Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T23:05:07.426Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Validation of the Spanish Version of the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2022

Angelo Fasce Open the ORCID record for Angelo Fasce [Opens in a new window] ,
Diego Avendaño Open the ORCID record for Diego Avendaño [Opens in a new window] ,
Neil Dagnall Open the ORCID record for Neil Dagnall [Opens in a new window] ,
Andrew Denovan Open the ORCID record for Andrew Denovan [Opens in a new window]  and
Álex Escolà-Gascón Open the ORCID record for Álex Escolà-Gascón [Opens in a new window]
Angelo Fasce*
Affiliation:
Universidade de Coimbra (Portugal)
Diego Avendaño
Affiliation:
Pécsi Tudományegyetem (Hungary)
Neil Dagnall
Affiliation:
Manchester Metropolitan University (UK)
Andrew Denovan
Affiliation:
University of Huddersfield (UK)
Álex Escolà-Gascón
Affiliation:
Universitat Ramon Llull (Spain)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Angelo Fasce. Universidade de Coimbra. Faculdade de Medicina. Rua Larga, 2. 3004–504 Coimbra (Portugal). E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Theorists acknowledge that conspiracy beliefs represent an established psychological construct. The study of conspiracy beliefs is important because allied ideation potentially influences everyday attitudes and behaviors across a range of domains (i.e., cognitive, social, cross-cultural, and political psychology). In this article, we analyze the internal structure and construct validity of the Spanish adaptation of the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale (GCBS). Correlational and confirmatory factor analyses using an international sample of 732 Spanish-speakers revealed a five-factor structure equivalent to the original instrument. Convergent validity was demonstrated using educational level, political orientation, need for uniqueness, and four social axioms (social cynicism, religiosity, reward for application, and fate control). In comparison to two English samples (N = 794 and N = 421), the adaptation demonstrated satisfactory, although restricted, levels of invariance. Accordingly, findings support the use of this translated form of the GCBS with Spanish speakers.

Keywords

Beliefsconspiracy theoriesGCBSneed for uniquenesssocial axioms
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 25 , 2022 , e25
Copyright
© Universidad Complutense de Madrid and Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Funding statement: This work was supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (AF, Grant Number 964728, JITSUVAX).

Conflicts of Interest: None.

Data sharing: All data and materials used in this article are publicly available in https://osf.io/whdgc/

References

Aaronovitch, D. (2009). Voodoo histories: The role of the conspiracy theory in shaping modern history. Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
Abalakina-Paap, M., Stephan, W. G., Craig, T., & Gregory, W. L. (1999). Beliefs in conspiracies. Political Psychology, 20(3), 637–647. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adam-Troian, J., Wagner-Egger, P., Motyl, M., Arciszewski, T., Imhoff, R., Zimmer, F., Klein, O., Babinska, M., Bangerter, A., Bilewicz, M., Blanuša, N., Bovan, K., Bužarovska, R., Cichocka, A., Çelebi, E., Delouvée, S., Douglas, K. M., Dyrendal, A., Gjoneska, B., … van Prooijen, J.-W. (2021). Investigating the links between cultural values and belief in conspiracy theories: The key roles of collectivism and masculinity. Political Psychology, 42(4), 597–618. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atari, M., Afhami, R., & Swami, V. (2019). Psychometric assessments of Persian translations of three measures of conspiracist beliefs. PLOS ONE, 14(4), Article e0215202. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215202CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beller, J. (2017). Religion and militarism: The effects of religiosity, religious fundamentalism, religious conspiracy belief, and demographics on support for military action. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 23(2), 179–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biddlestone, M., Green, R., Cichocka, A., Douglas, K., Sutton, R. (2022). A systematic review and meta-analytic synthesis of the motives associated with conspiracy beliefs. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/rxjqcCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biddlestone, M., Green, R., Douglas, K. M. (2020). Cultural orientation, power, belief in conspiracy theories, and intentions to reduce the spread of COVID–19. British Journal of Social Psychology, 59(3), 663–673. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12397CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bond, M. H., Leung, K., Au, A., Tong, K., & Chemonges-Nielson, Z. (2004). Combining social axioms with values in predicting social behaviours. European Journal of Personality, 18(3), 77–191. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brotherton, R., French, C. C., & Pickering, A. D. (2013). Measuring belief in conspiracy theories: The generic conspiracist beliefs scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 21(4), Article 279. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00279Google Scholar
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, S. X., Bond, M. H., & Cheung, F. M. (2006). Personality correlates of social axioms: Are beliefs nested within personality? Personality and Individual Differences, 40(3), 509–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.04.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dagnall, N., Denovan, A., Drinkwater, K., Parker, A., & Clough, P. (2017). Statistical bias and endorsement of conspiracy theories. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 31(4), 368–378. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denovan, A., Dagnall, N., Drinkwater, K., Parker, A., & Neave, N. (2020). Conspiracist beliefs, intuitive thinking, and schizotypal facets: A further evaluation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34(6), 1394–1405. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drinkwater, K. G., Dagnall, N., Denovan, A., & Neave, N. (2020). Psychometric assessment of the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale. PLOS ONE, 15(3), Article e0230365. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230365CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drinkwater, K. G., Dagnall, N., Denovan, A., & Walsh, R. S. (2021). To what extent have conspiracy theories undermined COVID–19: Strategic narratives? Frontiers in Communication, 6, Article 576198. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.576198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drinkwater, K., Dagnall, N., & Parker, A. (2012). Reality testing, conspiracy theories, and paranormal beliefs. Journal of Parapsychology, 76(1), 57–77.Google Scholar
Escolà-Gascón, Á. (2020). Researching unexplained phenomena II: New evidences for anomalous experiences supported by the Multivariable Multiaxial Suggestibility Inventory–2 (MMSI–2). Current Research in Behavioral Sciences, 1, Article 100005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crbeha.2020.100005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fasce, A., Adrián-Ventura, J., & Avendaño, D. (2020). Do as the Romans do: On the authoritarian roots of pseudoscience. Public Understanding of Science, 29(6), 597–613. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520935078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fasce, A., Adrián-Ventura, J., Lewandowsky, S., & van der Linden, S. (2021). Science through a tribal lens: A group-based account of polarization over scientific facts. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211050323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fasce, A., Avendaño, D., & Adrián-Ventura, J. (2021). Revised and short versions of the pseudoscientific belief scale. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35(3), 828–832. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, R. K., & Weeks, B. E. (2017). Epistemic beliefs’ role in promoting misperceptions and conspiracist ideation. PLOS ONE, 12(9), Article e0184733. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0184733CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Golec de Zavala, A., Bierwiaczonek, K., & Ciesielski, P. (2022). An interpretation of meta-analytical evidence for the link between collective narcissism and conspiracy theories. Current Opinion in Psychology, 47, Article 101360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101360CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goreis, A., & Voracek, M. (2019). A systematic review and meta-analysis of psychological research on conspiracy beliefs: Field characteristics, measurement instruments, and associations with personality traits. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 205. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00205CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Imhoff, R., & Bruder, M. (2014). Speaking (un-)truth to power: Conspiracy mentality as a generalized political attitude. European Journal of Personality, 28, 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imhoff, R., & Lamberty, P. K. (2017). Too special to be duped: Need for uniqueness motivates conspiracy beliefs. European Journal of Social Psychology, 47(6), 724–734. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imhoff, R., Zimmer, F., Klein, O., António, J. H. C., Babinska, M., Bangerter, A., Bilewicz, M., Blanuša, N., Bovan, K., Bužarovska, R., Cichocka, A., Delouvée, S., Douglas, K. M., Dyrendal, A., Etienne, T., Gjoneska, B., Graf, S., Gualda, E., Hirschberger, G., … van Prooijen, J.-M. (2022). Conspiracy mentality and political orientation across 26 countries. Nature Human Behaviour, 6, 392–403. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01258-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jolley, D., & Douglas, K. M. (2014). The effects of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories on vaccination intentions. PLoS ONE, 9(2), Article e89177. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089177CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leung, K., Lam, B. C. P., Bond, M., Conway, L. G., Gornick, L. J., Amponsah, B., Boehnke, K., Dragolov, G., Burgess, S. M., Golestaneh, M., Busch, H., Hofer, J., Espinosa, A. del, C. D., Fardis, M., Ismail, R., Kurman, J., Lebedeva, N., Tatarko, A. N., Sam, D. L., … Zhou, F. (2012). Developing and evaluating the Social Axioms Survey in eleven countries: Its relationship with the Five-Factor Model of Personality. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(5), 833–857. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022111416361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., & Lloyd, E. (2018). The ‘Alice in Wonderland’ mechanics of the rejection of (climate) science: Simulating coherence by conspiracism. Synthese, 195, 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1198-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lobato, E., Mendoza, J., Sims, V., & Chin, M. (2014). Examining the relationship between conspiracy theories, paranormal beliefs, and pseudoscience acceptance among a university population. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5(28), 617–625. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynn, M., & Harris, J. (1997). Individual differences in the pursuit of self-uniqueness through consumption. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27(21), 1861–1883. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb01629.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Majima, Y., & Nakamura, H. (2019). Development of the Japanese version of the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale (GCBS-J). Japanese Psychological Research, 62(4), 254–267. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpr.12267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McHoskey, J. W. (1995). Case closed? On the John F. Kennedy assassination: Biased assimilation of evidence and attitude polarization. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 395–409. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp1703_7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meade, A. W., Johnson, E. C., & Braddy, P. W. (2008). Power and sensitivity of alternative fit indices in tests of measurement invariance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(3), 568–592. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.568CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nattrass, N. (2013). Understanding the origins and prevalence of AIDS conspiracy beliefs in the United States and South Africa. Sociology of Health & Illness, 35(1), 113–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2012.01480.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nera, K., Bertin, P., & Klein, O. (2022). Conspiracy theories as opportunistic attributions of power. Current Opinion in Psychology, 47, Article 101381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nera, K., Wagner-Egger, P., Bertin, P., Douglas, K. M., & Klein, O. (2021). A power-challenging theory of society, or a conservative mindset? Upward and downward conspiracy theories as ideologically distinct beliefs. European Journal of Social Psychology, 51(4–5), 740–757. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nestik, T. A., Deyneka, O. S., & Maksimenkо, А. A. (2020). Socio-psychological predictors of belief in conspiracy theories of the origin of COVID–19 and involvement in social media. Social Psychology and Society, 11(4), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.17759/sps.2020110407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, J. E., & Wood, T. J. (2014). Conspiracy theories and the paranoid style(s) of mass opinion. American Journal of Political Science, 58(4), 952–966. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrin, A. (2015). Social networking usage: 2005–2015. Pew Research Center. http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/08/2015/Social-Networking-Usage-2005-2015/Google Scholar
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In von Eye, A. & Clogg, C. C. (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399–419). SAGE Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2016). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (4th Ed.). Routledge.Google Scholar
Singelis, T. M., Hubbard, C., Her, P., & An, S. (2003). Convergent validation of the Social Axioms Survey. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(2), 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00043-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soveri, A., Karlsson, L. C., Antfolk, J., Lindfelt, M., & Lewandowsky, S. (2021). Unwillingness to engage in behaviors that protect against COVID–19: The role of conspiracy beliefs, trust, and endorsement of complementary and alternative medicine. BMC Public Health, 21, Article 684. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10643-wCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stasielowicz, L. (2022). Who believes in conspiracy theories? A meta-analysis on personality correlates. Journal of Research in Personality, 98, Article 104229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2022.104229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swami, V., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2010). Unanswered questions: A preliminary investigation of personality and individual difference predictors of 9/11 conspiracist beliefs. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 749–761. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uscinski, J. E., Douglas, K., & Lewandowsky, S. (2017). Climate change conspiracy theories. In von Storch, H. (Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of climate science. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.328Google Scholar
van der Tempel, J., & Alcock, J. E. (2015). Relationships between conspiracy mentality, hyperactive agency detection, and schizotypy: Supernatural forces at work? Personality and Individual Differences, 82, 136–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.03.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Prooijen, J. W., & Song, M. (2021). The cultural dimension of intergroup conspiracy theories. British Journal of Psychology, 112(2), 455–473. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12471CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Prooijen, J.-M. (2020). An existential threat model of conspiracy theories. European Psychologist, 25(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Prooijen, J.-M., Krouwel, A. P. M., & Pollet, T. V. (2015). Political extremism predicts belief in conspiracy theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(5), 570–578. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614567356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Prooijen, J.-W. (2017). Why education predicts decreased belief in conspiracy theories. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 31(1), 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3301CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, J., & Wang, X. (2012). Structural equation modeling: Applications using Mplus. Higher Education Press. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118356258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, M. J., & Gray, D. (2019). Right-wing authoritarianism as a predictor of pro-establishment versus anti-establishment conspiracy theories. Personality and Individual Differences, 138, 163–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.09.036CrossRefGoogle Scholar