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 401–500 of 1,000
The Collective Conspiracy Mentality in Poland
Soral, W., Cichocka, A. K., Bilewicz, M., & Marchlewska, M. (2018) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190844073.003.0025 · Cited by 30
The stock market is rigged? Conspiracy beliefs and distrust predict lower stock market participation
Fiagbenu, M. E. (2022) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3981 · Cited by 27
Knowledge through social networks: Accuracy, error, and polarisation
Hahn, U., Merdes, C. J., & von Sydow, M. (2024) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0294815 · Cited by 30
Toward Mitigating Misinformation and Social Media Manipulation in LLM Era
Zhang, Y., Sharma, K., Du, L., & Liu, Y. (2024) · Companion Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2024 · doi:10.1145/3589335.3641256 · Cited by 25
“Researchers have been persistently working on combating mis-information and its manipulation toward social media [2, 13, 18, 32, 33, 38].”
BackgroundHe, L., Chen, Y., Xiong, X., Zou, X., & Lai, K. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18052243 · Cited by 25
“People′s belief in health rumors can trigger skepticism and resistance to the reco mended medical behaviors, and they may refuse proper r medy and effecti prev ntative behaviors [16].”
BackgroundCovid-19, the anti-vaccine movement and immunization challenges in Brazil
Bivar, G. C. C., AGUIAR, M. E. S. C. D., Santos, R. V. C., & Cardoso, P. R. G. (2021) · Scientia Medica · doi:10.15448/1980-6108.2021.1.39425 · Cited by 25
Is Covid-19 a natural event? Covid-19 pandemic and conspiracy beliefs
Pellegrini, V., Giacomantonio, M., Cristofaro, V. D., Salvati, M., Brasini, M., Carlo, E., Mancini, F., & Leone, L. (2021) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2021.111011 · Cited by 27
“Also, Jolley and Douglas (2014) showed that participants exposed to antivaccines conspiracy theories were less likely to vaccinate their children.”
BackgroundBertin, P., & Delouvée, S. (2021) · Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology · doi:10.1177/18344909211051800 · Cited by 27
“…conspiracy theories have been reported to have detrimental effects on one’s health (e.g., increasing negative intentions regarding vaccinations; Jolley & Douglas, 2014), some scholars have suggested that from an intergroup perspective, these beliefs may be adaptative (e.g., Raihani & Bell,…”
BackgroundHow education and GDP drive the COVID-19 vaccination campaign
Ngo, V. M., Zimmermann, K. F., Nguyen, P. V., Huynh, T. L. D., & Nguyen, H. H. (2022) · Archives of Public Health · doi:10.1186/s13690-022-00924-0 · Cited by 26
“Further, political-related anti-vaccine conspiracy theories that have been prevalent since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic are also strongly associated with reduced vaccination intentions [18].”
BackgroundSchemer, C., Ziegele, M., Schultz, T., Quiring, O., Jackob, N., & Jakobs, I. (2021) · Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1177/10776990211063527 · Cited by 30
“Furthermore, exposure to conspiratorial news can bias beliefs about the causes of the death of Lady Di (Douglas & Sutton, 2008) and increase beliefs in anti-vaccine conspiracies (Jolley & Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundVaccine hesitancy and cognitive biases: Evidence for tailored communication with parents
Casigliani, V., Menicagli, D., Fornili, M., Lippi, V., Chinelli, A., Stacchini, L., Arzilli, G., Scardina, G., Baglietto, L., Lopalco, P., et al. (2022) · Vaccine: X · doi:10.1016/j.jvacx.2022.100191 · Cited by 24
Pan, S., Zhang, D., & Zhang, J. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.548365 · Cited by 27
“These findings, which resulted from pooling the data for the U.S. and Chinese respondents together, are in line with our predictions and with theories and previous empirical studies (e.g., Prislin and Wood, 2005; Rimal and Real, 2005; Jolley and Douglas, 2014; Dunn et al., 2017).”
BackgroundResultMartinez-Berman, L., McCutcheon, L. E., & Huynh, H. P. (2020) · Psychology Health & Medicine · doi:10.1080/13548506.2020.1778754 · Cited by 24
“Additionally, British parents who resisted vaccination also tended to believe in conspiracy theories (Jolley & Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundResultHohlfeld, R., Harnischmacher, M., Heinke, E., Lehner, L. S., Sengl, M., & Verlagsgesellschaft, N. (2020) · Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG eBooks · doi:10.5771/9783748901334 · Cited by 34
Do we need the criminalization of medical fake news?
Mamak, K. (2021) · Medicine Health Care and Philosophy · doi:10.1007/s11019-020-09996-7 · Cited by 23
Mancosu, M., & Vassallo, S. (2022) · Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica · doi:10.1017/ipo.2021.57 · Cited by 25
“…is far from small in contemporary democracies: in many European countries, for example, the spread of conspiracy theories about big pharmaceutical companies has been shown to contribute, among other elements, to vaccination choices of parents (Jolley and Douglas, 2014; Giambi et al ., 2018).”
InfluentialConspiracy Brokers: Understanding the Monetization of YouTube Conspiracy Theories
Ballard, C., Goldstein, I., Mehta, P., Smothers, G., Take, K., Zhong, V., Greenstadt, R., Lauinger, T., & McCoy, D. (2022) · The Web Conference · doi:10.1145/3485447.3512142 · Cited by 28
“A 2014 study found that exposure to conspiracy content reduced an individual’s willingness to receive vaccinations [12, 38, 40, 57].”
BackgroundErişen, C. (2022) · International Political Science Review · doi:10.1177/01925121221084625 · Cited by 24
A longitudinal analysis of conspiracy beliefs and Covid-19 health responses
van Prooijen, J., Amodio, D. M., Boot, A. B., Eerland, A., Etienne, T. W., Krouwel, A. P. M., Onderčo, M., Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., & Zwaan, R. A. (2022) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291722002938 · Cited by 30
Does Belief in Conspiracy Theories Affect Interpersonal Relationships?
Toribio‐Flórez, D., Green, R., Sutton, R. M., & Douglas, K. M. (2023) · The Spanish Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1017/sjp.2023.8 · Cited by 24
“Specifically, previous work indicates that conspiracy beliefs reduce people’s political engagement through conventional means of political participation (e.g., voting intention; Jolley & Douglas, 2014a; Uscinski & Parent, 2014).”
BackgroundSelf-citationRepetition could increase the perceived truth of conspiracy theories
Béna, J., Rihet, M., Carreras, O., & Terrier, P. (2023) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-023-02276-4 · Cited by 32
“In addition, such studies typically displayed only one overarching conspiracy theory – conspiracy statements that are thematically related (e.g., conspiracy theories of Princess Diana's death; Douglas & Sutton, 2008; Jolley & Douglas, 2014a).”
The Psychology of Collective Narcissism
de Zavala, A. G. (2023) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781003296577 · Cited by 29
Welfare economics and wicked problems in coastal and marine governance
Groeneveld, R. A. (2020) · Marine Policy · doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103945 · Cited by 26
Misinformation, Crisis, and Public Health—Reviewing the Literature
Starbird, K., Spiro, E. S., & Koltai, K. (2020) · doi:10.35650/md.2063.d.2020 · Cited by 24
“Research suggests that these unfounded theories can play a role in shaping health behaviors—for example, in decisions of whether or not to vaccinate (Jolley and Douglas 2014; Falade and Coultas 2017).”
BackgroundFactors influencing COVID-19 vaccination uptake in an elderly sample in PolandPreprint
Malesza, M., & Bozym, M. (2021) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2021.03.21.21254047 · Cited by 24
Practical recommendations to communicate with patients about health‐related conspiracy theories
Marques, M. D., Douglas, K. M., & Jolley, D. (2022) · The Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/mja2.51475 · Cited by 23
Self-citationEffects of Health Literacy in the Fight Against the COVID-19 Infodemic: The Case of Japan
Cheng, J., & Nishikawa, M. (2022) · Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10410236.2022.2065745 · Cited by 18
Debriefing works: Successful retraction of misinformation following a fake news study
Greene, C. M., & Murphy, G. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0280295 · Cited by 23
“Some research has suggested that anti-vaccination misinformation leads to vaccine hesitancy and reduced vaccination intentions [20, 21].”
BackgroundLenti, J., Mejova, Y., Kalimeri, K., Panisson, A., Paolotti, D., Tizzani, M., & Starnini, M. (2023) · JMIR Infodemiology · doi:10.2196/44714 · Cited by 21
Vaccine-Hesitant Justifications
Rodriguez, N. J. (2016) · Global Qualitative Nursing Research · doi:10.1177/2333393616663304 · Cited by 23
“Jolley and Douglas (2014) suggest that even mere exposure to a conspiracy theory, such as the suggestion that pharmaceutical companies manipulate research, has “more than a trivial effect,” and in fact, “directly affects vaccination intentions” (p. 6).”
BackgroundInfluentialSkepticism toward Emerging Infectious Diseases and Influenza Vaccination Intentions in Nurses
Maridor, M., Ruch, S., Bangerter, A., & Emery, V. (2017) · Journal of Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10810730.2017.1296509 · Cited by 23
“Belief in antivaccine conspiracy theories is associated with decreased vaccination intentions (Jolley & Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundHow Conspiracy Theories Spread
DeWitt, D., Atkinson, M., & Wegner, D. (2018) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190844073.003.0021 · Cited by 24
The impact of information sources on COVID-19 knowledge accumulation and vaccination intention
Vlasceanu, M., & Coman, A. (2022) · International Journal of Data Science and Analytics · doi:10.1007/s41060-021-00307-8 · Cited by 23
“For example, belief in conspiracy theories has been linked to decreased vaccination rates [10], increased climate change denial [11], and increased intergroup prejudice [12].”
BackgroundLadini, R. (2021) · Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica · doi:10.1017/ipo.2021.15 · Cited by 22
Achimescu, V., Sultănescu, D., & Sultănescu, D. C. (2021) · Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties · doi:10.1080/17457289.2021.1924746 · Cited by 22
Gkinopoulos, T., & Mari, S. (2022) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/jasp.12923 · Cited by 23
Lalot, F., Abrams, D., Heering, M. S., Babaian, J., Özkeçeci, H., Peitz, L., Hayon, K. D., & Broadwood, J. (2022) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12871 · Cited by 22
“…which should be the case for vaccination intentions; some previous research has indeed successfully relied on such single-item measures in the context of COVID-19 (e.g., Faasse & Newby, 2020; Karlsson et al., 2021) as well as for other viruses (e.g., Jolley & Douglas, 2014; Nowak et al., 2020).”
What We Mean When We Say “Conspiracy Theory”
Walker, J. (2018) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190844073.003.0003 · Cited by 23
The impact of social norms on health‐related belief update
Vlasceanu, M., & Coman, A. (2022) · Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being · doi:10.1111/aphw.12313 · Cited by 38
“…can have destructive outcomes in all aspects of society, as concluded by numerous empirical articles linking false beliefs to decreased vaccination rates (Jolley & Douglas, 2014), increased climate change denial (Lewandowsky et al., 2015), and increased intergroup prejudice (Jolley et al., 2020).”
BackgroundKim, S. J., Villanueva, I. I., & Chen, K. (2023) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2023.2243852 · Cited by 21
“Anti-vaccination conspiracy theories are misinformation messages that explain negative events as results of secret acts by malevolent forces (Jolley et al., 2014).”
BackgroundConspiracy Theories and Religion
Robertson, D. G. C., & Dyrendal, A. (2018) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190844073.003.0028 · Cited by 21
Rateau, P., Tavani, J., & Delouvée, S. (2021) · Health An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health Illness and Medicine · doi:10.1177/13634593211005172 · Cited by 30
“Indeed, it is known that vaccine hesitancy is strongly linked to adherence to conspiracy theories that discredit science (Chen et al., 2020; Hornsey et al., 2019; Jolley and Douglas, 2014, 2017).”
BackgroundPublic perception on COVID-19 vaccination intention
Zaid, Z., & Pratondo, K. (2021) · International Journal of Public Health Science (IJPHS) · doi:10.11591/ijphs.v10i4.20914 · Cited by 23
“significant advances in the history of medicine and public health achievements [3].”
BackgroundSuppressing Scientific Discourse on Vaccines? Self-perceptions of researchers and practitioners
Elisha, E., Guetzkow, J., Shir-Raz, Y., & Ronel, N. (2022) · HEC Forum · doi:10.1007/s10730-022-09479-7 · Cited by 24
“Most health professionals assume that vaccine opponents are mostly hysterical parents or members of anti-vaccination groups who promote conspiracy theories and spread “fake news” about vaccines, thereby endangering science and public health (e.g., Jolley & Douglas, 2014 ; Lewandowsky et al., 2013 ).”
Capasso, M., Caso, D., & Zimet, G. D. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.936917 · Cited by 23
“Anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs were assessed by adapting the 8-item Anti-vaccine conspiracy belief scale (Jolley and Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialGórska, P., Marchlewska, M., Szczepańska, D., Molenda, Z., Michalski, P., & Furman, A. (2022) · The Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/00224545.2022.2111250 · Cited by 24
“…al., 2022); uncertainty (Marchlewska et al., 2018; Van Prooijen & Jostmann, 2013; Whitson et al., 2015), powerlessness (Abalakina-Paap et al., 1999; Jolley & Douglas, 2014b), feelings of relative deprivation (Bilewicz et al., 2013), threats to the fairness of the political system (Jolley et al.,…”
Correlates of belief in climate change: Demographics, ideology and belief systems
Furnham, A. F., & Robinson, C. (2022) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103775 · Cited by 21
Fountoulakis, K. Ν., Karakatsoulis, G. N., Abraham, S., Adorjan, K., Ahmed, H. U., Alarcón, R. D., Arai, K., Salihu, A., Bobes, J., Bobes-Bascarán, T., et al. (2023) · Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology · doi:10.1007/s00127-023-02438-8 · Cited by 25
Political network composition predicts vaccination attitudes
Facciani, M., Lazić, A., Viggiano, G., & McKay, T. (2023) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116004 · Cited by 22
Disinformation and Conspiracy Theories in the Age of COVID-19
Pereira, P. S., Silveira, A. D. S., & Pereira, A. (2020) · Frontiers in Sociology · doi:10.3389/fsoc.2020.560681 · Cited by 24
“For instance, anti-vaccination movements were common in the 19th century in England, the US, and Brazil (Figure 2) (Jolley and Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundThe effects of misinformation on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Bangladesh
Mahmud, M. R., Reza, R. B., & Ahmed, S. M. Z. (2021) · Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication · doi:10.1108/gkmc-05-2021-0080 · Cited by 20
Pierik, R., & Verweij, M. F. (2024) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/15307.001.0001 · Cited by 20
Conspiracy theory beliefs in the adolescent population: A systematic review
Byrne, A., Martin, D., Jones, C., Galbraith, N. D., & Mercer, T. (2024) · Journal of Adolescence · doi:10.1002/jad.12316 · Cited by 20
Cruickshank, I. J., Ginossar, T., Sulskis, J., Zheleva, E., & Berger-Wolf, T. Y. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/29127 · Cited by 20
Wang, J., & Kim, S. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph182211825 · Cited by 20
“Douglas [8] suggests that conspiracy theories are associated with political apathy, support for non-normative political actions, climate change denial, vaccine refusal, prejudice, crime, violence, workplace disengagement, and reluctance to adhere to COVID-19 recommendations.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialUpdating politicized beliefs: How motivated reasoning contributes to polarization
Su, S. (2021) · Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics · doi:10.1016/j.socec.2021.101799 · Cited by 23
Salvati, M., Giacomantonio, M., Pellegrini, V., Cristofaro, V. D., & Leone, L. (2022) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103508 · Cited by 28
Čavojová, V., Šrol, J., & Mikušková, E. B. (2023) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-023-04284-y · Cited by 19
“Unfortunately, vaccination attitudes can be influenced by misinformation (e.g. the hoax that the MMS vaccine causes autism) and conspiracy theories (e.g. vaccines are used to control people’s minds (Jolley & Douglas, 2014; Kennedy, 2017).”
Jolley, D., Seger, C. R., & Meleady, R. (2023) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2973 · Cited by 22
Self-citationSharma, A., Menon, S. N., Sasidevan, V., & Sitabhra Sinha, A. (2019) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006977 · Cited by 20
Wood, M. J., & Douglas, K. M. (2018) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190844073.003.0016 · Cited by 22
Self-citationRieger, M. O. (2020) · Frontiers in Sociology · doi:10.3389/fsoc.2020.00061 · Cited by 20
“Another major concern are vaccination-related conspiracy theories (Jolley and Douglas, 2014), but the issue permeates all kind of health-related topics and influences various behaviors (Oliver and Wood, 2014).”
BackgroundWada, K., & SMITH, D. R. (2015) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-015-1772-8 · Cited by 21
Taubert, F., Meyer-Hoeven, G., Schmid, P., Gerdes, P., & Betsch, C. (2024) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-024-20797-y · Cited by 25
Japanese anti- versus pro-influenza vaccination websites: a text-mining analysis
Okuhara, T., Ishikawa, H., OKADA, M., Kato, M., & Kiuchi, T. (2018) · Health Promotion International · doi:10.1093/heapro/day015 · Cited by 19
Addressing Covid-19 Vaccination Conspiracy Theories and Vaccination Intentions
Pummerer, L., Winter, K., & Sassenberg, K. (2022) · European Journal of Health Communication · doi:10.47368/ejhc.2022.201 · Cited by 19
“…by providing rational arguments (Banas & Miller, 2013), though other studies found that this method does not lead to the intended behaviour change (Jolley & Douglas, 2014; Stojanov, 2015) and that it fails when being confronted with conspiracy arguments right before (Jolley & Douglas, 2017).”
BackgroundHan, Q.-X., Zheng, B., Abakoumkin, G., Leander, N., & Stroebe, W. (2022) · Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being · doi:10.1111/aphw.12411 · Cited by 18
“One reason for this distrust in COVID-19 vaccines of US Republicans could be their distrust of science or willingness to believe in conspiracy theories (Jones, 2021).”
BackgroundPummerer, L., Ditrich, L., Winter, K., & Sassenberg, K. (2022) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/19485506221144150 · Cited by 19
Education and conspiracy beliefs: A replication of van Prooijen (2017)
Mikušková, E. B. (2022) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.4037 · Cited by 20
Kim, J. W., Lee, J., & Dai, Y. H. (2023) · Journal of Risk Research · doi:10.1080/13669877.2023.2176910 · Cited by 23
“Exposure to misinformation during public health crises is particularly problematic, given that it can undermine the adoption of evidence-based public health efforts (Jolley and Douglas 2014).”
BackgroundProbability and conspiratorial thinking
Kovic, M., & Füchslin, T. (2018) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3408 · Cited by 19
Nera, K., Pantazi, M., & Klein, O. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00684 · Cited by 20
“Other lines of research have focused on personality-related variables associated with the endorsement of CTs (e.g., Goertzel, 1994; Darwin et al., 2011; Douglas and Sutton, 2011; Newheiser et al., 2011; Marchlewska et al., 2017), as well as on generic cognitive biases associated with conspiracy mentality and CT endors…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialExamining Online Vaccination Discussion and Communities in Twitter
Yuan, X., & Crooks, A. T. (2018) · International Conference on Social Media and Society (SMSociety) · doi:10.1145/3217804.3217912 · Cited by 19
Schnepf, J., Lux, A., Jin, Z., & Formanowicz, M. (2021) · Journal of Language and Social Psychology · doi:10.1177/0261927x211044789 · Cited by 18
“Even before the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals who believed more in conspiracy theories were shown to have lower vaccination propensity (see Jolley & Douglas, 2014, Study 1) and to be less compliant with health behaviors (Oliver & Wood, 2014).”
Background(S)pin the flu vaccine: Recipes for concern
Guidry, J. P. D., Coman, I. A., Vraga, E. K., O’Donnell, N. H., & Sreepada, N. (2020) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.06.012 · Cited by 18
Investigation of Relationship Between Health Literacy with Anti-Vaccine: A Study on College Students
GÖDE, A., & Ertaş, H. (2021) · International Journal of Academic Value Studies (Javstudies JAVS) · doi:10.29228/javs.49907 · Cited by 18
Nera, K., Mora, Y. L., Klein, P., Roblain, A., Oost, P. V., Terache, J., & Klein, O. (2022) · Psychologica Belgica · doi:10.5334/pb.1086 · Cited by 14
Ahmed, W., Das, R., Vidal-Alaball, J., Hardey, M., & Fuster-Casanovas, A. (2022) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/43497 · Cited by 14
“Theoretical models of health behavior change argue that risks to individuals and groups can motivate action and belief in conspiracies [12,13].”
Qorib, M., Oladunni, T., Denis, M. F., Ososanya, E., & Cotae, P. (2023) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph20105803 · Cited by 18
National narcissism in politics and public understanding of science
Cisłak, A., & Cichocka, A. K. (2023) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-023-00240-6 · Cited by 26
“…the endorsement of con-spiracy beliefs regarding vaccination (for example, “Pharmaceutical companies, scientists and academics work together to cover up the dangers of vaccines” or “The flu vaccine allows the government to monitor the elderly through the implantation of tiny tracking devices”) 93 .”
BackgroundConspiracist propaganda: How Russia promotes anti-establishment sentiment online?
Watanabe, K. (2018) · Cited by 18
Thomson, R., McDaid, L., Emery, J. L., Naughton, F., Cooper, S. E., Dyas, J., & Coleman, T. J. (2019) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph16101814 · Cited by 18
“Misinformation and misperceptions (the belief that the misinformation claim is true) exist on a range of health issues and can be detrimental to effective treatment options or preventative health behaviours [27].”
BackgroundFell, L. (2020) · Digital Government Research and Practice · doi:10.1145/3428472 · Cited by 18
Tyrkalska, S. D., Candel, S., Pedoto, A., García‐Moreno, D., Alcaraz‐Pérez, F., Sánchez‐Ferrer, Á., Cayuela, M. L., & Mulero, V. (2022) · FEMS Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1093/femsre/fuac042 · Cited by 19
To What Extent Have Conspiracy Theories Undermined COVID-19: Strategic Narratives?
Drinkwater, K. G., Dagnall, N., Denovan, A., & Walsh, R. S. (2021) · Frontiers in Communication · doi:10.3389/fcomm.2021.576198 · Cited by 16
“Illustratively, research into the effects of conspiracy on immunization has demonstrated that mere exposure to confutation reduces the likelihood of vaccination (Jolley and Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundFernbach, P. M., & Bogard, J. E. (2023) · Topics in Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/tops.12662 · Cited by 17
THE “SCIENTIFIC MIRACLE OF THE QUR’ĀN,” PSEUDOSCIENCE, AND CONSPIRACISM
Bigliardi, S. (2017) · Zygon® · doi:10.1111/zygo.12321 · Cited by 17
van Prooijen, J., Etienne, T. W., Kutiyski, Y., & Krouwel, A. P. M. (2021) · Journal of Health Psychology · doi:10.1177/13591053211051816 · Cited by 19
“These findings are consistent with research carried out before the pandemic, underscoring that conspiracy theories can be consequential for health, as, for instance, reflected in decreased vaccination intentions (Jolley and Douglas, 2014).”
ResultBatmaz, H., & Meral, K. (2022) · Journal of Religion and Health · doi:10.1007/s10943-022-01513-9 · Cited by 17
“Such emotionally charged arguments, used to elicit fear, have contributed to vaccine hesitancy and a decline in vaccine uptake (Dubé et al., 2014; Jolley & Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundMohammed, D., & Rossi, M. G. (2022) · Argumentation library · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-91017-4_7 · Cited by 17
Fouogue, J. T., Noubom, M., Kenfack, B., Dongmo, N. T., Tabeu, M., Megozeu, L., Alima, J. M., Fogang, Y. F., Rim, L. C. A. N., Fouelifack, F. Y., et al. (2020) · Pan African Medical Journal · doi:10.11604/pamj.supp.2020.37.1.25688 · Cited by 17
Römer, D., & Jamieson, K. H. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-22014-5 · Cited by 21
Sheikh, N. S., Touseef, M., Sultan, R., Cheema, K. H., Cheema, S. S., Sarwar, A., & Siddique, H. Z. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0289678 · Cited by 17
Lepoutre, M. (2022) · Political Studies · doi:10.1177/00323217221129253 · Cited by 16
“Exposure to conspiracy theories can meaningfully influence our beliefs and intentions (e.g. Jolley and Douglas, 2014; Jolley et al., 2020; Romer and Jamieson, 2020; Uscinski, 2020: 6–10).”
BackgroundBelief correlations with parental vaccine hesitancy: Results from a national survey
Matthews, L. J., Nowak, S. A., Gidengil, C. A., Chen, C., Stubbersfield, J., Tehrani, J. J., & Parker, A. M. (2022) · American Anthropologist · doi:10.1111/aman.13714 · Cited by 15
“…rejection of evolution, global warming, etc.) and conspiracy ideation (e.g., moon landing faked, CDChidesvaccine sideeffects) (Healy andPickering2011; Jarrett et al. 2015; Jolley and Douglas 2014; Lewandowsky, Gignac, and Oberauer 2013; Nyhan et al. 2014; Oliver andWood 2014; Teoh et al. 2019).”
BackgroundLi, X., Lai, L. Y. H., Ostropolets, A., Arshad, F., Tan, E. H., Casajust, P., Alshammari, T. M., Duarte‐Salles, T., Minty, E. P., Areia, C. M., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2021.773875 · Cited by 16
“Heterogeneity in background rates across databases and age-sex strata may also persist even after robust data harmonization using common data models (Li et al., 2021).”
BackgroundMethodSchöpfer, C., Abatista, A., Fuhrer, J., & Cova, F. (2022) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2022.111900 · Cited by 16
Wang, J., & Tanes, Z. (2022) · Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media · doi:10.1080/08838151.2022.2153842 · Cited by 16
“Research has found that people who held more conspiracy beliefs were significantly less likely to follow public health guidelines and perform health-protective behaviors (Allington et al., 2021; Freeman et al., 2020; Jolley & Douglas, 2014).”
BackgroundAlshehri, S., & Sallam, M. (2023) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2023.2275962 · Cited by 17
“18,22,23 35 The declining immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) coupled with emergence of novel virus variants with immune escape properties may require continuous vaccination with booster doses.”
BackgroundThe Plot Thickens: A Sociology of Conspiracy Theories
Rao, H., & Greve, H. R. (2024) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-030222-031142 · Cited by 20
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
