The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 32 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions
Open accessAbstract
The current studies investigated the potential impact of anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs, and exposure to anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, on vaccination intentions. In Study 1, British parents completed a questionnaire measuring beliefs in anti-vaccine conspiracy theories and the likelihood that they would have a fictitious child vaccinated. Results revealed a significant negative relationship between anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs and vaccination intentions. This effect was mediated by the perceived dangers of vaccines, and feelings of powerlessness, disillusionment and mistrust in authorities. In Study 2, participants were exposed to information that either supported or refuted anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, or a control condition. Results revealed that participants who had been exposed to material supporting anti-vaccine conspiracy theories showed less intention to vaccinate than those in the anti-conspiracy condition or controls. This effect was mediated by the same variables as in Study 1. These findings point to the potentially detrimental consequences of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, and highlight their potential role in shaping health-related behaviors.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Two studies show that anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs and exposure to anti-vaccine conspiracy material are associated with lower intentions to vaccinate a fictitious child. These effects were mediated by perceived vaccine dangers, powerlessness, disillusionment, and mistrust in authorities.
Key findings
- In Study 1, anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs significantly negatively predicted vaccination intentions, \(F(1, 87) = 15.97, p < .001, R^2 = .16, \beta = -.63\). Perceived dangers of vaccines, powerlessness, disillusionment, and trust in authorities each significantly mediated this relationship.
- In Study 2, vaccination intentions were significantly lower in the pro-conspiracy condition (\(M = 4.87, SD = 1.74\)) than in the anti-conspiracy condition (\(M = 5.69, SD = 1.31, p = .003\)) and the control condition (\(M = 5.47, SD = 1.50, p = .028\)), overall \(F(2, 185) = 4.81, p = .009, \eta^2 = .05\).
- The manipulation check showed higher endorsement of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories in the pro-conspiracy condition (\(M = 4.11, SD = 1.41\)) than the anti-conspiracy condition (\(M = 2.93, SD = 1.14, p < .001\)) and control condition (\(M = 3.56, SD = 1.21, p = .014\)).
- Perceived vaccine dangers consistently mediated the effects; powerlessness and disillusionment mediated the pro- versus anti-conspiracy difference, and trust in authorities mediated the pro-conspiracy versus control difference.
Methods
- Study 1 used a correlational online questionnaire with 89 British parents (\(80\) women, \(9\) men; \(M\) age \(= 38.06, SD = 9.25\)). Participants completed measures of anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs, perceived dangers, powerlessness, disillusionment, trust in authorities, and intention to vaccinate a fictitious 8-month-old child against a made-up disease, dysomeria.
- Study 2 recruited 246 U.S. MTurk participants, with a final analyzed sample of 188 after screening exclusions. Participants were randomly assigned to pro-conspiracy, anti-conspiracy, or control information, then completed the same mediator measures and vaccination intention measure.
- Both studies used bootstrapping mediation analyses with 5000 bootstrap samples; Study 2 used ANOVA and indicator-coded mediation to compare the three conditions.
Limitations
- The paper states that effect sizes were small (e.g., \(\eta^2 = .05\) in Study 2), conspiracy endorsement was generally around or below the midpoint except in the pro-conspiracy condition (\(M = 4.11\)), the mediation pattern was less clear in Study 2, and findings relied on self-reported intentions for a fictional child and made-up disease rather than actual vaccination behavior.
- The paper notes that future research should examine larger samples, actual vaccination behavior, additional or isolated mediators, and geographical areas with dangerously low vaccination uptake.
- Evident from the text: Study 1 is correlational and cannot establish causality, and both studies use hypothetical vaccination scenarios, which may limit ecological validity.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 of 32 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Results revealed a significant negative relationship between anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs and vaccination intentions.”
- Also stated in: § Results and Discussion · plain
“As predicted, regression analyses revealed that anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs were a significant negative predictor of vaccination intentions, F(1, 87) = 15.97, p<.001, R2 = .16, β = −.63, t = − 3.10, p<. 001.”
- Also stated in: § Results and Discussion · plain
“Participants who endorsed anti-vaccine conspiracy theories to a greater extent indicated less intention to vaccinate.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Also stated in: § Results and Discussion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 2, anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs were a significant predictor of perceived dangers of vaccines, and feelings of powerlessness, disillusionment and trust in authorities, F(5, 83) = 120.37, p<.001, R2 = .58; F(5, 83) = 41.70, p<.001, R2 = .32; F(5, 83) = 74.43, p<.001, R2 = .46; F(5, 83) = 23.00, p<.001, R2 = .20, respectively.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 1 > Results and Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Results revealed that participants who had been exposed to material supporting anti-vaccine conspiracy theories showed less intention to vaccinate than those in the anti-conspiracy condition or controls.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This effect was mediated by the same variables as in Study 1.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This effect was mediated by the perceived dangers of vaccines, and feelings of powerlessness, disillusionment and mistrust in authorities.”
- Also stated in: § Results and Discussion · hedged
“The multiple mediation analysis of the effect of anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs on vaccination intentions indicated that perceived dangers of vaccines and feelings of powerlessness, disillusionment and trust in authorities (controlling for each other) were each significant mediators of this effect.”
- Also stated in: § Results and Discussion · plain
“When all factors were taken into account, each was a significant mediator of the relationship between anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs and vaccination intentions.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Also stated in: § Results and Discussion · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 2, anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs were a significant predictor of perceived dangers of vaccines, and feelings of powerlessness, disillusionment and trust in authorities, F(5, 83) = 120.37, p<.001, R2 = .58; F(5, 83) = 41.70, p<.001, R2 = .32; F(5, 83) = 74.43, p<.001, R2 = .46; F(5, 83) = 23.00, p<.001, R2 = .20, respectively.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 1 > Results and Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 2, anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs were a significant predictor of perceived dangers of vaccines, and feelings of powerlessness, disillusionment and trust in authorities, F(5, 83) = 120.37, p<.001, R2 = .58; F(5, 83) = 41.70, p<.001, R2 = .32; F(5, 83) = 74.43, p<.001, R2 = .46; F(5, 83) = 23.00, p<.001, R2 = .20, respectively.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 1 > Results and Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results of this analysis therefore support the use of four separate mediators.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 1 > Results and Discussion
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, results revealed no significant difference in trust in authorities between conditions, F(2, 185) = 2.32, p = .10, η2 = .03.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 2 > Results and Discussion
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived dangers were higher in the pro-conspiracy condition (M = 4.00, SD = 1.46) than the anti-conspiracy condition (M = 2.97, SD = 1.42, p<.001) and the control condition (M = 2.39, SD = 1.71, p = .021).”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 2 > Results and Discussion
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
- Probably not a substantial claim. 18
- It may state two separate claims as one. 9
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were eight statements (e.g., “Vaccines lead to allergies”, α = .86)”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 1 > Methods
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants were asked to read the statements (e.g., “I feel that my actions will not stop the negative outcomes of immunizations”, α = .82)”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 1 > Methods
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“consisted of four statements (e.g., “I am very disappointed with those who are involved in immunizations (e.g., the government, pharmaceutical companies)”, α = .89)”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 1 > Methods
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“and also that feelings of political powerlessness mediate the relationship between exposure to conspiracy theories and voting intentions [22].”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [22] Jolley D, Douglas KM (2013) The social consequences of conspiracism: Exposure to conspiracy theories decreases the intention to engage in politics and to reduce one’s carbon footprint. Br J Psychol: in press. doi:10.1111/bjop.12018. source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Further, polls demonstrate that more than 20% of respondents endorse the idea that there is a link between childhood vaccines and autism [13].”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] Public Policy Polling (2013) Democrats and Republicans differ on conspiracy theory beliefs. Available: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_National_ConspiracyTheories_040213.pdf. Accessed: 2013 Nov 27.
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Previous research has demonstrated that exposure to conspiracy theories increases political disillusionment [22]”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [22] Jolley D, Douglas KM (2013) The social consequences of conspiracism: Exposure to conspiracy theories decreases the intention to engage in politics and to reduce one’s carbon footprint. Br J Psychol: in press. doi:10.1111/bjop.12018. source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Endorsement of these conspiracy theories amongst African Americans has been found to be associated with negative attitudes towards contraceptive behaviors, which may potentially expose people to the risk of unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted illnesses [23], [24], [25].”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [23] ST Bird, 2003, Birth control conspiracy beliefs, perceived discrimination, and contraception among African Americans, Journal of Health Psychology source
- Not checked yetcites [24] LM Bogart, 2006, Relationship of African Americans’ socio demographic characteristics to belief in conspiracies about HIV/AIDS and birth control, Journal of the National Medical Association
- Not checked yetcites [25] MA Hoyt, 2012, HIV/AIDS-related institutional mistrust among multiethnic men who have sex with men: Effects on HIV testing and risk behaviors, Health Psychology source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The order of measures was counterbalanced.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 1 > Methods
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study was approved by the Psychology Ethics Committee at the University of Kent and all participants provided their written, informed consent.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 1 > Methods
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were two trust sources (corporations and government; Spearman-Brown Coefficient = .82)”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 1 > Methods
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Also, exposure to conspiracy theories has been found to have detrimental effects in other domains, such as reducing pro-environmental intentions and willingness to engage in politics [21], [22].”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [21] LD Butler, 1995, The psychological impact of viewing the film JFK: Emotions, beliefs and political behavioral intentions, Political Psychology source
- Not checked yetcites [22] Jolley D, Douglas KM (2013) The social consequences of conspiracism: Exposure to conspiracy theories decreases the intention to engage in politics and to reduce one’s carbon footprint. Br J Psychol: in press. doi:10.1111/bjop.12018. source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Study 2, feelings of powerlessness and disillusionment mediated the difference between the pro- and anti-conspiracy conditions, and mistrust in authorities mediated the difference between the pro-conspiracy and control conditions.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > General Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This means that the proportion of variance in vaccine intentions explained by exposure to conspiracy theories was quite modest and there are potentially many other factors that contribute to vaccine intentions.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > General Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The final sample size used for data analysis was therefore 188 (112 women and 76 men, M age = 36.33, SD = 13.40).”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 2 > Methods
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 188Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Further, feelings of powerlessness and disillusionment mediated the difference between the pro- and anti-conspiracy conditions, and mistrust in authorities mediated the difference between the pro-conspiracy and control conditions.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 2 > Results and Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were 60 participants in the pro-conspiracy condition, 62 in the anti-conspiracy condition, and 66 in the control condition.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 2 > Methods
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 60Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As is well known, intentions do not always translate into behaviors [47], [48], [49].”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > General Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [47] RT LaPiere, 1934, Attitudes vs. actions, Social Forces source
- Not checked yetcites [48] LS Linn, 1965, Verbal attitudes and overt behavior: A study of racial discrimination, Social Forces source
- Not checked yetcites [49] Sheeran P (2002) Intention-behavior relations: A conceptual and empirical review. In: Stroebe W, Hewstone M, editors. European Review of Social Psychology. Chichester, UK: Wiley. Vol. 12, 1–36. source
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Similarly, different strategies for successful intervention may apply for people who hold strong anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs than those who do not hold strong beliefs [44].”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > General Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [44] CR Sunstein, 2009, Conspiracy theories: Causes and cures, J Polit Philos source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Psychologists are learning more about the traits and characteristics associated with beliefs in conspiracy theories more generally, such as mistrust, anomie, political cynicism and Machiavellianism [8], [20], [31], [50]”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > General Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] T Goertzel, 1994, Belief in conspiracy theories, Polit Psychol source
- Not checked yetcites [20] KM Douglas, 2008, The hidden impact of conspiracy theories: Perceived and actual influence of theories surrounding the death of Princess Diana, Br J Soc Psychol source
- Not checked yetcites [31] M Abalakina-Paap, 1999, Beliefs in conspiracies, Political Psychology source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Specifically, they appear to reduce vaccination intentions by inducing undue concern about the dangers of vaccines, and increasing powerlessness, disillusionment, and mistrust.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > General Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, the participants were not strong endorsers of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, meaning that different patterns of findings may emerge for those who do strongly endorse conspiracy theories.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > General Discussion
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, overall, anti-vaccine conspiracy theories appear to introduce undue suspicion about vaccine safety, and increase feelings of powerlessness and disillusionment, whilst decreasing trust in authorities, which in turn introduce reluctance to vaccinate.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > General Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 2 > Methods
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study was approved by the Psychology Ethics Committee at the University of Kent and all participants provided their written, informed consent.”
§ The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions > Study 1 > Methods
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✗ Asserted: fails✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
The measured mediators (perceived vaccine dangers, powerlessness, disillusionment, and trust in authorities) are causally prior to and influence vaccination intentions, as required for the mediation analysis.
“Each of the candidate mediators was then examined in a test of mediation in order to explain the effect of the conspiracy conditions (pro-conspiracy versus anti-conspiracy, versus control) on vaccination intentions.”
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Consistentχ²(136) = 4544.44reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“X 2 (136) = 4544.44, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(1, 87) = 15.97reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(1, 87) = 15.97, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(5, 83) = 120.37reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(5, 83) = 120.37, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(5, 83) = 41.7reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(5, 83) = 41.70, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(5, 83) = 74.43reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(5, 83) = 74.43, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(5, 83) = 23reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(5, 83) = 23.00, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(2, 185) = 4.81reported p = .009 · recomputed p = .009
“F(2, 185) = 4.81, p = .009”
- ConsistentF(2, 185) = 7.61reported p = .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(2, 185) = 7.61, p = .001”
- ConsistentF(2, 185) = 3.44reported p = .034 · recomputed p = .034
“F(2, 185) = 3.44, p = .034”
- ConsistentF(2, 185) = 7.46reported p = .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(2, 185) = 7.46, p = .001”
- ConsistentF(2, 185) = 2.32reported p = .1 · recomputed p = .101
“F(2, 185) = 2.32, p = .10”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Table 1 gives two values for the same intention-danger correlation
MinorThe intention row reports its correlation with dangers as −.49, while the dangers row reports the same correlation as −.48.
“| (2) Immunisation intention | 5.63 (1.42) | −.40*** | – | −.49*** | .29** | −.36*** | .20¥ |”
“| (3) Dangers | 2.97 (1.37) | .76*** | −.48*** | – | .58*** | .60*** | −.48*** |”
Study 1 regression t and F statistics disagree
MinorFor a regression with one predictor, F equals t squared. The reported t of −3.10 gives F = 9.61, not 15.97.
Reported 15.97 · recomputed 9.61
“F(1, 87) = 15.97, p<.001, R2 = .16, β = −.63, t = − 3.10, p<. 001.”
Table 1 gives two values for the same danger-disillusionment correlation
MinorThe dangers row reports the correlation with disillusionment as .60, while the disillusionment row reports it as .59.
“| (3) Dangers | 2.97 (1.37) | .76*** | −.48*** | – | .58*** | .60*** | −.48*** |”
“| (5) Disillusionment | 2.45 (1.40) | .68*** | −.36*** | .59*** | .59*** | – | −.41*** |”
Study 1 standardized coefficient conflicts with its correlation
MinorIn a regression with one predictor, the standardized coefficient β equals the predictor-outcome correlation. The regression reports β = −.63, while Table 1 reports −.40.
“β = −.63”
“| (1) Anti-vaccine conspiracy belief | 2.00 (.89) | – | −.40*** | .76*** | .57*** | .68*** | −.46*** |”
Study 1 mediator regressions have incompatible degrees of freedom
MinorThe text describes four separate regressions, each with anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs as the predictor and one mediator as the outcome. Each would have one predictor degree of freedom, not the reported five.
“F(5, 83) = 120.37, p<.001, R2 = .58; F(5, 83) = 41.70, p<.001, R2 = .32; F(5, 83) = 74.43, p<.001, R2 = .46; F(5, 83) = 23.00, p<.001, R2 = .20, respectively.”
“Table: Table 2 Four separate regressions examining anti-conspiracy belief as predictor, and four mediator variables as criterions.”
Citations
Cites
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/brm.40.3.879 · Cited by 34,117 · cited 1×
“By repeating this process thousands of times, it builds an empirical approximation of the sampling distribution that constructs the confidence intervals [39].”
Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A New Source of Inexpensive, Yet High-Quality, Data?
Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691610393980 · Cited by 9,996
Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical Mediation Analysis in the New Millennium
Hayes, A. F. (2009) · Communication Monographs · doi:10.1080/03637750903310360 · Cited by 9,757 · cited 5×
“As argued by Hayes [40], an indirect effect is estimated as being significant if the confidence intervals do not contain a zero, as opposed to significance in the individual paths.”
InfluentialNew Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior
Stern, P. C. (2000) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00175 · Cited by 8,682
A Second Generation Little Jiffy
Kaiser, H. F. (1970) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291817 · Cited by 4,855
Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk
Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500002205 · Cited by 3,767
Intention—Behavior Relations: A Conceptual and Empirical Review
Sheeran, P. (2002) · European Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/14792772143000003 · Cited by 3,688 · cited 1×
“As is well known, intentions do not always translate into behaviors [47], [48], [49].”
Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable
Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2014) · British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology · doi:10.1111/bmsp.12028 · Cited by 3,403 · cited 3×
“This was carried out using Hayes and Preacher’s [38] bootstrapping method for indirect effects, as in Study 1.”
Misinformation and Its Correction: Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing
Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612451018 · Cited by 2,920
A Note on the Multiplying Factors for Various χ2 Approximations
Bartlett, M. S. (1954) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology) · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1954.tb00174.x · Cited by 2,168
Flagged first, then by citations
2 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 1,000
Ward, P., Attwell, K., Meyer, S. B., Rokkas, P., & Leask, J. (2017) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0185955 · Cited by 142
Xiao, X., Borah, P., & Su, Y. (2021) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/0963662521998025 · Cited by 175
“Conspiracy beliefs are known to reduce positive social and health attitude and behaviors (e.g. Goertzel, 2010; Jolley and Douglas, 2014a; Lewandowsky et al., 2015).”
InfluentialBored to fears: Boredom proneness, paranoia, and conspiracy theories
Brotherton, R., & Eser, S. (2015) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.011 · Cited by 151
Parent psychology and the decision to delay childhood vaccination.
Callaghan, T., Motta, M. P., Sylvester, S. M., Trujillo, K. L., & Blackburn, C. C. (2019) · Social Science & Medicine (1967) · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112407 · Cited by 119
The role of conspiracy beliefs for COVID-19 health responses: A meta-analysis
Bierwiaczonek, K., Gundersen, A. B., & Kunst, J. R. (2022) · Current Opinion in Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101346 · Cited by 160
Results of the COVID-19 mental health international for the general population (COMET-G) study
Fountoulakis, K. N., Karakatsoulis, G., Abraham, S., Adorjan, K., Ahmed, H. U., Alarcón, R. D., Arai, K., Auwal, S. S., Berk, M., Bjedov, S., et al. (2022) · European Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2021.10.004 · Cited by 134
Simione, L., Vagni, M., Gnagnarella, C., Bersani, G., & Pajardi, D. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.683684 · Cited by 146
Suspicion in the workplace: Organizational conspiracy theories and work‐related outcomes
Douglas, K. M., & Leite, A. C. (2017) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjop.12212 · Cited by 132
“Study 3 In this study, exposure to conspiracy theories was manipulated as in previous research (Jolley & Douglas, 2014a, b).”
InfluentialSelf-citationAddressing vaccine hesitancy and resistance for COVID-19 vaccines
Peters, M. D. J. (2022) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2022.104241 · Cited by 132
Believing in Conspiracy Theories: Evidence from an Exploratory Analysis of Italian Survey Data
Mancosu, M., Vassallo, S., & Vezzoni, C. (2017) · South European Society & Politics · doi:10.1080/13608746.2017.1359894 · Cited by 142
Anxious attachment and belief in conspiracy theories
Green, R., & Douglas, K. M. (2018) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.12.023 · Cited by 108
“For instance, some research suggests that conspiracy theories increase (rather than decrease) feelings of powerlessness (Jolley & Douglas, 2014a).”
BackgroundSelf-citationParental Decision-Making on Childhood Vaccination
Damnjanović, K., Graeber, J., Ilić, S., Lam, W. Y., Lep, Ž., Morales, S., Pulkkinen, T., & Vingerhoets, L. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00735 · Cited by 140
Pytlik, N., Soll, D., & Mehl, S. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2020.568942 · Cited by 151
“Beliefs in conspiracy theories are associated with the rejection of generally accepted norms, assumptions, and behaviors, e.g., regarding vaccination (2), combating climate change (3) or political participation (4).”
Falling into the Echo Chamber: The Italian Vaccination Debate on Twitter
Cossard, A., De Francisci Morales, G., Kalimeri, K., Mejova, Y., Paolotti, D., & Starnini, M. (2020) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v14i1.7285 · Cited by 126
Arif, N., Al-Jefri, M. M., Bizzi, I. H., Perano, G. B., Goldman, M., Haq, I., Chua, K. L., Mengozzi, M., Neunez, M., Smith, H. E., et al. (2018) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2018.01215 · Cited by 128
“, a personal story); (7) whether a celebrity was mentioned.”
BackgroundGrant, L., Hausman, B. L., Cashion, M., Lucchesi, N., Patel, K., & Roberts, J. (2015) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.4153 · Cited by 126
“Although social networking technologies make it easy for users to crowdsource information, there is widespread concern about the quality of the information that is circulated among users and the extent to which that information influences people’s decisions to vaccinate themselves [33] and their children [34].”
Wood, M. (2017) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjop.12231 · Cited by 80
Intention Seekers: Conspiracist Ideation and Biased Attributions of Intentionality
Brotherton, R., & French, C. C. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0124125 · Cited by 138
Oh, H. J., & Lee, H. (2019) · Journal of Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10810730.2019.1677824 · Cited by 135
“…not only because they travel much faster than true news (Vosoughi, Roy, & Aral, 2018)1, but also because they hinder individuals’ engagement in desirable health behaviors and institutional efforts to manage public health (Jolley & Douglas, 2014; Lee & Oh, 2017; Pluviano, Watt, & Della Sala, 2017).”
BackgroundMedical disinformation and the unviable nature of COVID-19 conspiracy theories
Grimes, D. R. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0245900 · Cited by 135
“Exposure to anti-vaccine propaganda, for example, is a major driver of vaccine hesitancy, heavily influencing parental intentions to vaccinate [4].”
BackgroundWho believes in conspiracy theories? A meta-analysis on personality correlates
Stasielowicz, L. (2022) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2022.104229 · Cited by 146
Jones-Jang, S. M., McKeever, B. W., Mckeever, R. J., & Kim, J. K. (2017) · Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10410236.2017.1384433 · Cited by 125
“Based on an unsubstantiated claim that vaccines cause autism, some parents delay or entirely refuse vaccination of their children against the recommendation of medical experts (Jolley & Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundAn Examination of Factors Contributing to the Acceptance of Online Health Misinformation
Pan, W., Liu, D., & Fang, J. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.630268 · Cited by 131
Romer, D., & Jamieson, K. H. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/25215 · Cited by 154
Akther, T., & Nur, T. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0261869 · Cited by 140
“Commonly accepted conspiracy theories contend that climate change is a hoax [30]; NASA faked the moon landings [31]; the US government orchestrated the 9/11 terrorist attacks [32]; and vaccinations are harmful, but this fact is concealed to maintain profits [33].”
BackgroundSallam, M., Al-Mahzoum, K., Dardas, L. A., Al‐Tammemi, A. B., Al-Majali, L., Al-Naimat, H., Jardaneh, L., AlHadidi, F., Al‐Salahat, K., Al-Ajlouni, E., et al. (2022) · Medicina · doi:10.3390/medicina58070924 · Cited by 126
“The importance of unravelling predictors of conspiracy theories in the context of emerging virus infections is related to its severe negative consequences on health-related measures and less trust in science [80,81].”
BackgroundMultidimensional social and cultural norms influencing HPV vaccine hesitancy in Asia
Wong, L. P., Wong, P., Hashim, M. M. A. A. M., Han, L., Lin, Y., Hu, Z., Zhao, Q., & Zimet, G. D. (2020) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2020.1756670 · Cited by 128
“are making tremendous profits from vaccines, there are anecdotal beliefs that researchers cover up evidence of the harmful side effects of vaccines and inflate statistics on vaccine efficacy.(69) In Western countries, the profit-making conspiracy theory has greatly reduced intention to vaccination.”
BackgroundAdam‐Troian, J., Wagner‐Egger, P., Motyl, M. S., Arciszewski, T., Imhoff, R., Zimmer, F., Klein, O., Babińska, M., Bangerter, A., Bilewicz, M., et al. (2020) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12716 · Cited by 119
Self-citationThe entertainment value of conspiracy theories
van Prooijen, J., Ligthart, J., Rosema, S., & Xu, Y. (2021) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjop.12522 · Cited by 131
Featherstone, J. D., Bell, R. A., & Ruiz, J. B. (2019) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.04.063 · Cited by 116
Belief in Science Influences Physical Distancing in Response to COVID-19 Lockdown PoliciesPreprint
Brzezinski, A., Kecht, V., Dijcke, D. V., & Wright, A. L. (2020) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3587990 · Cited by 115
Lamberty, P., & Imhoff, R. (2018) · Social Psychology · doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000347 · Cited by 93
“In addition, people who were confronted with anti-vaccination conspiracy theories were less willing to vaccinate themselves or their children (Jolley & Douglas, 2014), an effect mediated by feelings of powerlessness.”
BackgroundKlein, C., Clutton, P., & Dunn, A. (2019) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0225098 · Cited by 108
Lantian, A., Müller, D., Nurra, C., Klein, O., Berjot, S., & Pantazi, M. (2018) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2498 · Cited by 117
Online communication as a window to conspiracist worldviews
Wood, M. J., & Douglas, K. M. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00836 · Cited by 110
Self-citationThe Conspiracy Mentality Scale
Stojanov, A., & Halberstadt, J. (2019) · Social Psychology · doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000381 · Cited by 78
Chen, L., Zhang, Y., Young, R., Wu, X., & Zhu, G. (2020) · Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10410236.2020.1751384 · Cited by 125
“Jolley and Douglas (2014) found that British parents who were exposed to antivaccine conspiracy theories were much less likely to have their children vaccinated.”
BackgroundShining a spotlight on the dangerous consequences of conspiracy theories
Jolley, D., Marques, M. D., & Cookson, D. (2022) · Current Opinion in Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101363 · Cited by 110
Self-citationWong, L. P., Wong, P., & AbuBakar, S. (2020) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2019.1706935 · Cited by 109
Technologically scaffolded atypical cognition: the case of YouTube’s recommender system
Alfano, M., Fard, A. E., Carter, J. A., Clutton, P., & Klein, C. (2020) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-020-02724-x · Cited by 123
van der Tempel, J., & Alcock, J. E. (2015) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.03.010 · Cited by 120
Tomljenović, H., Bubić, A., & Erceg, N. (2019) · Psychology and Health · doi:10.1080/08870446.2019.1673894 · Cited by 121
“Importantly, such vaccine conspiracy beliefs do not seem to be a rare, outlying or psychopathological occurrence (Jolley & Douglas, 2014; Swami, Voracek, Stieger, Tran, & Furnham, 2014), as a national survey in the U.S.A. reported that up to 56% of the interviewed partially or fully endorsed such…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialThe Heart Trumps the Head: Desirability Bias in Political Belief Revision
Tappin, B. M., van der Leer, L., & McKay, R. T. (2017) · Journal of experimental psychology. General · doi:10.1037/xge0000298 · Cited by 69
“…or that climate change is a hoax (Lewandowsky, Oberauer, & Gignac, 2013) can reduce people’s intentions to vaccinate (Gangarosa et al., 1998; Horne, Powell, Hummel, & Holyoak, 2015; Jolley & Douglas, 2014a) or to minimize their carbon footprint (Douglas & Sutton, 2015; Jolley & Douglas, 2014b).”
BackgroundLazić, A., & Žeželj, I. L. (2021) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/09636625211011881 · Cited by 123
“It should primarily focus on the concerns through which anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs might increase vaccine hesitancy, such as the perceived danger of vaccines, feelings of powerlessness, disillusionment, and lower trust in medical authorities (Jolley and Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialTrust in physicians and trust in government predict COVID‐19 vaccine uptake
Viskupič, F., Wiltse, D. L., & Meyer, B. A. (2022) · Social Science Quarterly · doi:10.1111/ssqu.13147 · Cited by 121
“Rather than placing value in scientific findings and medical expertise, people often find comfort in anti-vaccine conspiracy theories; as a consequence, those people are less likely to receive vaccinations and to vaccinate their children (Jolley and Douglas 2014).”
BackgroundIndividual, intergroup and nation-level influences on belief in conspiracy theories
Hornsey, M., Bierwiaczonek, K., Sassenberg, K., & Douglas, K. M. (2022) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-022-00133-0 · Cited by 86
Self-citationOn the Viability of Conspiratorial Beliefs
Grimes, D. R. (2016) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147905 · Cited by 106
“Vaccination conspiracy—Conspiratorial beliefs about vaccination are endemic in the antivaccination movement [18, 22].”
BackgroundWhat drives people to believe in Zika conspiracy theories?
Klofstad, C., Uscinski, J. E., Connolly, J. M., & West, J. P. (2019) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-019-0243-8 · Cited by 109
Anti-Vaccination Beliefs and Unrelated Conspiracy Theories
Goldberg, Z. J., & Richey, S. (2020) · World Affairs · doi:10.1177/0043820020920554 · Cited by 59
“…to be the strongest predictor of belief in the dangers of vaccination (see also Wood 2016). furthermore, while not examining it directly, Jolley and douglas (2014) find notable bellwethers of conspiracy beliefs—namely, “powerlessness,” “disillusionment,” and “trust in authorities”—to…”
BackgroundBanai, I. P., Banai, B., & Mikloušić, I. (2021) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-021-01898-y · Cited by 118
“In addition, participants exposed to climate change conspiracy theories report a decreased intention to reduce their carbon footprint (Jolley & Douglas, 2014b).”
BackgroundTo what extent are conspiracy theorists concerned for self versus others? A COVID‐19 test case
Hornsey, M. J., Chapman, C. M., Álvarez, B., Bentley, S. V., Casara, B. G. S., Crimston, C. R., Ionescu, O., Krug, H., Selvanathan, H. P., Steffens, N. K., et al. (2021) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2737 · Cited by 101
“Dovetailing with the portrait painted by these correlational data are experimental data showing that exposure to conspiracy theories decreases various prosocial actions, including donation intentions (van der Linden, 2015) and vaccination intentions (Jolley & Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundVraga, E. K., Tully, M., & Bode, L. (2021) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444821998691 · Cited by 101
“Health (mis)information is prevalent on social media, can spread quickly, and can have serious implications for people’s behavior and well-being, as well as for public health (Betsch and Sachse, 2012; Jolley and Douglas, 2014; Southwell et al., 2019).”
BackgroundCovid-19 conspiracy beliefs and containment-related behaviour: The role of political trust
Karić, T., & Međedović, J. (2020) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2021.110697 · Cited by 78
Conspiracy beliefs prospectively predict health behavior and well-being during a pandemic
van Prooijen, J., Etienne, T. W., Kutiyski, Y., & Krouwel, A. P. M. (2021) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291721004438 · Cited by 108
“…experimental studies have revealed that exposure to anti-vaccine conspiracy theories lowers people ’ s favorability toward vaccinating children (Jolley & Douglas, 2014), and that exposure to governmental conspiracy theories increases people ’ s willingness to commit minor forms of crime (e.g.…”
Bridging the great divide: Conspiracy theory research for the 21st century
Bütter, M., & Knight, P. (2015) · Diogenes · doi:10.1177/0392192116669289 · Cited by 95
Bruder, M., & Kunert, L. (2021) · International Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1002/ijop.12769 · Cited by 115
Vaccine-related advertising in the Facebook Ad Archive
Jamison, A., Broniatowski, D. A., Dredze, M. H., Wood-Doughty, Z., Khan, D., & Quinn, S. C. (2019) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.10.066 · Cited by 101
Romer, D., & Jamieson, K. H. (2021) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114480 · Cited by 105
Are conspiracy theories harmless?
Douglas, K. M. (2021) · The Spanish Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1017/sjp.2021.10 · Cited by 92
“Jolley and Douglas (2014a) found that people who were asked to read anti-government conspiracy theorieswere less inclined to vote in the next election, compared to participants who had been given information refuting those conspiracy theories.”
BackgroundSelf-citationKim, S. C., Vraga, E. K., & Cook, J. (2020) · Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10410236.2020.1787933 · Cited by 108
The psychological and political correlates of conspiracy theory beliefs
Uscinski, J. E., Enders, A., Diekman, A., Funchion, J., Klofstad, C. A., Kübler, S., Murthi, M., Premaratne, K., Seelig, M. I., Verdear, D., et al. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-25617-0 · Cited by 86
Applying an attitude network approach to consumer behaviour towards plastic
Zwicker, M. V., Nohlen, H. U., Dalege, J., Gruter, G. M., & van Harreveld, F. (2020) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101433 · Cited by 87
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Serious Threat for Public Mental Health Globally.
Anjum, S., Ullah, R., Rana, M. S., Khan, H., Memon, F. S., Ahmed, Y., Jabeen, S., & Faryal, R. (2020) · Psychiatria Danubina · doi:10.24869/psyd.2020.245 · Cited by 81
“…have reported various examples where false beliefs related to medical health were held by study subjects which can easily enforces and leads movements like antivaccination at the time of measles outbreak, consequently, leads to less adherence to health recommendations (Jolley & Douglas 2014).”
BackgroundGinossar, T., Cruickshank, I. J., Zheleva, E., Sulskis, J., & Berger-Wolf, T. Y. (2022) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2021.2003647 · Cited by 95
Maftei, A., & Holman, A. C. (2020) · Ethics & Behavior · doi:10.1080/10508422.2020.1843171 · Cited by 86
“…endorsement of unfounded (conspiracy) beliefs about COVID-19 may lead to a higher compliance rate (i.e., a more responsible pandemic behavior), in line with previous studies suggesting similar outcomes concerning health-related behaviors (e.g., Jolley & Douglas, 2014; Lewandowsky et al., 2013).”
ResultConspiracy beliefs and the individual, relational, and collective selves
Biddlestone, M., Green, R., Cichocka, A. K., Sutton, R. M., & Douglas, K. M. (2021) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/spc3.12639 · Cited by 96
Self-citationJiang, X., Su, M.-H., Hwang, J., Lian, R., Bräuer, M., Kim, S., & Shah, D. V. (2021) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/20563051211048413 · Cited by 96
“As conserva-tives not only in general have less favorability of COVID-19 vaccination, but they also tend to be more risk averse than those who are liberal (Jost et al., 2003), it is likely that conservatives express more side effect concerns than liberals.”
BackgroundSpiritual skepticism? Heterogeneous science skepticism in the Netherlands
Rutjens, B. T., & van der Lee, R. (2020) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/0963662520908534 · Cited by 96
Is It All a Conspiracy? Conspiracy Theories and People’s Attitude to COVID-19 Vaccination
Yang, Z., Luo, X., & Jia, H. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9101051 · Cited by 84
“While studies have revealed that vaccine-related conspiracy theories significantly lowered people’s vaccination intentions [14,24,25], and some studies have revealed that COVID-19-related conspiracy theories negatively impacted people’s preventative health behaviors or vaccination intentions [11–15], the question rema…”
BackgroundInfluence of rapid COVID-19 vaccine development on vaccine hesitancy
Rosenthal, S., & Cummings, C. L. (2021) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.11.014 · Cited by 85
“This is consistent with other research using vaccine conspiracy beliefs to explain vaccination willingness and hesitancy [25,47,48].”
Ethics and Childhood Vaccination Policy in the United States
Hendrix, K. S., Sturm, L. A., Zimet, G. D., & Meslin, E. M. (2015) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2015.302952 · Cited by 83
Traumatic rift: How conspiracy beliefs undermine cohesion after societal trauma?
Bilewicz, M., Witkowska, M., Pantazi, M., Gkinopoulos, T., & Klein, O. (2019) · Europe’s Journal of Psychology · doi:10.5964/ejop.v15i1.1699 · Cited by 100
“…conspiracy theories have shown that conspiracy theories breed feelings of powerlessness, uncertainty, and disillusionment, that in turn may lead to decreased political engagement, lower pro-environmental behavior (Jolley & Douglas, 2014a), and lower vaccination intentions (Jolley & Douglas, 2014b).”
Does lack of control lead to conspiracy beliefs? A meta‐analysis
Stojanov, A., & Halberstadt, J. B. (2020) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2690 · Cited by 96
Díaz, R., & Cova, F. (2021) · Cognition & Emotion · doi:10.1080/02699931.2021.1941783 · Cited by 88
Lep, Ž., Babnik, K., & Beyazoglu, K. H. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01846 · Cited by 84
A critical review of measures of childhood vaccine confidence
Shapiro, G. K., Kaufman, J., Brewer, N. T., Wiley, K. E., Menning, L., Leask, J., Abad, N. S., Betsch, C., Bura, V., Correa, G. C., et al. (2021) · Current Opinion in Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.coi.2021.04.002 · Cited by 87
Su, Y., Lee, D. K. L., & Xiao, X. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2021.107111 · Cited by 84
Conceptual foundations and validation of the Pseudoscientific Belief Scale
Fasce, A., & Picó, A. (2018) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3501 · Cited by 80
Handbook of Conspiracy Theory and Contemporary Religion
Wood, M. J., & Douglas, K. (2018) · BRILL eBooks · doi:10.1163/9789004382022 · Cited by 79
Self-citationMedical conspiracy theories: cognitive science and implications for ethics
Andrade, G. E. (2020) · Medicine Health Care and Philosophy · doi:10.1007/s11019-020-09951-6 · Cited by 79
“This has important implications, as exposure to medical conspiracy theories influence health behaviors (Jolley and Douglas 2014).”
BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: A Systematic review of cognitive determinants
Pourrazavi, S., Fathifar, Z., Sharma, M., & Allahverdipour, H. (2023) · Health Promotion Perspectives · doi:10.34172/hpp.2023.03 · Cited by 79
Fake News Portrayals of Stem Cells and Stem Cell Research
Marcon, A. R., Murdoch, B., & Caulfield, T. (2017) · Regenerative Medicine · doi:10.2217/rme-2017-0060 · Cited by 78
Using Social and Behavioural Science to Support COVID-19 Pandemic ResponsePreprint
Bavel, J. J. V., D, K. B. A., Boggio, P. S., Capraro, V., Cichocka, A. K., Cikara, M., Crockett, M. J., Crum, A. J., Douglas, K. M., Druckman, J. N., et al. (2022) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4178356 · Cited by 89
Self-citationPantazi, M., Papaioannou, K., & van Prooijen, J. (2021) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12779 · Cited by 86
Health Misinformation and the Power of Narrative Messaging in the Public Sphere
Caulfield, T., Marcon, A. R., Murdoch, B., Brown, J. M., Perrault, S. T., Jarry, J., Snyder, J., Anthony, S. J., Brooks, S. P., Master, Z., et al. (2019) · Canadian Journal of Bioethics · doi:10.7202/1060911ar · Cited by 82
“Indeed, mere exposure to information can influence belief [55] and repeated exposures can strengthen perceptions of authenticity [56,57].”
BackgroundSutton, R. M., & Douglas, K. M. (2020) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291720002780 · Cited by 76
“Since responses are typically below or near the midpoint on such scales (e.g. Imhoff and Lamberty, 2017; Jolley and Douglas, 2014), omitting degrees of disagreement seems an important mistake.”
Self-citationPsychosocial and demographic characteristics relating to vaccine attitudes in Australia.
Rozbroj, T., Lyons, A., & Lucke, J. (2019) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2018.08.027 · Cited by 61
Internet users engage more with phatic posts than with health misinformation on Facebook
Berriche, M., & Altay, S. (2020) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-020-0452-1 · Cited by 86
“For instance, beliefs in antivaccine conspiracy theories could reduce vaccination intentions (Jolley and Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundJolley, D., Douglas, K. M., Skipper, Y., Thomas, E., & Cookson, D. (2021) · British Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjdp.12368 · Cited by 58
“Conspiracy theories can also impact health behaviours, such as reducing people’s intentions to vaccinate (Jolley & Douglas, 2014b), and their intentions to engage in other behaviours to stop the spread of diseases (e.g., COVID-19, Biddlestone, Green, &Douglas, 2020).”
BackgroundSelf-citationLazarević, L., Purić, D., Teovanović, P., Knežević, G., Lukić, P., & Zupan, Z. (2020) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2021.110771 · Cited by 64
Fong, A. A., Roozenbeek, J., Goldwert, D., Rathje, S., & van der Linden, S. (2021) · Group Processes & Intergroup Relations · doi:10.1177/1368430220987596 · Cited by 82
“…potency of even brief exposure to conspiratorial content, such as reduced social and civic engagement, and a greater likelihood of engaging in a motivated rejection of science (Jolley & Douglas, 2014; Lewandowsky, Gignac, & Oberauer, 2013; Lewandowsky & Oberauer, 2016; van der Linden, 2015).”
BackgroundNgai, C. S. B., Singh, R. G., & Yao, L. (2022) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/37806 · Cited by 84
“While there is a large body of research on the association between antivaccine misinformation and vaccine hesitancy [6,7,9,25,44,45], the specific content themes of discussion regarding antivaccine misinformation about COVID-19, how these content themes are manifested in writing through the use of…”
InfluentialMeuer, M., & Imhoff, R. (2020) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104081 · Cited by 73
Lyons, B. A., Mérola, V., & Reifler, J. (2018) · Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10410236.2018.1530526 · Cited by 72
Cisłak, A., Marchlewska, M., Wójcik, A. D., Śliwiński, K., Molenda, Z., Szczepańska, D., & Cichocka, A. K. (2021) · Group Processes & Intergroup Relations · doi:10.1177/1368430220959451 · Cited by 72
“Such messages might contribute to the spread of antivaccination conspiracy theories, which usually accuse pharmaceutical companies, governmental agencies, and scientists of withholding information about risks associated with vaccination from the public (e.g., Jolley & Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundMethodWinter, K., Pummerer, L., Hornsey, M. J., & Sassenberg, K. (2021) · British Journal of Health Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjhp.12550 · Cited by 81
“Exposure to anti-vaccine conspiracy theories has been demonstrated to have a negative impact on vaccination intentions (Chen, Zhang, Young, Wu, & Zhu, 2020; Jolley & Douglas, 2014, 2017).”
BackgroundPsychological benefits of believing conspiracy theories
van Prooijen, J. (2022) · Current Opinion in Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101352 · Cited by 70
Krishna, A. (2017) · Journal of Public Relations Research · doi:10.1080/1062726x.2017.1363047 · Cited by 78
“Mistrust in authorities, too, has been found to mediate the relationship between vaccine conspiracy beliefs and vaccine intentions among British parents (Jolley & Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundAntecedents and consequences of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs: a systematic reviewPreprint
van Mulukom, V., Pummerer, L., Alper, S., Bai, H., Čavojová, V., Farias, J. E. M., Kay, C. S., Lazarević, L. B., Lobato, E. J. C., Marinthe, G., et al. (2020) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/u8yah · Cited by 71
Ardèvol‐Abreu, A., de Zúñiga, H. G., & Gámez, E. (2020) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjso.12366 · Cited by 81
Metadata
- Authors
- Jolley, D., & Douglas, K. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Kent (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Jolley, Daniel
- Douglas, Karen M.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2014-02-20
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- e89177
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3930676
- OpenAlex
- W2016520072
- Cited by
- 1,232
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 68 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 116 · 2023: 147 · 2022: 225 · 2021: 232 · 2020: 147 · 2019: 51 · 2018: 72 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 6
- FWCI
- 89.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Staffordshire Online Repository (Staffordshire University) (acceptedVersion)
- Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (acceptedVersion)
- Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (submittedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Keywords
- vaccination intention, vaccine hesitancy, powerlessness, misinformation exposure, health behavior, parents
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Child, Preschool, Culture, Female, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Vaccination, Vaccines, Intention
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
