Conspiracy theories are a hot topic at the moment with cases such as Paloma Shemirani circulating the media once again this October. This is not a new occurrence. They have been prominent in cultures for centuries, such as Flat Earthers appearing in the late 1800s, and even dating back to Ancient Rome with rumours about the death of emperor Nero in 68 AD. Stereotypes around conspiracy theorists tend to label these individuals as uneducated or mentally unwell. However, lesser known psychological factors also tend to play a crucial role.
A conspiracy theory is defined as a belief in the malintent of a secret, but influential organisation, specifically around big events or phenomena (such as the CIA involvement in the JFK assassination). These theories tend to have largely negative connotations: they can lead to unnecessary distrust of authority, which can have dangerous implications on wider society, by undermining the hierarchal systems on which many communities run. That is not to say that standing up to authority is wrong, but it is important to understand that these particular theories focus on filling gaps in knowledge with low quality evidence to support their drastically radical prepositions. Take, for example, their reliance on eye-witness testimony. Any A-level psychology student will certainly know the numerous flaws of using such a resource, even in legal institutions. Conspiracy theorists may also defend their theory in a Catch-22 situation, whereby they disregard any valid counter arguments by accusing opposing individuals of being part of this secret malevolent group themselves. To quote Psychology Today, “They offer simple explanations for complex problems”, which I feel offers a simple definition for a complex situation, but does clearly state the fundamental flaw which underlies many of these theories.
There are three main motives for believing in conspiracy theories identified by research: epistemic, existential and social motives. An epistemic motive is based around the desire to understand one’s environment. Those who believe in paranormal phenomena are potentially more engaged in seeking meaning from their environments and may find this to be a particularly strong motive for relying on conspiracy theories. An existential motive is the desire for control and security, suggesting that those who live in a more anxious state may use conspiracy theories to regain mental stability. The psychodynamic perspective (Sigmund Freud’s psychological approach) would argue that these theories may be used as a type of defence mechanism. This may also mean that events leaving behind political or social uncertainty/distrust may create the perfect conditions for a conspiracy theory to thrive. A social motivator may involve the desire to maintain a “positive” self or group image. Especially those living in collectivist countries (societies built upon strong communities rather than individual aspirations) may find it difficult to escape conspiracy theories taught at a young age, and which are vital to social approval.
Another set of contributing psychological factors which may cause someone to believe in a conspiracy theory are cognitive biases. These are unconscious errors in thinking and information processing, which influence an individual’s perception and decision-making. Proportionality Bias causes people to believe that significant events must have substantial causes and some people find it hard to understand that more mundane contributing factors may be at play. For example, the JFK conspiracies could be applied to this model of thinking, where conspirators believe his assassination couldn’t possibly have been conducted by one gunman, but in fact a CIA led mission is a more probable explanation. Another example could be, Confirmation Bias where people tend to seek out information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs. For example, the Moon Landing Conspiracies ignore the valid, scientific evidence of moonrocks brought back from the expedition and instead focus on the unrealistic flag movement in the footage. Using their intuition, rather than science. The scale of the event itself may also influence these conspiracies. Some people may need cognitive closure (concrete answers which leave no ambiguity) for particularly large events and conspiracy theories are one way of achieving this.
Psychiatrist Murray Bowen’s theories around differentiation pose another explanation. Differentiation is the ability to retain a sense of self and identity when emotionally or physically close to others. Suggesting that those with an un-differentiated self may struggle with emotional dependency and may require validation from communities who share similar beliefs. Conspiracy theories offer emotional support, a sense of community and reinforce their belief system. Therefore, an un-differentiated person may be more likely to believe in conspiracy theories.
As fascinating as conspiracy theories may be from a distance, they can destroy families and lead to serious physical harm, especially health conspiracies. There is not yet any evidence to suggest that the mind of a conspiracy theorist can be changed, especially without willingness from the individual. However, I do believe the first steps in tackling such an issue need to stem from understanding their mindset, experiences and anxiety, before writing them off as ignorant.
