Suspicious minds: exploring the commonalities and differences among conspiracy beliefs, paranoid beliefs, and conspiracy mentality in a nationally representative sample

Abstract

Background: Despite the theoretical overlap between conspiracy beliefs, paranoid beliefs, and conspiracy mentality, their distinctions remain insufficiently understood. This study explored these constructs and their clinical significance within a nationally representative sample (N = 1497). Methods: We measured sociodemographic and psychological variables early in the COVID-19 pandemic (T1) and assessed conspiracy beliefs, paranoid beliefs, and conspiracy mentality one year later (T2), during a period of heightened visibility of these beliefs. This longitudinal design allowed us to analyse how early factors shaped these belief systems. We conducted factor analyses and regression models to disentangle their relationships and identify distinct predictors. Results: Conspiracy beliefs, paranoid beliefs, and conspiracy mentality emerged as distinct constructs. We found that paranoid beliefs were more strongly associated with psychological factors (e.g. anxiety, intolerance of uncertainty), whereas conspiracy beliefs were driven by sociopolitical variables (e.g. income, political ideology). We identified external locus of control as the sole predictor of conspiracy mentality. Few participants showed strong endorsement of coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, which followed a skewed distribution similar to paranoid beliefs in the general population. Discussion: These findings highlight the importance of tailored interventions targeting specific predictors, with critical implications for mental health and public health strategies.