Article citationsMore>>

Biddlestone, M., Green, R., Douglas, K. M., Azevedo, F., Sutton, R. M., & Cichocka, A. (2025). Reasons to Believe: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analytic Synthesis of the Motives Associated with Conspiracy Beliefs. Psychological Bulletin, 151, 48-87.
https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000463

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Unmasking Conspiracy Thinking: A Masked Priming Study Testing Belief-Based versus Communication-Based Conspiracy-Theory Endorsement

  AUTHORS: Daniel Gugerell, Sophie Steiner, Ulrich Ansorge

  KEYWORDS: Conspiracy, Masked Priming Paradigm

  JOURNAL NAME: Psychology, Vol.17 No.11, November 9, 2026

  ABSTRACT: Conspiracy theories have become increasingly prevalent in recent years, posing a threat to a democratic discourse. This study investigates whether conspiracy beliefs are internalized and automatically activated (belief-based hypothesis) or strategically used and context-dependent (communication-based hypothesis). Using a masked priming paradigm, 80 participants were presented with conspiracy- or science-related primes, followed by self- or other-referential targets. Reaction times (RTs) and accuracy were recorded, and explicit conspiracy beliefs were assessed using the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale. No priming effects indicative of the belief-based theory were found. This was also supported by additional analyses, with participants divided by median-split into two groups (conspiracy believers versus non-believers). These results provide no evidence for automatic semantic alignment between conspiracy content and the self, as would be expected under the belief-based hypothesis.