Sharing conspiracy theories and staying in power: How leaders' false theories influence leadership perception

Abstract

Research shows that spreading conspiracy theories impacts leaders' reputations; yet, it remains unclear how leaders are viewed when their theories are debunked. Across four studies (N = 1437), we explored whether conveying a conspiracy theory, regardless of its accuracy, influences followers' impressions of leader dominance, competence and warmth. Participants evaluated leaders who either incorrectly perceived (false-positive) or incorrectly misperceived (false-negative) a conspiracy about the cause of a simulated crisis. During intergroup conflict, false-positive leaders were seen as less warm, similarly competent, yet more dominant than false-negative leaders. The dominance gap grew when the consequences of overlooking a conspiracy were more severe. Conversely, in the absence of conflict, false-positive leaders were perceived as less warm and competent than false-negative leaders. These findings support an error management approach to conspiracy theories: Leaders who spread conspiracy theories, even if later debunked, are still perceived as strong leaders, particularly in conflict settings.