“ <i>Historia est magistra vitae</i>”? The impact of historical victimhood on current conspiracy beliefs

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Conspiracy beliefs constitute a propensity to attribute major events to powerful agents acting against less powerful “victims”. In this article we test whether collective victimhood facilitates conspiracy thinking. Study 1 showed that perceived group victimhood is associated with generic and group-specific conspiracy beliefs, but only for individuals who identify highly with their ingroup. Study 2 employed an experimental design to show that experimentally increased group victimhood leads to increased endorsement of conspiracy beliefs among high ingroup identifiers, but decreases endorsement of conspiracy beliefs among low identifiers. This effect was mediated by lack of trust towards outgroup members. Study 3 sought to replicate Study 2 in a different socio-political context. While Study 3 did not directly support the relationship between victimhood, group identification and conspiracy beliefs, an integrated meta-analysis of all three studies provides evidence for a significant interaction of victimhood and group identification in predicting conspiracy beliefs.

Related collections

Most cited references 66

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Detecting outliers: Do not use standard deviation around the mean, use absolute deviation around the median

Christophe Leys, Christophe Ley, Olivier Klein … (2013)

0 comments Cited 887 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions

Daniel Jolley, Karen M J Douglas (2014)

The current studies investigated the potential impact of anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs, and exposure to anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, on vaccination intentions. In Study 1, British parents completed a questionnaire measuring beliefs in anti-vaccine conspiracy theories and the likelihood that they would have a fictitious child vaccinated. Results revealed a significant negative relationship between anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs and vaccination intentions. This effect was mediated by the perceived dangers of vaccines, and feelings of powerlessness, disillusionment and mistrust in authorities. In Study 2, participants were exposed to information that either supported or refuted anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, or a control condition. Results revealed that participants who had been exposed to material supporting anti-vaccine conspiracy theories showed less intention to vaccinate than those in the anti-conspiracy condition or controls. This effect was mediated by the same variables as in Study 1. These findings point to the potentially detrimental consequences of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, and highlight their potential role in shaping health-related behaviors.

0 comments Cited 381 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated.

Dominique Muller, Charles M Judd, Vincent Y Yzerbyt (2005)

Procedures for examining whether treatment effects on an outcome are mediated and/or moderated have been well developed and are routinely applied. The mediation question focuses on the intervening mechanism that produces the treatment effect. The moderation question focuses on factors that affect the magnitude of the treatment effect. It is important to note that these two processes may be combined in informative ways, such that moderation is mediated or mediation is moderated. Although some prior literature has discussed these possibilities, their exact definitions and analytic procedures have not been completely articulated. The purpose of this article is to define precisely both mediated moderation and moderated mediation and provide analytic strategies for assessing each.

0 comments Cited 359 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Theofilos Gkinopoulos: (View ORCID Profile)

Michal Bilewicz: (View ORCID Profile)

Journal

Title: Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

Abbreviated Title: Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

Publisher: SAGE Publications

ISSN (Print): 1368-4302

ISSN (Electronic): 1461-7188

Publication date Created: February 2022

Publication date (Electronic): December 10 2020

Publication date (Print): February 2022

Volume: 25

Issue: 2

Pages: 581-601

Affiliations

[1 ]University of Oxford, Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford, UK

[2 ]University of Greenwich, Institute for Lifecourse Development, London, UK

[3 ]Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun, Poland

[4 ]Faculty of Psychology and Education, University Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium

[5 ]Faculty of Psychology, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

Article

DOI: 10.1177/1368430220968898

SO-VID: 7733dd33-9ae0-41d8-8b5d-a856cb10f649

License:

http://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license

History

Data availability:

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Smart Citations

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.