Explaining the paradox of conspiracy theories and system‐justifying beliefs from an intergroup perspective

Abstract

By distinguishing between ingroup versus outgroup conspiracy theories, this research seeks to explain a paradox in conspiracy theory research, namely, that conspiracy beliefs are associated with both derogation and justification of the social system. Study 1 (N = 1,481) was a survey in the context of the COVID‐19 pandemic in China, and the results revealed a negative correlation between belief in ingroup conspiracy theories and system‐justifying beliefs. In Study 2 (N = 195), exposure to outgroup conspiracy theories positively predicted system‐justifying beliefs, a finding that was serially mediated by external attributions and collective narcissism. In Study 3 (N = 256), exposure to ingroup conspiracy theories negatively predicted system‐justifying beliefs, a result that was serially mediated by internal attributions and anomie. In Study 4 (N = 616), exposure to a conspiracy theory about the US government increased system‐justifying beliefs among Chinese participants and decreased them among US participants. The distinction between ingroup versus outgroup conspiracy theories hence implies two different processes through which conspiracy theories affect system‐justifying beliefs.