Bridging the Cognitive/Collective and Supply/Demand Divides in Conspiracy Theory Research

Abstract

Objectives: Despite the fast growth of the social scientific literature on conspiracy theories, fragmentation rather than dialogue is the norm across disciplines. One such division is between the individual/cognitive versus sociopolitical dimensions of conspiracy beliefs, which are often studied in isolation. This article aims to contribute to bridging the gap. Methods: We carry out a selective review of the post-2010 literature that approaches conspiracy theories from (social) psychological and political sociological perspectives to highlight and compare their main inquiries and findings. Results: The examination finds that the psychological scholarship, which deals with individual and group-based variables, is more attuned to studying the public “demand” for conspiracy theories. By contrast, research on conspiracy theories in collective phenomena such as populism and social movements is more inclined to elucidate the “supply” side of the equation. Conclusions: In addition to the quantitative-qualitative rift already identified in the literature, conspiracy theory scholarship is also shaped by the divides that pertain to the level of analysis and the supply and demand sides of the conspiracy “market” dynamics. The article argues for a closer dialogue between micro (individual), meso (interpersonal), and macro (national/global) levels of analysis to integrate the demand and supply factors nourishing conspiracy narratives.