PPBS

Conspiratorial thinking [2020]

A Politico-Psychological Analysis

Report generated

March 23, 2026

1 Study Characteristics

1.1 Items: Conspiratorial thinking

1.2 Sample

N=TBD

Sample description for the 2020 PPBS CINT study to be added.

2 Descriptives

2.1 Means, SD, Range, & SE

Table 1: Descriptives
Descriptives for Conspiratorial thinking Items
mean sd median se
Consp1 5.83 2.05 6.0 0.05
Consp2 5.00 2.31 5.0 0.05
Consp3 5.59 2.25 5.0 0.05
Consp4 6.32 1.92 7.0 0.04
Mean 5.68 1.56 5.5 0.03
Note:
All items: n = 2000, min = 1, max = 9. Mean: min = 1, max = 9

2.2 Response Distribution

Figure 1: Proportion of each response categories for Conspiratorial thinking Items
Figure 2: Distribution of reponses for Conspiratorial thinking Items

2.3 Correlations

Figure 3: Bivariate Spearman’s correlations for Conspiratorial thinking

Note. Upper triangle shows Spearman’s rank-order correlations. *** p < .001, ** p < .01, * p < .05.

Figure 4: Bivariate Spearman’s correlations for Conspiratorial thinking

Note. Upper triangle shows Spearman’s rank-order correlations by party identity. *** p < .001, ** p < .01, * p < .05.

Figure 5: Correlation Matrix of Conspiratorial thinking items, Spearman’s rank correlations

3 Demographics

3.1 Social Class

Figure 6: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by SES
Figure 7: Raincloud Plots showing Conspiratorial thinking grouped by Social Class

Note on the Raincloud Plots

  • Statistical summary (top): Welch’s t-test (or ANOVA) results, effect size, confidence intervals, p-values, and sample sizes are shown above each plot.
  • Bayesian analysis (bottom): Log Bayes factor and credible intervals are reported below each plot.
Table 2: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by SES
SES N Mean SD
Poor 154 -0.05 1.02
Lower Middle Class 405 0.07 0.98
Middle Middle Class 786 0.08 0.98
Upper Middle Class 655 -0.13 1.02

3.2 Gender

Figure 8: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Gender
Figure 9: Raincloud Plots showing Conspiratorial thinking grouped by Gender
Table 3: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Gender
Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Gender
Gender N Mean SD
Male 970 -0.10 1.00
Female 1030 0.09 0.99

3.3 Age

Figure 10: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Age
Figure 11: Raincloud Plots showing Conspiratorial thinking grouped by Age
Table 4: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Age
Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Age
Age N Mean SD
18-24 years 233 0.05 0.96
25-34 years 356 0.08 1.01
35-44 years 335 0.03 1.03
45-54 years 331 0.03 0.92
55-64 years 332 0.03 1.05
NA 413 -0.16 1.00

3.4 Education

Figure 12: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Education
Figure 13: Raincloud Plots showing Conspiratorial thinking grouped by Education
Table 5: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Education
Education N Mean SD
High School or less 761 0.09 0.95
Some College 565 0.07 1.03
Bachelor or higher 674 -0.16 1.01

3.5 Income Levels

Figure 14: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Income Levels
Figure 15: Raincloud Plots showing Conspiratorial thinking grouped by Income Levels
Table 6: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Income Levels
Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Income Levels
Income Levels N Mean SD
$150,000 + 251 -0.17 1.02
$75,000-$99,999 243 -0.07 0.85
Less than $15,000 229 -0.07 1.01
$100,000-$149,999 290 -0.03 0.94
$50,000-$74,999 357 0.05 1.07
$25,000-$34,999 187 0.06 0.99
$35,000-$49,999 255 0.10 1.12
$15,000-$24,999 188 0.17 0.90

3.6 Ethnicity

Figure 16: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Ethnicity

Note on the Okabe-Ito color palette. The Okabe-Ito color palette (seen above) is a set of colorblind-friendly categorical colors available in R. We are using this palette for graphs with non-ordered variables (e.g., groups, categories) for accessibility.

Figure 17: Raincloud Plots showing Conspiratorial thinking grouped by Ethnicity
Table 7: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Ethnicity
Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Ethnicity
Ethnicity N Mean SD
Black/African American 255 0.17 1.10
Asian/Pacific Islander 99 -0.11 0.97
Native American 13 0.38 0.94
Other 27 0.01 1.02
NA 1516 -0.03 0.98
NA 88 0.00 1.03
NA 2 0.04 0.45

3.7 Occupation

Figure 18: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Occupation
Figure 19: Raincloud Plots showing Conspiratorial thinking grouped by Occupation
Table 8: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Occupation
Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Occupation
Occupation N Mean SD
Employed 994 0.02 0.98
Retired 420 -0.09 1.01
Unemployed 241 0.08 1.05
Parent 71 0.00 1.01
Disabled 114 -0.13 1.00
Student 123 0.12 1.00
Full-time caregiver 37 0.03 0.92

3.8 Area

Figure 20: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Area
Figure 21: Raincloud Plots showing Conspiratorial thinking grouped by Area
Table 9: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Area
Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Area
Area N Mean SD
Urban 568 0.04 1.04
Rural 424 0.12 1.01
NA 1008 -0.07 0.97

3.9 Religious Affiliation

Figure 22: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Religious Affiliation
Figure 23: Raincloud Plots showing Conspiratorial thinking grouped by Religious Affiliation
Table 10: Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Religion
Conspiratorial thinking as grouped by Religious Affiliation
Religious Affiliation N Mean SD
Catholic 468 -0.05 0.97
Protestant 784 0.05 1.00
Jewish 72 -0.17 1.03
Muslim 11 0.04 0.74
Atheist/Agnostic 328 -0.05 1.06
Don't know / refused 337 0.04 0.99

3.10 Section Summary

  Conspiratorial thinking
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 6.54 6.26 – 6.83 <.001
Age -0.05 -0.09 – -0.01 .020
Income -0.00 -0.04 – 0.03 .777
Education -0.15 -0.24 – -0.05 .002
Gender (Male) -0.25 -0.39 – -0.11 <.001
Observations 2000
R2 / R2 adjusted .020 / .018

4 Political Behavior

4.1 Political Orientation

Figure 24: Political Orientation
Figure 25: Political Orientation (Controlled for Demographics)

Note. The y-axis shows residuals after regressing the outcome on demographics (Age, Income, Education, Gender). This illustrates how much the focal construct explains beyond demographic factors.

Figure 26: Correlation Matrix - Political Orientation
Table 11: Models of Political Orientation (SPRI) & Conspiratorial thinking
  Political Orientation Social Political Orientation Economic Political Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 51.70 50.38 – 53.03 <.001 50.03 48.63 – 51.44 <.001 54.38 53.01 – 55.76 <.001
Conspiratorial thinking 3.30 1.97 – 4.62 <.001 3.05 1.65 – 4.45 <.001 2.51 1.13 – 3.89 <.001
Observations 2000 2000 2000
R2 / R2 adjusted .012 / .011 .009 / .009 .006 / .006
Table 12: Models of Ideology and Conspiratorial thinking with Controls
  Political Orientation Social Political Orientation Economic Political Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 27.11 19.28 – 34.95 <.001 28.94 20.66 – 37.22 <.001 25.77 17.64 – 33.90 <.001
Conspiratorial thinking 2.34 1.49 – 3.19 <.001 2.11 1.21 – 3.01 <.001 1.97 1.09 – 2.85 <.001
Age 2.86 2.06 – 3.65 <.001 2.95 2.11 – 3.79 <.001 2.82 2.00 – 3.64 <.001
Income -0.44 -1.10 – 0.23 .195 -0.57 -1.28 – 0.13 .108 0.21 -0.47 – 0.90 .541
Education -0.48 -2.27 – 1.30 .597 -2.04 -3.93 – -0.16 .034 0.38 -1.47 – 2.23 .686
Gender (Male) 2.50 -0.18 – 5.18 .067 3.28 0.45 – 6.12 .023 3.51 0.73 – 6.29 .013
Observations 2000 2000 2000
R2 / R2 adjusted .038 / .035 .037 / .034 .034 / .032

4.2 Partisanship

Figure 27: Party Identity
Table 13: Mean Conspiratorial thinking by Party Identity
Mean Conspiratorial thinking by Party Identity (raw means)
Party Identity N Mean SD
Democrat 772 5.62 1.62
Republican 657 5.75 1.58
Don't Know/Other 72 5.75 1.62
Independent/Moderate 499 5.67 1.41
Table 14: Model of Conspiratorial thinking & Party Identity (7-point)
  Conspiratorial thinking
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 5.56 5.38 – 5.74 <.001
Party Identity (7-point) 0.03 -0.01 – 0.07 .131
Observations 1429
R2 / R2 adjusted .002 / .001
Table 15: Model of Conspiratorial thinking & Party Identity with Controls
  Conspiratorial thinking
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 6.33 5.95 – 6.71 <.001
Party Identity (7-point) 0.04 -0.00 – 0.08 .072
Age -0.04 -0.09 – 0.01 .115
Income 0.00 -0.04 – 0.04 .986
Education -0.17 -0.28 – -0.06 .003
Gender (Male) -0.21 -0.38 – -0.04 .013
Observations 1429
R2 / R2 adjusted .018 / .015

4.3 Religiosity

Figure 28: Religiosity
Figure 29: Religiosity (Controlled for Demographics)

Note. The y-axis shows residuals after regressing the outcome on demographics (Age, Income, Education, Gender). This illustrates how much the focal construct explains beyond demographic factors.

Figure 30: Religiosity - Correlation Matrix

4.4 Candidate Preferences

Figure 31: Candidate Preferences
Table 16: Candidate Preferences (centered)
Candidate Preferences and Conspiratorial thinking [centered]
Candidate Preference N Mean SD
Donald Trump 614 0.14 0.96
Bernie Sanders 326 0.20 1.02
Joe Biden 326 -0.12 1.06
None/Not listed 217 0.00 0.90
Elizabeth Warren 86 -0.13 0.91
Hillary Clinton 78 -0.06 1.08
Pete Buttigieg 75 -0.36 1.01
Ted Cruz 46 -0.14 1.02
Michael Bloomberg 43 -0.38 0.84
Kamala Harris 30 -0.21 0.91
Jeb Bush 29 -0.47 1.20
Mitt Romney 28 -0.65 0.87
Marco Rubio 26 -0.21 0.63
Rand Paul 24 0.64 0.76
Amy Klobuchar 23 -0.41 0.98
Beto O'Rourke 13 -0.72 1.06
Gary Johnson 10 -0.17 0.49
Jill Stein 6 0.26 1.32
Table 17: Candidate Preferences (raw means)
Candidate Preferences and Conspiratorial thinking [raw means]
Candidate Preferences N Mean SD Range
Donald Trump 614 5.90 1.50 1-9
Bernie Sanders 326 6.00 1.59 1-9
Joe Biden 326 5.50 1.65 1-9
None/Not listed 217 5.69 1.39 1-9
Elizabeth Warren 86 5.47 1.42 1-9
Hillary Clinton 78 5.59 1.68 1-9
Pete Buttigieg 75 5.13 1.58 1-9
Ted Cruz 46 5.46 1.58 1-9
Michael Bloomberg 43 5.10 1.31 1-9
Kamala Harris 30 5.35 1.42 1-9
Jeb Bush 29 4.95 1.87 1-9
Mitt Romney 28 4.68 1.35 1-9
Marco Rubio 26 5.36 0.98 1-9
Rand Paul 24 6.68 1.18 1-9
Amy Klobuchar 23 5.04 1.53 1-9
Beto O'Rourke 13 4.56 1.65 1-9
Gary Johnson 10 5.42 0.76 1-9
Jill Stein 6 6.08 2.05 1-9

4.5 Party Preferences

Figure 32: Party Preferences
Table 18: Party Preferences (centered)
Party Preferences and Conspiratorial thinking [centered]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Democrat Party 841 -0.06 1.03
None 266 0.01 0.92
Republican Party 736 0.02 0.98
Tea Party 38 0.14 1.14
Libertarian Party 97 0.19 0.99
Green Party 22 0.48 0.84
Table 19: Party Preferences (raw means)
Party Preferences and Conspiratorial thinking [raw means]
Party Preferences N Mean SD Range
Democrat Party 841 5.58 1.61 1-9
None 266 5.70 1.43 1-9
Republican Party 736 5.72 1.52 1-9
Tea Party 38 5.91 1.78 1-9
Libertarian Party 97 5.98 1.55 1-9
Green Party 22 6.43 1.31 1-9

4.6 Voting Preferences

Table 20: Voting Preferences
  2020 [Trump vs. Biden]
Predictors Odds Ratios CI p
(Intercept) 11.28 6.51 – 19.93 <.001
Conspiratorial thinking 0.96 0.87 – 1.05 .376
Observations 2000
R2 Tjur .000
Figure 33: Logistic Regression, Conspiratorial thinking & Voting Preferences

4.7 Voting & Party Identity

Figure 34: Party Identity and Voting
Table 21: Party Identity & Voting
0 1
Don't Know/Other 47 25
Republican 36 621
Independent/Moderate 79 420
Democrat 41 731
Figure 35: Predicted, Voting & Party Identity
Table 22: Supporters
  2020 [Biden vs. Trump]
Predictors Odds Ratios CI p
(Intercept) 11.60 6.61 – 20.77 <.001
Party Identity (dichotomous) 0.93 0.70 – 1.25 .641
Conspiratorial thinking 0.96 0.87 – 1.05 .387
Observations 2000
R2 Tjur .000

4.8 Likeability

5 Politico-Psychological correlates of Conspiratorial thinking


5.1 Ideologies and Partisanship

Figure 36: Correlates - Ideologies and Partisanship (by magnitude)
Figure 37: Correlates - Ideologies and Partisanship (alphabetic)

5.2 Populism, Nationalism, Nativism, and Patriotism

Figure 38: Correlates - Populism, Nationalism, Nativism, and Patriotism (by magnitude)
Figure 39: Correlates - Populism, Nationalism, Nativism, and Patriotism (alphabetic)

5.3 Political Psychology

Figure 40: Correlates - Political Psychology (by magnitude)
Figure 41: Correlates - Political Psychology (alphabetic)



5.4 Positive and Negative correlates of Conspiratorial thinking

Figure 42: Correlates - Positive associations
Figure 43: Correlates - Positive associations (alphabetic)
Figure 44: Correlates - Negative associations
Figure 45: Correlates - Negative associations (alphabetic)

6 Elastic Net Analysis

Figure 46: Elastic net predicting Conspiratorial thinking: Political Psychology
Figure 47: Elastic net predicting Conspiratorial thinking: Ideology & Partisanship
Figure 48: Elastic net predicting Conspiratorial thinking: Demographics
Figure 49: Elastic net predicting Conspiratorial thinking: Attitudes
Figure 50: Elastic net predicting Conspiratorial thinking: Everything
Table 23: Elastic Net Summary
Elastic Net R² for predicting Conspiratorial thinking
Variable Group # Predictors R²
Political Psychology 4 .080
Ideology & Partisanship 5 .013
Demographics 5 .020
Attitudes 2 .016
Everything 16 .100
PPBS
Psychology of Political Behavior Studies PI: Flavio Azevedo