Abstract
In authoritarian states, emerging democracies, and well-established democracies alike, alternative accounts that contest official state narratives are common. Why do people believe such accounts even in the absence of supporting evidence? While this question has been explored in the United States, relatively little research has assessed it in other contexts. Through a survey experiment carried out in Pakistan, this article tests the impact of cues by political parties on belief in such conspiracy theories. The results provide evidence in favor of partisan cueing: When alternative narratives are endorsed by political parties viewed favorably by the respondent, they are more likely to be believed. I suggest that political parties are able to capitalize on misinformation and a lack of trust in official institutions for tactical advantage. Results differ by subgroup: Higher income and urban respondents are swayed more by their own party source than are lower income and rural individuals.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
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.
