The DOI matches its DataCite record.
The conspiracy hoax? Testing key hypotheses about the correlates of generic beliefs in conspiracy theories during the COVID-19 pandemic∗.
Open accessAbstract
Conspiracy beliefs receive unprecedented public attention during the COVID-19 pandemic. This may be because they could directly affect own and others’ health and economic outcomes due to detrimental effects on preventive behaviour. We aimed to (a) test key hypotheses on the correlates of generic beliefs in conspiracy theories in this high-relevance real-life setting, (b) examine the role of trust in mediating effects on preventive behaviour, and (c) thereby inform the public health response. Using cross-sectional data (N=1,013) from the German COVID-19 monitoring we tested the relationships between conspiracy beliefs and (a) level of education, (b) social and economic worries, (c) trust in media, the government, public health institutions, and science, and (d) hygiene-related and contact-related preventive behaviour. Results were in line with expectations apart from null findings for the relationships with social worries and hygiene-related preventive behaviour. Trust in government mediated effects of conspiracy beliefs on contact-related preventive behaviour.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Some recent studies have already implicated such a possibility by demonstrating that a lack of trust in the government is related to a higher acceptance of conspiracy theories (Bruder and Kunert, 2020) that is by itself related to the higher fear/anxiety related to COVID-19 (Alper et al., 2020; Larsen et al., 2020).”
From Intolerance of Uncertainty and Tendency to Worry as Mediators Between Trust in Institutions and Social Support and Fear of Coronavirus and Consequences of the Pandemic (2021) · cites this paper as Bruder and Kunert, 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Šrol, J., Čavojová, V., & Mikušková, E. B. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.726076 · Cited by 74
Ideological Extremism or Far-Right Attitudes? The Role of Ideology for COVID-19 Scepticism
Küppers, A., & Reiser, M. (2022) · Representation · doi:10.1080/00344893.2022.2134190 · Cited by 29
Gvozden, T. V., Baucal, A., Krstic, K., & Filipović, S. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.737188 · Cited by 18
Pseudo-Media Sites, Polarization, and Pandemic Skepticism in Spain
Palau-Sampio, D. (2021) · Frontiers in Political Science · doi:10.3389/fpos.2021.685295 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Bruder, M., & Kunert, L.
- Venue
- Leibniz Institute for Psychology (ZPID)
- Publisher
- Leibniz Institute for Psychology (ZPID)
- Published
- 2020-08
- OpenAlex
- W6926196659
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2022: 2 · 2021: 2
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- Locations
- Psychology Archives
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Communication and COVID-19 Impact
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
- Keywords
- conspiracy beliefs, COVID-19 pandemic, preventive behavior, public trust in government, public trust in science, media trust, hygiene practices, educational attainment, mediating effect, public health response
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
