The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Hidden Impact of Conspiracy Theories: Perceived and Actual Influence of Theories Surrounding the Death of Princess Diana
Abstract
The authors examined the perceived and actual impact of exposure to conspiracy theories surrounding the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, in 1997. One group of undergraduate students rated their agreement and their classmates' perceived agreement with several statements about Diana's death. A second group of students from the same undergraduate population read material containing popular conspiracy theories about Diana's death before rating their own and others' agreement with the same statements and perceived retrospective attitudes (i.e., what they thought their own and others' attitudes were before reading the material). Results revealed that whereas participants in the second group accurately estimated others' attitude changes, they underestimated the extent to which their own attitudes were influenced.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Douglas and Sutton (2008) showed that people were effectively persuaded by proconspiracy material but were not aware that they had been persuaded and falsely recalled that their preexposure beliefs were identical to their new beliefs.”
From The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories (2017) · cites this paper as Douglas and Sutton (2008)
In the citing paper
“Further, recent findings suggest that people tend to be persuaded by conspiracy theories they are exposed to without being aware of it [20].”
From The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions (2014) · cites this paper as [20]
In the citing 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]”
From The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions (2014) · cites this paper as [20]
Citations
Cites
Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement.
Rotter, J. B. (1966) · Psychological Monographs: General and Applied · doi:10.1037/h0092976 · Cited by 21,937
Psychometric theory (2nd ed.).
Sitgreaves, R. (1979) · Contemporary Psychology · doi:10.1037/018882 · Cited by 14,384
Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121 · Cited by 7,731
The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion.
Hamilton, V. L., & Lerner, M. J. (1982) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2067083 · Cited by 2,544
The Third-Person Effect in Communication
Davison, W. P. (1983) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/268763 · Cited by 1,967
Goertzel, T. (1994) · Political Psychology · doi:10.2307/3791630 · Cited by 1,094
Hindsight: Biased judgments of past events after the outcomes are known.
Hawkins, S. A., & Hastie, R. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.3.311 · Cited by 852
Hindsight-foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty.
Fischhoff, B. (1974) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e459202004-001 · Cited by 814
Lipkusa, I. M., Dalbert, C., & Siegler, I. C. (1996) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167296227002 · Cited by 555
Why people believe weird things: pseudoscience, superstition, and other confusions of our time
(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.35-1839 · Cited by 413
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Understanding Conspiracy Theories
Douglas, K. M., Uscinski, J. E., Sutton, R. M., Cichocka, A., Nefes, T., Ang, C. S., & Deravi, F. (2019) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12568 · Cited by 1,511
“Douglas and Sutton (2008) corroborated these findings with respect to conspiracy theories about the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. They further investigated whether people were aware that their attitudes had changed as a result of exposure to conspiracy theories, finding that they were not. Research also suggests…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSelf-citationThe Psychology of Conspiracy Theories
Douglas, K. M., Sutton, R. M., & Cichocka, A. (2017) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721417718261 · Cited by 1,316
“Douglas and Sutton (2008) showed that people were effectively persuaded by proconspiracy material but were not aware that they had been persuaded and falsely recalled that their preexposure beliefs were identical to their new beliefs.”
BackgroundSelf-citationThe Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions
Jolley, D., & Douglas, K. M. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0089177 · Cited by 1,232
“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], and it will be useful to know if the same, or different factors predict anti-vaccine conspiracy be…”
Self-citationBruder, M., Haffke, P., Neave, N., Nouripanah, N., & Imhoff, R. (2013) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00225 · Cited by 1,049
Measuring Belief in Conspiracy Theories: The Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale
Brotherton, R., French, C. C., & Pickering, A. D. (2013) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00279 · Cited by 950
“…required to illuminate the psychology of conspiracist ideation, and the number of recent publications on the topic (e.g., Leman and Cinnirella, 2007; Douglas and Sutton, 2008, 2011; Bogart et al., 2010; Swami et al., 2010, 2011, 2013; Darwin et al., 2011; Newheiser et al., 2011; Swami, 2012; Wood…”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Kent (GB)
- Venue
- The Journal of Social Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2008-04
- Volume
- 148
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 210-222
- ISSN
- 0022-4545 (ISSN-L)
- 1940-1183
- OpenAlex
- W2047390304
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 11.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Paranormal Experiences and Beliefs
- Keywords
- conspiracy theories, Princess Diana, perceived influence, attitude change, social influence
- MeSH terms
- Accidents, Traffic, Adolescent, Adult, Attitude to Death, England, Famous Persons, Female, Homicide, Humans, Deception, Male, Persuasive Communication, Psychological Theory, Public Opinion, Students, Wales
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
