ArticleScientific reports2025
Neural correlates of conspiracy beliefs during information evaluation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Still very much dead and alive: Incoherence in conspiracism as a departure from Bayesian rationality.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Altered cortical activation and functional connectivity during fixed phrase verbal fluency in children with autism spectrum disorder.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Conspiracy theories, despite their widespread societal impact, remain poorly understood at the neural level. While previous research has examined general belief processing, the neural mechanisms underlying how conspiracy beliefs influence information evaluation remain unclear. This study examined how individual differences in conspiracy belief modulate neural responses to conspiracy-related versus factual information using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Thirty-one participants, pre-screened for high versus low conspiracy beliefs using validated scales, evaluated the veracity of matched conspiracy-related and factual statements during scanning. Behaviorally, high conspiracy believers were more likely to endorse conspiracy statements, whereas both groups evaluated factual information similarly. Neurally, a double dissociation emerged: high conspiracy believers exhibited increased activation in the ventromedial and dorsomedial prefrontal cortices-regions implicated in value-based decision-making and belief uncertainty-when evaluating conspiracy-related content. In contrast, low conspiracy believers showed greater activation in the hippocampus and precuneus, areas associated with episodic and semantic memory retrieval. These findings indicate that conspiracy beliefs engage distinct neurocognitive pathways in a content-specific manner. Rather than reflecting a generalized bias, belief-related neural differences selectively emerge during the processing of conspiratorial information. This study offers novel insight into the neural basis of belief persistence and may inform strategies for promoting critical reasoning in the face of misinformation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.