Partisan and non-partisan conspiracy theories’ diverging effects on political participation

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Electoral Studies Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-20 DOI:10.1016/j.electstud.2025.102920
Mert Can Bayar
{"title":"Partisan and non-partisan conspiracy theories’ diverging effects on political participation","authors":"Mert Can Bayar","doi":"10.1016/j.electstud.2025.102920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>What role do conspiracy theories play in mobilizing political action? Both historical and contemporary accounts have written on the role of conspiracy theories (CTs) in mobilizing various movements, including during the process of nation-building, regime consolidation, and in challenges to liberal democracy in more recent years. In contrast, recent empirical research suggests that beliefs in CTs might reduce participation in politics. However, both research genres have only analyzed a limited number of CTs. This article explores how belief in different CTs affects people’s likelihood to participate in politics, particularly in relation to partisan narratives. Using two surveys conducted in the United States (n=1200) and Turkey (n=1500) -two cases that approximate a most different system design-, it finds that beliefs in partisan CTs encourage citizens to participate in politics while the effect of beliefs in non-partisan CTs on political participation varies depending on the individual’s political affiliation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48188,"journal":{"name":"Electoral Studies","volume":"95 ","pages":"Article 102920"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electoral Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379425000265","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

What role do conspiracy theories play in mobilizing political action? Both historical and contemporary accounts have written on the role of conspiracy theories (CTs) in mobilizing various movements, including during the process of nation-building, regime consolidation, and in challenges to liberal democracy in more recent years. In contrast, recent empirical research suggests that beliefs in CTs might reduce participation in politics. However, both research genres have only analyzed a limited number of CTs. This article explores how belief in different CTs affects people’s likelihood to participate in politics, particularly in relation to partisan narratives. Using two surveys conducted in the United States (n=1200) and Turkey (n=1500) -two cases that approximate a most different system design-, it finds that beliefs in partisan CTs encourage citizens to participate in politics while the effect of beliefs in non-partisan CTs on political participation varies depending on the individual’s political affiliation.
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
党派与非党派阴谋论对政治参与的差异效应
阴谋论在动员政治行动中扮演什么角色?历史和当代都有关于阴谋论(CTs)在动员各种运动中的作用的报道,包括在国家建设、政权巩固的过程中,以及近年来对自由民主的挑战。相比之下,最近的实证研究表明,对ct的信仰可能会减少政治参与。然而,这两种研究类型都只分析了有限数量的ct。本文探讨了对不同ct的信仰如何影响人们参与政治的可能性,特别是在党派叙事方面。通过在美国(n=1200)和土耳其(n=1500)进行的两项调查(这两个案例近似于最不同的系统设计),研究发现,对党派ct的信仰鼓励公民参与政治,而对无党派ct的信仰对政治参与的影响因个人的政治派别而异。
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
Electoral Studies
Electoral Studies POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: Electoral Studies is an international journal covering all aspects of voting, the central act in the democratic process. Political scientists, economists, sociologists, game theorists, geographers, contemporary historians and lawyers have common, and overlapping, interests in what causes voters to act as they do, and the consequences. Electoral Studies provides a forum for these diverse approaches. It publishes fully refereed papers, both theoretical and empirical, on such topics as relationships between votes and seats, and between election outcomes and politicians reactions; historical, sociological, or geographical correlates of voting behaviour; rational choice analysis of political acts, and critiques of such analyses.
期刊最新文献
Greater intra-party democracy in candidate selection has different effects on gender, ethnicity and class The Green Gender Gap: Environmental attitudes and pro-environmental vote choice across Europe District expectations and strategic defection in two-tiered proportional systems: The case of the 2021 Norwegian election Editorial Board Just like me? Testing descriptive attributes as voting heuristics
×
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:604180095
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