General anxiety predicts conspiracy beliefs while political anxiety does not

A new study published in the journal Politics and the Life Sciences sheds light on the psychological roots of conspiracy theory endorsement. The findings suggest that while generalized anxiety in daily life predicts a higher likelihood of believing in conspiracy theories, anxiety specifically related to politics does not. This distinction indicates that broad psychological predispositions may be more relevant to conspiratorial thinking than specific political stressors.

The prevalence of conspiracy theories in the United States has generated significant concern among scholars and the general public. Recent data indicates that a large majority of Americans believe conspiracy theories are spiraling out of control. These beliefs can lead to tangible societal harms, such as vaccine refusal or political violence.

Previous psychological research established a link between general anxiety and the endorsement of such theories. The prevailing theory suggests that conspiracy narratives offer simplified explanations for complex or distressing events. By creating a sense of order and predictability, these narratives may help individuals regulate negative emotions associated with uncertainty.

Despite this established link, prior research had not differentiated between general anxiety and anxiety specifically derived from the political environment. The authors of the current study sought to fill this gap. They aimed to determine if the stress caused by political polarization, elections, and governance functions in the same way as general nervousness.

It is plausible that political anxiety could drive people toward conspiracy theories to explain a chaotic political world. It is also possible that political anxiety could have the opposite effect by prompting individuals to seek out higher-quality information to reduce their uncertainty. The researchers designed their inquiry to test which of these psychological pathways is supported by data.

“There has been a lot of literature in psychology showing that general anxiety is a predictor of support for conspiracy theories,” said study author Aaron Weinschenk, the Ben J. and Joyce Rosenberg Professor of Political Science and director of Social Sciences & Public Policy Domain at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay.

“Recently, there a new measure of anxiety related to politics has been developed, and we wanted to learn whether it was general anxiety or political anxiety (or both) that drives conspiracy theory beliefs. Since many conspiracy theories are connected to politics, we thought it would be interesting to see whether people who are politically anxious are especially likely to support them.”

To investigate these questions, the research team collected data through a university-sponsored survey. The survey was fielded in October 2023. The sample consisted of 451 residents of Wisconsin. The participants were recruited via Dynata, an online survey panel provider. The demographic composition of the sample was compared to U.S. Census estimates to ensure it reasonably reflected the population of the state. The sample was slightly older and more educated than the state average.

The researchers employed specific measures to quantify the different types of anxiety. To measure generalized anxiety, they used the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2 (GAD-2) scale. This is a standard psychological tool that asks respondents how often they feel nervous, anxious, or unable to stop worrying.

To measure political anxiety, the team used a specialized ten-item battery developed in recent political science scholarship. This measure asked respondents to rate how much anxiety they felt regarding specific political situations. These situations included the election of a disliked candidate, the level of polarization, and the uncivil nature of modern politics.

The dependent variable was an index of support for conspiracy theories. The researchers presented respondents with seven specific conspiratorial statements. These statements covered a diverse range of topics and time periods to gauge a broad propensity for conspiratorial thinking.

The theories included claims that Jeffrey Epstein was murdered to cover up a criminal network and that the government perpetrated school shootings. Other items included beliefs that scientists manipulate evidence, that humans have made contact with aliens, and that the 2020 presidential election was illegitimate. Additional items involved government involvement in the 9/11 attacks and the alleged dangers of 5G technology.

The analysis examined the relationship between the two types of anxiety and the conspiracy index. The researchers used regression models that allowed them to control for various other factors. These controls included age, education, income, political ideology, and media consumption habits. Including these controls helped ensure that any observed relationships were not caused by outside variables.

The data revealed a positive relationship between generalized anxiety and support for conspiracy theories. Individuals who reported higher levels of daily nervousness and worry were more likely to endorse the conspiracy statements. This aligns with the results of previous meta-analyses on the subject. However, the magnitude of this effect was relatively modest. The findings support the idea that individuals with higher baseline anxiety may turn to conspiracy theories as a coping mechanism.

The results regarding political anxiety were different. The analysis showed no statistically significant relationship between political anxiety and conspiracy theory support. This finding held true even when political anxiety was tested as the sole predictor. The study suggests that feeling stressed or anxious about the state of American politics does not appear to drive individuals toward conspiratorial explanations. The null result contradicts the hypothesis that political distress acts as a catalyst for conspiracy endorsement.

The researchers performed additional checks to understand the nuances of their findings. They analyzed the relationship between anxiety and each of the seven conspiracy theories individually. This breakdown revealed that the link between generalized anxiety and the overall index was driven primarily by two specific theories. These were the belief in hidden alien contact and the belief that the 2020 election was illegitimate. For the other five theories, the connection to generalized anxiety was not statistically significant. This indicates that the impact of anxiety may depend heavily on the specific content of the conspiracy theory.

As with all research, there are some limitations. The sample was drawn exclusively from Wisconsin. While the demographics were fairly representative, the results may not perfectly generalize to the entire United States population. The study utilized a cross-sectional design. This means the data was collected at a single point in time. Consequently, the researchers cannot definitively prove the direction of causality. It is possible that believing in conspiracy theories causes anxiety rather than the other way around.

Future research could address these limitations by employing longitudinal designs. Tracking the same individuals over time would allow scientists to see if changes in anxiety levels precede changes in conspiracy beliefs. This would help clarify whether anxiety is a cause or a consequence of conspiratorial thinking. Researchers could also replicate this study in other states or countries to see if the patterns hold true in different political contexts.

The authors also suggest investigating why specific conspiracy theories appeal to anxious individuals more than others. The finding that generalized anxiety predicted belief in aliens and election fraud, but not 5G conspiracies, warrants further exploration. It may be that certain narratives offer more psychological comfort to anxious people than others. Understanding these distinctions could help in developing interventions to reduce the spread of misinformation.

Another potential avenue for future inquiry involves the measurement of political anxiety. The current study focused on anxiety regarding the political environment and process. Future studies might explore anxiety related to specific political policies or existential threats. It is possible that different forms of political distress interact with conspiracy beliefs in ways not captured by the current measures.

This research contributes to a more refined understanding of why people believe in conspiracy theories. It challenges the assumption that the stressful nature of modern politics is a primary driver of conspiratorial thinking. Instead, it points toward individual psychological predispositions as a more relevant factor.

“Overall, our main finding is that anxiety (and not political anxiety) seems to be more strongly related to conspiracy theory support,” Weinschenk told PsyPost. “This means that general psychological predispositions are relevant to politics (even if they don’t seem explicitly ‘political’).”

The study, “General anxiety, political anxiety, and support for conspiracy theories,” was authored by Aaron C. Weinschenk, Isaac Erickson, Kaleigh Gale, Chloe Halford, James Harris, Alex Lange, Zea Miller, Ella Schwantes, Alax Stylinson, Connor Tenor, and Lucas Weisshappel.