Your browser doesn't support javascript.
A longitudinal analysis of conspiracy beliefs and Covid-19 health responses.
van Prooijen, Jan-Willem; Amodio, David M; Boot, Arnout; Eerland, Anita; Etienne, Tom; Krouwel, André P M; Onderco, Michal; Verkoeijen, Peter; Zwaan, Rolf A.
  • van Prooijen JW; Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Amodio DM; The Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Boot A; Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
  • Eerland A; Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, NY, USA.
  • Etienne T; Department of Social Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Krouwel APM; Department of Psychology, Education, and Child Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Onderco M; Department of Communication Science, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • Verkoeijen P; Kieskompas, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Zwaan RA; Department of Political Science & Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Psychol Med ; : 1-8, 2022 Sep 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2050214
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Little is known about how conspiracy beliefs and health responses are interrelated over time during the course of the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. This longitudinal study tested two contrasting, but not mutually exclusive, hypotheses through cross-lagged modeling. First, based on the consequential nature of conspiracy beliefs, we hypothesize that conspiracy beliefs predict an increase in detrimental health responses over time. Second, as people may rationalize their behavior through conspiracy beliefs, we hypothesize that detrimental health responses predict increased conspiracy beliefs over time.

METHODS:

We measured conspiracy beliefs and several health-related responses (i.e. physical distancing, support for lockdown policy, and the perception of the coronavirus as dangerous) at three phases of the pandemic in the Netherlands (N = 4913) During the first lockdown (Wave 1 April 2020), after the first lockdown (Wave 2 June 2020), and during the second lockdown (Wave 3 December 2020).

RESULTS:

For physical distancing and perceived danger, the overall cross-lagged effects supported both hypotheses, although the standardized effects were larger for the effects of conspiracy beliefs on these health responses than vice versa. The within-person change results only supported an effect of conspiracy beliefs on these health responses, depending on the phase of the pandemic. Furthermore, an overall cross-lagged effect of conspiracy beliefs on reduced support for lockdown policy emerged from Wave 2 to 3.

CONCLUSIONS:

The results provide stronger support for the hypothesis that conspiracy beliefs predict health responses over time than for the hypothesis that health responses predict conspiracy beliefs over time.
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Cohort study / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Language: English Journal: Psychol Med Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: S0033291722002938

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Cohort study / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Language: English Journal: Psychol Med Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: S0033291722002938