If only I had not fallen down the rabbit hole: Counterfactual thinking reduces engagement with conspiracy theories

Conspiracy theories harm society, so it is important to find ways to stop their spread. We provide evidence that counterfactual thinking – thinking about what might have been – may pose a promising approach to tackle conspiracy theories. Across four experimental studies (total N = 2487), we tested how counterfactual thinking affects conspiracy-related cognitions and consequential behaviours. We found that encouraging individuals to entertain subtractive counterfactual thoughts about the negative consequences of conspiracy beliefs makes them more likely to consider opposing viewpoints and reflect on their own stances on conspiracy theories, with small effect sizes (Cohen's d s = 0.12–0.23). While reading counterfactuals did not influence individuals' conspiracy beliefs per se, doing so shaped how they engaged with conspiracy theories: It reduced individuals' behavioural engagement with conspiracy theories compared to non-conspiratorial content in a selective exposure task, with small-to-medium effect sizes (Cohen's d s = 0.24–0.33). Participants who read counterfactual statements before a reading task selected more non-conspiracy than conspiracy articles to read, whereas those who did not read counterfactuals showed the opposite preference. Reading counterfactuals also significantly reduced the time spent reading conspiracy articles without significantly affecting the time spent reading non-conspiracy articles. We found these effects regardless of individuals' general tendency to believe in conspiracy theories (i.e., conspiracy mentality). The present studies contribute to fundamental understanding of how counterfactual thinking shapes individuals' cognitive operations and behaviour in conspiracy theory contexts. We furthermore provide practically relevant insights into the potential and limitations of counterfactual thinking in combatting conspiracy theories. • We tested how counterfactual thinking could help tackling conspiracy theories. • Reading counterfactuals increases consideration of opposing viewpoints in conspiracy theory contexts. • Counterfactuals reduce engagement with conspiracy (vs. non-conspiracy) content, but not conspiracy beliefs. • Counterfactuals reduce the time spent reading conspiracy (but not non-conspiracy) articles.