Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34483993›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2021

Conspiratorial Thinking During COVID-19: The Roles of Paranoia, Delusion-Proneness, and Intolerance of Uncertainty.

Emmett M Larsen, Kayla R Donaldson, Megan Liew, Aprajita Mohanty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Intolerance of uncertainty and psychosis: A systematic review.The British journal of clinical psychology · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. On peer review-then, now, and soon to be?Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Emmett M LarsenNeuroscience of Emotion, Cognition, and Psychopathology Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States.
Kayla R DonaldsonNeuroscience of Emotion, Cognition, and Psychopathology Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States.
Megan LiewNeuroscience of Emotion, Cognition, and Psychopathology Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States.
Aprajita MohantyNeuroscience of Emotion, Cognition, and Psychopathology Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 global pandemic has left many feeling a sense of profound uncertainty about their world, safety, and livelihood. Sources espousing misinformation and conspiracy theories frequently offer information that can help make sense of this uncertainty. Individuals high in intolerance of uncertainty (IU) may be particularly impacted by the impoverished epistemic environment and may thus be more drawn to conspiratorial thinking (CT). In the present work, we show across 2 studies (

Indexed as

anxietyconspiracyconspiracy theoryepistemicindividual differencesschizotypy

Identifiers

PMID34483993
PMCPMC8416269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.