[Conspiracy theories, social polarization and crises].

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Nervenarzt Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-13 DOI:10.1007/s00115-024-01740-3
Jürgen Fritze
{"title":"[Conspiracy theories, social polarization and crises].","authors":"Jürgen Fritze","doi":"10.1007/s00115-024-01740-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Social media facilitate the distribution of conspiracy theories. It is uncertain whether indeed the number of myths and also the number of those who appropriate myths has increased. Conspiracy theories have so far essentially been the subject of sociological and psychosociological research showing a general disposition to become infected irrespective of the topic of a myth. Are there specific psychopathological risk factors for becoming infected by conspiracy myths? Are there effective therapeutic or preventive measures?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was carried out in PubMed using the query \"conspir*[title] AND review\" followed by manual selection and appraisal only of publications addressing conspiracy theories in general, i.e. not limited to specific myths, with a focus on systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Moreover, the publications identified were manually screened for further meta-analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search resulted in 166 hits. The available evidence is essentially based on studies using questionnaires, which can clarify only associations but not causalities. The evidence suggests that the strongest correlates of conspiratorial ideation pertain to low cognitive abilities, nonanalytic style of thought resulting in reduced balancing of probabilities before deciding, feelings of loss of control, paranoia, schizotypy and the dark triad (narcissism, Machiavellianism, authoritarianism).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Specific psychological characteristics are risk factors for conspiratorial ideation. Current research approaches are unsuitable to clarify whether psychiatric disorders are overrepresented. Sociodemographic risk factors include male gender, low level of education, low income, social isolation and are non-specific. Group processes promote, again presumably nonspecifically, conspiracy theories thus contributing to social polarization. The genetic basis and neurobiological mechanisms are unknown. Conspiracy theories were and are used as an instrument of political contention. The enlightened democratic social contract requires free, unbiased thinking. Consequently, the risk factors identified so far facilitate conspiratorial ideation and question the very fundaments of the social contract by impairing unbiased evaluation and decision making. Therefore, prevention is warranted. .</p>","PeriodicalId":49770,"journal":{"name":"Nervenarzt","volume":" ","pages":"998-1004"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nervenarzt","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00115-024-01740-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Social media facilitate the distribution of conspiracy theories. It is uncertain whether indeed the number of myths and also the number of those who appropriate myths has increased. Conspiracy theories have so far essentially been the subject of sociological and psychosociological research showing a general disposition to become infected irrespective of the topic of a myth. Are there specific psychopathological risk factors for becoming infected by conspiracy myths? Are there effective therapeutic or preventive measures?

Methods: A systematic search was carried out in PubMed using the query "conspir*[title] AND review" followed by manual selection and appraisal only of publications addressing conspiracy theories in general, i.e. not limited to specific myths, with a focus on systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Moreover, the publications identified were manually screened for further meta-analyses.

Results: The search resulted in 166 hits. The available evidence is essentially based on studies using questionnaires, which can clarify only associations but not causalities. The evidence suggests that the strongest correlates of conspiratorial ideation pertain to low cognitive abilities, nonanalytic style of thought resulting in reduced balancing of probabilities before deciding, feelings of loss of control, paranoia, schizotypy and the dark triad (narcissism, Machiavellianism, authoritarianism).

Conclusion: Specific psychological characteristics are risk factors for conspiratorial ideation. Current research approaches are unsuitable to clarify whether psychiatric disorders are overrepresented. Sociodemographic risk factors include male gender, low level of education, low income, social isolation and are non-specific. Group processes promote, again presumably nonspecifically, conspiracy theories thus contributing to social polarization. The genetic basis and neurobiological mechanisms are unknown. Conspiracy theories were and are used as an instrument of political contention. The enlightened democratic social contract requires free, unbiased thinking. Consequently, the risk factors identified so far facilitate conspiratorial ideation and question the very fundaments of the social contract by impairing unbiased evaluation and decision making. Therefore, prevention is warranted. .

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[阴谋论、社会两极分化和危机]。
目的:社交媒体为阴谋论的传播提供了便利。目前还不能确定神话的数量是否确实增加了,也不能确定神话的传播者数量是否确实增加了。迄今为止,阴谋论一直是社会学和社会心理学研究的主题,这些研究表明,无论神话的主题是什么,受感染的倾向都是普遍的。是否存在感染阴谋论神话的特定心理病理学风险因素?是否有有效的治疗或预防措施?在 PubMed 上使用 "阴谋*[标题]和综述 "进行系统搜索,然后仅人工选择和评估涉及一般阴谋论(即不限于特定神话)的出版物,重点是系统综述和荟萃分析。此外,还对确定的出版物进行了人工筛选,以进一步进行荟萃分析:搜索结果:共搜索到 166 篇文章。现有的证据主要基于使用调查问卷进行的研究,这些研究只能阐明关联性,而不能阐明因果关系。证据表明,阴谋论思想的最强相关因素涉及认知能力低下、非分析性思维方式导致在做出决定前减少对可能性的权衡、失控感、偏执狂、精神分裂症和黑暗三部曲(自恋、马基雅维利主义、独裁主义):结论:特定的心理特征是阴谋论思想的风险因素。结论:特定的心理特征是阴谋论思想的风险因素,目前的研究方法并不适合澄清精神病是否占多数。社会人口风险因素包括男性性别、低教育水平、低收入、社会孤立,这些都是非特异性的。群体过程促进了阴谋论,这也可能是非特异性的,从而助长了社会两极分化。其遗传基础和神经生物学机制尚不清楚。阴谋论过去和现在都被用作政治争论的工具。开明民主的社会契约要求自由、无偏见的思考。因此,迄今发现的风险因素会助长阴谋论思想,并通过损害公正的评估和决策来质疑社会契约的根本。因此,预防是必要的。.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nervenarzt
Nervenarzt 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
18.20%
发文量
169
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Der Nervenarzt is an internationally recognized journal addressing neurologists and psychiatrists working in clinical or practical environments. Essential findings and current information from neurology, psychiatry as well as neuropathology, neurosurgery up to psychotherapy are presented. Review articles provide an overview on selected topics and offer the reader a summary of current findings from all fields of neurology and psychiatry. Freely submitted original papers allow the presentation of important clinical studies and serve the scientific exchange. Review articles under the rubric ''Continuing Medical Education'' present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice.
期刊最新文献
[Emergency intervention plans for treatment of suicidal patients: a narrative literature review]. [Lethal nitrous oxide]. [End of life perspectives: a systematic survey of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis]. [The current legal practice of judicial review of restraints]. Erratum zu: Periphere neuroimmunologische Erkrankungen – neuropathologische Einsichten und klinische Perspektiven.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1