| Conspiracy theorists have traditionally been treated as being relatively non-threatening
believers of wild theories. However, in recent years the growth of conspiracy theories within the
American public has caused many commentators pause. While violence and extreme actions
have become more common amongst conspiracy theorists (e.g. Pizzagate), the world witnessed
in shock the culmination of decades of radicalization within the conspiracy theory community
when “patriots” stormed the US Capitol Building in an act of armed and violent insurrection.
This has forced many to stop dismissing conspiracy theories as being mostly harmless musings.
While it is clear that being a conspiracy theorist will influence these individual’s views toward
issues directly related to a given conspiracy theory, no previous research has sought to determine
if conspiracy theorists hold policy preferences on traditional policy issues that differ from nonconspiracy theorists. In short, does being a conspiracy theorist influence attitudes and beliefs
unrelated to a given conspiracy? Does believing in specific conspiracy theories influence
attitudes and beliefs unrelated to a given conspiracy? Using a large national public opinion
survey, this project examines the extent to which a variety of public policy preferences are
influenced by being a conspiracy theorist and believing in specific conspiracy theories. Analyses
reveal that conspiracy theorists hold unique preferences that differentiate them from nonconspiracy theorists.
Keywords: Conspiracy Theories, Public Policy, Policy Preferences, Public Opinion, Political
Science |