Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38360799›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

People do change their beliefs about conspiracy theories-but not often.

Matt N Williams, Mathew Ling, John R Kerr, Stephen R Hill, Mathew D Marques, Hollie Mawson, Edward J R Clarke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Matt N WilliamsMassey University, North Shore, Private Bag 102904, Auckland, 0745, New Zealand. m.n.williams@massey.ac.nz.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0571-215X
Mathew LingDeakin University, Geelong, Australia.
John R KerrUniversity of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Stephen R HillMassey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Mathew D MarquesLa Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Hollie MawsonMassey University, North Shore, Private Bag 102904, Auckland, 0745, New Zealand.
Edward J R ClarkePhilipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany.

Funding

Marsden Fund Council, managed by Royal Society Te Apārangi Grant reference MFP-MAU2103Massey University RM22245
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent research has produced a significant body of knowledge about the antecedents and consequences of individual differences in belief in conspiracy theories. What is less clear, however, is the extent to which individuals' beliefs in conspiracy theories vary over time (i.e., within-person variation). In this descriptive and exploratory study, we therefore aimed to describe within-person variability in belief in conspiracy theories. We collected data from 498 Australians and New Zealanders using an online longitudinal survey, with data collected at monthly intervals over 6 months (March to September 2021). Our measure of conspiracy theories included items describing ten conspiracy theories with responses on a 5-point Likert scale. While there was substantial between-person variance, there was much less within-person variance (intraclass r = 0.91). This suggests that beliefs in conspiracy theories were highly stable in our sample. This stability implies that longitudinal studies testing hypotheses about the causes and consequences of belief in conspiracy theories may require large samples of participants and time points to achieve adequate power. It also implies that explanations of belief in conspiracy theories need to accommodate the observation that beliefs in such theories vary much more between people than within people.

Indexed as

Australasian PeopleIndividualityPoliticsAustraliaHumans

Identifiers

PMID38360799
PMCPMC10869812

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.