Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
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.
Petrović et al. (Tue,) studied this question.