The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Beliefs in Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation About COVID-19: Comparative Perspectives on the Role of Anxiety, Depression and Exposure to and Trust in Information Sources
Open accessAbstract
While COVID-19 spreads aggressively and rapidly across the globe, many societies have also witnessed the spread of other viral phenomena like misinformation, conspiracy theories, and general mass suspicions about what is really going on. This study investigates how exposure to and trust in information sources, and anxiety and depression, are associated with conspiracy and misinformation beliefs in eight countries/regions (Belgium, Canada, England, Philippines, Hong Kong, New Zealand, United States, Switzerland) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were collected in an online survey fielded from May 29, 2020 to June 12, 2020, resulting in a multinational representative sample of 8,806 adult respondents. Results indicate that greater exposure to traditional media (television, radio, newspapers) is associated with lower conspiracy and misinformation beliefs, while exposure to politicians and digital media and personal contacts are associated with greater conspiracy and misinformation beliefs. Exposure to health experts is associated with lower conspiracy beliefs only. Higher feelings of depression are also associated with greater conspiracy and misinformation beliefs. We also found relevant group- and country differences. We discuss the implications of these results.
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.
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
The spread of true and false news online
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aap9559 · Cited by 8,847
Qiu, J., Shen, B., Zhao, M., Wang, Z., Xie, B., & Xu, Y. (2020) · General Psychiatry · doi:10.1136/gpsych-2020-100213 · Cited by 4,307
Salari, N., Hosseinian-Far, A., Jalali, R., Vaisi-Raygani, A., Rasoulpoor, S., Mohammadi, M., Rasoulpoor, S., & Khaledi-Paveh, B. (2020) · Globalization and Health · doi:10.1186/s12992-020-00589-w · Cited by 3,560
Fake News Detection on Social Media: A Data Mining Perspective
Shu, K., Sliva, A., Wang, S., Tang, J., & Liu, H. (2017) · ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter · doi:10.1145/3137597.3137600 · Cited by 3,304
Defining “Fake News”: A typology of scholarly definitions
Tandoc, E. C., Lim, Z. W., & Ling, R. (2018) · Digital Journalism · doi:10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143 · Cited by 2,172
Levis, B., Benedetti, A., & Thombs, B. D. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l1476 · Cited by 1,718
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
Network Propaganda: Manipulation, Disinformation, and Radicalization in American Politics
Benkler, Y., Faris, R., & Roberts, H. (2018) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190923624.001.0001 · Cited by 1,504
Garfin, D. R., Silver, R. C., & Holman, E. A. (2020) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/hea0000875 · Cited by 1,270
The 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 · cited 3×
“Furthermore, previous studies have shown that exposure to disease-related conspiracy theories is associated with lower vaccination intentions (Jolley and Douglas, 2014), lower levels of trust in governmental and health institutions (Lutkenhaus et al., 2019), and less willingness to follow…”
BackgroundInfluential
Cited by
A systematic review of worldwide causal and correlational evidence on digital media and democracy
Lorenz-Spreen, P., Oswald, L., Lewandowsky, S., & Hertwig, R. (2022) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01460-1 · Cited by 348
Deiana, G., Dettori, M., Arghittu, A., Azara, A., Gabutti, G., & Castiglia, P. (2023) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines11071217 · Cited by 168
Sallam, M., Salim, N. A., Al-Tammemi, A. B., Barakat, M., Fayyad, D., Hallit, S., Harapan, H., Hallit, R., & Mahafzah, A. (2023) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.35029 · Cited by 130
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
Ishizumi, A., Kolis, J., Abad, N., Prybylski, D., Brookmeyer, K. A., Voegeli, C., Wardle, C., & Chiou, H. (2024) · The Lancet Public Health · doi:10.1016/s2468-2667(24)00031-8 · Cited by 79
Metadata
- Authors
- De Coninck, D., Frissen, T., Matthijs, K., d’Haenens, L., Lits, G., Champagne-Poirier, O., Carignan, M.-E., David, M. D., Pignard-Cheynel, N., Salerno, S., & Généreux, M.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Psychology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2021-04-16
- Volume
- 12
- Pages
- 646394-646394
- ISSN
- 1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3155023262
- Cited by
- 308
- References
- 53
- FWCI
- 82.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Beliefs in Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation About COVID-19: Comparative Perspectives on the Role of Anxiety, Depression and Exposure to and Trust in Information Sources. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.646394
- The paper
- De Coninck, D., Frissen, T., Matthijs, K., d’Haenens, L., Lits, G., Champagne-Poirier, O., Carignan, M.-E., David, M. D., Pignard-Cheynel, N., Salerno, S., & Généreux, M. (2021). Beliefs in Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation About COVID-19: Comparative Perspectives on the Role of Anxiety, Depression and Exposure to and Trust in Information Sources. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.646394
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.
