Conspiracy theories related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have propagated around the globe, leading the World Health Organization to declare the spread of misinformation an “Infodemic.” We tested the hypothesis that national narcissism—a belief in the greatness of one’s nation that requires external recognition—is associated with the spread of conspiracy theories during the COVID-19 pandemic. In two large-scale national surveys (NTotal = 950) conducted in the United States and the United Kingdom, and secondary analysis of data from 56 countries (N = 50,757), we found a robust, positive relationship between national narcissism and proneness to believe and disseminate conspiracy theories related to COVID-19. Furthermore, belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories was related to less engagement in health behaviors and less support for public-health policies to combat COVID-19. Our findings illustrate the importance of social identity factors in the spread of conspiracy theories and provide insights into the psychological processes underlying the COVID-19 pandemic.
AzevedoF.PavlovicT.RêgoG. G.CerenF. A.GjoneskaB.RossR. M.SchoeneggerP.RianoJ.CichockaA.CapraroV.CianL.LongoniC.ChanH. F.GkinopoulosT.KantorowiczJ.ICSMP ConsortiumSampaioW. (2021). Social and Moral Psychology of COVID-19 across 69 Countries. http://10.17605/OSF.IO/TFSZA
3.
BackM. D.KüfnerA. C. P.DufnerM.GerlachT. M.RauthmannJ. F.DenissenJ. J. A. (2013). Narcissistic admiration and rivalry: Disentangling the bright and dark sides of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(6), 1013–1037. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034431
4.
BasolM.RoozenbeekJ.van der LindenS. (2020). Good news about bad news: Gamified inoculation boosts confidence and cognitive immunity against fake news. Journal of Cognition, 3(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.91
5.
BellA.FairbrotherM.JonesK. (2018). Fixed and random effects models: Making an informed choice. Quality & Quantity, 53(2), 1051–1074. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0802-x
6.
BertinP.NeraK.HamerK.Uhl-HaedickeI.DelouvéeS. (2021, January13). Stand out of my Sunlight: The mediating role of climate change conspiracy beliefs in the relationship between national collective narcissism and acceptance of climate science. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/cnmfa
7.
BiddlestoneM.CichockaA.ŽeželjI.BilewiczM. (2020). Conspiracy theories and intergroup relations. In Routledge handbook of conspiracy theories (pp. 219–230). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429452734-2_6
8.
BiddlestoneM.GreenR.DouglasK. M. (2020). Cultural orientation, power, belief in conspiracy theories, and intentions to reduce the spread of COVID-19. British Journal of Social Psychology, 59(3), 663–673. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12397
CarneyD. R.JostJ. T.GoslingS. D.PotterJ. (2008). The secret lives of liberals and conservatives: Personality profiles, interaction styles, and the things they leave behind. Political Psychology, 29(6), 807–840. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00668.x
11.
CichockaA. (2016). Understanding defensive and secure in-group positivity: The role of collective narcissism. European Review of Social Psychology, 27(1), 283–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2016.1252530
CichockaA.Golec de ZavalaA.MarchlewskaM.BilewiczM.JaworskaM.OlechowskiM. (2018). Personal control decreases narcissistic but increases non-narcissistic in-group positivity. Journal of Personality, 86(3), 465–480.
15.
CichockaA.MarchlewskaM.Golec de ZavalaA. (2016). Does self-love or self-hate predict conspiracy beliefs? Narcissism, self-esteem and the endorsement of conspiracy theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(2), 157–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550615616170
16.
CichockaA.MarchlewskaM.Golec de ZavalaA.OlechowskiM. (2016). “They will not control us”: Ingroup positivity and belief in intergroup conspiracies. British Journal of Psychology, 107(3), 556–576. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12158
17.
CislakA.MarchlewskaM.WojcikA.SliwińskiK.MolendaZ.SzczepańskaD.CichockaA. (2021). National narcissism and support for voluntary vaccination policy: The mediating role of vaccination conspiracy beliefs. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 24(5), 701–719. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220959451
18.
CislakA.WojcikA. D.CichockaA. (2018). Cutting the forest down to save your face: Narcissistic national identification predicts support for anti-conservation policies. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 59, 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.08.009
DouglasK. M.SuttonR. M.CallanM. J.DawtryR. J.HarveyA. J. (2016). Someone is pulling the strings: Hypersensitive agency detection and belief in conspiracy theories. Thinking & Reasoning, 22(1), 57–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2015.1051586
21.
DouglasK. M.SuttonR.CichockaA. (2017). The psychology of conspiracy theories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 538–542. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417718261
EffronD. A. (2018). It could have been true: How counterfactual thoughts reduce condemnation of falsehoods and increase political polarization. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(5), 729–745. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217746152
24.
EinsteinK. L.GlickD. M. (2015). Do I think BLS data are BS? The consequences of conspiracy theories. Political Behavior, 37(3), 679–701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-014-9287-z
25.
EndersA. M.UscinskiJ. E. (2021). Are misinformation, antiscientific claims, and conspiracy theories for political extremists?Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 24(4), 583–605. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220960805
26.
FedericoC. M.De ZavalaA. G. (2018). Collective narcissism and the 2016 US presidential vote. Public Opinion Quarterly, 82(1), 110–121. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfx048
27.
Golec de ZavalaA.CichockaA. (2012). Collective narcissism and anti-semitism in Poland. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 15(2), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430211420891
28.
Golec de ZavalaA.CichockaA.BilewiczM. (2013). The paradox of in-group love: Differentiating collective narcissism advances understanding of the relationship between in-group and out-group attitudes. Journal of Personality, 81(1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00779.x
29.
Golec de ZavalaA.CichockaA.EidelsonR.JayawickremeN. (2009). Collective narcissism and its social consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 1074–1096. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016904
30.
Golec de ZavalaA.CichockaA.Iskra-GolecI. (2013). Collective narcissism moderates the effect of in-group image threat on intergroup hostility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(6), 1019–1039. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032215
31.
Golec de ZavalaA.Dyduch-HazarK.LantosD. (2019). Collective narcissism: Political consequences of investing self-worth in the ingroup’s image. Political Psychology, 40, 37–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12569
32.
Golec de ZavalaA.PekerM.GuerraR.BaranT. (2016). Collective narcissism predicts hypersensitivity to in-group insult and direct and indirect retaliatory intergroup hostility. European Journal of Personality, 30(6), 532–551. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2067
33.
GronfeldtB.CichockaA.CislakA.SterniskoA. I. (2021, June28). A small price to pay: National narcissism predicts readiness to sacrifice in-group members to defend the in-group’s image. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/7fmrx
34.
GruzdA.MaiP. (2020). Going viral: How a single tweet spawned a COVID-19 conspiracy theory on Twitter. Big Data & Society, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720938405
35.
GuerraR.BierwiaczonekK.FerreiraM.GolecdeZavalaA.AbakoumkinG.WildschutT.SedikidesC. (2020). An intergroup approach to collective narcissism: Intergroup threats and hostility in four European Union countries. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220972178
HughesS.MachanL. (2021). It’s a conspiracy: Covid-19 conspiracies link to psychopathy, Machiavellianism and collective narcissism. Personality and Individual Differences, 171, 110559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110559
38.
ImhoffR.LambertyP. (2020). A bioweapon or a hoax? The link between distinct conspiracy beliefs about the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak and pandemic behavior. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(8), 1110–1118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620934692
JolleyD.DouglasK. M. (2017). Prevention is better than cure: Addressing anti-vaccine conspiracy theories. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 47(8), 459–469. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12453
41.
JostJ. T.GlaserJ.KruglanskiA. W.SullowayF. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339
42.
KostermanR.FeshbachS. (1989). Toward a measure of patriotic and nationalistic attitudes. Political Psychology, 10(2), 257–274. https://doi.org/10.2307/3791647
43.
KrizanZ.HerlacheA. D. (2018). The narcissism spectrum model: A synthetic view of narcissistic personality. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316685018
44.
LantianA.MullerD.NurraC.KleinO.BerjotS.PantaziM. (2018). Stigmatized beliefs: Conspiracy theories, anticipated negative evaluation of the self, and fear of social exclusion. European Journal of Social Psychology, 48(7), 939–954. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2498
45.
LawsonM. A.LarrickR. P.SollJ. B. (2020). Comparing fast thinking and slow thinking: The relative benefits of interventions, individual differences, and inferential rules. Judgment & Decision Making, 15(5), 660–684.
46.
LeachC. W.Van ZomerenM.ZebelS.VliekM. L.PennekampS. F.DoosjeB.OuwerkerkJ. W.SpearsR. (2008). Group-level self-definition and self-investment: A hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 144–165. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.144
47.
León-MedinaF. J.Tena-SánchezJ.MiguelF. J. (2020). Fakers becoming believers: How opinion dynamics are shaped by preference falsification, impression management and coherence heuristics. Quality & Quantity, 54(2), 385–412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-019-00909-2
MarchlewskaM.CichockaA.JaworskaM.Golec de ZavalaA.BilewiczM. (2020). Superficial ingroup love? Collective narcissism predicts ingroup image defense, outgroup prejudice, and lower ingroup loyalty. British Journal of Social Psychology, 59(4), 857–875. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12367
51.
MarchlewskaM.CichockaA.ŁozowskiF.GórskaP.WiniewskiM. (2019). In search of an imaginary enemy: Catholic collective narcissism and the endorsement of gender conspiracy beliefs. The Journal of Social Psychology, 159(6), 766–779. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2019.1586637
52.
MarchlewskaM.CichockaA.PanayiotouO.CastellanosK.BataynehJ. (2018). Populism as identity politics: Ingroup disadvantage, collective narcissism and support for populism. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(2), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617732393
53.
MarintheG.BrownG.DelouvéeS.JolleyD. (2020). Looking out for myself: Exploring the relationship between conspiracy mentality, perceived personal risk, and COVID-19 prevention measures. British Journal of Health Psychology, 25(4), 957–980. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.12449
54.
MoslehM.PennycookG.RandD. G. (2020). Self-reported willingness to share political news articles in online surveys correlates with actual sharing on Twitter. PLOS ONE, 15(2), Article e0228882. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228882
55.
NeraK.Wagner-EggerP.BertinP.DouglasK.KleinO. (2021). A power-challenging theory of society, or a conservative mindset? Upward and downward conspiracy theories as ideologically distinct beliefs. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2769
56.
NielsenM.HaunD.KärtnerJ.LegareC. H. (2017). The persistent sampling bias in developmental psychology: A call to action. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 162, 31–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.017
57.
NowakB.BrzóskaP.PiotrowskiJ.SedikidesC.Żemojtel-PiotrowskaM.JonasonP. K. (2020). Adaptive and maladaptive behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic: The roles of Dark Triad traits, collective narcissism, and health beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 167, 110232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110232
58.
PennycookG.CheyneJ. A.BarrN.KoehlerD. J.FugelsangJ. A. (2015). On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit. Judgement and Decision Making, 10(6), 549–563. https://doi.org/10.1037/t52525-000
59.
PennycookG.McPhetresJ.ZhangY.LuJ. G.RandD. G. (2020). Fighting COVID-19 misinformation on social media: Experimental evidence for a scalable accuracy-nudge intervention. Psychological Science, 31(7), 770–780. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620939054
60.
PennycookG.RandD. G. (2020). Who falls for fake news? The roles of bullshit receptivity, overclaiming, familiarity, and analytic thinking. Journal of Personality, 88(2), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12476
61.
PostmesT.HaslamS. A.JansL. (2012). A single-item measure of social identification: Reliability, validity, and utility. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52(4), 597–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12006
62.
PrimiC.MorsanyiK.ChiesiF.DonatiM. A.HamiltonJ. (2016). The development and testing of a new version of the cognitive reflection test applying item response theory (IRT). Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 29(5), 453–469. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1883
63.
ScherbaumC. A.PesnerE. (2019). Power analysis for multilevel research. In HumphreyS. E.LeBretonJ. M. (Eds.), The handbook of multilevel theory, measurement, and analysis (pp. 329–352). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000115-015
64.
SterniskoA.CichockaA.Van BavelJ. J. (2020). The dark side of social movements: Social identity, non-conformity, and the lure of conspiracy theories. Current Opinion in Psychology, 35, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.02.007
65.
SzasziB.SzollosiA.PalfiB.AczelB. (2017). The cognitive reflection test revisited: Exploring the ways individuals solve the test. Thinking & Reasoning, 23(3), 207–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2017.1292954
66.
UscinskiJ. E.EndersA. M.KlofstadC.SeeligM.FunchionJ.EverettC.WuchtyS.PremaratneK.MurthiM. (2020). Why do people believe COVID-19 conspiracy theories?Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, 1(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-015
67.
Van BavelJ. J.CichockaA.CapraroV.SjåstadH.NezlekJ. B.PavlovićT.AlfanoA.GelfandM. J.AzevedoF.BirtelM. D.CislakA.LockwoodP.RossR. M.AbtsK.AgadullinaE.ArutaJ. J. B. R.BesharatiS.BorA.ChomaB. L.BoggioP. (in press). National identity predicts public health support during a global pandemic. Nature Communication.
68.
Van BavelJ. J.HarrisE. A.PärnametsP.RathjeS.DoellK.TuckerJ. A. (2021). Political psychology in the digital (mis) information age: A model of news belief and sharing. Social Issues and Policy Review, 5(1), 83–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12077
69.
Van BavelJ. J.PereiraA. (2018). The partisan brain: An identity-based model of political belief. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(3), 213–224.
70.
van der LindenS.PanagopoulosC.AzevedoF.JostJ. T. (2021). The paranoid style in American politics revisited: An ideological asymmetry in conspiratorial thinking. Political Psychology, 42(1), 23–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12681
71.
van ProoijenJ. W.KrouwelA. P.PolletT. V. (2015). Political extremism predicts belief in conspiracy theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(5), 570–578. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614567356
72.
van ProoijenJ. W.SongM. (2021). The cultural dimension of intergroup conspiracy theories. British Journal of Psychology, 112(2), 455–473. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12471
WoodM. J. (2018). Propagating and debunking conspiracy theories on Twitter during the 2015–2016 Zika virus outbreak. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 21(8), 485–490. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2017.0669
ZmigrodL.RentfrowP. J.RobbinsT. W. (2018). Cognitive underpinnings of nationalistic ideology in the context of Brexit. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(19), E4532–E4540.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
