Explaining the paradox of conspiracy theories and system-justifying beliefs from an intergroup perspective

Abstract

By distinguishing between ingroup versus outgroup conspiracy theories, this research seeks to explain a paradox in conspiracy theory research, namely, that conspiracy beliefs are associated with both derogation and justification of the social system. Study 1 (N = 1,481) was a survey in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in China, and the results revealed a negative correlation between belief in ingroup conspiracy theories and system-justifying beliefs. In Study 2 (N = 195), exposure to outgroup conspiracy theories positively predicted system-justifying beliefs, a finding that was serially mediated by external attributions and collective narcissism. In Study 3 (N = 256), exposure to ingroup conspiracy theories negatively predicted system-justifying beliefs, a result that was serially mediated by internal attributions and anomie. In Study 4 (N = 616), exposure to a conspiracy theory about the US government increased system-justifying beliefs among Chinese participants and decreased them among US participants. The distinction between ingroup versus outgroup conspiracy theories hence implies two different processes through which conspiracy theories affect system-justifying beliefs.