Reflective thinking predicts lower conspiracy beliefs: A meta-analysis

Yelbuz, Büşra Elif; Madan, Ecesu; Alper, Sinan

doi:10.1017/s1930297500008913

Cited by 30 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 112 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Using a different AOT scale, we found correlations ranging from −.19 to −.29 in Prolific samples ( Stanovich and Toplak 2019 ). These findings have been much replicated, as AOT scales have been found to correlate with a variety of different measures of conspiracy belief ( Binnendyk and Pennycook 2022 ; Erceg et al 2022 ; Jastrzębski and Chuderski 2022 ; Pennycook et al 2020 ; Rizeq et al 2021 ; Yelbuz et al 2022 ).…”

Section: Twenty-five Years Trying To Measure Aotmentioning

confidence: 76%

Actively Open-Minded Thinking and Its Measurement

Stanovich

Toplak

2023

J. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Actively open-minded thinking (AOT) is measured by items that tap the willingness to consider alternative opinions, sensitivity to evidence contradictory to current beliefs, the willingness to postpone closure, and reflective thought. AOT scales are strong predictors of performance on heuristics and biases tasks and of the avoidance of reasoning traps such as superstitious thinking and belief in conspiracy theories. Nevertheless, AOT is most commonly measured with questionnaires rather than performance indicators. Questionnaire contamination becomes even more of a danger as the AOT concept is expanded into new areas such as the study of fake news, misinformation, ideology, and civic attitudes. We review our 25-year history of studying the AOT concept and developing our own AOT scale. We present a 13-item scale that both is brief and accommodates many previous criticisms and refinements. We include a discussion of why AOT scales are such good predictors of performance on heuristics and biases tasks. We conclude that it is because such scales tap important processes of cognitive decoupling and decontextualization that modernity increasingly requires. We conclude by discussing the paradox that although AOT scales are potent predictors of performance on most rational thinking tasks, they do not predict the avoidance of myside thinking, even though it is virtually the quintessence of the AOT concept.

show abstract

Section: Twenty-five Years Trying To Measure Aotmentioning

confidence: 76%

Actively Open-Minded Thinking and Its Measurement

Stanovich

Toplak

2023

J. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Higher education predicted fewer conspiracy beliefs only in countries with low corruption. A major part of research on conspiracy beliefs focuses on factors that change how much people are gullible to these theories, including factors like education (Douglas et al., 2016; van Prooijen, 2017), analytical thinking (Alper et al., 2021a; Pennycook et al., 2020; Swami et al., 2014; van Mulukom et al., 2022; van Prooijen, 2017; Yelbuz et al., 2022), actively open‐minded thinking (Erceg et al., 2022; Pennycook et al., 2020), need for cognition (Lobato et al., 2014), and scientific reasoning (Čavojová et al., 2022, 2020). Although these factors are related to how much people are receptive to conspiracy theories, the current findings showed that their relationship with conspiracy beliefs is stronger in low corruption countries and weaker in high corruption countries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Analytical thinking and science literacy were negatively related to conspiracy beliefs, regardless of the level of country-level corruption. Analytical thinking (Alper et al, 2021a;Pennycook et al, 2020;Swami et al, 2014;van Mulukom et al, 2022;van Prooijen, 2017;Yelbuz et al, 2022) and scientific reasoning skills ( Čavojová et al, 2022, 2020) were found to be related to lower levels of conspiracy beliefs. Analytical thinking and science literacy could be more direct measures of people's (lack of) gullibility, compared to their education level, since the former measures performance while the latter merely states the mean country-level performance (Study 1) or the highest education degree participants earned (Study 2).…”

Section: F I G U R Ementioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, a more direct measure of gullibility would be individuals’ thinking ability. Higher analytical thinking ability is related to lower conspiracy beliefs (Alper et al., 2021a; Pennycook et al., 2020; Swami et al., 2014; van Mulukom et al., 2022; van Prooijen, 2017; Yelbuz et al., 2022). Study 3 replicates previous studies using individual‐level analytic thinking ability, rather than individual‐ or country‐level education.…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

There are higher levels of conspiracy beliefs in more corrupt countries

Alper

2022

Euro J Social Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data for Study 1 is accessible at https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/msvke1lg9d/Globalism2020 Guardian Conspiracy Theories.pdf Data for Study 2 is accessible at https://osf.io/qzxv9/?view_only=852910a2c08c42018edf84a0b556aa14 Data for Study 3 is accessible at https://osf.io/y7ckt/ The corresponding author of Rutjens et al., 2021 should be contacted for the data used in Study 4.Online supplementary material, codebook (data dictionary) and analysis codes are available at https://osf.io/bctkd/files/?view_only=e208d813d5264a5ba9c7e1f5e28154abThe current study is based on secondary analyses of previously published datasets and thus an ethical permission was not required. Similarly, no informed consent was required.I have no conflict of interest to declare. I thank Joel Rogers de Waal, Matthew Hornsey, and Bastiaan Rutjens for providing access to the datasets used in the current study. I thank Serkan Dolma for his feedbacks on the methodology. I thank Büşra Elif Yelbuz for her help with data curation.

show abstract

“…Based on earlier research, Van Prooijen (2019) concluded that the gullible conspiracist hypothesis is more accurate, especially considering the negative correlation between reflective thinking and conspiracy beliefs (Douglas et al, 2016;Van Prooijen et al, 2015). Moreover, a recent metaanalysis conducted by Yelbuz et al (2022) involving 145 studies also found that reflective thinking inhibits belief in conspiracy theories. This phenomenon is consistently observed across various measurement tools, including self-reports such as the rational-experiential inventory (REI; Epstein et al, 1996;Norris & Epstein, 2011)-a widely measure for self-reported reflective/rational thinking in the realm of conspiracy beliefs research (Yelbuz et al, 2022).…”

Section: Reflective Thinking and Conspiracy Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The moderating role of reflective thinking on personal factors affecting belief in conspiracy theories

Ozono,

Sakakibara

2023

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID‐19 pandemic has sparked an interest in conspiracy theories worldwide. Previous research has shown that reflective thinking can inhibit belief in conspiracy theories. However, this study delves further by investigating whether reflective thinking moderates the effects of other personal factors, such as anxiety and social class. We conducted an online survey and analyzed data from 937 crowd workers in Japan. The results show that the inhibitory effect of reflective thinking, measured through performance‐based and self‐report methods, remained robust among the participants. However, our analysis yielded near‐null results for the interaction, rejecting the idea that reflective thinking acts as a significant moderator in the relationship between reflective thinking and various personal factors. The implications of these findings suggest that reflective thinking does not amplify factors that strengthen belief in conspiracy theories. Instead, fostering reflective thinking appears to be an effective strategy for reducing conspiracy beliefs.

show abstract

Reflective thinking predicts lower conspiracy beliefs: A meta-analysis

Cited by 30 publications

References 112 publications

Actively Open-Minded Thinking and Its Measurement

Actively Open-Minded Thinking and Its Measurement

There are higher levels of conspiracy beliefs in more corrupt countries

The moderating role of reflective thinking on personal factors affecting belief in conspiracy theories

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About