The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How paranoid are conspiracy believers? Toward a more fine-grained understanding of the connect and disconnect between paranoia and belief in conspiracy theories
Abstract
Public discourse and scholarly literature often make a strong connection between paranoid thought and belief in conspiracy theories. We report one meta‐analysis and two correlational studies across two distinct cultural contexts (total N = 578) to provide an estimate for their association but also evidence for their distinctiveness via a multi‐trait‐multi‐method approach. Whereas the meta‐analysis (k = 11 studies) provided support for a reliable association between paranoia and conspiracy beliefs, the two additional studies provide direct evidence for their distinctiveness and divergent associations with other constructs. Although both assume sinister intentions of others, beliefs in conspiracy theories are more specific in who these others are (powerful groups) than paranoia (everyone). In contrast, paranoia was more restricted in terms of who the target of the negative intentions is (the self) than conspiracy theorizing (society as a whole). In light of this and distinct associations of conspiracy beliefs with political control and trust but not (inter‐)personal control and trust (like paranoia), we propose to treat the two as distinct (albeit correlated) constructs with conspiracy beliefs reflecting a political attitude compared to paranoia as a self‐relevant belief.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“(3) feel safe and in control [36][37][38].”
From The dark side of social movements: social identity, non-conformity, and the lure of conspiracy theories (2020) · cites this paper as [36]
In the citing paper
“studies found that stronger uniqueness needs were linked to stronger conspiracy theory beliefs [31,32,36].”
From The dark side of social movements: social identity, non-conformity, and the lure of conspiracy theories (2020) · cites this paper as [36]
Citations
Cites
Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588 · Cited by 20,015
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0046016 · Cited by 17,116
Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5 · Cited by 16,280
Handbook of Positive Psychology
(2001) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195135336.001.0001 · Cited by 9,158
Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001 · Cited by 4,244
The Authoritarian Personality.
Bunzel, J. H., Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., Sanford, R. N., Bettelheim, B., Janowitz, M., Ackerman, N. W., & Jahoda, M. (1950) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2087322 · Cited by 4,189
At what sample size do correlations stabilize?
Schönbrodt, F. D., & Perugini, M. (2013) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2013.05.009 · Cited by 2,232
Fisher, R. A. (1915) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/10.4.507 · Cited by 2,230
The SPQ: A Scale for the Assessment of Schizotypal Personality Based on DSM-III-R Criteria
Raine, A. (1991) · Schizophrenia Bulletin · doi:10.1093/schbul/17.4.555 · Cited by 2,164
Bias and Efficiency of Meta-Analytic Variance Estimators in the Random-Effects Model
Viechtbauer, W. (2005) · Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics · doi:10.3102/10769986030003261 · Cited by 1,699
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Adorno T. W., 1947, Dialektik der Aufklärung [Dialectic of enlightenment], 177
- Derogatis L. R., 1994, SCL‐90‐R symptom checklist‐90‐R administration, scoring and procedures manual
- Franke G. H., 1995, SCL‐90‐R. Die Symptom‐Checkliste von Derogatis‐Deutsche Version
- Imhoff R., 2010, Zwei Formen des modernen Antisemitismus? Eine Skala zur Messung primären und sekundären Antisemitismus [Two forms of modern antisemitism? A scale for the measurement of primary and secondary antisemitism], Conflict & Communication, 9, 1
- Imhoff R., 2015, The psychology of conspiracy, 122
- Klein O., 2015, The psychology of conspiracy, 162
- Kofta M., 2001, Od myśli i uczuć do decyzji i działań, 60
- Rosseel Y., 2012, Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling and more
- Shapiro D., 1965, Neurotic styles
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Understanding Conspiracy Theories
Douglas, K. M., Uscinski, J. E., Sutton, R. M., Cichocka, A., Nefes, T., Ang, C. S., & Deravi, F. (2019) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12568 · Cited by 1,511
“Jolley and Douglas (2014b) found that participants who were exposed to antigovernment conspiracy theories— compared to those who were presented with refuting information— showed less intention to vote in the next election.”
BackgroundInfluentialImhoff, R., & Lamberty, P. (2020) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550620934692 · Cited by 722
“…content-wise even completely unrelated conspiracy beliefs are so highly intercorrelated that they typically load on one factor (Bruder et al., 2013; Swami et al., 2011) and are thus often understood as specific expressions of a generalized mindset or political attitude (Imhoff & Lamberty, 2018).”
BackgroundSelf-citationPylons ablaze: Examining the role of 5G COVID‐19 conspiracy beliefs and support for violence
Jolley, D., & Paterson, J. (2020) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjso.12394 · Cited by 337
“…but closely correlated construct of conspiracy beliefs, paranoia refers to the belief that awide range of external agents harbours hostile intent towards them personally – as opposed to the conspiratorial belief that powerful organizations are harming society at large (Imhoff & Lamberty, 2018).”
BackgroundBelief in conspiracy theories: Basic principles of an emerging research domain
van Prooijen, J., & Douglas, K. M. (2018) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2530 · Cited by 483
“Moreover, these findings are not specific for health-related conspiracy theories: More general conspiracy beliefs predict a preference for alternative over regular, evidence-based medical approaches (Lamberty & Imhoff, 2018).”
BackgroundBertin, P., Nera, K., & Delouvée, S. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.565128 · Cited by 336
“Overall, there might be a negative relation between conspiracy beliefs and attitude toward scientific medicine, Lamberty and Imhoff (2018) have shown that conspiracy mentality was associated with a preference for alternative medicines over evidence based, biomedical treatments.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Imhoff, R., & Lamberty, P.
- Affiliations
- Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Imhoff, Roland
- Venue
- European Journal of Social Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-05-30
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 909-926
- ISSN
- 0046-2772 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0992
- OpenAlex
- W2799716520
- Semantic Scholar
- 47550a1d8d5b54bb390d03c1b1d299c52887c2b9
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 70
- Citations by year
- 2026: 39 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 43.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Journal of Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Paranormal Experiences and Beliefs
- Keywords
- paranoia, conspiracy beliefs, conspiracy theories, paranoid thinking, political control, trust, interpersonal control, self-relevance, construct distinctiveness
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
