MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383818070 · doi:10.1515/for-2023-2022

Conspiracy Theories in the US: Who Believes in Them?

2023· article· en· W4383818070 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forum · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMisinformation and Its Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindsetRealmIdeologyPoliticsSocial psychologyPolitical philosophySociologyPsychologyPolitical scienceLawSocial scienceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Conspiracy theories have become an increasingly important part of the political realm especially in the United States. More than 30 % of citizens either strongly or somewhat believe in QAnon, the Birther or the Truther conspiracy to name a few of these theories. In this article, I provide an overview of conspiracy theory beliefs and evaluate the factors that make people more likely to believe in such theories. With the help of an original survey comprising 1000 residents in the US, I detect that there is not necessarily a conspirational mindset. While low education, a right-wing ideology seem to increase beliefs in conspiracy theories throughout the board, the effects of other indicators including populist attitudes, low self-esteem and age tend differ based on the conspiracy theory under investigation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it