Examining the Relationship Between Conspiracy Theories, Paranormal Beliefs, and Pseudoscience Acceptance Among a University Population

253 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit (2015, unknown): “Beliefs that conﬂict with common naturalistic conceptions of the world have been labelled epistemically suspect (e.g., Lobato et al., 2014; Pennycook, Fugelsang & Koehler, in press).”
An examination of the underlying dimensional structure of three domains of contaminated mindware: paranormal beliefs, conspiracy beliefs, and anti-science attitudes (2020, unknown): “These results are consistent with and extend previous research examining associations between those individual differences and unwarranted beliefs (e.g., Lindeman et al., 2015; Lobato et al., 2014; Pennycook et al., 2015a; Stanovich et al., 2016; Swami et al, 2014).”
Everyday Consequences of Analytic Thinking (2015, unknown): “Many pseudoscientific beliefs are also epistemically suspect (Lobato et al., 2014) and could therefore potentially relate to analytic thinking.”
Modeling Attitudes Toward Science: Development and Validation of the Credibility of Science Scale (2017, background): “At a conceptual level, belief in paranormal phenomena is in tension with a scientific perspective (Goode, 2012), and, empirically, belief in the paranormal correlate positively with conspiracist and pseudoscientific beliefs (Lobato et al., 2014).”