Can Debunked Conspiracy Theories Change Radicalized Views? Evidence from Racial Prejudice and Anti-China Sentiment Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic.

IF 4.6 1区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES Journal of Chinese Political Science Pub Date : 2022-09-29 DOI:10.1007/s11366-022-09832-0
Tianyang Liu, Tianru Guan, Randong Yuan
{"title":"Can Debunked Conspiracy Theories Change Radicalized Views? Evidence from Racial Prejudice and Anti-China Sentiment Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic.","authors":"Tianyang Liu, Tianru Guan, Randong Yuan","doi":"10.1007/s11366-022-09832-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>With the advent of the 'age of conspiracism', the harmfulness of conspiratorial narratives and mindsets on individuals' mentalities, on social relations, and on democracy, has been widely researched by political scientists and psychologists. One known negative effect of conspiracy theories is the escalation toward political radicalism. This study goes beyond the exploration of mechanisms underpinning the relationship between conspiracy theory and radicalization to focus on possible approaches to mitigating them. This study sheds light on the role of counter-conspiracy approaches in the process of deradicalization, adopting the case study of anti-China sentiment and racial prejudice amid the Covid-19 pandemic, through conducting an experiment (<i>N</i> = 300). The results suggest that, during critical events such as the Covid-19 pandemic, exposure to countermeasures to conspiracist information can reduce individual acceptance of radicalism. We investigated two methods of countering conspiracy theory, and found that: (1) a content-targeted 'inoculation' approach to countering conspiracy theory can prevent the intensification of radicalization, but does not produce a significant deradicalization effect; and (2) an audience-focused 'disenchantment' method can enable cognitive deradicalization, effectively reducing the perception of competitive victimhood, and of real and symbolic threats. This study is one of the first attempts to address causality between deradicalization and countermeasures to conspiracy theories in the US-China relations.</p>","PeriodicalId":46205,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9520097/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Chinese Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-022-09832-0","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

With the advent of the 'age of conspiracism', the harmfulness of conspiratorial narratives and mindsets on individuals' mentalities, on social relations, and on democracy, has been widely researched by political scientists and psychologists. One known negative effect of conspiracy theories is the escalation toward political radicalism. This study goes beyond the exploration of mechanisms underpinning the relationship between conspiracy theory and radicalization to focus on possible approaches to mitigating them. This study sheds light on the role of counter-conspiracy approaches in the process of deradicalization, adopting the case study of anti-China sentiment and racial prejudice amid the Covid-19 pandemic, through conducting an experiment (N = 300). The results suggest that, during critical events such as the Covid-19 pandemic, exposure to countermeasures to conspiracist information can reduce individual acceptance of radicalism. We investigated two methods of countering conspiracy theory, and found that: (1) a content-targeted 'inoculation' approach to countering conspiracy theory can prevent the intensification of radicalization, but does not produce a significant deradicalization effect; and (2) an audience-focused 'disenchantment' method can enable cognitive deradicalization, effectively reducing the perception of competitive victimhood, and of real and symbolic threats. This study is one of the first attempts to address causality between deradicalization and countermeasures to conspiracy theories in the US-China relations.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
被揭穿的阴谋论能否改变激进的观点?COVID-19疫情中种族偏见和反华情绪的证据。
随着 "阴谋论时代 "的到来,政治学家和心理学家广泛研究了阴谋论叙事和心态对个人心理、社会关系和民主的危害。阴谋论的一个已知负面影响是政治激进主义的升级。本研究不仅探讨了阴谋论与激进主义之间的关系机制,还关注了缓解这种关系的可能方法。本研究以 "科维德-19 "大流行中的反华情绪和种族偏见为案例,通过实验(N = 300)揭示了反阴谋论方法在去激进化过程中的作用。结果表明,在 Covid-19 大流行等重大事件中,接触反阴谋论信息可以减少个人对激进主义的接受。我们研究了两种反阴谋论的方法,结果发现(1) 以内容为目标的 "接种 "反阴谋论方法可以防止激进化的加剧,但不会产生显著的去激进化效果;(2) 以受众为重点的 "去迷惑 "方法可以实现认知上的去激进化,有效降低竞争性受害者的感知,以及对现实和象征性威胁的感知。本研究是首次尝试探讨中美关系中去激进化与阴谋论对策之间的因果关系。
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
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
27.30%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Journal of Chinese Political Science (JCPS) is a refereed academic journal that publishes theoretical, policy, and empirical research articles on Chinese politics across the whole spectrum of political science, with emphasis on Chinese domestic politics and foreign policy in comparative perspectives. However, JCPS also welcomes manuscripts on different aspects of contemporary China when these relate closely to Chinese politics, political economy, political culture, reform and opening, development, the military, law and legal system, foreign relations, and other important issues of political significance.
期刊最新文献
Demarketization and Corruption in China: Evidence from a Quasi-Experiment Voices from within: Tracing Chinese Public Perceptions of Democracy in the New Era Cost-Saving or Cream-Skimming? Partner Ownership and the Project Returns of Public-Private Partnerships in China Factors Influencing China’s Participation in UN Peacekeeping Operations Judicial Resilience: How Judges Manage Pressures in China’s Anti-crime Campaigns
×
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