Who Is Most Vulnerable to Conspiracist Ideation? Mapping Conspiracy Belief Profiles and the Psychological Characteristics That Differentiate Them

Conspiracy beliefs are consequential for politics, public health, and trust in science, yet less is known about the psychosocial characteristics associated with different patterns of endorsement across conspiracy domains. The aim was to identify latent profiles of conspiracy belief and test whether profiles differ on psychosocial characteristics. Adults (n = 252) recruited via Prolific completed the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale and measures of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, conservatism, loneliness, alienation, societal discontent, relative deprivation, and paranoid thoughts. Latent profile analysis supported four profiles: Low Conspiracy Endorsement, Low-to-Average Conspiracy Endorsement, Elevated Institution-Focused Conspiracy Endorsement, and High Conspiracy Endorsement. Conspiracy belief increased progressively across the four profiles, although the two highest-endorsing profiles did not differ on Government Malfeasance or Information Control. The High Conspiracy Endorsement profile was instead distinguished by greater endorsement of Malevolent Global, Extraterrestrial, and Personal Wellbeing conspiracies relative to the Elevated Institution-Focused Conspiracy Endorsement profile. ANOVAs revealed profile differences in societal discontent, grandiose narcissism, paranoid thoughts, vulnerable narcissism, and conservatism, with the High Conspiracy Endorsement profile scoring significantly higher than the Low Conspiracy Endorsement profile. However, no significant differences were observed between profiles for relative deprivation, loneliness, or alienation. These findings identify societal discontent, narcissism, conservatism, and paranoid thoughts as psychosocial characteristics associated with current conspiracy belief profiles.