ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Evaluating the psychometric properties of the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale: a Rasch modelling approach.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Within psychological research, the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale (GCBS) has emerged as the predominant measure of conspiratorial ideation. Although studies report that the GCBS is psychometrically satisfactory (i.e., valid and reliable) and possesses a robust five-factor multidimensional latent structure, analysis has employed traditional measurement evaluation. Acknowledging this, the present paper evaluated the GCBS using Rasch analysis. Rasch analysis was necessary because it provides a more rigorous examination of measurement properties than classical test theory. This allows theorists to refine scales, develop precise measures, and advance the quality and comparability of findings across studies. Methods: The study sample comprised 2,987 UK participants ( Results: Preliminary evaluation confirmed the presence of more than one dimension. Accordingly, the authors proceeded with multidimensional Rasch modelling, which verified that data supported the original five-factor structure. Moreover, the GCBS demonstrated satisfactory item/person fit and reliability, and items mostly displayed invariance across age (young, 18-24 years vs. older adults, 25-88 years). There were strong positive associations within GCBS dimensions; the highest was between Government Malfeasance (i.e., illegal or unethical state actions) and Control of Information (i.e., the deliberate manipulation or suppression of truth). Discussion: The presence of a multidimensional, correlated latent structure supported the notion that the GCBS assesses a range of construct breadth. Future research should evaluate GCBS item functioning across heterogeneous samples, specifically non-Western, non-English speaking, and different educational groups. Furthermore, since the Control of Information subscale demonstrated lower reliability, further refinement is essential for its effective use as a distinct index of conspiratorial ideation.
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.