IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i10p5065-d552578.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dissociation, Cognitive Reflection and Health Literacy Have a Modest Effect on Belief in Conspiracy Theories about COVID-19

Author

Listed:
  • Vojtech Pisl

    (Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital in Pilsen, Charles University, 30100 Pilsen, Czech Republic)

  • Jan Volavka

    (Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital in Pilsen, Charles University, 30100 Pilsen, Czech Republic
    Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, New York University, New York, NY 10016, USA)

  • Edita Chvojkova

    (Department of Psychological Methods, University of Amsterdam, 1012 Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Katerina Cechova

    (Memory Clinic, Department of Neurology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Motol University Hospital, 15006 Prague, Czech Republic
    International Clinical Research Center, St. Anne’s University Hospital Brno, 65691 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Gabriela Kavalirova

    (Center of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Education, University of West Bohemia, 30100 Pilsen, Czech Republic)

  • Jan Vevera

    (Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital in Pilsen, Charles University, 30100 Pilsen, Czech Republic
    Department of Psychiatry, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital in Prague, 12808 Prague, Czech Republic
    Institute for Postgraduate Medical Education, 10005 Prague, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Understanding the predictors of belief in COVID-related conspiracy theories and willingness to get vaccinated against COVID-19 may aid the resolution of current and future pandemics. We investigate how psychological and cognitive characteristics influence general conspiracy mentality and COVID-related conspiracy theories. A cross-sectional study was conducted based on data from an online survey of a sample of Czech university students ( n = 866) collected in January 2021, using multivariate linear regression and mediation analysis. Sixteen percent of respondents believed that COVID-19 is a hoax, and 17% believed that COVID-19 was intentionally created by humans. Seven percent of the variance of the hoax theory and 10% of the variance of the creation theory was explained by (in descending order of relevance) low cognitive reflection, low digital health literacy, high experience with dissociation and, to some extent, high bullshit receptivity. Belief in COVID-related conspiracy theories depended less on psychological and cognitive variables compared to conspiracy mentality (16% of the variance explained). The effect of digital health literacy on belief in COVID-related theories was moderated by cognitive reflection. Belief in conspiracy theories related to COVID-19 was influenced by experience with dissociation, cognitive reflection, digital health literacy and bullshit receptivity.

Suggested Citation

  • Vojtech Pisl & Jan Volavka & Edita Chvojkova & Katerina Cechova & Gabriela Kavalirova & Jan Vevera, 2021. "Dissociation, Cognitive Reflection and Health Literacy Have a Modest Effect on Belief in Conspiracy Theories about COVID-19," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-12, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:10:p:5065-:d:552578
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/10/5065/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/10/5065/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amery Wu & Bruno Zumbo, 2008. "Understanding and Using Mediators and Moderators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 87(3), pages 367-392, July.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:2:p:179-186 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Orkan Okan & Torsten Michael Bollweg & Eva-Maria Berens & Klaus Hurrelmann & Ullrich Bauer & Doris Schaeffer, 2020. "Coronavirus-Related Health Literacy: A Cross-Sectional Study in Adults during the COVID-19 Infodemic in Germany," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-20, July.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:6:p:549-563 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    6. Mariusz Duplaga, 2020. "The Determinants of Conspiracy Beliefs Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Nationally Representative Sample of Internet Users," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-15, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Serena Iacobucci & Roberta De Cicco, 2022. "A literature review of bullshit receptivity: Perspectives for an informed policy making against misinformation," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 6(S1), pages 23-40, July.
    2. Albertas Skurvydas & Ausra Lisinskiene & Daiva Majauskiene & Dovile Valanciene & Ruta Dadeliene & Natalja Fatkulina & Asta Sarkauskiene, 2022. "Do Physical Activity, BMI, and Wellbeing Affect Logical Thinking?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-15, May.
    3. Sheng-Chih Chen & Le Duc Huy & Cheng-Yu Lin & Chih-Feng Lai & Nhi Thi Hong Nguyen & Nhi Y. Hoang & Thao T. P. Nguyen & Loan T. Dang & Nguyen L. T. Truong & Tan N. Phan & Tuyen Van Duong, 2022. "Association of Digital Health Literacy with Future Anxiety as Mediated by Information Satisfaction and Fear of COVID-19: A Pathway Analysis among Taiwanese Students," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-16, November.
    4. Albertas Skurvydas & Ausra Lisinskiene & Daiva Majauskiene & Dovile Valanciene & Ruta Dadeliene & Natalja Istomina & Asta Sarkauskiene & Gediminas Buciunas, 2022. "What Types of Exercise Are Best for Emotional Intelligence and Logical Thinking?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-15, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mitja Vrdelja & Sanja Vrbovšek & Vito Klopčič & Kevin Dadaczynski & Orkan Okan, 2021. "Facing the Growing COVID-19 Infodemic: Digital Health Literacy and Information-Seeking Behaviour of University Students in Slovenia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-16, August.
    2. van Mulukom, Valerie & Pummerer, Lotte J. & Alper, Sinan & Bai, Hui & Čavojová, Vladimíra & Farias, Jessica & Kay, Cameron S. & Lazarevic, Ljiljana B. & Lobato, Emilio J.C. & Marinthe, Gaëlle & Pavela, 2022. "Antecedents and consequences of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).
    3. Justin F. Landy, 2016. "Representations of moral violations: Category members and associated features," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(5), pages 496-508, September.
    4. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    5. David J. Cooper & Krista Saral & Marie Claire Villeval, 2021. "Why Join a Team?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6980-6997, November.
    6. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2019. "Digital Communication and Swift Trust," SciencePo Working papers Main halshs-02050514, HAL.
    7. Brice Corgnet & Roberto Hernán Gonzalez & Ricardo Mateo, 2015. "Cognitive Reflection and the Diligent Worker: An Experimental Study of Millennials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, November.
    8. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    9. Luigi Guiso, 2015. "A Test of Narrow Framing and its Origin," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 1(1), pages 61-100, March.
    10. Breaban, Adriana & van de Kuilen, Gijs & Noussair, Charles, 2016. "Prudence, Personality, Cognitive Ability and Emotional State," Other publications TiSEM 9a01a5ab-e03d-49eb-9cd7-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    12. Fabian Herweg & Svenja Hippel & Daniel Müller & Fabio Römeis, 2024. "Axiom Preferences and Choice Mistakes under Risk," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 326, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    13. Fuchsman, Dillon & McGee, Josh B. & Zamarro, Gema, 2023. "Teachers’ willingness to pay for retirement benefits: A national stated preferences experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    14. Prokudina, Elena & Renneboog, Luc & Tobler, Philippe, 2015. "Does Confidence Predict Out-of-Domain Effort?," Discussion Paper 2015-055, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    15. Jordi Brandts & Isabel Busom & Cristina Lopez-Mayan & Judith Panadés, 2022. "Images Say More Than Just Words: Effectiveness of Visual and Text Communication in Dispelling the Rent–Control Misconception," Working Papers 1322, Barcelona School of Economics.
    16. Noussair, C.N. & Tucker, S. & Xu, Yilong, 2014. "A Future Market Reduces Bubbles but Allows Greater Profit for More Sophisticated Traders," Other publications TiSEM 43ded173-9eee-48a4-8a15-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Johannes Abeler & Felix Marklein, 2017. "Fungibility, Labels, and Consumption," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 99-127.
    18. Ek, Claes, 2017. "Some causes are more equal than others? The effect of similarity on substitution in charitable giving," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 45-62.
    19. Lex Borghans & Angela Lee Duckworth & James J. Heckman & Bas ter Weel, 2008. "The Economics and Psychology of Personality Traits," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(4).
    20. Fellner, Gerlinde & Maciejovsky, Boris, 2007. "Risk attitude and market behavior: Evidence from experimental asset markets," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 338-350, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:10:p:5065-:d:552578. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.