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

Abstract

Despite the scientific consensus about the anthropogenic nature of climate change, there are still obstacles hindering society from acknowledging the severity of the situation. Notably, previous research suggests that climate change threats can cause people to display ethnocentric reactions to preserve the ingroup’s interests. In this research, we investigate the relation between collective narcissism and attitudes towards climate science. We argue that national collective narcissism is negatively associated with the acceptance of climate science. We further hypothesized that this relation might be mediated by conspiracy beliefs about climate change, because narcissistic identifiers are prone to hold conspiracy beliefs. In a pilot study (N = 409), we found that national collective narcissism was significantly associated with climate change conspiracy beliefs. In Study 1 (N = 295), climate change conspiracy beliefs mediated the negative relation between national collective narcissism and acceptance of climate science. In Study 2 (N = 375), this mediation was replicated when controlling for other forms of climate skepticism. Lastly, general conspiracy mentality did not mediate this relation, which emphasizes the importance of considering the specificity of climate change conspiracy theories (rather than generic propensity to believe in conspiracy theories) in understanding distrust of climate science.

Keywords

attitudes towards climate science climate change climate skepticism collective narcissism conspiracy mentality conspiracy theories science acceptance

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anvari

Lakens

(2018). The replicability crisis and public trust in psychological science. Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology, 3, 266–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/23743603.2019.1684822

Bamberg

(2013). Changing environmentally harmful behaviors: A stage model of self- regulated behavioral change. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 151–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.01.002

Bauer

P. C.

Barbera

Ackermann

Venetz

(2017). Is the left-right scale a valid measure of ideology? Individual-level variation in associations with “left” and “right” and left-right self-placement. Political Behavior, 39, 553–583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-016-9368-2

Bergman

J. Z.

Westerman

J. W.

Bergman

S. M.

Westerman

Daly

J. P.

(2014). Narcissism, materialism, and environmental ethics in business students. Journal of Management Education, 38, 489–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562913488108

Bertin

Nera

Delouvée

(2020). Conspiracy beliefs, rejection of vaccination, and support for hydroxychloroquine: A conceptual replication-extension in the COVID-19 pandemic context. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 2471. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.565128

Björnberg

K. E.

Karlsson

Gilek

Hansson

S. O.

(2017). Climate and environmental science denial: A review of the scientific literature published in 1990–2015. Journal of Cleaner Production, 167, 229–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.066

Bliuc

A.-M.

McGarty

Thomas

E. F.

Lala

Berndsen

Misajon

(2015). Public division about climate change rooted in conflicting socio-political identities. Nature Climate Change, 5, 226–229. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2507

Bruder

Haffke

Neave

Nouripanah

Imhoff

(2013). Measuring individual differences in generic beliefs in conspiracy theories across cultures: Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 225. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00225

Cichocka

(2016). Understanding defensive and secure in-group positivity: The role of collective narcissism. European Review of Social Psychology, 27, 283–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2016.1252530

10.

Cichocka

Golec

Zavala

Marchlewska

Olechowski

(2015). Grandiose delusions: Collective narcissism, secure in-group identification, and belief in conspiracies. In Bilewicz

Cichocka

Soral

(Eds.), The psychology of conspiracy (pp. 42–61). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315746838-9

11.

Cichocka

Marchlewska

Golec de Zavala

Olechowski

(2016). “They will not control us”: Ingroup positivity and belief in intergroup conspiracies. British Journal of Psychology, 107, 556–576. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12158

12.

Cislak

Wojcik

A. D.

Cichocka

(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

13.

Cologna

Siegrist

(2020). The role of trust for climate change mitigation and adaptation behaviour: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 69, Article 101428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101428

14.

Institut français d’opinion publique [IFOP]. (2019). Enquête sur le complotisme – Vague 2 [Conspiracy investigation – Phase 2]. https://jean-jaures.org/sites/default/files/redac/commun/productions/2019/0220/rapport_complot.pdf

15.

Cook

Nuccitelli

Green

S. A.

Richardson

Winkler

Painting

Way

Jacobs

Skuce

(2013). Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature. Environmental Research Letters, 8, Article 024024. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024

16.

Cook

Oreskes

Doran

P. T.

Anderegg

W. R. L.

Verheggen

Maibach

E. W.

Carlton

J. S.

Lewandowsky

Skuce

A. G.

Green

S. A.

Nuccitelli

Jacobs

Richardson

Winkler

Painting

Rice

(2016). Consensus on consensus: A synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming. Environmental Research Letters, 11, Article 048002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002

17.

Diethelm

McKee

(2009). Denialism: What is it and how should scientists respond? European Journal of Public Health, 19, 2–4. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckn139

18.

Douglas

K. M.

Sutton

R. M.

(2015). Climate change: Why the conspiracy theories are dangerous. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 71, 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0096340215571908

19.

Douglas

K. M.

Sutton

R. M.

(2018). Why conspiracy theories matter: A social psychological analysis. European Review of Social Psychology, 29, 256–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2018.1537428

20.

Douglas

K. M.

Uscinski

J. E.

Sutton

R. M.

Cichocka

Nefes

Ang

C. S.

Deravi

(2019). Understanding conspiracy theories. Political Psychology, 40, 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12568

21.

Dunn

T. J.

Baguley

Brunsden

(2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105, 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12046

22.

Ecklund

E. H.

Scheitle

C. P.

Peifer

Bolger

(2017). Examining links between religion, evolution views, and climate change skepticism. Environment and Behavior, 49, 985–1006. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916516674246

23.

Einstein

K. L.

Glick

D. M.

(2013, August). Scandals, conspiracies and the vicious cycle of cynicism. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.

24.

Feygina

(2012). The challenge of system justification for acknowledging and responding to environmental dilemmas and climate change (Publication No. 3546399) [Doctoral dissertation, New York University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

25.

Frantz

Mayer

F. S.

Norton

Rock

(2005). There is no “I” in nature: The influence of self-awareness on connectedness to nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 427–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.10.002

26.

Fritsche

Barth

Jugert

Masson

Reese

(2018). A social identity model of pro-environmental action (SIMPEA). Psychological Review, 125, 245–269. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000090

27.

Fritsche

Cohrs

J. C.

Kessler

Bauer

(2012). Global warming is breeding social conflict: The subtle impact of climate change threat on authoritarian tendencies. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.10.002

28.

Fritsche

Jonas

Kessler

(2011). Collective reactions to threat: Implications for intergroup conflict and for solving societal crises. Social Issues and Policy Review, 5, 101–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-2409.2011.01027.x

29.

Galliford

Furnham

(2017). Individual difference factors and beliefs in medical and political conspiracy theories. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 58, 422–428. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12382

30.

Gallucci

(2020). jAMM: jamovi advanced mediation models [Computer software] (Version 1.0.4). https://jamovi-amm.github.io/

31.

Goertzel

(2010). Conspiracy theories in science: Conspiracy theories that target specific research can have serious consequences for public health and environmental policies. EMBO Reports, 11, 493–499. https://doi.org/10.1038/embor.2010.84

32.

Goldsby

Koolage

W. J.

(2015). Climate modeling: Comments on coincidence, conspiracy, and climate change denial. Environmental Philosophy, 12, 221–252. https://doi.org/10.5840/envirophil2015102625

33.

Golec de. Zavala

(2021). Why is populism so robustly associated with conspiratorial thinking? Collective narcissism and the meaning maintenance model. In Sinnott

J. D.

Rabin

J. S.

(Eds.), The psychology of political behaviour in a time of change (pp. 277–290). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38270-4_12

34.

Golec de. Zavala

Cichocka

Eidelson

Jayawickreme

(2009). Collective narcissism and its social consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1074–1096. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016904

35.

Golec de Zavala

Cichocka

Iskra-Golec

(2013). Collective narcissism moderates the effect of in-group image threat on intergroup hostility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 1019–1039. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032215

36.

Golec

de.

Zavala

Dyduch-Hazar

Lantos

(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

37.

Golec

de.

Zavala

Federico

C. M.

(2018). Collective narcissism and the growth of conspiracy thinking over the course of the 2016 United States presidential election: A longitudinal analysis. European Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 1011–1018. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2496

38.

Golec

de.

Zavala

Lantos

(2020). Collective narcissism and its social consequences: The bad and the ugly. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29, 273–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420917703

39.

Golec

de.

Zavala

Peker

Guerra

Baran

(2016). Collective narcissism predicts hypersensitivity to in-group insult and direct and indirect retaliatory intergroup hostility. European Journal of Personality, 30, 532–551. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2067

40.

Haltinner

Sarathchandra

(2018). Climate change skepticism as a psychological coping strategy. Sociology Compass, 12, Article e12586. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12586

41.

Hamer

Penczek

Bilewicz

(2018). Between universalistic and defensive forms of group attachment. The indirect effects of national identification on intergroup forgiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 131, 15–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.03.052

42.

Hamer

Penczek

McFarland

Wlodarczyk

Łużniak-Piecha

Golińska

Cadena

L. M.

Ibarra

Bertin

Delouvée

(2020). Identification with all humanity—A test of the factorial structure and measurement invariance of the scale in five countries. International Journal of Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12678

43.

Hansson

S. O.

(2017). Science denial as a form of pseudoscience. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science: Part A, 63, 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2017.05.002

44.

Hornsey

M. J.

Harris

E. A.

Fielding

K. S.

(2018). Relationships among conspiratorial beliefs, conservatism and climate scepticism across nations. Nature Climate Change, 8, 614–620. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0157-2

45.

Hotez

P. J.

(2020a). Anti-science extremism in America: Escalating and globalizing. Microbes and Infection, 22, 505–507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micinf.2020.09.005

46.

Hotez

P. J.

(2020b). Combating antiscience: Are we preparing for the 2020s? PLoS Biology, 18, Article e3000683. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000683

47.

Jacques

P. J.

Dunlap

R. E.

Freeman

(2008). The organisation of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental scepticism. Environmental Politics, 17, 349–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010802055576

48.

Jolley

Douglas

K. M.

(2014a). The effects of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories on vaccination intentions. PLoS ONE, 9, Article e89177. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089177

49.

Jolley

Douglas

K. M.

(2014b). The social consequences of conspiracism: Exposure to conspiracy theories decreases intentions to engage in politics and to reduce one’s carbon footprint. British Journal of Psychology, 105, 35–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12018

50.

Jolley

Meleady

Douglas

K. M.

(2019). Exposure to intergroup conspiracy theories promotes prejudice which spreads across groups. British Journal of Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12385

51.

Jolley

Paterson

J. L.

(2020). Pylons ablaze: Examining the role of 5G COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and support for violence. British Journal of Social Psychology, 59, 628–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12394

52.

Jonas

McGregor

Klackl

Agroskin

Fritsche

Holbrook

Nash

Proulx

Quirin

(2014). Threat and defense. In Zanna

Olson

(Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 49, pp. 219–286). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800052-6.00004-4

53.

Krueger

(2001). Null hypothesis significance testing: On the survival of a flawed method. American Psychologist, 56, 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.1.16

54.

Lantian

Muller

Nurra

Douglas

K. M.

(2016). Measuring belief in conspiracy theories: Validation of a French and English single-item scale. International Review of Social Psychology, 29, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.8

55.

Larkin

Fink

J. S.

(2019). Toward a better understanding of fan aggression and dysfunction: The moderating role of collective narcissism. Journal of Sport Management, 33, 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsm.2018-0012

56.

Lewandowsky

Gignac

G. E.

Oberauer

(2013). The role of conspiracist ideation and worldviews in predicting rejection of science. PLoS ONE, 8, Article e75637. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0075637

57.

Lewandowsky

Oberauer

(2016). Motivated rejection of science. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 217–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416654436

58.

Lewandowsky

Oberauer

Gignac

G. E.

(2013). NASA faked the moon landing—Therefore, (climate) science is a hoax: An anatomy of the motivated rejection of science. Psychological Science, 24, 622–633. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612457686

59.

Malka

Soto

C. J.

Inzlicht

Lelkes

(2014). Do needs for security and certainty predict cultural and economic conservatism? A cross-national analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 1031–1051. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036170

60.

Marchlewska

Cichocka

Łozowski

Górska

Winiewski

(2019). In search of an imaginary enemy: Catholic collective narcissism and the endorsement of gender conspiracy beliefs. The Journal of Social Psychology, 159, 766–779. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2019.1586637

61.

Marchlewska

Cichocka

Panayiotou

Castellanos

Batayneh

(2018). Populism as identity politics: Perceived in-group disadvantage, collective narcissism, and support for populism. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9, 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617732393

62.

Marinthe

Brown

Delouvée

Jolley

(2020). Looking out for myself: Exploring the relationship between conspiracy mentality, perceived personal risk and COVID-19 prevention measures. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/cm9st

63.

McFarland

Hackett

Hamer

Katzarska-Miller

Malsch

Reese

Reysen

(2019). Global human identification and citizenship: A review of psychological studies. Political Psychology, 40, 141–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12572

64.

McFarland

Webb

Brown

(2012). All humanity is my ingroup: A measure and studies of identification with all humanity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 830–853. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028724

65.

Moscovici

(1987). The conspiracy mentality. In Graumann

C. F.

Moscovici

(Eds.), Changing conceptions of conspiracy (pp. 151–169). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4618-3_9

66.

Naderi

Strutton

(2014). Can normal narcissism be managed to promote green product purchases? Investigating a counterintuitive proposition. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44, 375–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12230

67.

Poortinga

Spence

Whitmarsh

Capstick

Pidgeon

N. F.

(2011). Uncertain climate: An investigation into public scepticism about anthropogenic climate change. Global Environmental Change, 21, 1015–1024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.03.001

68.

Rahmstorf

(2004). The climate sceptics. In Re

Munich

(Ed.) Weather catastrophes and climate change – Is there still hope for us? (pp. 76–83). verlag: Munich.

69.

Rohrer

J. M.

(2018). Thinking clearly about correlations and causation: Graphical causal models for observational data. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1, 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245917745629

70.

Rutjens

B. T.

Sutton

R. M.

van der Lee

(2018). Not all skepticism is equal: Exploring the ideological antecedents of science acceptance and rejection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44, 384–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217741314

71.

Schönbrodt

F. D.

Perugini

(2013). At what sample size do correlations stabilize? Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 609–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.05.009

72.

Sternisko

Cichocka

van Bavel

J. 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

73.

Stoll-Kleemann

Schmidt

U. J.

(2017). Reducing meat consumption in developed and transition countries to counter climate change and biodiversity loss: A review of influence factors. Regional Environmental Change, 17, 1261–1277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-1057-5

74.

Swami

Barron

Weis

Voracek

Stieger

Furnham

(2017). An examination of the factorial and convergent validity of four measures of conspiracist ideation, with recommendations for researchers. PLoS ONE, 12, Article e0172617. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172617

75.

Tranter

Booth

(2015). Scepticism in a changing climate: A cross-national study. Global Environmental Change, 33, 154–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.05.003

76.

Uhl

Jonas

Klackl

(2016). When climate change information causes undesirable side effects: The influence of environmental self-identity and biospheric values on threat responses/Cuando la información sobre el cambio climático tiene efectos indeseados: La influencia de la identidad ambiental y de los valores biosféricos en la respuesta ante una amenaza. Psyecology, 7, 307–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/21711976.2016.1242228

77.

Uhl

Klackl

Hansen

Jonas

(2018). Undesirable effects of threatening climate change information: A cross-cultural study. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21, 513–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217735577

78.

Uscinski

J. E.

Douglas

Lewandowsky

(2017). Climate change conspiracy theories. In Uscinski

J. E.

Douglas

Lewandowsky

(Eds.), Oxford research encyclopedia of climate science. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.328

79.

Van der Linden

(2015). The conspiracy-effect: Exposure to conspiracy theories (about global warming) decreases pro-social behavior and science acceptance. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 171–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.07.045

80.

Van der Linden

S. L.

Leiserowitz

A. A.

Feinberg

G. D.

Maibach

E. W

. (2015). The scientific consensus on climate change as a gateway belief: Experimental evidence. PLoS ONE, 10, Article e0118489. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118489

81.

Van der Linden

Panagopoulos

Azevedo

Jost

J. T.

(2020). The paranoid style in American politics revisited: An ideological asymmetry in conspiratorial thinking. Political Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12681

82.

Van der Linden

Rosenthal

S. A

. (2016). Measuring narcissism with a single question? A replication and extension of the Single-Item Narcissism Scale (SINS). Personality and Individual Differences, 90, 238–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.10.050

83.

Washburn

A. N.

Skitka

L. J.

(2018). Science denial across the political divide: Liberals and conservatives are similarly motivated to deny attitude-inconsistent science. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9, 972–980. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617731500

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.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB