Both a bioweapon and a hoax: the curious case of contradictory conspiracy theories about COVID-19

Amidst the flow of conspiracy theories (CTs) about the COVID-19 pandemic, many were logically incompatible. We aimed to map the psychological profile of their endorsers. Upon pretesting for familiarity and logical incompatibility, we choose eight pairs of contradictory COVID-19 CTs. Across three studies, a substantial portion of respondents (40%-42%) endorsed at least one pair. In Study 1 (N = 290), conspiracy mentality and doublethink, but not preference for consistency, meaningfully related to endorsement of contradictory CTs; doublethink contributed over and above other predictors. In two following studies we introduced indicators of superficial (Study 2; N = 281) and analytical (Study 3; N = 170) information-processing as predictors. The endorsers of contradictory CTs were more intuitive, prone to ontological confusions and pseudo-profound bullshit, less rational and less actively open-minded; doublethink again added to the prediction. We end by suggesting how the interventions should be tailored to address people with such distinct information-processing style.

Automated summary

This study aims to explore the psychological profile of COVID-19 conspiracy theorists. The findings show that a portion of respondents endorse contradictory conspiracy theories, and conspiracy mentality and doublethink are related to this endorsement. Those who endorse contradictory conspiracy theories are more intuitive, prone to confusion, less rational, and doublethink plays a significant role in predicting their endorsement.