Conspiracy Theories: Evolved Functions and Psychological Mechanisms

Conspiracy Theories: Evolved Functions and Psychological Mechanisms

Abstract

Belief in conspiracy theories-such as that the nine eleven terrorist attacks were an inside job or that the pharmaceutical industry deliberately spreads diseases-is a widespread and culturally universal phenomenon. Why do so many people around the globe believe conspiracy theories, and why are they so influential? Previous research focused on the proximate mechanisms underlying conspiracy beliefs but ignored the distal, evolutionary origins and functions. We review evidence pertaining to two competing evolutionary hypotheses: (a) conspiracy beliefs are a by-product of a suite of psychological mechanisms (e.g., pattern recognition, agency detection, threat management, alliance detection) that evolved for different reasons, or (b) conspiracy beliefs are part of an evolved psychological mechanism specifically aimed at detecting dangerous coalitions. This latter perspective assumes that conspiracy theories are activated after specific coalition cues, which produce functional counterstrategies to cope with suspected conspiracies. Insights from social, cultural and evolutionary psychology provide tentative support for six propositions that follow from the adaptation hypothesis. We propose that people possess a functionally integrated mental system to detect conspiracies that in all likelihood has been shaped in an ancestral human environment in which hostile coalitions- that is, conspiracies that truly existed-were a frequent cause of misery, death, and reproductive loss.

Conspiracy theories are omnipresent among members of modern and traditional societies. A common definition of conspiracy theory is the conviction that a group of actors meets in secret agreement with the purpose of attaining some malevolent goal. Contrary to the view that belief in such theories is pathological, large portions of the human population believe conspiracy theories. In two thousand four, forty-nine percent of New York City residents believed the U.S. government to be complicit in the nine eleven terrorist attacks. In addition, in a nationally representative sample of the U.S. population, thirty-seven percent answered "agree" to the following statement: "the Food and Drug Administration is deliberately preventing the public from getting natural cures for cancer and other diseases because of pressure from drug companies." Another thirty-one percent answered "neither agree nor disagree," and only thirty-two percent disagreed with this statement. Belief in conspiracy theories is thus a widespread societal phenomenon and has increasingly drawn the research attention of social scientists. This research focused predominantly on the direct, proximate mechanisms underlying conspiracy beliefs but ignored the distal, evolutionary roots and functions of such beliefs. The aim of the current contribution is to fill this void.

We pursue the following more specific goals. First, we conceptualize conspiracy theories and identify the psychological mechanisms that interact to characterize belief in such theories. Second, to assess the core question of why conspiracy theories are widely believed, we place the key findings of this growing research domain within the context of evolutionary psychology. Through a synthesis of the empirical literature with theoretical insights from evolutionary, social, and cultural psychology, we put forward two rival hypotheses. The first, called the by-product hypothesis, argues that conspiracy theories are a by-product of a suite of cognitive mechanisms (e.g., pattern perception, agency detection) that evolved for different reasons. The second hypothesis, which we label the adaptive-conspiracism hypothesis, stipulates that conspiracy thinking is an adaptive feature of the human coalitional mind that evolved (a) to alert ancestral humans to the possibility that others were forming dangerous coalitions against them and (b) to stimulate appropriate actions to fend off such threats. Finally, on the basis of our line of reasoning, we generate novel predictions about potential mediators and moderators of conspiracy beliefs.

What Is a Conspiracy Theory?

Although the definition provided above is rather general, here we explicate the specific underlying features of conspiracy theories. We argue that a conspiracy theory contains at least five critical ingredients. First, conspiracy theories make an assumption of how people, objects, or events are causally interconnected. Put differently, a conspiracy theory always involves a hypothesized pattern. Second, conspiracy theories stipulate that the plans of alleged conspirators are deliberate. Conspiracy theories thus ascribe intentionality to the actions of conspirators, implying agency. Third, a conspiracy theory always involves a coalition, or group, of actors working in conjunction. An act of one individual, a lone wolf, does not fit the definition of a conspiracy theory. Fourth, conspiracy theories always contain an element of threat such that the alleged goals of the conspirators are harmful or deceptive. Sometimes, people may suspect others to conspire toward benevolent goals, but that is not how conspiracy theories are commonly conceptualized. Fifth, and finally, a conspiracy theory always carries an element of secrecy and is therefore often difficult to invalidate. Conspiracy theories that turn out true-such as Watergate or the Iran-Contra scandal-are no longer conspiracy "theories." Hence, in judging the validity of conspiracy theories, there is always room for error.

People hold many beliefs that share some of the key elements of conspiracy theories, such as supernatural beliefs. Indeed, conspiracy theories and supernatural beliefs are positively correlated.

What distinguishes conspiracy theories from supernatural beliefs is that they necessarily involve a coalition element of deceptive or potentially dangerous other human beings acting in unison. If one sees a collection of non-human stimuli grouped together-an unusually shaped collection of trees, rocks, mountains, stars, or the like-pattern perception and agency detection may provide people with mystical experiences, spirituality, religious revelations, and the desire to perform sacred rituals. For conspiracy theories to occur, however, these non-human stimuli need, at the very least, to be connected to the real or suspected presence of a coordinated group of deliberate actors. Unlike other forms of beliefs, a hostile coalition is a prerequisite of any conspiracy theory.

Browsing through the Internet, one can find many lay theories that fit the key ingredients of a conspiracy theory (patterns, agency, coalitions, threats, secrecy). They usually involve powerful groups such as societal leaders, governmental institutions (e.g., secret services), influential branches of industry (e.g., oil companies, the pharmaceutical industry), or stigmatized minority groups (e.g., Muslims, Jews). Besides the context of citizens' perception of geopolitical events, conspiracy theories emerge frequently in the microlevel setting of organizations, as employees often suspect their managers of conspiring toward evil goals such as pursuing their self-interest at the expense of employees and the organization. Belief in conspiracy theories is also common in non-Western cultures; for instance, in rural parts of various African countries (e.g., Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania), large portions of citizens believe conspiracy theories that involve malpractice of societal elites, sorcery or witchcraft by enemy groups, and hostile Western plots. Furthermore, although the term conspiracy theory may sometimes be used to invalidate legitimate accusations of corruption, not all conspiracy theories are irrational. Recent history is replete with examples of actual conspiracies in politics (Watergate), organizations (e.g., corporate corruption), and science (e.g., the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment).

Despite the variety of conspiracy theories, however, belief in such theories seems to reflect one more general conspiratorial mind-set. For instance, belief in one conspiracy theory is an excellent predictor of belief in different, unrelated conspiracies. Even mutually incompatible conspiracy beliefs- such as the belief that Princess Diana staged her own death and the belief that she was murdered-are positively correlated. These insights suggest that although there are many different conspiracy theories, belief in such theories is grounded in the same underlying psychology.