Exhibit 1092

Some Dare Call It Conspiracy: Labeling Something a Conspiracy Theory Does Not Reduce Belief in It

Exhibit 1092 · Peer-reviewed article

Some Dare Call It Conspiracy: Labeling Something a Conspiracy Theory Does Not Reduce Belief in It

In Experiment 1, 150 participants judged a list of historical and speculative theories to be no less likely when they were labeled “conspiracy theories” than when they were labeled “ideas.”

Two online experiments (Amazon Mechanical Turk, N=150 and N=802). Items labeled 'conspiracy theories' were judged no less likely than the same items labeled 'ideas,' and fictitious corruption allegations were endorsed no less when labeled 'conspiracy theories.' The author calls the null result unexpected.

Source: Michael J. Wood, Political Psychology 37(5):695-705
Date: 2016
Quoted from: Abstract
Grade: Peer-reviewed
Document: https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12285
Accessed: 2026-11-10
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit
Note: Quote read in the abstract as served by the OpenAlex API; confirm against the publisher page before publication.

Cited by

Finding INF-5.12: Peer-reviewed Two experiments (n = 5,271 and n = 1,568) found that false headlines without warnings were seen as more accurate when other headlines carried warnings, and a later study found that wrongly labeling accurate news as inaccurate reduced its credibility. In two online experiments (N = 150 and N = 802), items labeled "conspiracy theories" were judged no less likely than the same items labeled "ideas."