Beliefs in Misinformation About COVID-19 and the Russian Invasion of Ukraine Are Linked: Evidence From a Nationally Representative Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Detrimental effects of misinformation were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Presently, amid Russia's military aggression in Ukraine, another wave of misinformation is spreading on the web and impacting our daily lives, with many citizens and politicians embracing Russian propaganda narratives. Despite the lack of an objective connection between these 2 societal issues, anecdotal observations suggest that supporters of misinformation regarding COVID-19 (BM-C) have also adopted misinformation about the war in Ukraine (BM-U) while sharing similar media use patterns and political attitudes.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a link between respondents' endorsement of the 2 sets of misinformation narratives, and whether some of the selected factors (media use, political trust, vaccine hesitancy, and belief rigidity) are associated with both BM-C and BM-U.

METHODS

We conducted a survey on a nationally representative sample of 1623 individuals in the Czech Republic. Spearman correlation analysis was performed to identify the relationship between BM-C and BM-U. In addition, multiple linear regression was used to determine associations between the examined factors and both sets of misinformation.

RESULTS

We discovered that BM-C and BM-U were moderately correlated (Spearman ρ=0.57; P<.001). Furthermore, increased trust in Russia and decreased trust in the local government, public media, and Western allies of the Czech Republic predicted both BM-C and BM-U. Media use indicating frustration with and avoidance of public or mainstream media, consumption of alternative information sources, and participation in web-based discussions indicative of epistemic bubbles predicted beliefs in misinformation narratives. COVID-19 vaccine refusal predicted only BM-C but not BM-U. However, vaccine refusers were overrepresented in the BM-U supporters (64/161, 39.8%) and undecided (128/505, 25.3%) individuals. Both beliefs were associated with belief rigidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides empirical evidence that supporters of COVID-19 misinformation were susceptible to ideological misinformation aligning with Russian propaganda. Supporters of both sets of misinformation narratives were primarily linked by their shared trust or distrust in the same geopolitical actors and their distrust in the local government.

Populist attitudes and belief in conspiracy theories: anti-elitist attitudes and the preference for unrestricted popular sovereignty reduce the positive impact of an analytical thinking style on conspiracy beliefs

OBJECTIVE

Populist attitudes and the tendency to believe in specific conspiracy theories (conspiracy beliefs) are often exploited by extremist or populist parties. However, more scientific research is needed to scrutinize this association. Consequently, the present non-preregistered exploratory online study assessed whether and how conspiracy beliefs and populist attitudes are associated and whether populist attitudes moderate the association between the preference for an analytical or intuitive thinking style and conspiracy beliefs.

RESULTS

We assessed 483 nonclinical individuals regarding their conspiracy beliefs, populist attitudes, and thinking styles and found a moderate correlation between populist attitudes and conspiracy beliefs. Conspiracy beliefs were significantly predicted by three facets of populist attitudes (anti-elitism, preference for unrestricted popular sovereignty, and belief in the homogeneity and virtuousness of the people). Anti-elitist attitudes and a preference for unrestricted popular sovereignty significantly moderated (reduced) the impact of an analytical thinking style on conspiracy beliefs. Anti-elitism and a preference for popular sovereignty might enhance a person's vulnerability to conspiracy beliefs. We assume that these populistic attitudes reduce a person's motivation to use a more effortful thinking style to reinterpret ideology-inconsistent information to protect existing conspiracy beliefs. Our results provide new insights into the interplay between conspiracy beliefs, populism, and a preference for an analytical/more effortful thinking style.

Ideology: Psychological Similarities and Differences Across the Ideological Spectrum Reexamined

A key debate in the psychology of ideology is whether leftists and rightists are psychologically similar or different. A long-standing view holds that left-wing and right-wing people are meaningfully different from one another across a whole host of basic personality and cognitive features. Scholars have recently pushed back, suggesting that left-wing and right-wing people are more psychologically similar than distinct. We review evidence regarding the psychological profiles of left-wing and right-wing people across a wide variety of domains, including their dispositions (values, personality, cognitive rigidity, threat-sensitivity, and authoritarianism), information processing (motivated reasoning and susceptibility to misinformation), and their interpersonal perceptions and behaviors (empathy, prejudice, stereotyping, and violence). Our review paints a nuanced picture: People across the ideological divide are much more similar than scholars sometimes appreciate. And yet, they differ-to varying degrees-in their personality, values, and (perhaps most importantly) in the groups and causes they prioritize, with important implications for downstream attitudes and behavior in the world.

Toward a Cultural Psychology of Conspiracy Theories: A life-narrative analysis of Flat Earthers

While the idea of a flat earth may seem absurd in the twenty-first century, there is today a large and growing number of people who believe it. Who are these people and what animates their belief? In answering these questions, this article aims to articulate a cultural psychological approach to conspiracy theories. This is advanced through an in-depth narrative analysis of three individuals' life stories concerning before, during, and after the transition to the new belief. Thus, rather than starting from the typical look at what socio-demographic factors predict conspiracy beliefs, we start from a nuanced look at flat earth believers' own life worlds. We show how different individual motives (epistemological, social and existential) and knowledge systems (scientific, religious, societal) come together in individuals' adoption and reconstruction of conspiracy theories so that they resonate with believers' personal lives. Most importantly, flat earth theory offers people a comprehensive vision that places human beings at the center of the universe and provides arguments for how life is meaningful. However, we show that this is reached through different pathways in accordance with people's unique life histories and challenges.

Quantifiable Cross-cultural Research on Medical Mistrust is Necessary for Effective and Equitable Vaccination in Low- and Middle-income Countries

Perceptions of healthcare personnel and institutions substantially impact healthcare behaviors. In the US, minority experiences with racist events like the Tuskegee study, alongside everyday experiences of marginalization and discrimination, drive medical mistrust in populations that are already burdened with health inequalities. However, the concept of medical mistrust is rarely applied outside of industrialized contexts. Histories of colonialism, underfunded healthcare institutions, and the enormous cultural and ethnolinguistic diversity present in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) make medical mistrust a likely contributor to health behavior in these contexts. In the era of COVID-19 and emergent malaria vaccines, there is an urgent need to mitigate factors leading to medical mistrust, which impedes interest in novel vaccines. Doing so requires substantial investment in research that examines the causes of medical mistrust across diverse communities, develops methodological tools that can effectively measure medical mistrust across diverse cultural and ethno-linguistic contexts, and applies this data to policy and public health messaging. This commentary highlights the role of medical mistrust in vaccination and argues for its utility in addressing vaccine decision-making in LMICs.

COVID-19 Vaccine decision-making: trust among the transgender and disability communities in India

BACKGROUND

Historical marginalisation and ongoing trust deficits in health and government systems shape present-day vaccine perceptions among marginalised communities. This paper sought to understand the role of trust in decision-making about COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the transgender and disability communities in India.

METHODS

Using a participatory approach we interviewed 24 community representatives, identifying themselves as transgender individuals or as persons with disability, and 21 key informants such as vaccine programme managers, vaccine providers, and community advocates. We undertook an inductive thematic analysis of the data using a socio-ecological model.

RESULTS

Fear of side effects in relation to specific needs of the two communities and mistrust of systems involved in vaccination shaped four different pathways for vaccine decision-making. Mistrust of systems was influenced by past negative experiences with the health system, creating contexts in which information and misinformation are shared and interpreted. Participants negotiated their doubts about safety and mistrust of systems by interacting with different sources of influence showing patterns of decision-making that are dynamic, context-dependent, and intersectional.

CONCLUSION

These findings will help in determining the content, strategies and approaches to equitable vaccine communication for these two communities. The two communities ought to be included in vaccine trials. Vaccine information must respond to the specific needs of these two communities which could be enabled by collaboration and engagement with community members and influencers. Finally, long-term investment towards the needs of marginalised communities is vital to dismantle cycles of marginalisation and distrust and in turn improve vaccine acceptance and uptake.

Is it pathological to believe conspiracy theories?

According to a naturalist conception of what counts as a disorder, conspiracy beliefs are pathological beliefs if they are the outcome of a cognitive dysfunction. In this article, I take issue with the view that it is pathological to believe a conspiracy theory. After reviewing several approaches to the aetiology of conspiracy beliefs, I find that no approach compels us to view conspiracy beliefs as the outcome of a dysfunction: a speaker's conspiracy beliefs can appear as implausible and unshakeable to an interpreter, but in a naturalist framework it is not pathological for the speaker to adopt and maintain such beliefs.

Identifying psychological predictors of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination: A machine learning study

BACKGROUND

Major barriers to addressing SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy include limited knowledge of what causes delay/refusal of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and limited ability to predict who will remain unvaccinated over significant time periods despite vaccine availability. The present study begins to address these barriers by developing a machine learning model that prospectively predicts who will persist in not vaccinating against SARS-CoV-2.

METHOD

Unvaccinated individuals (n = 325) who completed a baseline survey were followed over the six-month period when vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 were first widely available (April-October 2021). A random forest model was used to predict who would remain unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 from their baseline measures, including demographic information (e.g., age), medical history (e.g., of influenza vaccination), Health-Belief Model constructs (e.g., perceived vaccine dangerousness), conspiracist ideation, and task-based metrics of vulnerability to conspiracist ideation (e.g., tendency toward illusory pattern perception).

RESULTS

The resulting model significantly predicted vaccination status (AUC-PR = 0.77, 95%CI [0.56 0.90]). At the optimal probability threshold determined by the Generalized Threshold Shifting Protocol, the model was moderately precise (0.83) when identifying individuals who remained unvaccinated (n = 80), and had a very low rate (0.04) of false-positives (incorrectly suggesting that individuals remained unvaccinated). Permutational importance tests suggested that baseline SARS-CoV-2 vaccine intentions conveyed the most information about future SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status. Conspiracist ideation was the second most informative predictor, suggesting that misinformation influences vaccination behavior. Other important predictors included perceived vaccine dangerousness, as expected under the Health Belief Model, and influenza vaccination history.

CONCLUSIONS

The model we developed can accurately and prospectively identify individuals who remain unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. It could therefore facilitate empirically-informed allocation of interventions that encourage vaccine uptake. The predictive value of conspiracist ideation, perceived vaccine dangerousness, and vaccine intentions in our model is consistent with potential causal relations between these variables and SARS-CoV-2 vaccine uptake.

Determining factors for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Brazilians: a study using structural equation modeling

OBJECTIVES

to investigate the factors influencing vaccine hesitancy against COVID-19 among Brazilians.

METHODS

this research employed an observational and analytical approach, utilizing a web-based survey. Data collection took place in 2020, and data analysis was conducted using structural equation modeling.

RESULTS

the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy was found to be 27.5% (1182 individuals). There is a negative correlation between belief in conspiracy theories and social influence. Among the various beliefs associated with vaccination intentions, only conspiracy beliefs exhibited significant predictive value. Thus, the findings suggest that personal beliefs significantly impact hesitancy towards vaccination, and also indicate that trust in governmental bodies is inversely related to hesitancy.

CONCLUSIONS

vaccine hesitancy emerges as a multifaceted phenomenon influenced by a complex array of factors, including personal beliefs, trust in governmental bodies, and healthcare systems.

Finding common ground: Understanding and engaging with science mistrust in the Great barrier reef region

At a time when ambitious environmental management initiatives are required to protect and restore aquatic ecosystems, public trust in the science that underpins environmental policy and decision-making is waning. This decline in public trust coincides with a rise in misinformation, and threatens to undermine public support for, and participation in, environmental protection. Our study investigates the prevalence and predictors of mistrust in science associated with the protection and management of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) and its catchments. Using survey data from 1,877 residents of the GBR region, we identify environmental values, perceptions, and attitudes that are associated with science mistrust. Our results include a typology of GBR science trust and scepticism. Science-sceptical respondents, representing 31% of our sample, were likely to perceive waterway management decisions as being unfair, felt less responsible, and were less motivated to contribute to improving waterway health than those with greater trust in science. Science-sceptical respondents also had differing perceptions of some threats to waterways, in particular climate change. However, similarities and 'common ground' between respondents with varying levels of trust in science included a shared recognition of the importance of waterways' ecosystem services, and a shared perception of the relative health and problems within their regions' waterways. Our findings can help to break down assumptions about science-sceptical groups in the GBR region and elsewhere. We offer recommendations to guide more constructive engagement that seeks to restore trust and build consensus on mutual goals and pathways to protect vital ecosystem functions and services.

No evidence that belief in conspiracy theories is negatively related to attitudes toward transhumanism

Transhumanism is a movement that emphasizes the improvement of the human condition by developing technologies and making them widely available. Conspiracy theories regularly refer to the allegedly transhumanist agenda of elites. We hypothesized that belief in conspiracy theories would be related to more unfavorable attitudes toward the transhumanist movement. We examined this association through two pre-registered studies (based on two French samples, total N after exclusion = 550). We found no evidence of a negative relationship between belief in conspiracy theories and attitudes toward transhumanism. This null result was further corroborated by Bayesian analysis, an equivalence test, and an internal mini meta-analysis. This work plays a precursory role in understanding attitudes toward an international cultural and intellectual movement that continues to grow in popularity and influence.

Inoculating Against Anti-Vaccination Conspiracies

This study examined the efficacy of inoculation treatments in preventing anti-vaccination propaganda. Study predictions were tested in an independent-group experiment (N = 165), wherein participants were randomly assigned to a fact-based inoculation or a logic-based inoculation or a control message, with an excerpt from an anti-vaccination conspiracy film, Vaxxed, used as a counterattitudinal attack message. The results indicated that both inoculation treatments (fact-based and logic-based) were effective at instilling resistance to counter-persuasion, as compared to the control condition, and both types of inoculation messages were equal in their potential to facilitate resistance. In addition, we tested whether inoculating participants against an anti-vaccination conspiracy would help prevent the endorsement of other conspiracy theories. The data revealed that inoculating against one type of a conspiracy did not foster protection against other types of conspiratorial ideas, and, similar to previous research, endorsing one type of a conspiracy theory was positively associated with the endorsement of other conspiracies. These and other results are discussed along with their implications, limitations, and future research directions.

The Roles of Social Media Use and Medical Mistrust in Black Americans' COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: The RISP Model Perspective

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented challenges to healthcare and public health messaging in the United States. One area of focus has been vaccination uptake among Black Americans, who have experienced COVID-19 deaths disproportionate to their share of the United States population, raising questions about the processes involved in vaccination perceptions and behaviors. Guided by the Risk Information Seeking and Processing model, this study explored the roles of medical mistrust and social media as a source of risk information in Black Americans' vaccine hesitancy. Survey results from a YouGov panel sample of Black Americans (n = 1,136; 53.5% female) showed that social media use and medical mistrust were positively associated with belief in misinformation related to the COVID-19 vaccine, which, in turn, was positively related to vaccine hesitancy through perceived information insufficiency and information seeking intentions. Furthermore, we found that belief in misinformation and subjective norms toward anti-vaccination also serially mediated the association between social media use and medical mistrust with vaccine hesitancy. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Assessing inoculation's effectiveness in motivating resistance to conspiracy propaganda in Finnish and United States samples

Introduction

This study tested the motivational power of inoculation to foster resistance to conspiracy propaganda (9/11 Truth Movement), comparing inoculation effects across United States and Finnish study participants.

Method

We used a 2 inoculation (treatment vs. control)  ×  2 national culture (American vs. Finnish) independent groups design (N = 319), while examining the effects of motivational threat and thinking modes-analytic vs. intuitive-on the inoculation process. To test the effectiveness of the inoculation strategy, we used an excerpt from a conspiracy film Loose Change as a counterattitudinal attack message.

Results

Our results indicated that inoculation was effective at motivating resistance regardless of national culture. Inoculation effects emerged mostly as a direct effect on resistance and two indirect effects wherein motivational threat mediated the relationship between inoculation and resistance as well as inoculation and analytic mode of message processing. Although we found that an increase in analytic mode of processing facilitated resistance and intuitive processing increased conspiracy-theory endorsement, the indirect effects between inoculation and resistance via message processing modes were not significant. Finally, the data revealed national culture differences in analytic mode and cultural-context differences mostly pertaining to the relationships between thinking styles, media literacy, and modes of thinking.

Discussion

These results offer important theoretical implications for inoculation scholarship and suggest viable practical solutions for efforts to mitigate misinformation and conspiratorial beliefs.

Toward trustworthy COVID-19 interventions: Building vaccine trust through community-university partnerships

Prior research identifies trust as critical to increase vaccine acceptance and uptake. However, few intervention studies have sought to develop or test strategies for bolstering vaccine-related trust. To address this gap, this exploratory study identifies features of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy interventions that can promote or undermine trust across three interconnected domains: institutional, interpersonal, and product (the vaccine itself). We draw on focus groups (N = 27 participants) with community and university partners involved with hosting COVID-19 testing and vaccine events in underserved Oklahoma communities. Focus groups explored participants' experiences serving community health needs and elicited feedback on proposed vaccine hesitancy interventions. Proposed interventions included two technology-based strategies (text message reminders and tablet-based testimonials and education) and one dialogue-based strategy (anti-body test interpretation). We find that community partners perceived local universities as trustworthy institutions because of their association with popular sports programs, academic credentials, and proximity, creating opportunities to address vaccine-related distrust through community-university partnerships. The most promising intervention strategies for building interpersonal trust included engaging in one-on-one dialogue and using autonomy enhancing approaches. Finally, interventions that successfully encouraged vaccine trust did so by incorporating personalized health information about individuals' potential level of protection and susceptibility to the COVID-19 virus. These findings can inform future public health efforts to create trustworthy vaccine hesitancy interventions.

"Trust me, do not trust anyone": how epistemic mistrust and credulity are associated with conspiracy mentality

Previous research shows that the propensity to endorse conspiracy theories is associated with disrupted forms of epistemic trust, i.e., the appropriate openness towards interpersonally communicated information. There are associations, first, with an increased mistrust in several actors and institutions responsible for the communication of information in society, and second, with a pronounced credulity in unreliable sources and implausible phenomena (e.g., superstition, astrology). This study aims to investigate whether these phenomena are associated with specific personality-related disruptions of epistemic trust. Based on selfreported data of 417 individuals (mean = 33.28; standard deviation = 11.11) from a UK population sampled online, the potential relationships between disruptions in epistemic trust and the endorsement of a conspiracy mentality are explored. The epistemic stances characterized by mistrust and credulity (independent variables) are measured with the epistemic trust, mistrust, and credulity questionnaire (ETMCQ), and conspiracy mentality (dependent variable) is measured with the conspiracy mentality questionnaire. In a multiple linear regression model, mistrust is associated with the endorsement of a conspiracy mentality, even when accounting for other contributing factors (e.g., individual narcissism, attachment avoidance and anxiety, authoritarianism, loneliness). In a bootstrapped mediation model controlling for other relevant predictors, the association between credulity and conspiracy mentality is fully mediated by mistrust. In future research, the impact of disrupted epistemic trust on conspiracy beliefs should be investigated in terms of the specific epistemic stances of mistrust and credulity. In this respect, the ETMCQ represents a highly promising instrument to assess individual differences in factors underpinning aspects of conspiracy endorsement.

The relationship between epistemic stance, mentalizing, paranoid distress and conspiracy mentality: an empirical investigation

Epistemic stance, comprising epistemic trust, mistrust, and credulity, and the closely related construct of mentalizing have been related to paranoid ideation and conspiracy mentality. All phenomena are common in the general population and may become clinically and societally relevant at an extreme expression by influencing an individual's positioning towards socially transmitted information possibly as far as complete social detachment or attachment to extremist views. Herein, an individual's experienced distress may play an important role, which has however largely been neglected in empirical research. Thus, this study aims to empirically investigate the effect of epistemic stance on a clinically relevant aspect of paranoid ideation, namely paranoid distress. We assume that epistemic stance will be associated with paranoid distress, but that this association will be mediated by mentalizing. Moreover, we assume that epistemic stance will be indirectly associated with conspiracy thinking via paranoid distress. Data of 595 participants (mean age = 43.05; SD = 13.87; female = 48.32%, male = 51.18%, diverse = 0.51%) were collected via self-report questionnaires through an online-based cross-sectional study. Structural equation modeling was performed for data analysis. As expected, epistemic mistrust was associated with paranoid distress via mentalizing deficits. Unexpectedly, epistemic trust was associated with more paranoid distress. Indirectly, epistemic trust was associated with conspiracy mentality via paranoid distress. Findings partially confirmed the hypothesized associations. Mentalizing may be a target for reducing distress associated with a distrusting epistemic stance. Epistemically trusting individuals with high paranoid distress may turn to conspiracy theories for regulation.

Conspiracy mentality, subclinical paranoia, and political conservatism are associated with perceived status threat

Status threat (i.e., concern that one's dominant social group will be undermined by outsiders) is a significant factor in current United States politics. While demographic factors such as race (e.g., Whiteness) and political affiliation (e.g., conservatism) tend to be associated with heightened levels of status threat, its psychological facets have yet to be fully characterized. Informed by a "paranoid" model of American politics, we explored a suite of possible psychological and demographic associates of perceived status threat, including race/ethnicity, political conservatism, analytic thinking, magical ideation, subclinical paranoia, and conspiracy mentality. In a small, quota sample drawn from the United States (N = 300), we found that conspiracy mentality, subclinical paranoia, conservatism, and age were each positively (and uniquely) associated with status threat. In addition to replicating past work linking conservatism to status threat, this study identifies subclinical paranoia and conspiracy mentality as novel psychological associates of status threat. These findings pave the way for future research regarding how and why status threat concerns may become exaggerated in certain individuals, possibly to the detriment of personal and societal wellbeing.

Believing in conspiracy theories in Spain during the COVID-19 pandemic: Drivers and public health implications

Conspiracy theories jeopardize public health by disseminating misinformation and undermining authoritative health guidelines. This study explores social factors associated with the belief in conspiracy theories in Spain during the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing upon the theoretical framework of Max Weber, it posits that beliefs in conspiracy theories are linked to both instrumental rationality considerations, such as trust in health authorities, science, and pharmaceutical companies, as well as value-rationality based factors, such as ideological orientation. The study analyzes recent, nationally representative survey data and is the first to examine the social predictors of belief in conspiracy theories in Spain during the pandemic. The findings highlight that conspiracy theory beliefs are (a) associated with considerably worse vaccination behaviors, (b) not or only very weakly associated with standard demographics such as age, sex, or education, (c) related to instrumental rationality considerations, and (d) only weakly related to value-rationality indicators such as ideological and religious affiliations. In conclusion, the study underscores the significance of public health policies that specifically address conspiracy theory convictions, and to that end, advocates for the application of a Weberian sociological perspective to better understand the diverse rationalities underlying these beliefs, particularly in the absence of discernible demographic predictors.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Cameroon: The Role of Medical Mistrust and Social Media Use

Most African countries report low COVID-19 vaccination rates (Msellati et al., 2022; WHO Africa; 2020). This study focuses on factors associated with vaccine hesitancy specifically in the country of Cameroon. Social media use and medical mistrust have been suggested as key variables that may increase vaccine hesitancy. Adopting the information-related perspective guided by the risk information seeking and processing model, the current research explored how social media use and medical mistrust are related to vaccine hesitancy among Cameroonians. Survey results from a sample of 1,000 Cameroonians fielded in early 2022 showed that social media use and medical mistrust were positively associated with belief in misinformation related to the COVID-19 vaccine. Belief in misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine was negatively associated with perceived information insufficiency. A positive relationship between perceived information insufficiency and information seeking, as well as a negative relationship between information seeking and vaccine hesitancy were also found. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

A taxonomy of anti-vaccination arguments from a systematic literature review and text modelling

The proliferation of anti-vaccination arguments is a threat to the success of many immunization programmes. Effective rebuttal of contrarian arguments requires an approach that goes beyond addressing flaws in the arguments, by also considering the attitude roots-that is, the underlying psychological attributes driving a person's belief-of opposition to vaccines. Here, through a pre-registered systematic literature review of 152 scientific articles and thematic analysis of anti-vaccination arguments, we developed a hierarchical taxonomy that relates common arguments and themes to 11 attitude roots that explain why an individual might express opposition to vaccination. We further validated our taxonomy on coronavirus disease 2019 anti-vaccination misinformation, through a combination of human coding and machine learning using natural language processing algorithms. Overall, the taxonomy serves as a theoretical framework to link expressed opposition of vaccines to their underlying psychological processes. This enables future work to develop targeted rebuttals and other interventions that address the underlying motives of anti-vaccination arguments.

Fighting the infodemic: the 4 i Framework for Advancing Communication and Trust

BACKGROUND

The proliferation of false and misleading health claims poses a major threat to public health. This ongoing "infodemic" has prompted numerous organizations to develop tools and approaches to manage the spread of falsehoods and communicate more effectively in an environment of mistrust and misleading information. However, these tools and approaches have not been systematically characterized, limiting their utility. This analysis provides a characterization of the current ecosystem of infodemic management strategies, allowing public health practitioners, communicators, researchers, and policy makers to gain an understanding of the tools at their disposal.

METHODS

A multi-pronged search strategy was used to identify tools and approaches for combatting health-related misinformation and disinformation. The search strategy included a scoping review of academic literature; a review of gray literature from organizations involved in public health communications and misinformation/disinformation management; and a review of policies and infodemic management approaches from all U.S. state health departments and select local health departments. A team of annotators labelled the main feature(s) of each tool or approach using an iteratively developed list of tags.

RESULTS

We identified over 350 infodemic management tools and approaches. We introduce the 4 i Framework for Advancing Communication and Trust (4 i FACT), a modified social-ecological model, to characterize different levels of infodemic intervention: informational, individual, interpersonal, and institutional. Information-level strategies included those designed to amplify factual information, fill information voids, debunk false information, track circulating information, and verify, detect, or rate the credibility of information. Individual-level strategies included those designed to enhance information literacy and prebunking/inoculation tools. Strategies at the interpersonal/community level included resources for public health communicators and community engagement approaches. Institutional and structural approaches included resources for journalists and fact checkers, tools for managing academic/scientific literature, resources for infodemic researchers/research, resources for infodemic managers, social media regulation, and policy/legislation.

CONCLUSIONS

The 4 i FACT provides a useful way to characterize the current ecosystem of infodemic management strategies. Recognizing the complex and multifaceted nature of the ongoing infodemic, efforts should be taken to utilize and integrate strategies across all four levels of the modified social-ecological model.

Negative and positive ageism in an Italian sample: how ageist beliefs relate to epistemic trust, psychological distress, and well-being

Ageism is a social issue of growing concern; ageist beliefs can shape the individual and collective experience of aging. The present study aimed to explore positive and negative ageism in young adults (YA) (18-30 years) and adults (AD) (31-60 years) and their relationship with epistemic trust, psychological distress, and psychological well-being. 301 Italian adult participants completed an online survey that included the following self-report questionnaires: attitudes towards older people scale, epistemic trust, mistrust and credulity questionnaire, depression anxiety stress scale-21, and Warwick-Edinburgh mental wellbeing scale. Negative ageism was significantly higher in YA compared to AD; on the contrary, AD presented more positive ageism than YA. When considering the entire sample, negative ageism was correlated with various dimensions of psychological distress and epistemic trust. A mediation model revealed that epistemic mistrust fully mediated the relationship between age and negative ageism, suggesting that changes in ageist beliefs that seem to occur with age are mediated by a mistrustful epistemic stance. Future research should focus on further exploring the link between epistemic trust, mental health, and holding ageist beliefs. The results are also discussed in terms of their implications for the treatment of older patients.

Psychological profiles of anti-vaccination argument endorsement

The proliferation of anti-vaccination arguments online can threaten immunisation programmes, including those targeting COVID-19. To effectively refute misinformed views about vaccination, communicators need to go beyond providing correct information and debunking of misconceptions, and must consider the underlying motivations of people who hold contrarian views. Drawing on a taxonomy of anti-vaccination arguments that identified 11 "attitude roots"-i.e., psychological attributes-that motivate an individual's vaccine-hesitant attitude, we assessed whether these attitude roots were identifiable in argument endorsements and responses to psychological construct measures corresponding to the presumed attitude roots. In two UK samples (total n = 1250), we found that participants exhibited monological belief patterns in their highly correlated endorsements of anti-vaccination arguments drawn from different attitude roots, and that psychological constructs representing the attitude roots significantly predicted argument endorsement strength and vaccine hesitancy. We identified four different latent anti-vaccination profiles amongst our participants' responses. We conclude that endorsement of anti-vaccination arguments meaningfully dovetails with attitude roots clustering around anti-scientific beliefs and partisan ideologies, but that the balance between those attitudes differs considerably between people. Communicators must be aware of those individual differences.

The role of conspiracy mindset in reducing support for child vaccination for COVID-19 in the United States

Introduction

We have previously proposed and tested a model that predicts reluctance to vaccinate against COVID-19 in the US from embrace of a conspiracy mindset that distrusts the federal health agencies of the US government and regards their intentions as malevolent. In this study, we tested the model's ability to predict adult support for COVID vaccination of children ages 5-11 after the vaccine was approved for this age group.

Methods

Relying on a national panel that was established in April 2021 (N = 1941) and followed until March of 2022, we examined the relation between conspiratorial thinking measured at baseline and belief in misinformation and conspiracies about COVID vaccines, trust in various health authorities, perceived risk of COVID to children, and belief in conspiracy theories about the pandemic's origin and impact. In addition, we tested a structural equation model (SEM) in which conspiracy mindset predicted adult support for childhood vaccination for COVID in January and March of 2022 as well as the adults own vaccination status and their willingness to recommend vaccinating children against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR).

Results

The model accounted for 76% of the variance in support for childhood vaccination for COVID-19; the relation between the mindset and support for vaccination was entirely mediated by baseline assessments of misinformation, trust, risk, and acceptance of pandemic conspiracy theories.

Discussion

The SEM replicated the prior test of the model, indicating that a conspiracy mindset present among at least 17% of the panel underlies their resistance to vaccinate both themselves and children. Efforts to counteract the mindset will likely require the intervention of trusted spokespersons who can overcome the skepticism inherent in conspiratorial thinking about the government and its health-related agencies' recommendations for a particular vaccine.

I Wear a Mask for My Country: Conspiracy Theories, Nationalism, and Intention to Adopt Covid-19 Prevention Behaviors at the Later Stage of Pandemic Control in China

Various conspiracy theories have accompanied COVID-19 since its initial outbreak. Based on a nationwide survey in China, this study probes the health consequences of beliefs in different COVID-19 conspiracy theories in China. The research found that believing the coronavirus has a foreign natural origin was associated with increased rather than decreased intention to adopt protective behaviors. Nonetheless, believing that the source of the pandemic was a Chinese lab or that it is a foreign biological weapon was related to reduced intentions to protect one's health. In addition, measured as national pride and satisfaction with China's pandemic control effort, people's level of nationalism was strongly associated with their intention to adopt protective behaviors, which moderates the health consequences of believing in false conspiracy theories. Scientific literacy was also associated with an increased likelihood of adopting preventive measures. Despite revealing the diversified health consequences of conspiracy beliefs, this study demonstrates the importance of examining collectivist sociopolitical constructs in health communication.

Illusory perception of visual patterns in pure noise is associated with COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs

Just as perceptual heuristics can lead to visual illusions, cognitive heuristics can lead to biased judgements, such as "illusory pattern perception" (i.e., seeing patterns in unrelated events). Here we further investigated the common underlying mechanism behind irrational beliefs and illusory pattern perception in visual images. For trials in which no object was present in the noise, we found that the tendency to report seeing an object was positively correlated with the endorsement of both COVID-19 specific conspiracy theories and paranormal beliefs. The present results suggest that the cognitive bias to see meaningful connections in noise can have an impact on socio-political cognition as well as on perceptual decision making.

What Are Conspiracy Theories? A Definitional Approach to Their Correlates, Consequences, and Communication

Conspiracy theories are abundant in social and political discourse, with serious consequences for individuals, groups, and societies. However, psychological scientists have started paying close attention to them only in the past 20 years. We review the spectacular progress that has since been made and some of the limitations of research so far, and we consider the prospects for further progress. To this end, we take a step back to analyze the defining features that make conspiracy theories different in kind from other beliefs and different in degree from each other. We consider how these features determine the adoption, consequences, and transmission of belief in conspiracy theories, even though their role as causal or moderating variables has seldom been examined. We therefore advocate for a research agenda in the study of conspiracy theories that starts-as is routine in fields such as virology and toxicology-with a robust descriptive analysis of the ontology of the entity at its center.

Unpacking trust: The Italian validation of the Epistemic Trust, Mistrust, and Credulity Questionnaire (ETMCQ)

The construct of epistemic trust has received much consideration in recent psychological literature, even though mainly from a theoretical perspective. The overall aim of this study was to validate the first self-report measure of epistemic trust-the Epistemic Trust, Mistrust, and Credulity Questionnaire (ETMCQ)-in an Italian sample. Our primary goal was to test the factorial validity of the instrument, also exploring the influence of age, gender, and level of education on epistemic trust (Study 1, n = 843). Secondarily, we investigated the associations between epistemic trust, mistrust, credulity, and other aspects of psychological functioning, as well as with the presence of adverse childhood experiences in a smaller number of participants (Study 2, n = 445). Besides the ETMCQ, the survey included an ad hoc questionnaire investigating socio-demographic characteristics and self-report measures of reflective functioning, mentalized affectivity, traumatic experiences, attachment, and psychological symptoms. Statistical analysis showed a three-factor hierarchical structure similar to the model proposed in the original validation, with some differences that suggest an influence of cultural factors in determining individuals' epistemic stance. Our results corroborate previous theoretical contributions regarding the association between epistemic trust and psychological wellbeing, and between epistemic disruptions and higher levels of psychological suffering. Both Mistrust and Credulity were significantly related to the presence of childhood traumatic experiences, attachment avoidance and anxiety, lower levels of mentalization, lower abilities in emotional regulation, and higher levels of psychopathological symptoms. The ETMCQ represents an easily administered and time-effective tool. Its use could pave the way for interesting clinical and theoretical findings.

Explaining demographic differences in COVID-19 vaccination stage in the United States - April-May 2021

COVID-19 vaccine coverage in the US has marked demographic and geographical disparities, but few explanations exist for them. Our paper aimed to identify behavioral and social drivers that explain these vaccination disparities. Participants were a national probability sample of 3562 American adults, recruited from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel. Participants completed an online survey in spring 2021, when COVD-19 vaccination was available for higher-risk groups but not yet available to all US adults. The survey assessed COVID-19 vaccination stage (intentions and vaccine uptake), constructs from the Increasing Vaccination Model (IVM) domains (thinking and feeling, social processes, and direct behavior change), self-reported exposure to COVID-19 vaccine information, and demographic characteristics. Analyses used multiple imputation to address item nonresponse and linear regressions to conduct mediation analyses. Higher COVID-19 vaccination stage was strongly associated with older age, liberal political ideology, and higher income in adjusted analyses (all p < .001). Vaccination stage was more modestly associated with urbanicity, white race, and Hispanic ethnicity (all p < .05). Some key mediators that explained more than one-third of demographic differences in vaccination stage were perceived vaccine effectiveness, social norms, and recommendations from family and friends across most demographic characteristics (all p < .05). Other mediators included safety concerns, trust, altruism, provider recommendation, and information seeking. Access to vaccination, barriers to vaccination, and self-efficacy explained few demographic differences. One of the most reliable explanations for demographic differences in COVID-19 vaccination stage is social processes, including social norms, recommendations, and altruism. Interventions to promote COVID-19 vaccination should address social processes and other domains in the IVM.

Rabbit Hole Syndrome: Inadvertent, accelerating, and entrenched commitment to conspiracy beliefs

There is mounting anecdotal evidence that some individuals fall into conspiracy "rabbit holes" causing harms ranging from social isolation to violence. We propose a hypothetical Rabbit Hole Syndrome in which some individuals' subscription to conspiracy beliefs is initially inadvertent, accelerates recursively, then becomes difficult to escape. This proposal is distinguished by a person-centered and dynamic perspective on conspiracy beliefs. It aims to provide a theoretical foundation for research that (a) illuminates the rabbit hole phenomenon, (b) is pluralistic, spanning diverse subdisciplines (e.g., social and clinical psychology), and methods (e.g., qualitative, longitudinal, and case studies), and (c) informs theory and practice by uncovering discontinuities between committed believers and other populations in the causes, consequences, and "remedies" of conspiracy beliefs.

Conspiratorial thinking as a precursor to opposition to COVID-19 vaccination in the US: a multi-year study from 2018 to 2021

Despite widespread availability of safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines in the US, only about 66% of the eligible US population had taken the recommended initial doses of the COVID-19 vaccines as of April 2022. Explanations for this hesitancy have focused on misinformation about the vaccines, lack of trust in health authorities, and acceptance of conspiracy theories about the pandemic. Here we test whether those with a conspiratorial mindset, which distrusts a wide range of institutions, were poised to reject COVID vaccines before the pandemic even began. To answer that question, we reinterviewed members of a national US panel that we had previously surveyed beginning in 2018. As hypothesized, having a conspiratorial mindset in 2019 predicted COVID-vaccination hesitancy in 2021 better than prior trust in health authorities or acceptance of vaccine misinformation. Those with the mindset were also more likely to consume media that bolstered belief in pandemic conspiracies. Research is needed on the determinants of conspiratorial mindset and ways to minimize the likelihood that consequential health decisions will be influenced by it.

A gateway conspiracy? Belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories prospectively predicts greater conspiracist ideation

A primary focus of research on conspiracy theories has been understanding the psychological characteristics that predict people's level of conspiracist ideation. However, the dynamics of conspiracist ideation-i.e., how such tendencies change over time-are not well understood. To help fill this gap in the literature, we used data from two longitudinal studies (Study 1 N = 107; Study 2 N = 1,037) conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. We find that greater belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories at baseline predicts both greater endorsement of a novel real-world conspiracy theory involving voter fraud in the 2020 American Presidential election (Study 1) and increases in generic conspiracist ideation over a period of several months (Studies 1 and 2). Thus, engaging with real-world conspiracy theories appears to act as a gateway, leading to more general increases in conspiracist ideation. Beyond enhancing our knowledge of conspiracist ideation, this work highlights the importance of fighting the spread of conspiracy theories.

Paranoid beliefs and conspiracy mentality are associated with different forms of mistrust: A three-nation study

Paranoia and conspiracy are terms typically used interchangeably. However, although the underlying content of these types of beliefs might be similar (e.g., seeing others as powerful and threatening), recent research suggests that these constructs differ in important ways. One important feature shared by both constructs is excessive mistrust but this aspect might play different roles in each belief system. In this study we explored the strength of associations of different trust predictors (i.e., trust in institutions, trust in sources of information, perceptual trust, and interpersonal trust) between conspiracy mentality and paranoid beliefs. We tested this association in a large representative multinational sample (United Kingdom n = 2025; Spain n = 1951; and Ireland n = 1041). Confirmatory factor analysis supported a two-factor model of conspiracy and paranoid beliefs in each nation sample. Path and equality of constraints analysis revealed that paranoia was more strongly associated with perceptual mistrust (bias towards mistrusting unfamiliar faces) whereas conspiracy was more strongly associated with mistrust in political institutions. Although interpersonal mistrust and trust in social sources of information were associated significantly with conspiracy their association with paranoid beliefs was stronger. These findings clarify the role of different trust processes in both belief systems. Limitations of this study are discussed.

Pandemic control - do's and don'ts from a control theory perspective

Managing a pandemic is a difficult task. Pandemics are part of the dynamics of nonlinear systems with multiple different interactive features that co-adapt to each other (such as humans, animals, and pathogens). The target of controlling such a nonlinear system is best achieved using the control system theory developed in engineering and applied in systems biology. But is this theory and its principles actually used in controlling the current coronavirus disease-19 pandemic? We review the evidence for applying principles in different aspects of pandemic control related to different goals such as disease eradication, disease containment, and short- or long-term economic loss minimization. Successful policies implement multiple measures in concordance with control theory to achieve a robust response. In contrast, unsuccessful policies have numerous failures in different measures or focus only on a single measure (only testing, vaccines, etc.). Successful approaches rely on predictions instead of reactions to compensate for the costs of time delay, on knowledge-based analysis instead of trial-and-error, to control complex nonlinear systems, and on risk assessment instead of waiting for more evidence. Iran is an example of the effects of delayed response due to waiting for evidence to arrive instead of a proper risk analytical approach. New Zealand, Australia, and China are examples of appropriate application of basic control theoretic principles and focusing on long-term adaptive strategies, updating measures with the evolution of the pandemic.

Belief traps: Tackling the inertia of harmful beliefs

Beliefs can be highly resilient in the sense that they are not easily abandoned in the face of counterevidence. This has the advantage of guiding consistent behavior and judgments but may also have destructive consequences for individuals, nature, and society. For instance, pathological beliefs can sustain psychiatric disorders, the belief that rhinoceros horn is an aphrodisiac may drive a species extinct, beliefs about gender or race may fuel discrimination, and belief in conspiracy theories can undermine democracy. Here, we present a unifying framework of how self-amplifying feedbacks shape the inertia of beliefs on levels ranging from neuronal networks to social systems. Sustained exposure to counterevidence can destabilize rigid beliefs but requires organized rational override as in cognitive behavioral therapy for pathological beliefs or institutional control of discrimination to reduce racial biases. Black-and-white thinking is a major risk factor for the formation of resilient beliefs associated with psychiatric disorders as well as prejudices and conspiracy thinking. Such dichotomous thinking is characteristic of a lack of cognitive resources, which may be exacerbated by stress. This could help explain why conspiracy thinking and psychiatric disorders tend to peak during crises. A corollary is that addressing social factors such as poverty, social cleavage, and lack of education may be the most effective way to prevent the emergence of rigid beliefs, and thus of problems ranging from psychiatric disorders to prejudices, conspiracy theories, and posttruth politics.

Intuition, reason, and conspiracy beliefs

Conspiracy theories tend to involve doubt and skepticism, but are conspiracy believers really more deliberative? We review recent research that investigates the relative roles of intuition and reason in conspiracy belief and find that the preponderance of evidence indicates that conspiracy belief is linked to an overreliance on intuition and a lack of reflection. This research, in addition to work investigating the broader influence of misinformation, indicates that people may believe conspiracies partly because they fail to engage in analytic thinking and rely too much on their intuitions. However, we also note that research in this area lacks in experimental studies and that work focusing on underlying cognitive mechanisms is needed.

Efficacy information influences intention to take COVID-19 vaccine

OBJECTIVES

A successful response to the COVID-19 pandemic requires achieving high levels of vaccine uptake. We tested whether directly contrasting the high efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines with the lower efficacy of the annual flu vaccine would increase intentions to take a COVID-19 vaccine.

DESIGN

A pre-registered online study of 481 participants compared four information conditions: (1) no information; (2) COVID-19 Vaccine Information Only; and COVID-19 Vaccine Information combined with flu vaccine information suggesting either (3) 60% efficacy or (4) 40% efficacy; we measured COVID-19 and flu vaccine intentions along with several other vaccine-related variables.

METHODS

The Prolific platform was used to recruit 481 UK participants (64% female; aged between 18 and 85 years) who had been pre-screened to have intermediate levels of vaccine hesitancy. After reading a short text (~200 words) about COVID-19 vaccines, participants were asked about their vaccination intentions.

RESULTS

Providing information about the safety and efficacy of the new COVID-19 vaccines resulted in vaccination intentions that were, on average, 0.39 standard deviations (SDs) higher than those in the no information condition; providing the same COVID vaccine efficacy information in the context of information about flu vaccine efficacy resulted in a further significant increase in vaccination intentions that were 0.68 SD higher than those in the no information condition. This positive contrast effect for the COVID-19 vaccine was not associated with reduced flu vaccine intentions.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination intentions can be strengthened through a simple messaging intervention that utilizes context effects to increase perceived response efficacy.

A darkening spring: How preexisting distrust shaped COVID-19 skepticism

Despite widespread communication of the health risks associated with the COVID-19 virus, many Americans underestimated its risks and were antagonistic regarding preventative measures. Political partisanship has been linked to diverging attitudes towards the virus, but the cognitive processes underlying this divergence remain unclear. Bayesian models fit to data gathered through two preregistered online surveys, administered before (March 13, 2020, N = 850) and during the first wave (April-May, 2020, N = 1610) of cases in the United States, reveal two preexisting forms of distrust--distrust in Democratic politicians and in medical scientists--that drove initial skepticism about the virus. During the first wave of cases, additional factors came into play, suggesting that skeptical attitudes became more deeply embedded within a complex network of auxiliary beliefs. These findings highlight how mechanisms that enhance cognitive coherence can drive anti-science attitudes.

Willingness to vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2: The role of reasoning biases and conspiracist ideation

BACKGR1OUND: Widespread vaccine hesitancy and refusal complicate containment of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Extant research indicates that biased reasoning and conspiracist ideation discourage vaccination. However, causal pathways from these constructs to vaccine hesitancy and refusal remain underspecified, impeding efforts to intervene and increase vaccine uptake.

METHOD

554 participants who denied prior SARS-CoV-2 vaccination completed self-report measures of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine intentions, conspiracist ideation, and constructs from the Health Belief Model of medical decision-making (such as perceived vaccine dangerousness) along with tasks measuring reasoning biases (such as those concerning data gathering behavior). Cutting-edge machine learning algorithms (Greedy Fast Causal Inference) and psychometric network analysis were used to elucidate causal pathways to (and from) vaccine intentions.

RESULTS

Results indicated that a bias toward reduced data gathering during reasoning may cause paranoia, increasing the perceived dangerousness of vaccines and thereby reducing willingness to vaccinate. Existing interventions that target data gathering and paranoia therefore hold promise for encouraging vaccination. Additionally, reduced willingness to vaccinate was identified as a likely cause of belief in conspiracy theories, subverting the common assumption that the opposite causal relation exists. Finally, perceived severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection and perceived vaccine dangerousness (but not effectiveness) were potential direct causes of willingness to vaccinate, providing partial support for the Health Belief Model's applicability to SARS-CoV-2 vaccine decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

These insights significantly advance our understanding of the underpinnings of vaccine intentions and should scaffold efforts to prepare more effective interventions on hesitancy for deployment during future pandemics.

Are COVID-19 conspiracies a threat to public health? Psychological characteristics and health protective behaviours of believers

We tested the link between COVID-19 conspiracy theories and health protective behaviours in three studies: one at the onset of the pandemic in the United Kingdom (UK), a second just before the first national lockdown, and a third during that lockdown (N = 302, 404 and 399). We focused on conspiracy theories that did not deny the existence of COVID-19 and evaluated the extent to which they predicted a range of health protective behaviours, before and after controlling for psychological and sociodemographic characteristics associated with conspiracy theory belief. COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs were positively correlated with beliefs in other unrelated conspiracies and a general conspiracy mind-set, and negatively correlated with trust in government and a tendency towards analytical thinking (vs. intuitive thinking). Unexpectedly, COVID-19 conspiracy believers adhered to basic health guidelines and advanced health protective measures as strictly as non-believers. Conspiracy believers were, however, less willing to install the contact-tracing app, get tested for and vaccinated against COVID-19, and were more likely to share COVID-19 misinformation-all of which might undermine public health initiatives. Study 3 showed conspiracy theory believers were less willing to undertake health protective behaviours that were outside of their personal control, perceiving these as having a negative balance of risks and benefits. We discuss models explaining conspiracy beliefs and health protective behaviours, and suggest practical recommendations for public health initiatives.

Conspiracy Theories: A Public Health Concern and How to Address It

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was characterized by a significant increase in the endorsement of conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories are narratives that can enable and accentuate distrust toward health professionals and authorities. As such, they can lead to violent radicalization and should be considered a public health issue. This perspective article aims to further the understanding of professionals on conspiracy theories via the 3N model of radicalization and self-determination theory. Based on empirical research, theory, and existing interventions, potential initiatives intended to tackle the issue of conspiracy theories during pandemics are also presented.