4.4 Article

The cultural dimension of intergroup conspiracy theories

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 112, Issue 2, Pages 455-473

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bjop.12471

Keywords

conspiracy theories; culture; power distance; collective narcissism; outgroup threat

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined intergroup conspiracy beliefs in United States and Chinese samples during the peak of the trade war. Results showed that these beliefs were stronger among Chinese participants due to higher power distance values and vertical collectivism. Cultural dimensions promoting hierarchy in society were associated with increased intergroup conspiracy beliefs, through psychological involvement in intergroup conflict.
Although conspiracy theories are ubiquitous across times and cultures, research has not investigated how cultural dimensions may predict conspiracy beliefs. The present research examined intergroup conspiracy beliefs in United States and Chinese samples at the peak of the trade war. In two studies (one pre-registered; totalN = 1,092), we asked US participants to what extent they believed Chinese institutions and companies were conspiring against the United states and Chinese participants to what extent they believed US institutions and companies were conspiring against China. Results revealed that such beliefs were stronger among Chinese than US participants due to higher power distance values and vertical collectivism. In particular, these cultural dimensions were associated with increased psychological involvement in intergroup conflict (as reflected by higher levels of collective narcissism and perceived outgroup threat), which in turn predicted intergroup conspiracy beliefs. Exploratory analyses suggested that particularly power distance values mediate these effects. We conclude that cultural dimensions that promote hierarchy in society are associated with increased intergroup conspiracy beliefs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available