COVID 19 conspiracy theories in Canada: Evidence, verification, and implications for decision making
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Aim/purpose – The COVID-19 pandemic generated a new communication universe with numerous actors, including conspiracy theory (CT) promoters who spread skepti- cism about the authenticity of the pandemic and the necessity of health emergency regu- lations. This study explores the dissemination of COVID-19 conspiracy theories in Canada to create a model for verifying conspiracy theories, especially in the context of decision making. Design/methodology/approach – The study was transdisciplinary and it was composed of an empirical and a conceptual part. The first part used analysis of websites and social media, observation with participation for data collection, and standard content analysis for data analysis. The conceptual part used a philosophical inquiry and a framework on heuristics in decision making. Findings – The empirical part of the study established three types of conspiracy theory promoters and labeled these as Conspiracy Theory Mill, Busy Gunman, and Hyper Re- lay. The conceptual part of the study created a model for CT verification. The study extends conceptualizing of conspiracy theories by characterizing them as narratives based on arbitrary ontological assumptions, epistemic naïveté and flaws, and contorted and biased logic. These narratives represent a form of folkish storytelling and entertain- ment, which become dangerous in the state of a public health emergency. Research implications/limitations – The study has implications for research on con- spiracy theories and for the theory of decision making. The study’s insight into the Canadian conspiracy theory landscape is limited by the types of social contexts studied. The model for verifying a conspiracy theory, which the study developed, is still incipient in character and needs further validation. The model can be used in decision-making theory. Originality/value/contribution – The study confirms the literature on conspiracy theo- ries originating in the areas of psychology and cultural studies. Beyond just exhibiting characteristics reported in the literature, the discovered three types of conspiracy theory promoters may advance the corresponding typology research. The model for verifying a conspiracy theory may contribute to research on the nature of conspiratorial content as well as to decision-making theory. Practically, the three promoter types and the verifica- tion model can be used as part of a blueprint for identifying and controlling conspiracy theories. Decision-makers at large may benefit, including those in health institutions, government, business as well as lay people. Keywords: COVID-19, conspiracy theory, Canada, decision making. JEL Classification: D7, D8, I1.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».