Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32834288›Full record

ArticlePersonality and individual differences2021

Content matters. Different predictors and social consequences of general and government-related conspiracy theories on COVID-19.

Tomasz Oleksy, Anna Wnuk, Dominika Maison, Agnieszka Łyś

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Personality and individual differences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
58.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 191 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Emotion Dysregulation and Conspiracy Beliefs about COVID-19: The Moderating Role of Critical Social Media Use.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tomasz OleksyUniversity of Warsaw, Faculty of Psychology, ul., Stawki 5/7, 00-183 Warsaw, Poland.
Anna WnukUniversity of Warsaw, The Robert Zajonc Institute for Social Studies, UW, ul. Stawki 5/7, 00-183 Warsaw, Poland.
Dominika MaisonUniversity of Warsaw, Faculty of Psychology, ul., Stawki 5/7, 00-183 Warsaw, Poland.
Agnieszka ŁyśUniversity of Warsaw, Faculty of Psychology, ul., Stawki 5/7, 00-183 Warsaw, Poland.
University of Warsaw · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In times of crisis, people are more prone to endorse conspiracy theories. Conspiracy thinking provides answers about the causes of an event, but it can also have harmful social consequences. Our research tested both the predictor and the consequences of two types of conspiracy beliefs related to the Covid-19 pandemic: (1) general conspiracy beliefs and (2) government-related conspiracy theories. In two studies in Poland (N

Indexed as

Conspiracy theoriesCoronavirusCOVID-19Health behaviourIntergroup attitudesLack of control

Identifiers

PMID32834288
PMCPMC7375289
OpenAlexW3044745861

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.