Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs in the German-speaking general population: endorsement rates and links to reasoning biases and paranoia

Sarah Anne Kezia Kuhn; Roselind Lieb; Daniel Freeman; Christina Andreou; Thea Zander-Schellenberg

doi:10.1017/S0033291721001124

Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs in the German-speaking general population: endorsement rates and links to reasoning biases and paranoia

Sarah Anne Kezia Kuhn, Roselind Lieb, Daniel Freeman, Christina Andreou, Thea Zander-Schellenberg^*

^*Korrespondierende/r Autor/-in für diese Arbeit

Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie

54 Zitate (Scopus)

Abstract

Background. Coronavirus-related conspiracy theories (CT) have been found to be associated with fewer pandemic containment-focused behaviors. It is therefore important to evaluate associated cognitive factors. We aimed to obtain first endorsement rate estimates of coronavirus-related conspiracy beliefs in a German-speaking general population sample and investigate whether delusion-related reasoning biases and paranoid ideation are associated with such beliefs. Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional non-probability online study, quota-sampled for age and gender, with 1684 adults from Germany and German-speaking Switzerland. We assessed general and specific coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, reasoning biases [ jumping-to-conclusions bias (JTC), liberal acceptance bias (LA), bias against disconfirmatory evidence (BADE), possibility of being mistaken (PM)], and paranoid ideation, using established experimental paradigms and self-report questionnaires. Results. Around 10% of our sample endorsed coronavirus-related CT beliefs at least strongly, and another 20% to some degree. Overall endorsement was similar to levels observed in a UK-based study (Freeman et al., 2020b). Higher levels of conspiracy belief endorsement were associated with greater JTC, greater LA, greater BADE, higher PM, and greater paranoid ideation. Associations were mostly small to moderate and best described by non-linear relationships. Conclusions. A noticeable proportion of our sample recruited in Germany and German-speaking Switzerland endorsed coronavirus conspiracy beliefs strongly or to some degree. These beliefs are associated with reasoning biases studied in delusion research. The non-probability sampling approach limits the generalizability of findings. Future longitudinal and experimental studies investigating conspiracy beliefs along the lines of reasoning are encouraged to validate reasoning aberrations as risk factors.

Originalsprache	Englisch
Zeitschrift	Psychological Medicine
Jahrgang	52
Ausgabenummer	16
Seiten (von - bis)	4162-4176
Seitenumfang	15
ISSN	0033-2917
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291721001124
Publikationsstatus	Veröffentlicht - 16.12.2022

Fördermittel

The authors would like to thank Ruth Veckenstedt for her support in providing study-relevant material, Ursula Drew for her support in the translation process of the conspiracy-belief items and editing, and Sarah Ulrich as well as Gregory Elbel for their support in study implementation and constructive discussions during the conceptualization period. This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, neither from commercial nor from non-profit sectors. This study was financially supported by the Division of Clinical Psychology and Epidemiology (Head: Prof. Dr Roselind Lieb), Faculty of Psychology, University of Basel. SK and TZS are supported by an SNF Ambizione Grant (Grant No. 179897 awarded to Dr Thea Zander-Schellenberg).

Träger	Trägernummer
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg
Universität-Kenderspital beider Basel
Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung	179897

UN SDGs

Dieser Output leistet einen Beitrag zu folgendem(n) Ziel(en) für nachhaltige Entwicklung

SDG 3 – Gesundheit und Wohlergehen

DFG-Fachsystematik

2.23-10 Klinische Psychiatrie, Psychotherapie und Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie

Coronavirus-Bezug

Forschung zu SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19

Dokumente

10.1017/S0033291721001124

Weitere Links

Link to publication in Scopus

Zitieren

@article{6167dfd54c9d4bf994444a5d2257b94f,

title = "Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs in the German-speaking general population: endorsement rates and links to reasoning biases and paranoia",

abstract = "Background. Coronavirus-related conspiracy theories (CT) have been found to be associated with fewer pandemic containment-focused behaviors. It is therefore important to evaluate associated cognitive factors. We aimed to obtain first endorsement rate estimates of coronavirus-related conspiracy beliefs in a German-speaking general population sample and investigate whether delusion-related reasoning biases and paranoid ideation are associated with such beliefs. Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional non-probability online study, quota-sampled for age and gender, with 1684 adults from Germany and German-speaking Switzerland. We assessed general and specific coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, reasoning biases [ jumping-to-conclusions bias (JTC), liberal acceptance bias (LA), bias against disconfirmatory evidence (BADE), possibility of being mistaken (PM)], and paranoid ideation, using established experimental paradigms and self-report questionnaires. Results. Around 10\% of our sample endorsed coronavirus-related CT beliefs at least strongly, and another 20\% to some degree. Overall endorsement was similar to levels observed in a UK-based study (Freeman et al., 2020b). Higher levels of conspiracy belief endorsement were associated with greater JTC, greater LA, greater BADE, higher PM, and greater paranoid ideation. Associations were mostly small to moderate and best described by non-linear relationships. Conclusions. A noticeable proportion of our sample recruited in Germany and German-speaking Switzerland endorsed coronavirus conspiracy beliefs strongly or to some degree. These beliefs are associated with reasoning biases studied in delusion research. The non-probability sampling approach limits the generalizability of findings. Future longitudinal and experimental studies investigating conspiracy beliefs along the lines of reasoning are encouraged to validate reasoning aberrations as risk factors.",

author = "Kuhn, \{Sarah Anne Kezia\} and Roselind Lieb and Daniel Freeman and Christina Andreou and Thea Zander-Schellenberg",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press.",

year = "2022",

month = dec,

day = "16",

doi = "10.1017/S0033291721001124",

language = "English",

volume = "52",

pages = "4162--4176",

journal = "Psychological Medicine",

issn = "0033-2917",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

number = "16",

}

Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs in the German-speaking general population: endorsement rates and links to reasoning biases and paranoia. / Kuhn, Sarah Anne Kezia; Lieb, Roselind; Freeman, Daniel et al.
in: Psychological Medicine, Jahrgang 52, Nr. 16, 16.12.2022, S. 4162-4176.

Publikation: Beiträge in Fachzeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › Begutachtung

TY - JOUR

T1 - Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs in the German-speaking general population

T2 - endorsement rates and links to reasoning biases and paranoia

AU - Kuhn, Sarah Anne Kezia

AU - Lieb, Roselind

AU - Freeman, Daniel

AU - Andreou, Christina

AU - Zander-Schellenberg, Thea

PY - 2022/12/16

Y1 - 2022/12/16

N2 - Background. Coronavirus-related conspiracy theories (CT) have been found to be associated with fewer pandemic containment-focused behaviors. It is therefore important to evaluate associated cognitive factors. We aimed to obtain first endorsement rate estimates of coronavirus-related conspiracy beliefs in a German-speaking general population sample and investigate whether delusion-related reasoning biases and paranoid ideation are associated with such beliefs. Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional non-probability online study, quota-sampled for age and gender, with 1684 adults from Germany and German-speaking Switzerland. We assessed general and specific coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, reasoning biases [ jumping-to-conclusions bias (JTC), liberal acceptance bias (LA), bias against disconfirmatory evidence (BADE), possibility of being mistaken (PM)], and paranoid ideation, using established experimental paradigms and self-report questionnaires. Results. Around 10% of our sample endorsed coronavirus-related CT beliefs at least strongly, and another 20% to some degree. Overall endorsement was similar to levels observed in a UK-based study (Freeman et al., 2020b). Higher levels of conspiracy belief endorsement were associated with greater JTC, greater LA, greater BADE, higher PM, and greater paranoid ideation. Associations were mostly small to moderate and best described by non-linear relationships. Conclusions. A noticeable proportion of our sample recruited in Germany and German-speaking Switzerland endorsed coronavirus conspiracy beliefs strongly or to some degree. These beliefs are associated with reasoning biases studied in delusion research. The non-probability sampling approach limits the generalizability of findings. Future longitudinal and experimental studies investigating conspiracy beliefs along the lines of reasoning are encouraged to validate reasoning aberrations as risk factors.

AB - Background. Coronavirus-related conspiracy theories (CT) have been found to be associated with fewer pandemic containment-focused behaviors. It is therefore important to evaluate associated cognitive factors. We aimed to obtain first endorsement rate estimates of coronavirus-related conspiracy beliefs in a German-speaking general population sample and investigate whether delusion-related reasoning biases and paranoid ideation are associated with such beliefs. Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional non-probability online study, quota-sampled for age and gender, with 1684 adults from Germany and German-speaking Switzerland. We assessed general and specific coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, reasoning biases [ jumping-to-conclusions bias (JTC), liberal acceptance bias (LA), bias against disconfirmatory evidence (BADE), possibility of being mistaken (PM)], and paranoid ideation, using established experimental paradigms and self-report questionnaires. Results. Around 10% of our sample endorsed coronavirus-related CT beliefs at least strongly, and another 20% to some degree. Overall endorsement was similar to levels observed in a UK-based study (Freeman et al., 2020b). Higher levels of conspiracy belief endorsement were associated with greater JTC, greater LA, greater BADE, higher PM, and greater paranoid ideation. Associations were mostly small to moderate and best described by non-linear relationships. Conclusions. A noticeable proportion of our sample recruited in Germany and German-speaking Switzerland endorsed coronavirus conspiracy beliefs strongly or to some degree. These beliefs are associated with reasoning biases studied in delusion research. The non-probability sampling approach limits the generalizability of findings. Future longitudinal and experimental studies investigating conspiracy beliefs along the lines of reasoning are encouraged to validate reasoning aberrations as risk factors.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85102739646

U2 - 10.1017/S0033291721001124

DO - 10.1017/S0033291721001124

M3 - Journal articles

AN - SCOPUS:85102739646

SN - 0033-2917

VL - 52

SP - 4162

EP - 4176

JO - Psychological Medicine

JF - Psychological Medicine

IS - 16

ER -

Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs in the German-speaking general population: endorsement rates and links to reasoning biases and paranoia

Abstract

Fördermittel

UN SDGs

DFG-Fachsystematik

Coronavirus-Bezug

Dokumente

Weitere Links

Fingerprint

Zitieren