theories exhibited a degree of stability, though not an absolute rigidity. For any given theory, the overwhelming majority of participants maintained their status as “consistent skeptics,” abstaining from agreement at all survey intervals.
A segment of “consistent believers” was also identified, individuals who affirmed their agreement with specific theories throughout every survey response. For the majority of the theories investigated, this group constituted the second-largest demographic.
Nevertheless, for each conspiracy theory examined, a small proportion of individuals transitioned from disbelief to belief. These “converts” initially disagreed with a theory but subsequently affirmed it by the study’s conclusion. A corresponding small group, termed “apostates,” shifted from agreement to disagreement over the study period.
Crucially, the numerical representation of converts and apostates tended to be relatively balanced, thereby contributing to the overarching stability in the percentage of believers over time.
Navigating the ‘Rabbit Hole’
This observed relative constancy is particularly salient, especially considering a prominent critique leveled against conspiracy theories: their purported inability to be “falsified.” The argument suggests that perceived contradictory evidence can be readily dismissed by adherents as an integral component of the alleged cover-up.
Yet, the evidence clearly demonstrates that individuals do, on occasion, disavow conspiracy theories they previously espoused.
Our findings bring into question the widely held notion of the “rabbit hole” – a concept suggesting that individuals rapidly adopt a series of conspiracy theories sequentially, akin to Alice’s descent into Wonderland in Lewis Carroll’s celebrated literary work.
While it is plausible that such rapid immersion occurs for a minority of individuals, our research suggests this is not a universally typical experience.
For the majority, the pathway into conspiratorial belief may be characterized by a more gradual progression. This process might be more analogous to traversing a genuine rabbit burrow, from which egress is also achievable.
Mathew Ling (Neami National), Stephen Hill (Massey University), and Edward Clarke (Philipps-Universität Marburg) made significant contributions to the research detailed herein.
