Do you really believe that? Trolls may be skewing conspiracy theory research

Publicly released:
Australia; New Zealand; NSW; VIC
Photo by Gary Bendig on Unsplash
Photo by Gary Bendig on Unsplash

How many of us lie when doing surveys about conspiracy theories? Aussie and New Zealand researchers explored this by surveying 810 people to figure out how many people were answering sincerely. They presented one conspiracy too insane for anyone to possibly believe - that the Canadian military is developing an elite army of genetically-engineered, super-intelligent, giant raccoons to invade nearby countries - and conflicting conspiracies, and asking respondents whether they were joking, trolling, or lying in any way. In the final sample, 13.3% of respondents were classified as insincere – with 8.3% of people saying they’d lied at some point, and 7.2% endorsing the armed raccoons conspiracy theory. They found people who were categorised as insincere using one of these methods were much more likely to endorse conspiracy theories. The team says researchers must consider these respondents when performing these surveys, as insincere responses more than doubled some conspiracy-supporting results, indicating conspiracy theory surveys could be inflated by people just having a laugh. Australians appear to think the same way, with a similar survey of over 1000 Australians reporting similar results.

News release

From: The Royal Society

Do you really believe that? Examining the prevalence and predictors of belief in conspiracy theories when accounting for insincerity

Recent research suggests that some survey respondents who endorse conspiracy theories are responding insincerely. However, it is unclear to what extent this problem may distort important empirical findings with respect to conspiracy theories. In this Registered Report, we recruited a demographically representative quota sample of the New Zealand population (N = 810), and probed sincerity by two methods: presenting a farcically bizarre conspiracy theory and explicitly asking respondents if they had been insincere in any of their responses. We found that respondents classified as insincere according to either of these methods displayed substantially higher levels of conspiracy theory endorsement. Respondents who displayed signs of insincerity were also much more likely to endorse contradictory conspiracy theories. Furthermore, we found that the relationships between endorsement of conspiracy theories and well-established predictors (paranoia, belief in a dangerous world, cognitive reflection, and trust, but not anxiety) had significant interactions with insincerity. While some uncertainty remains about the validity of the methods that we used to detect insincerity, our findings suggest that insincere responses may distort empirical findings relating to belief in conspiracy theories. Researchers should not assume that every survey respondent who endorses a conspiracy theory believes that theory.

Attachments

Note: Not all attachments are visible to the general public. Research URLs will go live after the embargo ends.

Research The Royal Society, Web page The URL will go live after the embargo lifts.
Journal/
conference:
Royal Society Open Science
Research:Paper
Organisation/s: Massey University, La Trobe University, Macquarie University
Funder: This study is supported by the Marsden Fund Council from New Zealand Government funding, managed by Royal Society Te Apārangi. R.M.R. was supported by the John Templeton Foundation (grant ID: 62631).
Media Contact/s
Contact details are only visible to registered journalists.