Sexism and Feminist Conspiracy Beliefs: Hostile Sexism Moderates the Link Between Feminist Conspiracy Beliefs and Rape Myth Acceptance.

This research examined the effect of belief in feminist conspiracy theories and sexist ideology on endorsing rape myths. Study 1 (N = 201) uncovered that the relationship between feminist conspiracy beliefs and rape myth acceptance was conditional on higher levels of hostile sexism. Study 2 (N = 552) demonstrated that for those with higher hostile sexism, exposure to feminist conspiracy theories (vs. control) increased feminist conspiracy beliefs, which were then associated with rape myths. The current research suggests that the link between feminist conspiracy beliefs and rape myths could result from such beliefs upholding a hostile sexist view of women.

Shining a spotlight on the dangerous consequences of conspiracy theories.

The COVID-19 pandemic has illuminated how conspiracy beliefs-that explain important events as the secret actions of the powerful-can severely impact health choices (such as reduced infection-prevention behaviours). However, the consequences of conspiracy beliefs span far beyond the topic of COVID-19. This review shines a spotlight on how conspiracy beliefs could impact public and personal health (e.g., vaccine uptake), democratic citizenship (e.g., political engagement), intergroup relations (e.g., prejudice and discrimination), and may inspire violence and extremism. We argue that conspiracy beliefs are likely to have the power to mobilise citizens in ways detrimental to a smooth-running society. We conclude the review by offering a range of fruitful avenues for future investigation.

A social norms approach intervention to address misperceptions of anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs amongst UK parents.

Anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs among parents can reduce vaccination intentions. Parents' beliefs in anti-vaccine conspiracy theories are also related to their perceptions of other parents' conspiracy beliefs. Further, research has shown that parents hold misperceptions of anti-vaccine conspiracy belief norms: UK parents over-estimate the anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs of other parents. The present study tested the effectiveness of a Social Norms Approach intervention, which corrects misperceptions using normative feedback, to reduce UK parents' anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs and increase vaccination intentions. At baseline, 202 UK parents of young children reported their personal belief in anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, future intentions to vaccinate, and their perceptions of other UK parents' beliefs and intentions. Participants were then randomly assigned to a normative feedback condition (n = 89) or an assessment-only control condition (n = 113). The normative feedback compared participants' personal anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs and perceptions of other UK parents' beliefs with actual normative belief levels. Parents receiving the normative feedback showed significantly reduced personal belief in anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs at immediate post-test. As hypothesised, changes in normative perceptions of anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs mediated the effect of the intervention. The intervention, did not directly increase vaccination intentions, however mediation analysis showed that the normative feedback increased perceptions of other parents' vaccination intentions, which in turn increased personal vaccination intentions. No significant effects remained after a six-week follow-up. The current research demonstrates the potential utility of Social Norms Approach interventions for correcting misperceptions and reducing anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs among UK parents. Further research could explore utilising a top-up intervention to maintain the efficacy.

Measuring adolescents' beliefs in conspiracy theories: Development and validation of the Adolescent Conspiracy Beliefs Questionnaire (ACBQ).

Four studies (total n = 961) developed and validated the Adolescent Conspiracy Beliefs Questionnaire (ACBQ). Initial items were developed in collaboration with teachers. An exploratory factor analysis (Study 1, n = 208, aged 11-14) and a student focus group (N = 3, aged 11) enabled us to establish the factor structure of a 9-item scale. This was replicated via confirmatory factor analysis in Study 2 (N = 178, aged 11-17), and the scale displayed good convergent (i.e., relationship with paranoia and mistrust) and discriminant validity (i.e., no relationship with extraversion). Study 3a (N = 257) further tested convergent validity with a sample of 18-year-olds (i.e., relationship with adult-validated measures of conspiracy beliefs) and demonstrated strong test-retest reliability. Study 3b (N = 318) replicated these findings with a mixed-age adult sample. The ACBQ will allow researchers to explore the psychological antecedents and consequences of conspiracy thinking in young populations.