Shows that leaders spreading conspiracy theories influence their perceived dominance and warmth during conflict, suggesting complex dynamics in leadership.
Research shows that spreading conspiracy theories impacts leaders' reputations; yet, it remains unclear how leaders are viewed when their theories are debunked. Across four studies (N = 1437), we explored whether conveying a conspiracy theory, regardless of its accuracy, influences followers' impressions of leader dominance, competence and warmth. Participants evaluated leaders who either incorrectly perceived (false-positive) or incorrectly misperceived (false-negative) a conspiracy about the cause of a simulated crisis. During intergroup conflict, false-positive leaders were seen as less warm, similarly competent, yet more dominant than false-negative leaders. The dominance gap grew when the consequences of overlooking a conspiracy were more severe. Conversely, in the absence of conflict, false-positive leaders were perceived as less warm and competent than false-negative leaders. These findings support an error management approach to conspiracy theories: Leaders who spread conspiracy theories, even if later debunked, are still perceived as strong leaders, particularly in conflict settings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: