ABSTRACT
Conspiracy theories widely influence our social and political lives. A recent example is the broad impact such theories had on government's efforts to halt the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. In that context, public's compliance and willingness to get vaccinated was found to be substantially and negatively affected by the belief in conspiracy theories, among various factors. In the present study, we tested whether some countries are more susceptible to conspiracy theories than others. We examined, for the first time, the idea that the degree of intensity of conflict predicts the degree of belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories. A multilevel analysis across 66 countries (N = 46,450) demonstrated that people living in countries with higher conflict intensity tended to be more susceptible to COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs. These findings are the first large-scale comparative evidence of the profound psychological effects of conflicts on the involved societies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) Impact Statement The belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories has severe implications on public's health. Thus, it is important to better understand the reasons behind such beliefs. The present study provides new information which helps to better understand the contexts in which conspiracy belief thrive. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
Conspiracy theories widely influence our social and political lives. A recent example is the broad impact such theories had on government's efforts to halt the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. In that context, public's compliance and willingness to get vaccinated was found to be substantially and negatively affected by the belief in conspiracy theories, among various factors. In the present study, we tested whether some countries are more susceptible to conspiracy theories than others. We examined, for the first time, the idea that the degree of intensity of conflict predicts the degree of belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories. A multilevel analysis across 66 countries (N = 46,450) demonstrated that people living in countries with higher conflict intensity tended to be more susceptible to COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs. These findings are the first large-scale comparative evidence of the profound psychological effects of conflicts on the involved societies.
ABSTRACT
At the beginning of 2020, COVID-19 became a global problem. Despite all the efforts to emphasize the relevance of preventive measures, not everyone adhered to them. Thus, learning more about the characteristics determining attitudinal and behavioral responses to the pandemic is crucial to improving future interventions. In this study, we applied machine learning on the multinational data collected by the International Collaboration on the Social and Moral Psychology of COVID-19 (N = 51,404) to test the predictive efficacy of constructs from social, moral, cognitive, and personality psychology, as well as socio-demographic factors, in the attitudinal and behavioral responses to the pandemic. The results point to several valuable insights. Internalized moral identity provided the most consistent predictive contribution—individuals perceiving moral traits as central to their self-concept reported higher adherence to preventive measures. Similar results were found for morality as cooperation, symbolized moral identity, self-control, open-mindedness, and collective narcissism, while the inverse relationship was evident for the endorsement of conspiracy theories. However, we also found a non-neglible variability in the explained variance and predictive contributions with respect to macro-level factors such as the pandemic stage or cultural region. Overall, the results underscore the importance of morality-related and contextual factors in understanding adherence to public health recommendations during the pandemic.
ABSTRACT
Previous studies have shown that external threats, such as financial crises and natural disasters, might fuel negative attitudes, emotions, and behaviors towards outgroup members. However, it is unclear what types of outgroups are likely to be targeted when an external threat is taking its toll. In this study, we examine two types of outgroups that might be at risk of becoming victims of intergroup hostility. The first is the “ultimate scapegoat” outgroup which has a long history of negative relations with the ingroup. The second is the "context-dependent" outgroup which is viewed as an outgroup only in certain contexts. We utilized the COVID-19 crisis and the highly diverse social makeup of Israeli society to explore the extent to which each type of outgroup would be targeted. Results from our study (N = 664), conducted during the first peak of COVID-19 in Israel, show that higher levels of exposure to COVID-19 predicted lower willingness to aid outgroups and that outgroup dehumanization mediated this association. However, this held true only when the target outgroup was a context-dependent outgroup. When the target group was the ultimate scapegoat, exposure to COVID-19 did not predict ingroup willingness to aid them. Our findings contribute to our theoretical and practical knowledge on how intergroup hostility proliferates during external threats and, as such, are valuable to scholars, practitioners, and policymakers working to reduce intergroup tensions during large-scale crises.
ABSTRACT
Previous studies have shown that external threats, such as financial crises and natural disasters, might fuel negative attitudes, emotions, and behaviors towards outgroup members. However, it is unclear what types of outgroups are likely to be targeted when an external threat is taking its toll. In this study, we examine two types of outgroups that might be at risk of becoming victims of intergroup hostility. The first is the "ultimate scapegoat" outgroup which has a long history of negative relations with the ingroup. The second is the "context-dependent" outgroup which is viewed as an outgroup only in certain contexts. We utilized the COVID-19 crisis and the highly diverse social makeup of Israeli society to explore the extent to which each type of outgroup would be targeted. Results from our study (N = 664), conducted during the first peak of COVID-19 in Israel, show that higher levels of exposure to COVID-19 predicted lower willingness to aid outgroups and that outgroup dehumanization mediated this association. However, this held true only when the target outgroup was a context-dependent outgroup. When the target group was the ultimate scapegoat, exposure to COVID-19 did not predict ingroup willingness to aid them. Our findings contribute to our theoretical and practical knowledge on how intergroup hostility proliferates during external threats and, as such, are valuable to scholars, practitioners, and policymakers working to reduce intergroup tensions during large-scale crises.