Overconfidently Conspiratorial: Conspiracy Believers are Dispositionally Overconfident and Massively Overestimate How Much Others Agree With Them

There is a pressing need to understand why people believe in conspiracies. Although past work has focused on needs and motivations, we propose an alternative driver of belief: overconfidence. Across eight studies with 4,181 U.S. adults, conspiracy believers consistently overestimated their performance on numeracy and perception tests (even after taking their actual performance into account). This relationship with overconfidence was robust in controlling for analytic thinking, the need for uniqueness, and narcissism, and it was strongest for the most fringe conspiracies. We also found that conspiracy believers-particularly overconfident ones-massively overestimated (>4×) how much others agree with them: Although conspiratorial claims were believed by a majority of participants only 12% of the time, believers thought themselves to be in the majority 93% of the time. This was evident even when asked to rate agreement among counter-partisans, indicating that conspiracists are genuinely unaware that their beliefs are on the fringe.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Published
2025-05-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672251338358
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
29.41

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Overconfidently Conspiratorial: Conspiracy Believers are Dispositionally Overconfident and Massively Overestimate How Much Others Agree With Them

Gordon Pennycook, David G. Rand, Jabin Binnendyk
7 citations
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Misinformation and Its Impacts
29.41
article

Overconfidently Conspiratorial: Conspiracy Believers are Dispositionally Overconfident and Massively Overestimate How Much Others Agree With Them

Gordon Pennycook, David G. Rand, Jabin Binnendyk
article en
7 citations

Abstract

There is a pressing need to understand why people believe in conspiracies. Although past work has focused on needs and motivations, we propose an alternative driver of belief: overconfidence. Across eight studies with 4,181 U.S. adults, conspiracy believers consistently overestimated their performance on numeracy and perception tests (even after taking their actual performance into account). This relationship with overconfidence was robust in controlling for analytic thinking, the need for uniqueness, and narcissism, and it was strongest for the most fringe conspiracies. We also found that conspiracy believers-particularly overconfident ones-massively overestimated (>4×) how much others agree with them: Although conspiratorial claims were believed by a majority of participants only 12% of the time, believers thought themselves to be in the majority 93% of the time. This was evident even when asked to rate agreement among counter-partisans, indicating that conspiracists are genuinely unaware that their beliefs are on the fringe.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
University of Regina (CA), Cornell University (US), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
John Templeton Foundation, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
29.41
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.