No evidence that priming analytic thinking reduces belief in conspiracy theories A Registered Report of high-powered direct replications of Study 2 and Study 4 from Swami, Voracek, Stieger, Tran, and Furnham (2014)

Open Access
Authors
Publication date 01-2024
Journal Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Article number 104549
Volume | Issue number 110
Number of pages 9
Organisations
  • Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences (FMG) - Psychology Research Institute (PsyRes)
Abstract
Analytic thinking is reliably associated with lower belief in conspiracy theories. However, evidence for whether increasing analytic thinking can reduce belief in conspiracies is sparse. As an exception to this, Swami et al. (2014) showed that priming analytical thinking through a verbal fluency task (i.e., scrambled sentence task) or a processing fluency manipulation (i.e., difficult-to-read fonts) reduced belief in conspiracy theories. To probe the robustness of these effects, in this Registered Report, we present two highly powered (i.e., 95%) direct replications of two of the original studies (i.e., Studies 2 and 4). We found no evidence that priming analytic thinking through the scrambled sentence task (N = 302), nor the difficult-to-read fonts (N = 488) elicited more analytic thinking, nor reduced belief in conspiracy theories. This work highlights the need for further research to identify effective ways of inducing analytic thinking in order to gauge its potential causal impact on belief in conspiracies.
Document type Article
Note With supplementary file
Language English
Published at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2023.104549
Other links https://osf.io/keahr/
Downloads
1-s2.0-S0022103123001063-main (Final published version)
Supplementary materials
Permalink to this page
Back