key: cord-0749956-xhhoq2c5 authors: Wabnegger, Albert; Gremsl, Andreas; Schienle, Anne title: The association between the belief in coronavirus conspiracy theories, miracles, and the susceptibility to conjunction fallacy date: 2021-07-06 journal: Appl Cogn Psychol DOI: 10.1002/acp.3860 sha: 88b47d8ed43aa65f0e9ee6f37a32e0a42eec86ee doc_id: 749956 cord_uid: xhhoq2c5 Previous research has shown that people who endorse conspiracy theories are more prone to the conjunction fallacy: the tendency to perceive conjunct events as more probable than constituent events. The present study examined the relationship between specific beliefs (belief in conspiracy theories, religiosity) and the susceptibility to conjunction errors (CEs) in specific domains. A total of 500 participants was presented with brief scenarios from the domains “coronavirus conspiracy,” “miraculous healing,” and a control condition. Each scenario included one statement about a separate event and a second statement about two joint events co‐occurring. The participants estimated the probability of each statement. Results showed that the number of CEs made in the coronavirus domain was only associated with the belief in conspiracy theories, while general religiosity was only associated with CEs for scenarios describing miraculous healings. The assessed beliefs were not associated with CEs made in the control condition. Results suggest that distinct beliefs are uniquely associated with the susceptibility to conjunction errors in particular domains. Since the global outbreak of the coronavirus in 2019 (COVID-19), a plethora of conspiracy theories (CTs) has spread. This is not surprising as CTs typically arise during events in world affairs such as wars, acts of terrorism, or infectious diseases (Basham, 2003; Ross et al., 2006; van Prooijen & Douglas, 2017) . Usually, conspiracy theories refer to a group of actors working together to pursue malevolent and sinister goals (Swami & Furnham, 2014) . Endorsement of conspiracy theories is a widespread phenomenon. In a study by Freeman et al. (2020) , 50% of the participants endorsed conspiracist ideation. Such erroneous beliefs can have detrimental effects including open aggression or refusal of health-related interventions (Ford et al., 2013; Oliver & Wood, 2014) . For instance, telecommunication equipment has been attacked due to the belief that the 5G technology is responsible for COVID-19 spreading (https://www.bbc.com/news/53191523; retrieved January 21, 2021). Another study found that belief in anti-vaccination conspiracy theories correlated negatively with the willingness to receive vaccinations (Jolley & Douglas, 2014) . Such attitudes are particularly concerning during a pandemic like COVID-19. Previous research has shown that individuals endorsing conspiracist ideation perceive a conjunct event (event 1 + 2) as more probable than a constituent event (event 1; Brotherton & French, 2014) . Tversky and Kahneman (1982) labeled this logical fallacy "representativeness error" or "conjunction fallacy" and presented this in the well-known Linda scenario. They described a hypothetical woman named Linda together with some of her The susceptibility to make conjunction errors (CEs) could also play a role in particular religious beliefs such as miraculous healings. Similar to COVID-19 conspiracy theories, the belief in divine intervention in illness is widespread. For instance, in Lourdes, a major pilgrimage site in France, over 7000 medically unexplained cures have been reported, and 70 of them have been recognized as miraculous by the Catholic church (https://www.lourdes-france.org/en/miraculous-healings/; retrieved, January 22, 2021). Interestingly, the cures mainly concerned tuberculosis (François et al., 2014) , which affects the lungs similar to the new coronavirus. It has been pointed out that conspiracy beliefs, as well as religious beliefs, give a sense of meaning and control, which in turn helps to reduce the distress caused by the perception of randomness (Schienle et al., 2020; Swami et al., 2011) . Interestingly, only a few studies have investigated the association between religiosity and conjunction fallacy. In a previous study by Prike et al. (2017) religiosity was positively correlated with the number of conducted conjunction fallacies. More recently, Bakhti (2018) showed that participants who were primed with religious words (e.g., pray) made more CEs compared to the priming with reflective (e.g., reason) and neutral (e.g., paper) words. The author suggested that an intuitive rather than an analytical thinking style is associated with religious propensity and thus with more CEs. However, it is important to note that the effects of priming on religious belief have failed to replicate in other studies (Chivers, 2019; Sanchez et al., 2017) . The present study sought to extend the existing knowledge about CEs by creating specific conjunction scenarios with contents concerning the coronavirus or religion (miraculous healings). It was hypothesized that the belief in conspiracy theories would be positively associated with the susceptibility to conjunction errors in COVID-19 conspiracy-related scenarios. Moreover, we hypothesized that general religiosity would be positively associated with the susceptibility to conjunction errors made in scenarios describing miraculous healings. The understanding that many co-occurring events are indeed attributable to mere coincidence rather than a causal event may help to reduce the detrimental effects, especially of (some) conspiracy theories. The participants completed the following questionnaires: Generic Con- We computed a negative binomial regression to capture the association between the belief in conspiracy theories, general religiosity, and age (mean-centered predictors) and the susceptibility to make con- More than two-thirds of the participants (74%) made at least one CE No predictor was significant for the number of CEs committed in the control condition (all ps > .05). Detailed results are depicted in Table 1 . The present study identified unique predictors of the susceptibility for conjunction errors (CEs) in specific domains. We revealed that a higher degree in conspiracist ideation and general religiosity was associated with erroneous decisions that a conjunction of two statements (probability of event 1 + 2) is more likely than a single statement (probability of event 1 2016, 2017) that revealed an enhanced susceptibility to CEs in participants who believe in conspiracy theories and paranormal events (e.g., psychokinesis). For believers with a high degree in those trait-like variables, specific domains may be more representative or prototypical and are therefore subjectively more likely. This perception of enhanced representativeness possibly triggers faster but error-prone conclusions and neglects the necessity to rely on objective probabilistic laws. Thus, participants are less inclined to critically question their probability estimates for events that correspond to their world view and they need less evidence to draw a conclusion (French & Stone, 2014) . As a result, the participants misattribute underlying causal relationships to actual independent situations (Bressan, 2002; Rogers et al., 2009; Tversky & Kahneman, 1983) . In line with this interpretation, it has been revealed that people of faith and conspiracy believers tend to perceive meaningful patterns in randomly generated stimuli (Riekki et al., 2013; van Prooijen et al., 2018) . Hadlaczky and Westerlund (2011) showed that believers and skeptics have a different conception of random events with believers requiring less evidence before detecting meaningful patterns in noise. In their study, paranormal believers were less able than skeptics to discriminate between somewhat and very remarkable coincidences, implying that believers have a lower threshold for being surprised by coincidences. Further, we speculate that individuals with a higher degree in general religiosity or conspiracist ideation are more prone to perceive randomness in specific domains as an aversive state. Belief in an entity or group of people that exert control may, hence, serve as a coping mechanism that diminishes this negative state. The perception that such occurrences are typical can ascribe plausibility to such theories/reports (Brotherton & French, 2014) which may reduce distress. In this sense, both conspiracy theories and religious beliefs provide a sense of coherence and meaning and thereby make highly complex processes in the world easier to explain and understand. The present study also demonstrated that the investigated specific beliefs did not increase the susceptibility to conjunction errors per se, but only in those domains with related contents. None of the cognitive constructs (general religiosity, belief in conspiracy) was associated with the number of CEs made in the control scenarios. This is in contrast to previous literature that found general effects of conspiracy theory beliefs and the propensity to commit conjunction errors (Brotherton & French, 2014; Prike et al., 2017; Rogers et al., 2009 Rogers et al., , 2011 Rogers et al., , 2016 Rogers et al., , 2018 . The majority of the sample consisted of university students, of those psychology students with a solid statistical background were the largest group (~20%). Rogers et al. (2009) showed that participants with qualifications in statistics and/or psychology committed fewer conjunction fallacies and were rather classified as "non-believers." Consistently, the current sample consisted of fairly skeptical individuals characterized by relatively low scores in general religiosity and conspiracist ideation, who moreover committed only a relatively low number of conjunction errors. This could indicate that only when a certain level in conspiracist ideation and general religiosity is exceeded, the propensity to perceive ostensible causal connections across further domains increases. This fits nicely with the idea that believers find the second option describing the conjunct event less remarkable and surprising because it confirms their worldview. Such a worldview might explain why more extreme believers are characterized by an increased propensity to commit conjunction errors in general (Rogers et al., 2017) . We have to mention some limitations of the current study. As mentioned above the sample consisted mainly of university students, thus results cannot be generalized to the general population. Further, a relatively low number of conjunction errors was committed. Consequently, we modeled the data by using a negative binomial regression which is generally used for over-dispersed count outcomes with excessive zeros. The current study assessed participants´self-reports on general religiosity. Religious affiliation data were not collected due to the relatively homogenous distribution of denominations (Roman Catholic;~75%) in Austria. Future studies could investigate whether individuals with different types of religious affiliations differ in their proneness to make conjunction errors. Moreover, it would be interesting to compare individuals who believe that a higher being exists but does not directly intervene (i.e., Deists) with individuals who believe in an intervening god (i.e., Theists). Finally, it remains questionable whether the susceptibility to conjunction errors is a result or cause of general religiosity/conspiracist ideation. This could be investigated in longitudinal studies. Intervention studies would be helpful to elucidate whether information provided about conjunction errors can reduce the susceptibility for conspiracy beliefs. In conclusion, the current investigation showed that a high degree in conspiracist ideation and general religiosity was associated with an enhanced probability to fall victim to the conjunction fallacy in specific domains (coronavirus conspiracy, miraculous healings). Training in statistics and probability theory may reduce the propensity to commit conjunction fallacies (Morier & Borgida, 1984) . Religious versus reflective priming and susceptibility to the conjunction fallacy Malevolent global conspiracy The connection between random sequences, everyday coincidences, and belief in the paranormal Belief in conspiracy theories and susceptibility to the conjunction fallacy Measuring belief in conspiracy theories: The generic Conspiracist beliefs scale What's next for psychology's embattled field of social priming Belief in AIDS-related conspiracy theories and mistrust in the government: Relationship with HIV testing among at-risk older adults The Lourdes medical cures revisited Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, mistrust, and compliance with government guidelines in England Anomalistic psychology: Exploring paranormal belief and experience Sensitivity to coincidences and paranormal belief The effects of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories on vaccination intentions Randomness, attributions of arousal, and belief in god The conjunction fallacy: A task specific phenomenon? Conspiracy theories and the paranoid style(s) of mass opinion Translating traumatic experiences into language: Implications for child abuse and long-term health. In From child sexual abuse to adult sexual risk: Trauma, revictimization, and intervention Psychics, aliens, or experience? Using the anomalistic belief scale to examine the relationship between type of belief and probabilistic reasoning Paranormal and religious believers are more prone to illusory face perception than skeptics and non-believers Paranormal belief and susceptibility to the conjunction fallacy Paranormal belief and the conjunction fallacy: Controlling for temporal relatedness and potential surprise differentials in component events Paranormal Believers' susceptibility to confirmatory versus disconfirmatory conjunctions Paranormal belief and errors of probabilistic reasoning: The role of constituent conditional relatedness in believers' susceptibility to the conjunction fallacy Paranormal belief, thinking style preference and susceptibility to confirmatory conjunction errors. Consciousness and Cognition Conspiracy beliefs about the origin of HIV/AIDS in four racial/ethnic groups No evidence that analytic thinking decreases religious belief Belief in the miracles of Lourdes: A voxel-based morphometry study Conspiracist ideation in Britain and Austria: Evidence of a monological belief system and associations between individual psychological differences and real-world and fictitious conspiracy theories Political paranoia and conspiracy theories Judgments of and by representativeness Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment MI-RSB 48-Die Entwicklung eines multidimensionalen Inventars zum religiös-spirituellen Befinden. [MI-RSWB 48-The development of a multidimensional inventory of religiousspiritual well-being Conspiracy theories as part of history: The role of societal crisis situations Connecting the dots: Illusory pattern perception predicts belief in conspiracies and the supernatural The association between the belief in coronavirus conspiracy theories, miracles, and the susceptibility to conjunction fallacy The authors acknowledge the financial support by the University of Graz for open-access publishing. The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. Data is available under following url: https://osf.io/h846s/. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1170-4639