Difference between revisions of "Conspiracy theory/Academic research"
(COVID) |
(re-wording / update) |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|description=Like "[[terrorism research]]", this is long on assumptions and short on empirical investigation (especially of the historical record). It is part of a project to demonize any criticism of {{on}}s and promote [[deep state denialism]]. | |description=Like "[[terrorism research]]", this is long on assumptions and short on empirical investigation (especially of the historical record). It is part of a project to demonize any criticism of {{on}}s and promote [[deep state denialism]]. | ||
}} | }} | ||
− | The '''academic study of "[[conspiracy theories]]"''' is modern part of an larger project to undermine criticism of government and cover-up the existence of [[deep state groups]]. The phrase "[[conspiracy theory]]" was used to that end since the [[CIA]]'s use of [[Operation Mockingbird]] to try to sure up the findings of the [[Warren Commission]]. | + | The '''academic study of "[[conspiracy theories]]"''' is modern part of an larger project to undermine criticism of government and cover-up the existence of [[deep state groups]]. The phrase "[[conspiracy theory]]" was used to that end since the [[CIA]]'s use of [[Operation Mockingbird]] to try to sure up the findings of the [[Warren Commission]]. It is crucial to understand that academic research in this area works with [[Projection]]. It makes some (generally implicit) assumptions to try to equate suspicion of {{on}}s with [[mental illness]] and confine it to a small set of the population. This done, it argues that people who are identified as "conspiracy theorists" be subject to repressive measures such as [[censorship]]. |
==Popularity== | ==Popularity== | ||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
Western democracies may occasionally deceive people, but the existence of a "[[free press]]" makes it is impossible that this could be anything more than an isolated few [[bad apples]]. Widespread systemic corruption is unthinkable. | Western democracies may occasionally deceive people, but the existence of a "[[free press]]" makes it is impossible that this could be anything more than an isolated few [[bad apples]]. Widespread systemic corruption is unthinkable. | ||
− | In the 21<sup>st</sup> century, increasing numbers of marginalised people are mistrustful of their "[[democratic]]" governments. They are "susceptible"<ref>Too special to be duped: Need for uniqueness motivates conspiracy beliefs</ref> to material on the [[internet]] which advocates false and misleading "[[conspiracy theories]]", which are psychologically appealing even without credible evidence. | + | In the 21<sup>st</sup> century, increasing numbers of marginalised people are mistrustful of their "[[democratic]]" governments. They are "susceptible"<ref>Too special to be duped: Need for uniqueness motivates conspiracy beliefs https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2530</ref> to material on the [[internet]] which advocates false and misleading "[[conspiracy theories]]", which are psychologically appealing even without credible evidence. |
[[Academic]] study of the psychological flaws of "[[conspiracy theorists]]" could potentially help:- | [[Academic]] study of the psychological flaws of "[[conspiracy theorists]]" could potentially help:- | ||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
==Assumptions== | ==Assumptions== | ||
− | The academic study of "conspiracy theories" makes a range of often hidden assumptions, most importantly that these theories are incorrect and therefore pernicious. For example, a 2018 | + | The academic study of "conspiracy theories" makes a range of often hidden assumptions, most importantly that these theories are incorrect and therefore pernicious. For example, a 2018 paper stated that {{SMWQ |
|eio=0 | |eio=0 | ||
|text=they are emotional given that negative emotions and not rational deliberations cause conspiracy beliefs... One limitation... is that the field is lacking a solid theoretical framework that contextualizes previous findings, that enables novel predictions, and that suggests ''interventions to reduce the prevalence of conspiracy theories in society''. | |text=they are emotional given that negative emotions and not rational deliberations cause conspiracy beliefs... One limitation... is that the field is lacking a solid theoretical framework that contextualizes previous findings, that enables novel predictions, and that suggests ''interventions to reduce the prevalence of conspiracy theories in society''. | ||
|subjects=conspiracy theories, conspiracy beliefs | |subjects=conspiracy theories, conspiracy beliefs | ||
|format=inline | |format=inline | ||
− | |||
|authors=Jan-Willem van Prooijen, Karen M. Douglas | |authors=Jan-Willem van Prooijen, Karen M. Douglas | ||
|date=2018 | |date=2018 | ||
− | |source_name=https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2530 | + | |source_name=Belief in conspiracy theories: Basic principles of an emerging research domain https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2530 |
}} | }} | ||
Line 43: | Line 42: | ||
|subjects=conspiracy theories, conspiracy beliefs | |subjects=conspiracy theories, conspiracy beliefs | ||
|format=inline | |format=inline | ||
− | |||
|source_title=The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories | |source_title=The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories | ||
|authors=Karen M. Douglas, Robbie M. Sutton, Aleksandra Cichocka | |authors=Karen M. Douglas, Robbie M. Sutton, Aleksandra Cichocka | ||
|date=June 2017 | |date=June 2017 | ||
− | |source_name=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317401748_The_Psychology_of_Conspiracy_Theories | + | |source_name=Current Directions in Psychological Science https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317401748_The_Psychology_of_Conspiracy_Theories |
}} | }} | ||
===Historical inaccuracy=== | ===Historical inaccuracy=== | ||
− | Research into "[[conspiracy theory]]" appears sometimes almost determinedly uninformed by historical research into [[conspiracies]]. The phrase "[[conspiracy theory]]" was launched in the 1960s by the [[CIA]] to try to undermine criticism of the [[Warren Commission]]'s report.<ref>[[]]</ref> Few {{if any}} academics in the field have acknowledged this essential piece of background, an ommission indicative of either woeful ignorance or willful deception. | + | Research into "[[conspiracy theory]]" appears sometimes almost determinedly uninformed by historical research into [[conspiracies]]. The phrase "[[conspiracy theory]]" was launched in the 1960s by the [[CIA]] to try to undermine criticism of the [[Warren Commission]]'s report.<ref>[[Document:Countering_Criticism_of_the_Warren_Report]]</ref> Few {{if any}} academics in the field have acknowledged this essential piece of background, an ommission indicative of either woeful ignorance or willful deception. |
− | |||
===Minority status=== | ===Minority status=== | ||
Generally unspoken is the assumption that only a small minority subscribe to "conspiracy theories", notwithstanding evidence to the contrary. This is often implicit, as when [[Roland Imhoff]] and [[Pia Karoline Lamberty]] argue that {{SMWQ | Generally unspoken is the assumption that only a small minority subscribe to "conspiracy theories", notwithstanding evidence to the contrary. This is often implicit, as when [[Roland Imhoff]] and [[Pia Karoline Lamberty]] argue that {{SMWQ | ||
Line 59: | Line 56: | ||
|text=a small part in motivating the endorsement of such seemingly irrational beliefs is the desire to stick out from the crowd, the need for uniqueness | |text=a small part in motivating the endorsement of such seemingly irrational beliefs is the desire to stick out from the crowd, the need for uniqueness | ||
|subjects=conspiracy theories | |subjects=conspiracy theories | ||
− | |||
|authors=Roland Imhoff, Pia Karoline Lamberty | |authors=Roland Imhoff, Pia Karoline Lamberty | ||
|format=inline | |format=inline | ||
|date=2016 | |date=2016 | ||
− | |source_name=http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2265 | + | |source_name=Too special to be duped: Need for uniqueness motivates conspiracy beliefs http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2265 |
}}. They state in their conclusion that {{SMWQ | }}. They state in their conclusion that {{SMWQ | ||
|text=[Conspiracy beliefs] are — almost by definition — not shared by the majority of people. | |text=[Conspiracy beliefs] are — almost by definition — not shared by the majority of people. | ||
|subjects=conspiracy theories | |subjects=conspiracy theories | ||
− | |||
|authors=Roland Imhoff, Pia Karoline Lamberty | |authors=Roland Imhoff, Pia Karoline Lamberty | ||
|format=inline | |format=inline | ||
|date=2016 | |date=2016 | ||
− | |source_name=http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2265 | + | |source_name=Too special to be duped: Need for uniqueness motivates conspiracy beliefs http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2265 |
}} This compares with the majority of the US population believing that the [[JFK assassination]] was carried out by a [[conspiracy]], and a 2017 estimate of 60% of the US and UK population believing in at least one conspiracy theory.<ref>https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2331</ref> | }} This compares with the majority of the US population believing that the [[JFK assassination]] was carried out by a [[conspiracy]], and a 2017 estimate of 60% of the US and UK population believing in at least one conspiracy theory.<ref>https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2331</ref> | ||
Line 92: | Line 87: | ||
|subjects=conspiracy theories, conspiracy beliefs | |subjects=conspiracy theories, conspiracy beliefs | ||
|format=inline | |format=inline | ||
− | |||
|source_title=The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories | |source_title=The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories | ||
|authors=Karen M. Douglas, Robbie M. Sutton, Aleksandra Cichocka | |authors=Karen M. Douglas, Robbie M. Sutton, Aleksandra Cichocka | ||
|date=June 2017 | |date=June 2017 | ||
− | |source_name=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317401748_The_Psychology_of_Conspiracy_Theories | + | |source_name=Current Directions in Psychological Science https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317401748_The_Psychology_of_Conspiracy_Theories |
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 02:13, 30 September 2020
Conspiracy theory/Academic research (Cover up, deep state denialism) | |
---|---|
Like "terrorism research", this is long on assumptions and short on empirical investigation (especially of the historical record). It is part of a project to demonize any criticism of official narratives and promote deep state denialism. |
The academic study of "conspiracy theories" is modern part of an larger project to undermine criticism of government and cover-up the existence of deep state groups. The phrase "conspiracy theory" was used to that end since the CIA's use of Operation Mockingbird to try to sure up the findings of the Warren Commission. It is crucial to understand that academic research in this area works with Projection. It makes some (generally implicit) assumptions to try to equate suspicion of official narratives with mental illness and confine it to a small set of the population. This done, it argues that people who are identified as "conspiracy theorists" be subject to repressive measures such as censorship.
Contents
Popularity
The first burst of research into "conspiracy theories" was in the 1990s.[citation needed] A 2018 paper reported that the "scientific study of belief in conspiracy theories has developed rapidly in the past decade."[1]
As of 2020, the area was actively researching public perceptions of COVID-19, including its origins.[2]
Official narrative
Western democracies may occasionally deceive people, but the existence of a "free press" makes it is impossible that this could be anything more than an isolated few bad apples. Widespread systemic corruption is unthinkable.
In the 21st century, increasing numbers of marginalised people are mistrustful of their "democratic" governments. They are "susceptible"[3] to material on the internet which advocates false and misleading "conspiracy theories", which are psychologically appealing even without credible evidence.
Academic study of the psychological flaws of "conspiracy theorists" could potentially help:-
- Identify factors which psychologically predispose people to the deluded "conspiracy mindset";
- "Inoculate" of such people against suspicion of official narratives;
- Re-engage such people into the political process.
- Automate "fact checking" to detect/remove incorrect or misleading material from the internet .
Assumptions
The academic study of "conspiracy theories" makes a range of often hidden assumptions, most importantly that these theories are incorrect and therefore pernicious. For example, a 2018 paper stated that “they are emotional given that negative emotions and not rational deliberations cause conspiracy beliefs... One limitation... is that the field is lacking a solid theoretical framework that contextualizes previous findings, that enables novel predictions, and that suggests interventions to reduce the prevalence of conspiracy theories in society.” [4]
The Third Rail
Academic research on "conspiracy theories" almost never[If ever?] reflects on the truth or falsehood of particular theories. While rare papers concede that conspiracies do happen and that theorising about them can assist correction of the historical record, the general pattern is to include under the label "conspiracy theory".
“Work in online misinformation details how alternative media intentionally fabricate conspiracy theories, spreading false allegations ranging from reptilian presidents to staged terrorist attacks” [5]
Historical inaccuracy
Research into "conspiracy theory" appears sometimes almost determinedly uninformed by historical research into conspiracies. The phrase "conspiracy theory" was launched in the 1960s by the CIA to try to undermine criticism of the Warren Commission's report.[6] Few [If any?] academics in the field have acknowledged this essential piece of background, an ommission indicative of either woeful ignorance or willful deception.
Minority status
Generally unspoken is the assumption that only a small minority subscribe to "conspiracy theories", notwithstanding evidence to the contrary. This is often implicit, as when Roland Imhoff and Pia Karoline Lamberty argue that “a small part in motivating the endorsement of such seemingly irrational beliefs is the desire to stick out from the crowd, the need for uniqueness” [7]. They state in their conclusion that “[Conspiracy beliefs] are — almost by definition — not shared by the majority of people.” [8] This compares with the majority of the US population believing that the JFK assassination was carried out by a conspiracy, and a 2017 estimate of 60% of the US and UK population believing in at least one conspiracy theory.[9]
"Conspiratorial mindset"
- Full article: Conspiratorial mindset
- Full article: Conspiratorial mindset
Most of the research papers presuppose the existence of a "conspiratorial mindset" which is predisposed to believe accusations of conspiracy. They then attempt to characterise it in some way.[7] This is often regarded as independent of the nature of the conspiracy.
Conspiracy research
It appears to be taboo for research into "conspiracy theory" to review the available evidence for such beliefs. There are however a few authors who have published academic papers which look at the evidence of conspiracies (for example Amy Baker Benjamin, Lance deHaven-Smith or Peter Dale Scott).
Projection
- Full article: Conspiracy theories/Academic research/Projection
- Full article: Conspiracy theories/Academic research/Projection
Cass Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule's work is an example of projection. It advocates "cognitive infiltration".[citation needed]
Purposes
The stigmatisation of those who doubt official pronouncements is accompanied by growing efforts to censor their self-expression on the internet.
Very little academic research about "conspiracy theories" considers the content, or makes more than a token reference to the fact that they are sometimes proven correct. A rare except to this a 2017 paper which, although concluding that "it is possible... that conspiracy belief is a self-defeating form of motivated social cognition", does note in passing that “history has repeatedly shown that corporate and political elites do conspire against public interests. Conspiracy theories play an important role in bringing their misdeeds into the light.” [5]
An example
Page name | Description |
---|---|
COMPACT - Comparative Analysis of Conspiracy Theories |
Related Quotation
Page | Quote | Author | Date |
---|---|---|---|
"Conspiracy mindset" | ““Conspiracy belief”, “conspiracy thinking”, “conspiracy mindset”, “conspiracy predispositions”, “conspiracist ideation”, “conspiracy ideology”, “conspiracy mentality” and “conspiracy worldview” — most of these apparently serving no distinct purpose other than an attempt at elegant variation — are all terms based upon the psychologists' own delusional beliefs. For some reason, all those researching the psychology of those they have labelled conspiracy theorist imagine, without reason, that the so-named “conspiracists” don’t have any evidence to back up their arguments.” | Iain Davis | 1 August 2022 |
References
- ↑ https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2530
- ↑ https://educationnewscanada.com/article/education/region/quebec/26/829640/universite-de-sherbrookeapril-23-2020-covid-19-stress-and-anxiety-very-present-in-quebec-and-canada-aggravated-by-misinformation.html
- ↑ Too special to be duped: Need for uniqueness motivates conspiracy beliefs https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2530
- ↑ Belief in conspiracy theories: Basic principles of an emerging research domain https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2530 , 2018
- ↑ a b Current Directions in Psychological Science https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317401748_The_Psychology_of_Conspiracy_Theories , June 2017
- ↑ Document:Countering_Criticism_of_the_Warren_Report
- ↑ a b Too special to be duped: Need for uniqueness motivates conspiracy beliefs http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2265 , 2016
- ↑ Too special to be duped: Need for uniqueness motivates conspiracy beliefs http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2265 , 2016
- ↑ https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2331