# Demographic and personality predictors of conspiracy theory belief ## Introduction The prevalence of conspiracy theories—defined as convictions that significant historical, political, or social events are the direct result of malevolent, secretive coordination by powerful groups—represents a significant phenomenon within contemporary political psychology and sociology [cite: 1, 2]. While public discourse often frames the endorsement of such theories as the domain of fringe subcultures or the result of clinical psychopathology, extensive empirical data indicates that conspiratorial ideation is a widespread, continuous psychological variable present across diverse demographic and cultural contexts [cite: 3, 4, 5]. Research on conspiratorial ideation has expanded rapidly; bibliometric analyses indicate that the number of studies concerning conspiracy beliefs increased by more than 150% between 2020 and 2021 alone, driven largely by the proliferation of decentralized communication networks and the societal stress induced by the COVID-19 pandemic [cite: 3, 5]. Identifying the predictors of susceptibility is critical for addressing downstream behavioral consequences. The literature reliably links the endorsement of conspiracy theories to anti-normative behaviors, science rejection, non-compliance with public health mandates, decreased political participation, and an increased propensity for political violence [cite: 1, 6, 7, 8]. A synthesis of systematic reviews, multi-nation cross-sectional studies, and meta-analyses reveals that susceptibility is not predicted by a single variable, but rather by an intricate interplay of cognitive processing styles, sub-clinical personality traits, epistemic vulnerabilities, sociodemographic factors, and macro-level institutional and cultural frameworks [cite: 3, 5, 9, 10]. ## Conceptual Distinctions and Definitions ### Conspiracy Mentality Versus Specific Beliefs A foundational distinction in the psychological literature separates the endorsement of specific, localized conspiracy theories from a broader, underlying psychological predisposition known as "conspiracy mentality" or "conspiratorial ideation" [cite: 3, 11]. Conspiracy mentality represents a generalized, monological belief system that routinely interprets systemic events through a lens of suspicion toward powerholders and institutional authorities [cite: 3, 6, 7]. Research utilizing psychometric instruments such as the Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire (CMQ) and the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale (GCBS) demonstrates that individuals with high conspiracy mentality are highly likely to endorse novel or specific conspiracy theories, regardless of the subject matter [cite: 3, 6, 12, 13]. One of the most robust predictors of believing in a specific conspiracy theory is the concurrent belief in other conspiracy theories, even when those theories logically contradict one another or involve entirely fictitious entities [cite: 1, 3, 11]. The generalized nature of this trait suggests that susceptibility is less dependent on the evidentiary content of any single theory and more reliant on an underlying psychological architecture that inherently favors alternative, secretive explanations over official narratives [cite: 1, 2, 13]. ### Differentiating Conspiracy Ideation from Misinformation Susceptibility While often grouped together under the colloquial umbrella of "problematic information" or "fake news," the endorsement of conspiracy theories and susceptibility to misinformation exhibit distinct cognitive and psychological profiles [cite: 14, 15, 16]. Misinformation entails incorrect or misleading information resulting from error, inattention, or deliberate fabrication (disinformation), which individuals may accept due to low digital literacy, reliance on heuristics, or partisan bias [cite: 17, 18]. Recent advancements in the field utilize Signal Detection Theory (SDT) to untangle these phenomena by distinguishing between two independent cognitive components: "discrimination ability" and "response bias" [cite: 19, 20, 21]. Discrimination ability (d') refers to the cognitive capacity to accurately separate true from false information. Response bias (c) captures the threshold at which an individual accepts any piece of information as true or false, regardless of its actual veracity [cite: 16, 19, 21]. A comprehensive meta-analysis of 256,337 unique veracity judgments from 11,561 participants across 31 experiments demonstrated that discrimination ability is positively associated with cognitive reflection and analytical thinking [cite: 19, 22]. Individuals with higher analytical thinking skills are generally better at identifying false news. However, susceptibility to misinformation is heavily influenced by "myside bias" or ideological congruency, leading to a true-news response bias (naïvety) when false information aligns with pre-existing political identities [cite: 18, 19, 20]. In contrast, conspiracy endorsement is less responsive to simple analytical corrections. It is deeply tied to a rejection of institutional epistemic authority and altered response criteria regarding official narratives [cite: 20]. Despite these differences, individuals susceptible to both misinformation and conspiracy theories share a highly predictive epistemic vulnerability: the fundamental conviction that "truth is political" [cite: 15, 23, 24]. | Feature | Conspiracy Ideation | Misinformation Susceptibility | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Core Mechanism** | Deeply held worldview prioritizing secretive, malevolent coordination by elites [cite: 1, 3]. | Acceptance of false/inaccurate claims due to heuristic processing, inattention, or bias [cite: 17, 18]. | | **Epistemic Drivers** | High "truth is political" belief; hypersensitive agency detection [cite: 7, 24]. | Low cognitive reflection; high ideological congruency (myside bias) [cite: 19, 20, 25]. | | **Response to Interventions** | High resistance; corrections are often incorporated into the conspiracy narrative [cite: 15, 16]. | Moderate responsiveness; accuracy nudges can improve discrimination ability [cite: 15, 16]. | | **Signal Detection Theory (SDT)** | Linked to high false-news bias for official narratives; skepticism toward established facts [cite: 20]. | Linked to low discrimination ability; high true-news bias (naïvety) for familiar or aligned content [cite: 19, 25]. | ## Cognitive Processing and Epistemic Beliefs ### Dual-Process Theory and Cognitive Reflection A highly replicated predictor of conspiracy endorsement is an individual's cognitive processing style, analyzed through the framework of dual-process cognition. This theory differentiates between intuitive (experiential, automatic, and heuristic-based) thinking and analytic (reflective, deliberate, and effortful) thinking [cite: 21, 26]. Extensive meta-analytic evidence, incorporating published and unpublished correlational data across 145 samples and 181 effect sizes, confirms a significant negative correlation (r = -.189) between reflective thinking and conspiracy beliefs [cite: 26, 27]. Individuals who engage in analytic thinking are significantly less inclined to endorse conspiracy theories, demonstrating that cognitive reflection acts as a protective buffer against the heuristic errors that make conspiratorial narratives appealing [cite: 26, 27]. Conversely, a reliance on intuitive thinking and "gut feelings" predicts higher susceptibility [cite: 23, 27]. This finding replicates consistently across cross-cultural boundaries; a large-scale study spanning 48 cultures confirmed the negative association between reflection and belief in conspiracy theories, noting that the protective effect of analytical thinking is present and even stronger in non-WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic) societies [cite: 28]. Activating analytical thinking through debiasing training has been shown to causally reduce endorsement of generic and specific conspiracy beliefs [cite: 28]. ### The Jumping to Conclusions Bias and Metacognitive Sensitivity Intimately related to intuitive processing is the "Jumping to Conclusions" (JTC) bias, defined as a cognitive tendency to make hasty decisions based on exceptionally limited evidence [cite: 7, 29]. Originally studied extensively within the context of clinical delusions, paranoia, and schizophrenia, the JTC bias has recently been identified as a cognitive underpinning of non-clinical conspiracy beliefs [cite: 12, 29]. Empirical assessments using probabilistic reasoning tasks (such as the beads or fish tasks) demonstrate that individuals exhibiting a pronounced JTC bias require fewer informational inputs to form fixed beliefs, making them uniquely vulnerable to conspiratorial narratives that rely on connecting disparate, unrelated events with sparse evidence [cite: 29]. Generic conspiracy belief is also associated with a suite of other cognitive vulnerabilities. These include the conjunction fallacy (estimating the occurrence of two overlapping events as more probable than a single event), hypersensitive agency detection (the evolutionary predisposition to perceive intent and agency in random or natural events), and "bullshit receptivity" (the tendency to find profound meaning in syntactically correct but semantically empty statements) [cite: 7]. Furthermore, conspiracy believers frequently exhibit lower metacognitive sensitivity [cite: 7, 20]. Metacognitive sensitivity refers to an individual's ability to accurately evaluate the limits and accuracy of their own knowledge. Lower sensitivity results in an illusion of explanatory depth, leading individuals to exhibit overconfidence in unfounded theories regarding highly complex sociopolitical or scientific phenomena [cite: 7, 30]. ### Epistemic Stances: The Role of "Truth is Political" Beyond the mechanics of cognitive processing, epistemic beliefs—an individual's fundamental understanding of the nature of knowledge, how it is acquired, and what constitutes evidence—play a critical role in determining susceptibility [cite: 24, 31]. Research methodologies often assess three primary epistemic dimensions: the need for empirical evidence, faith in intuition for facts, and the conviction that truth is politically constructed [cite: 23, 24, 32]. The belief that "truth is political"—the conviction that objective facts do not exist independently but are instead socially and politically constructed by those in power to serve elite interests—is identified as one of the strongest independent predictors of both generalized conspiracy ideation and misinformation susceptibility [cite: 15, 24, 33]. In empirical studies assessing acceptance of COVID-19 misinformation and conspiracy theories, researchers found that over 30% of conspiracy believers ranked at the extreme high end of the scale for believing truth is political [cite: 15, 33]. Individuals harboring this epistemic stance systematically reject the objectivity of scientific consensus, journalistic institutions, and democratic processes [cite: 15, 23]. Consequently, interventions focused purely on fact-checking or presenting empirical evidence frequently fail among this demographic, as the evidence itself is perceived as a fabricated artifact of political power [cite: 15, 24]. [image delta #1, 0 bytes] ## Personality Traits and Psychopathological Correlates The search for a definitive "conspiratorial personality" has generated vast amounts of data, leading to a complex consensus. While popular cultural narratives often frame conspiracy theorists as suffering from generalized, normal-range personality defects, large-scale meta-analyses reveal that standard personality taxonomies hold minimal predictive power. Instead, specific sub-clinical psychopathological traits and antagonistic dispositions are the primary personality drivers of conspiratorial susceptibility [cite: 5, 34]. ### The Big Five Personality Traits Comprehensive meta-analytic models aggregating dozens of independent samples and tens of thousands of participants (e.g., Bowes et al., 2023; Stasielowicz, 2022) demonstrate that the Big Five personality traits (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism) are exceptionally weak correlates of conspiratorial ideation [cite: 5, 35]. Most relationships fall well below the threshold of a small effect size (r < .10) [cite: 5]. Agreeableness consistently displays a weakly negative correlation (r = -.07), suggesting that the antagonism, suspicion, and hostility inherent in low agreeableness contribute slightly to a worldview that assumes malevolent intent in others [cite: 5, 34, 35]. Conscientiousness also displays a weakly negative association (r = -.04) [cite: 5]. Neuroticism (Emotionality) is weakly positive (r = .04 to .05), reflecting the role of underlying emotional volatility, anxiety, and insecurity in driving individuals toward narratives that provide a sense of explanatory order [cite: 5, 34, 35]. Extraversion and Openness to Experience show non-significant or negligible positive associations (r = .02 to .03), although some discrete studies hypothesize that the active imagination and intellectual curiosity components of Openness may occasionally drive novelty-seeking behavior toward alternative narratives [cite: 5, 35, 36]. Ultimately, conspiratorial ideation is not a manifestation of broad, normal-range personality variations [cite: 5]. | Personality/Psychopathology Trait | Meta-Analytic Correlation (r) | Clinical Interpretation | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Schizotypy** | .38 | High propensity for magical thinking, odd beliefs, and hypersensitive threat detection [cite: 5, 12]. | | **Paranoia** | .34 | High generalized suspicion; tendency to view the environment as inherently hostile [cite: 5, 9]. | | **Humility (Honesty-Humility)** | -.15 | Inverse relationship; low humility correlates with intellectual overconfidence and arrogance [cite: 5]. | | **Agreeableness** | -.07 | Very weak negative relationship; captures low-level antagonism and interpersonal distrust [cite: 5, 35]. | | **Neuroticism** | .05 | Very weak positive relationship; linked to anxiety-driven sense-making during crises [cite: 5, 36]. | | **Conscientiousness** | -.04 | Negligible negative relationship [cite: 5]. | | **Extraversion** | .03 | Negligible positive relationship [cite: 5]. | ### Schizotypy, Paranoia, and Threat Detection In stark contrast to the Big Five, indices of sub-clinical psychopathology serve as the most robust personological predictors. Schizotypy (r = .38) and paranoia (r = .34) exhibit moderate-to-strong positive correlations with conspiracy beliefs [cite: 5]. [image delta #2, 0 bytes] Positive schizotypy encompasses a propensity for magical thinking, odd beliefs, and an intrinsic difficulty in appropriately evaluating the veracity of external information, rendering individuals highly susceptible to both sharing and believing in misinformation and conspiratorial narratives [cite: 5, 12]. However, precise conceptual distinctions must be drawn between clinical paranoid ideation and non-clinical conspiracy mentality [cite: 37, 38]. Paranoia is primarily self-referential and interpersonally focused; individuals experiencing paranoid ideation perceive themselves as the direct targets of localized persecution, and exhibit high perceptual mistrust (e.g., judging unfamiliar faces as highly untrustworthy) [cite: 37, 38]. Conspiracy mentality, conversely, is socio-centric. The perceived threat is directed at society at large or specific in-groups, perpetrated by macro-level political, corporate, or institutional elites, rather than interpersonal acquaintances [cite: 37, 38]. ### The Dark Triad and Collective Narcissism The "Dark Triad" of personality—comprising narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy—consistently predicts conspiracy endorsement [cite: 38, 39]. These traits share a core of agentic extraversion, interpersonal antagonism, a disregard for normative social contracts, and a willingness to believe that other actors operate with similar malevolent, self-serving, and deceptive intent [cite: 34, 38]. Narcissism operates as a profound driver of conspiracy beliefs at both the individual and collective levels [cite: 28, 34, 39]. At the individual level, conspiracy theories appeal to narcissists by fulfilling a "need for uniqueness." The adoption of esoteric, hidden knowledge elevates the narcissist above the "gullible masses," satisfying an ego-driven desire for intellectual superiority and control during times of societal uncertainty [cite: 34, 40, 41]. At the intergroup level, collective narcissism—an inflated, defensive belief in the exceptional greatness of one's in-group coupled with a hypersensitive perception that the group is constantly underappreciated or threatened by out-groups—heavily predicts intergroup conspiracy theories, xenophobia, and out-group scapegoating [cite: 4]. ## Sociodemographic Predictors and the Education Paradox ### Age, Gender, and Social Class Sociodemographic variables present a complex, and occasionally contradictory, picture across the literature, heavily dependent on the specific methodology and the nature of the conspiracy theories assessed. Regarding age, older adults generally display higher discrimination ability regarding online misinformation, benefiting from accumulated historical knowledge and crystallized intelligence that aids in detecting false news [cite: 19, 22]. However, this is counterbalanced by a higher overall "false-news bias" (caution) and lower digital literacy, meaning older demographics may exhibit higher absolute rates of engaging with or sharing misinformation on social platforms despite better theoretical discernment [cite: 19, 42, 43]. Gender differences are highly context-dependent. For instance, European survey data indicates women were significantly more prone to endorse health-related COVID-19 conspiracy theories than men (aligning with higher rates of pandemic-induced anxiety and depression), yet showed no significant gender differences regarding political or immigration-related conspiracy narratives [cite: 8]. Income, social class, and objective deprivation show consistent inverse relationships with conspiracy beliefs. Individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds receive less formal education, live in harsher environments, and face genuine external threats, leading to an external locus of control and diminished feelings of sociopolitical power [cite: 44, 45, 46]. Marginalization fuels a profound psychological need to explain systemic disadvantages through the intentional machinations of powerful out-groups, making conspiracy theories a highly functional narrative tool for navigating deprivation [cite: 45, 46]. ### The Education Paradox In standard models of political psychology, higher educational attainment functions as a strong protective factor against conspiracy endorsement [cite: 44, 47]. Increased years of formal education correlate tightly with higher analytical thinking capabilities, greater cognitive complexity, an improved understanding of institutional mechanics, and higher generalized trust [cite: 8, 47]. However, contemporary research identifies a significant "Education Paradox" when demographic predictors interact with specific personality traits. For individuals scoring high in narcissistic traits, the typical protective effect of education is entirely neutralized, and in some cases, reversed [cite: 34]. For highly narcissistic individuals, advanced education artificially inflates intellectual overconfidence, reinforcing their self-perception that they are uniquely capable of "seeing through" official narratives and critically deconstructing the establishment [cite: 34]. Furthermore, in highly polarized environments or regions characterized by intense intergroup conflict, higher political knowledge and education do not reliably mitigate conspiracy beliefs; instead, highly knowledgeable individuals may utilize their advanced cognitive resources to engage in sophisticated motivated reasoning, rationalizing and defending their pre-existing conspiratorial and partisan biases [cite: 48, 49]. ## Political Ideology and Polarization ### Ideological Asymmetry Versus Political Extremity A persistent and contentious debate in political science centers on whether conspiracy beliefs are primarily a phenomenon of the political right (the "asymmetry thesis") or if they are distributed symmetrically at the extremes of the ideological spectrum [cite: 50, 51, 52]. While specific, high-profile conspiracy theories (e.g., climate change denial, electoral fraud claims, or QAnon) find significantly higher purchase among conservatives and Republicans in the United States [cite: 32, 53, 54], comprehensive analyses of generic conspiracy mentality provide robust evidence against the asymmetry thesis [cite: 50, 53]. When analyzing a broad taxonomy of conspiracy theories, the data supports a U-shaped quadratic distribution: political extremity at both the far-left and far-right strongly predicts high conspiracy ideation [cite: 10, 35, 52]. Extremists on both ends of the political spectrum share a pessimistic outlook on society, fundamentally low trust in democratic institutions, and a core belief that the mainstream political and economic systems are rigged by malevolent actors [cite: 8, 52]. Advanced neuroscientific research further supports this "horseshoe theory" of politics. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies demonstrate that politically extreme individuals—whether far-left or far-right—process political information with strikingly similar neural activity patterns. These brains exhibit synchronized, high emotional reactivity to polarizing language, a neural signature entirely distinct from the diverse processing patterns observed in political moderates [cite: 55]. Extremity of belief, rather than the specific direction of the ideology, drives the shared cognitive architecture of conspiracism [cite: 50, 55]. ### Populism, Nationalist Sentiment, and Political Violence Conspiracy beliefs are intimately tied to non-normative political worldviews, with populism serving as a primary ideological vehicle [cite: 8, 50]. The core populist binary—dividing society into the "pure, ordinary people" versus a "corrupt, self-serving elite"—aligns seamlessly with the fundamental structure of conspiratorial narratives [cite: 8, 10]. Crucially, conspiracy ideation is a strong, longitudinal predictor of attitudinal support for, and actual engagement in, political violence [cite: 6, 41]. Long-term analyses indicate that the correlation between the general tendency toward conspiracy theorizing and attitudinal support for political violence tripled in magnitude between 2012 and 2022 [cite: 6]. Individuals harboring nonnormative personality traits alongside a generalized conspiratorial worldview are significantly more likely to endorse violence, especially when a specific conspiracy theory scapegoats an identifiable out-group, suggests an imminent existential threat, or is amplified by trusted partisan elites [cite: 6, 14]. ## Cross-Cultural Dynamics and Institutional Trust Conspiracy beliefs do not emerge in a vacuum; they are profoundly shaped by macro-level societal conditions, the objective quality of institutional governance, and historically entrenched cultural values. ### Institutional Trust and Historical Disenfranchisement A generalized climate of institutional mistrust is the primary breeding ground for conspiracy theories [cite: 37, 56]. Distrust in the federal government, scientific bodies, mainstream media, and the medical establishment provides the necessary epistemic void that alternative conspiracy narratives fill [cite: 3, 17, 57]. Importantly, this mistrust is frequently grounded in objective historical realities. The literature underscores the critical role of historical disenfranchisement and real-world conspiracies in shaping legitimate, protective institutional skepticism [cite: 58, 59, 60]. The "Tuskegee effect"—named after the deeply unethical, decades-long Tuskegee Syphilis Study conducted by the U.S. Public Health Service—illustrates how documented historical abuses by medical and governmental institutions engender deep, generational mistrust among marginalized communities, particularly Black Americans [cite: 59, 61, 62]. This structural inequality and the lived experience of systemic discrimination act as a psychological priming effect. Patients who anticipate bias or mistreatment exhibit heightened vigilance, disrupted clinical communication, and profound medical distrust [cite: 59]. This legitimate skepticism frequently bleeds into the endorsement of medical conspiracy theories (e.g., beliefs that vaccines are experimental or gene-altering), driving significant disparities in vaccine hesitancy and healthcare utilization [cite: 59, 61]. ### Cultural Dimensions: Power Distance and Collectivism Cross-cultural psychology demonstrates that conspiratorial ideation varies systematically along established dimensions of cultural values, such as Hofstede's model [cite: 1, 2, 4]. | Cultural Dimension | Influence on Conspiracy Beliefs | Mechanisms and Societal Impact | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Collectivism** | High Positive Correlation | Societies prioritizing group identity (e.g., East Asia, Middle East) exhibit higher rates of intergroup conspiracy theories. Threats are perceived as coordinated attacks by foreign coalitions against the in-group's national/religious identity [cite: 1, 4, 10]. | | **Power Distance** | High Positive Correlation | In cultures where hierarchical inequalities are strictly enforced (e.g., China), citizens accurately perceive that elites possess unchecked power. Autocratic plots are viewed as highly plausible realities, rendering conspiracy theories a functional heuristic [cite: 2, 4]. | | **Individualism** | Qualitative Shift | Western cultures emphasize personal autonomy; conspiracy theories here frequently revolve around fears of surveillance, loss of individual liberty, and excessive government overreach [cite: 10]. | | **Uncertainty Avoidance** | Moderate Positive Correlation | In societies intolerant of ambiguity, conspiracy theories proliferate because they artificially impose rigid order and identifiable villains onto chaotic or random events [cite: 56]. | ### Macroeconomic Factors and the Middle East and North Africa Region At the macroeconomic level, structural deficiencies such as lower GDP per capita, higher indices of governmental corruption, and lower democratic functioning serve as robust country-level predictors of conspiracy beliefs [cite: 2, 8, 63, 64]. In environments lacking journalistic transparency and democratic accountability, conspiracy theories often serve as reasonable, functional hypotheses for citizens attempting to interpret opaque elite behavior [cite: 2]. Furthermore, the negative association between conspiracy theory endorsement and compliance with public health measures was found to be even greater in highly developed countries, highlighting the complex interaction between national wealth and individual behavior [cite: 65]. The Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region provides a potent, highly studied case of these macro-level dynamics. Belief in anti-Western, anti-Zionist, and Judeo-Masonic conspiracy theories is extraordinarily high and deeply embedded in the digital discourse of the Arab world [cite: 48, 49, 66]. While early theoretical models frequently attributed this phenomenon to a sense of political powerlessness among the populace, rigorous empirical experiments conducted in the MENA region reveal that these beliefs are not primarily driven by a psychological lack of control [cite: 48, 67]. Instead, conspiracism in the MENA region is deeply rooted in high nationalist sentiment, historical exposure to actual foreign military intervention, sectarian divisions, and the deliberate, top-down dissemination of disinformation by state actors who utilize conspiracy narratives as geopolitical tools to deflect domestic failures [cite: 49, 60, 66]. In this context, experimental exposure to nationalist primes significantly increases the endorsement of conspiracy theories involving minority collusion with foreign powers [cite: 67]. Consequently, conspiracy beliefs in these regions represent a reflection of intense, structurally embedded intergroup conflict and state-sponsored narratives, rather than merely an aggregate of individual cognitive deficits [cite: 48, 49]. ## Conclusion Susceptibility to conspiracy theories cannot be reductively attributed to a single psychological flaw, political affiliation, or demographic category. The architecture of conspiracy endorsement relies on a multifaceted interaction of epistemic distrust (the core belief that truth is purely political), cognitive processing styles (an overreliance on intuitive reasoning and a jumping-to-conclusions bias), and sub-clinical psychopathological traits such as collective narcissism, schizotypy, and paranoia. While demographic factors like education generally insulate populations against these beliefs by fostering analytical thinking, the "Education Paradox" demonstrates that for highly narcissistic or politically extreme individuals, advanced knowledge can merely reinforce conspiratorial overconfidence and facilitate motivated reasoning. Politically, the phenomenon is driven not symmetrically by right-wing or left-wing ideologies inherently, but by the extremities of both, fueled by populist sentiment and a fundamental rejection of institutional authority. Ultimately, combating conspiratorial ideation requires moving beyond individual-level cognitive interventions to address the macro-level systemic inequities, historical disenfranchisement, and institutional opacity that make the world appear inherently conspiratorial to marginalized and distressed populations. ## Sources 1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9945548/ 2. https://pure.psu.edu/en/publications/conspiracy-theories-and-institutional-trust-examining-the-role-of/ 3. https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/enders_conspiracy_theory_beliefs_political_violence_20241212.pdf 4. https://edepot.wur.nl/651562 5. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9623260/ 6. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/judgment-and-decision-making/article/reflective-thinking-predicts-lower-conspiracy-beliefs-a-metaanalysis/73D77DBC333AA2C1778D8F71A1A918FF 7. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1a98/1ca2b6d076138e30add2dcd708379f094dc3.pdf 8. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39965309/ 9. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/20445911.2025.2563541 10. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7530244/ 11. https://research.vu.nl/files/127554925/pops.12716_Investigating_the_Links_Between_Cultural_Values_and_Belief_in_Conspiracy_Theories.pdf 12. https://www.psypost.org/new-study-identifies-cultural-dimensions-that-predict-conspiracy-theory-beliefs/ 13. https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:5e21f6b/UQ5e21f6b_OA.pdf 14. https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1175&context=orpc 15. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35830765/ 16. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8624959/ 17. https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/bul-bul0000392.pdf 18. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9685076/ 19. https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstreams/6ce1e73c-4546-471b-8c1b-a0e03705db59/download 20. https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/bul-bul0000392.pdf 21. https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10410084-psychological-political-correlates-conspiracy-theory-beliefs 22. https://boothnews.eiu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/New-electronic-resources-for-July-2025.xlsx 23. https://timryan.web.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/7415/2020/07/Ryan-Aziz-JOP-SI.pdf 24. https://jspp.psychopen.eu/index.php/jspp/article/view/5025/5025.html 25. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9751515/ 26. https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2025/08/political-polar-opposites-more-alike 27. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10213760/ 28. https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/not-so-different-after-all-antecedents-of-believing-in-misinformation-and-conspiracy-theories-on-covid-19/ 29. https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/wintterlin_not-so-different-after-all_20251030.pdf 30. https://news.osu.edu/reliance-on-gut-feelings-linked-to-belief-in-fake-news-study-finds/ 31. https://rkellygarrett.com/author/admin/page/5/ 32. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:2001550/FULLTEXT01.pdf 33. https://www.mdpi.com/2673-5172/7/1/61 34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11588074/ 35. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39531500/ 36. https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2024/september/online-misinformation-most-likely-to-be-believed-by-ideological-.html 37. https://www.pew.org/en/trend/archive/fall-2024/americans-deepening-mistrust-of-institutions 38. https://counteringconspiracies.publicfirst.co.uk/wider-context/ 39. https://electionlab.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2023-10/voter-trust.pdf 40. https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/27894/chapter/8 41. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/29986907.2025.2584141 42. https://boothnews.eiu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/New-electronic-resources-for-July-2025.xlsx 43. https://www.mdpi.com/2673-5172/7/1/61 44. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/397783879_Trust_in_scientists_and_conspiracy_beliefs_predict_online_misinformation_susceptibility_and_fake_news_detection_a_cross-sectional_study_in_Greece 45. https://advances.in/psychology/10.56296/knowledge-hub/psychology-of-misinformation/ 46. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10259813/ 47. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388597717_Individual_differences_in_detecting_and_sharing_misinformation_Positive_schizotypy_conspiracy_beliefs_and_autism 48. https://www.google.com/search?q=time+in+Macon+County,+US 49. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6396711/ 50. https://research.unipd.it/retrieve/92da1b8c-4eb1-4440-87c9-6f266b813642/Brz_ska_et_al._2023_Thinking_and_Reasoning.pdf 51. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00205/full 52. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9694922/ 53. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359734855_Who_believes_in_conspiracy_theories_A_meta-analysis_on_personality_correlates 54. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10968668/ 55. https://grokipedia.com/page/List_of_political_conspiracies 56. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/386227774_Why_Would_I_Go_Back_There_Medical_Mistrust_and_the_Problem_of_Maternal_Mortality 57. https://www.quora.com/Conspiracy-theories-by-definition-are-factually-incorrect-and-will-never-be-verifiable-Why-do-people-believe-this-nonsense-when-all-evidence-points-towards-opposing-notions 58. https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/phac-aspc/documents/services/reports-publications/health-promotion-chronic-disease-prevention-canada-research-policy-practice/vol-45-no-4-2025/hpcdp-vol-45-no-4-2025.pdf 59. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12367794/ 60. https://philosophy.northwestern.edu/people/continuing-faculty/cv-2025.pdf 61. https://thesis.unipd.it/retrieve/1f3ad813-5263-461e-bf29-b67c2c68df4b/Cattelan_Sofia.pdf 62. https://journals.flvc.org/edis/article/download/134476/143072/271216 63. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395344507_Teaching_about_teaching_controversial_issues_Insights_from_two_teacher_education_courses_on_controversial_issues_across_school_subjects 64. https://www.psypost.org/new-study-identifies-cultural-dimensions-that-predict-conspiracy-theory-beliefs/ 65. https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1175&context=orpc 66. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224545.2024.2397491 67. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00205/full 68. https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/the-impact-of-conspiracy-belief-on-democratic-culture-evidence-from-europe/ 69. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9945548/ 70. https://jspp.psychopen.eu/index.php/jspp/article/view/13385/13385.html 71. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326001217_Conspiracy_and_Misperception_Belief_in_the_Middle_East_and_North_Africa 72. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/1/266 73. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel8/6287639/6514899/11168202.pdf 74. https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/not-so-different-after-all-antecedents-of-believing-in-misinformation-and-conspiracy-theories-on-covid-19/ 75. https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/wintterlin_not-so-different-after-all_20251030.pdf 76. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11565410/ 77. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1417910/full 78. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:2001550/FULLTEXT01.pdf 79. https://sites.dartmouth.edu/nyhan/files/2021/03/mena-conspiracy.pdf 80. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287352652_Conspiracy_theories_in_the_Arab_world_Sources_and_politics 81. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theories_in_the_Arab_world 82. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2504.14037 83. https://www.uni-muenster.de/Religion-und-Politik/en/aktuelles/schwerpunkte/epidemien/thema07_verschwoerung.shtml 84. https://www.traitpath.com/blog/articles/conspiracy-theories-psychology 85. https://www.inverse.com/health/32493-conspiracy-theory-education-paradox-brotherton-van-prooijen 86. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395344507_Teaching_about_teaching_controversial_issues_Insights_from_two_teacher_education_courses_on_controversial_issues_across_school_subjects 87. http://ndl.ethernet.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/28249/1/34..pdf 88. https://philosophy.northwestern.edu/people/continuing-faculty/cv-2025.pdf 89. https://kar.kent.ac.uk/101483/15/Euro%20J%20Social%20Psych%20-%202023%20-%20Douglas%20-%20Identifying%20important%20individual%E2%80%90%20and%20country%E2%80%90level%20predictors%20of%20conspiracy.pdf 90. https://csbs.uni.edu/sites/default/files/poster-_covid-19_conspiracy_-_hiroki_hirano.pdf 91. https://repository.tilburguniversity.edu/bitstreams/3732960e-5fa2-4da6-be6f-c89a613e971a/download 92. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332464163_Conspiracy_Theories_in_Southeast_Asia 93. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10046644/ 94. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1801278/full 95. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/25051/5226 96. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10692149/ 97. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Susceptibility-to-misinformation-is-consistent-and-Roozenbeek-Maertens/5f3ee63b9dc2cf7e52736bd7a219f8222a0fe866 98. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2409329121 99. https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.2409329121 100. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39531500/ 101. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Susceptibility-to-online-misinformation%3A-A-of-and-Sultan-Tump/3e7ee9e7b1da9a42fa222e12afca554a0e822097 102. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395358092_The_Online_Misinformation_Susceptibility_Scale_Development_and_Initial_Validation **Sources:** 1. [vu.nl](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEPjNEyeS8ddbB1unBCU88Qv_t-zzqvU20ka72SuByEq9WqCYv10_Y87W0TIAz-UnNpjSw6YoMRNDWPf6OeYkGTAoBojhYsC-nQlVbwJ8wkL-_HIkZqEofLOAvPJ9Gi7zKIfvRKKnE3UIXpWqXQ7Ht-KRAeFBpdHHsyAOjvvSNNl2_qgMAyVVgZ53KQeII5ouLAYCHtuOQ8NogH9oGM_9lyI-TEEC-lEZgwhj-KO94D7aARH9nLs7GcaKsN3_in) 2. [gvsu.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQENX5Y08Cg4-BWbr4p5OPSucSJQjo2JdkK2Kj3nklcaQFHHx3A1COKW9yyfkHQ2XpBqnUwLlsdoJYMv1aFqq9Ok0ULgbrAPnFX8iH9_iz4oPmWtzUYnBBS0VyBJv4CMkSp5k5ji4U9w8KyqFGBJJxYqG_c844rWSAtSiqC2Phivgws=) 3. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEhJroNOTW3_zXu1HRLMFPfTs8FdQoHDrbyxAZ_t6C686e4rUYFWwWhZeiQSlFCvgvEQva0OwjMHQxz3nGCOBGURKW9YfFPGNbuuDP-rny04PKwSGb20-Qi-D14ny-OqJOOcDMZMR2-) 4. [psypost.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHJhdCoN24pu88ec4yRQvkwpGZYjQSi7k0txs8sF0Kx9H1Q12Y4vISNazgCqKoscSnWdm6zAxTejZWsSxdVExKs5ujWLVztEtTskELoEFMRA-DVfaUd4ywa2ThS2vKJ409XqtsQPeZBZeKU9szH-sdsjkzd1CISuB2RAlAKmlgGwy5Q-gzfpZzVOxCqVKPCKtIJXfwVpTQxscXUtfl7bw==) 5. [apa.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQG6EAcyqpplZGqAn1lEuhcnJTrXlQYqaArBb9zEEiFz6hioNRYtyXCSGmofRsR8MLSlXHmmine8GV6WIHQRkRRGSemZlys2Y3sIxvMmIAwLGuqiFTENCO7PXrtnuMtv-jEIArDThupXWrle_PKynct6mLHR) 6. [harvard.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGZeonfWA2KIxU3tPQw261FF7KKr8LQH_BsbBn5HAbLPUD_9dymVve2WXYNW9fz8Xc1VVN4RNu1EOE81pmXUu8hazYFU8kbfvfWzaxo9sCrjd05n-JApr-lyS6GlPPTeN723NG6Np5wjZdTryWCljrry_EXBZgxcfePtYwqLdpNoCqDOAhfXVAF6uxab_okKH4eosG-SCeoB9dp35Ab-_fw2pJkcc603gHmrxCeLTLkN_qeO20X7C-P) 7. [tandfonline.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQF9BSWZ_eUcVWgQuu_Yl2Z1u25FuHYqmuDePVYuRG69TZ8nDxW0Z1cTmCXxaad7Icfu6seWuY2T5D_Of8apVTLaT5GP4oGTgzKCArt1xQj3Xm6xsvfSzGAwYjPXF8b-XeFkdJNOYXmrKt7lBQ_tDw4zr3zgCtbzbaI=) 8. [harvard.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEDAVo-xROyeYqlB4Xp7QNbgM7hVxS6eUQ3T3oGagMvupfw7ViL3t47fnoctjyBZtn6zwoBlI_vKY054QH3PSRQ4LsSNyimIeEscgoIxuSJweOega1e_S0WsZHXqE1gqjn_cFg6bctYLK7bgrywdAYMwkSwyozNvnsEjUYadN1MB_MPOsGgOy4xsLpPBmjUdFXCQkXKEKQKEH3-3EPAe7XSM1sa9l43t5G1SOa4ZDxM) 9. [researchgate.net](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGI6hrA1SdS8H6uyZGjkCch9k_oR6Ki5RtKtMyQRXUoUugpEHUMiOmkjyimXcAmIqlupkzQ37BR8RqXSQd4pYZ2idbQikMWuv9vmX3pShRGxlOlXvkv0EatvQjOPrb9bdL3Q0ViTfhkLYmEEQ6RrOLbZ1xap3IrPhxKLxfbrtsm1sPJLlCs2dHfuUCUVhT04rKK2EluUQRz8UIpf3s0QrC6IT3e9wibxMdF92UIJ8h-Qhublyaepg4=) 10. [ieee.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQG5ImSDKPX2QPBJ1WWmLFrueqY5Dm0vQYLe5G-__liKN-lVWnO9bEFIyGW3_y627L9sIthlB7Fe9fP7_B6sjEOoQxEZcZCkQ4JdgqfhfAo9pKXymPkPpugZHl1STwUqfMCVrhERYs8cFMBa2YeKD4SbUt49) 11. [wur.nl](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQH2maM2rDRmCXF2J4I9f1C3LpdWVJvHnT3fQPeHKbMOlgsPVJWK_27VxnJMQ_kQLfvw1fN0bqS8s_s0MzkTNWqQrEUS3J0j-vy2YDf72PFWoB4g) 12. [researchgate.net](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQF5bEjYVoSR93vOOMlZNdYz7sjcn2GJbsOsrUCZ7bLd1EA6Swq_Hw6diorOd_9abkuAKwxfWLsy6Tph389QwmooWtmGpJS9RkaswhSeb23-Hn2rtHUmEp76AJP5ABp6CUwVnRRzpNRBrR3E5aw1E_UwrTQIWnwXr5AhUGYeU98xeZLvhL-oL85mFg6_zAEs2QxDbdnDP3ckzlmFrpohYjMhahPNx2vLJXIcDPOZSS7mG8wgoQ5HjnCqKCNncizcO4tuv0x1J1qVzBXYQk_Ae5mD5d_JoC97GK6eEw==) 13. [kent.ac.uk](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGZ3ucD4TsAve9h66guMRwDS53QLtNfwqTZsbvdQmMYGtNUHVsHU4SWuSr2HFJkGuZfc6iH3zGsNAKPHCo_OcZvtH1Kcq_j9eT3LIAdN-AztW5hGCUA9fR0QWyZnHt97NhequJLQL_pWAVd-Gqp8FS68fx7c0eYJBeGX74MYlyvPzxYQAJVkogHrOKtzdxmGDWOZSO1JatQBs9JQZyWf34AUi85ykdOoQHHgxzJyF0j42Wm667p8G7_EDymiXZEFK8b8rvMsVY4K-vanln7K1JbatNn9XFK3DF8nyrEnCMve5QBBHJx-nEN3F7i7OF3ab0BuDeB9YAF95X2qyf6PUE=) 14. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEBqj4oMkdBxx6-xq-M66GN5jmuA7ds2I2mQ5HwsPrCWewSBjpKqeKxs4DULCB6POQpr9vz2Ji8g-JhU4078777pHJDp9x-MZzFcqKtw0SK8hxKyJRBVJs8ylbMdrjEuJ9d4wrPoybbpA==) 15. [harvard.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHvHmEDeHrFGd4lCuYu_KfaTOsy-XQDS2L_dQfdSCKW8rcPmp7bnQ8ywuKY6xBxd6Zg5SHagUmZC51O6labQT5ZbVZpgEXDH5JinsGSyHsQqn51PnZDUJZBs1dsllsGNbIBYDwRI7enPEaaaqd0abmjtN3gPK97dMll715HM_goReLrX0lMSCnVE1jUfrRxNXMfY-4iSfW_zD_2hq6WDYjJyhWvLJSuWsifngvYTR6tOAy0kxhqvikbfIATgQSzNU3gWItPNUwd7kuS20EH_w8=) 16. [ijoc.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFAZ4kS-CPBljKBR4-ehh0poIW4I5kSHOCyFLELvlOtq8gUjIoO51ghrm-HnGt4zI2LdiWmZ90M7k12tJ11fPnGOHlLWWjmZPA8gaQTHmQ2kWzbyTDj-PjT5dnF50uvk5EgjukKQguP4QVlwFkv) 17. [publicfirst.co.uk](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQE1rUuH2Z8X1mCO7-T6120r2PzoRB1_-m0AVHEb1bxpXQNDl4MWsiaALT_07xUlKCGT4e3R_PtMyblB31sffFJUsymzRoEJnKK09-e-i5_z7IjdH3A11ck34NWrFiSHQycWBuBKyLurG7jS2ioaK0pb_3tlvTQ=) 18. [semanticscholar.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEYKRCaT-_YggIzn7X812844JoBURHFvsmi-UT1VghJxoc3HJPZSEsMSYbQj9yv3jT3mkETa2zem8zls5uALtjyvjy7r5UAUKKR08mWNKH--lHWXUQwUes0Yp9BFwqkGK8QsZb6SC1jekgPGo3GS5SPOxGAcnxECoOp7lGntFkDC7N6uDKcx5dDs3DVf42bkhgJ3wegp5MiEMuNdbgdLwm1hdz6sGXs7IYDOctVfZjFW1dE51RgMUt-BEoMFLeS4VrVruq8zcx04lRZehA=) 19. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGYUpXQ9BoE52U1TcvqzQuRZEtHnJBPFV9sbGbm68tcyQL29IxgD-Ju7RB6DrhSH79vadKXkDowAJXmgA_enpAT5blF3x7YXqG6QrHrDPHpX7dndSZ80Li0Iw16KE6GZI6FpROPAabUeQ==) 20. [frontiersin.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEzBGaz9uKM74vk_TMCLFdn94RGHr_LQP-XiG2JNV3J_Qr-kMD57ss1CJPFuwwXcZ9-FuOiOovmLgQHYyXp0JTNq357oTlSKtl1cci5KMDYbkuPSiFyr4-6Dt1Wdj4te-CaDytBd993wm4tvB4Q1XgXaHT_HJ1TZtXsU7qNbYYi-4WaTE9wXCRl5c1oE85Tz4Ya) 21. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQH9lKXDAropDZV93EJyn__xC-eAXsxViHgKQaT9gKAzY2ZKbLTE0Dr-iZSwaSPpEp6-oYtDlGWfqosbwE5ktFv6n8YXLK8588fYaOcGApUFqZRVT6CSkiSuUO5ZW9VbBUecWiiWolrLww==) 22. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEecLtLjaXs1q5d0WXF7dAgY7X8UgALkht1iOnRznm73hzbg_MMnFDoGbQYDaWxGeFgVOu11GSPYN1J0mKxsvI0QfrpWbdQrW6NrjffFyd5m_dKZJui-UdQNt6obSQKlw==) 23. [osu.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGzZ5B3O_s4iJ-qYJwKiuI9yMsPVvGHn-gnCD3vyRLdE7drw6Vu0XKVywGddp-dq6E1ndlFOx1m52F7U6i1dLtqVyKNPeCNuzQo-6NWxzTA5irv7jtaU3_bf954dFNckQrYLkUcOuLQR9qTT47RBWEV38753YY83Xj38J0k8CjEaINlsYGRMSpkVo4t8t59) 24. [rkellygarrett.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEWb8ZQb5CUTNTmWf7HC9HQtRYetii7dxnpb8YuS7aAHfjlumhSOkjqHvHDHYgDLpOfMxEAx9g09XtQqrviYG459D_EIw6Fn6JdobOB_ujAYWFnn07ii9IIMYi_iTwUvllGdt2S) 25. [pnas.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEpMi7RfNUCC4nz-Xh68-eHyKnvscCavj-XY25jy54FLwTY79S_w06Xc5lxcnbNspumrJ3wrT6x688pVgtVzahBQLOtQ9zhgtbgSoU6-E3hFkIFjVs-3hSDVo-GrkBntOe9Rpck-sM=) 26. [cambridge.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQE-67lFj1l7hQ0AJIBeGptiDeVy7stJGeUeHWCsc77ZgnvRHTL60tNjyfQjwP83kKqOPIDgg_MTBTCIH8iDdn55o32kwPnMSGWsKLER5vuW__8vef7a9kXORiRGNqiKxF3sOA3zMk3_83keMoURyXthz5rYnbY3H2KJnYvws13p1VCNsGsKcBHva22eSvtyoAGVaM9S95Vpi-dd1Q0HZNW-C9ElQy2QFkYr8KcpU70wuM4YGdbLyWZaRJzKeEfn9_flS8QkTcwiVQdsrUpnSlLGgctYsgV_5YZguvciGWJw3Z5BmxzrHJxUig==) 27. [semanticscholar.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFO6Dmlql7C8ecSz_SyKxo8Y-MGXkpBtneGabhfMzoKqDHAnxrGnw3dyN4XEJxTAr7ROKMNkaORwT-XVhvZC13lX5B8pM8MhHvVj_2B8-kVwyvh2GEjhwW9y59aogdKvHWxXNScUKZIQy55F9UZ5W0ajgF7GS-ilJYr5y-bTg19tEhaq6s=) 28. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEsFXKSXGinwXPfWQGAkAaf2MfwIOUKW5ps66TwBHybHdsC1KvSLbkEtFK5UhshH71WzePeGeuC3Pnv4gcjh3dsmr_XDO-t1SetNbMNoFE1nfR52KsQsx4vpseKA6i5aQ==) 29. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHDaLuM2Ur6riyT3FOVR_YboZGdwxvtY-4B_AhQiB0WUYcsPuHc4i-gpzKNuDZZKfBbbwElp6Zu2Rliz78t0rfyGK_ufdW38RSiNgO-4ST-pZXHNU2fVmOFVMNY1B908KLbdVwUZBeq) 30. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQH50yI9LixDUYTDyKQz_aKic5b2Grez-91_-Cf7qhJwdDpLimMLCQCVm-1u7WmpQ6UdbDX8b9DUHxmPPnCjl5x5JcRu-BPc12efA50P8CMm0f9t6LLsIeUwDXdomx5-2tADzumcXAdjxg==) 31. [diva-portal.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGdcQ56nzNY-eA8KgIeTDEyuVeR4eZ_k_j9CvhabDWYh_rCbbsNqtJ9iBO0pmJGgKBV2WA8XJAVK4TIetF2genPksh0juvLr5qvugv0yHQJrS7ce5dCBCRdNBpwmHHmaZHZiprOTxID_xr5fFCWUSBJwgQFb4R-9Qo=) 32. [frontiersin.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQF6XtgMtRoXbCSagAgzfSjn2i9u0hOdVaWnz9oocuQ2jQ7FI2fZZrRepR5_f3ThLsp26Jaww_0d52EUkLDBiRsYc3gtEdfdvSGqx7Ucdg2VzjTk7lci6i0ZrxDN3EDymeyYAdV_mXz-U5CaZSj-aScRBGbsdn0nDnb0W1dkvG9xdl0f9YMJ60ryUxGvfNke) 33. [harvard.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGEtqcmOGW9vnXbKSMwJJXxPNO9FJ68rFfkFN4RF1WNdw6B2-HzGso2z-xbQWaVQ3gebI818LiD9RXZKWhzzcdlGsa7JRye_ReqawQ1JCgt6py7QrNKCmMjmFxkpUjGtlbr78AUOD2zEjiYay-7n8Xd2kgU2N2asweLLn_cSfItQzQCM7Hm4bfWA4VNDtyXAVlYxc3IMRmkN3iv2gXipOTW6ZUpvxUiSMs2) 34. [traitpath.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFoFrkClvoWHI_fNfVO58FZVRXVe5i2rrIsoQqbHADGXuxCOULm4c8yeUW7-Hd1Wu6zCpnzoAML54mpdL423iUX0aWpy6yHfn7C9QK-PfOta1ApYHWbt-bAr-hDUk7gQhEPOkCJQG-tYkrL3HPX9OoV5KHOJSmQ77HoUj9g) 35. [frontiersin.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEGbki3AWnwCkZ7Lx1JwaAccD0cWt3MQKSvCOdKJK1IQbW8OCTM2pv0g5h-cnzy1GLrLdDx4SYYwtksa1ReeXnVcqgkYoQ5fhgLzC78PQbDWsuCOKfRsM1UtlwdL2LDIL5shTdUeZEb8sJK96kIQQKTyZp67C9X4PkybqGLh40U12xM2NaIKKJgsQsvgg==) 36. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEqqAqFNrENcH43ZuO_7XQE4pZufGMZRaH01E3EAgA_IWIIhl19QYhI5ZBqsXa5HNqMU1C1u9-cRGB2GXFs4QgF6TfFWiAG_dTg8pI4zek6GneGbcBBDcNlsT_OD1Q3GMVrnP9yz5Ce) 37. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQH5JAZvUnGVJmDOFFqTv0Khlcxp_h5vhUbg6QtkXyWsnxq2pKjMuy0gSDlMwjYYRcj9dlSrTYXg049aFLDks1iu_S1iD5b1Tn0Go_vsv_NGJ6uwSPbqjMQm6ig12Ef4vT79voMGgdy4) 38. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQG7uW1VvZnLgyX0_PBcVG6HETAKZpjT2BozjyYUboUnDSqlw26BfJ3ukcNi4ajS9mX2GGfIoJarD7bpCZv_XBcgi8ljZ7PZvDeLR9GYotW0JOGle4pGyGOxeNfw2pLUIljFH--jBtOq) 39. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFBcLCj291XK3Ks2VetxJyjkObwnTuJkb5bsxPeaUqVFZB8cUNPYLtlOb7_sOXQ2uzbP-mcsWk5MB70aATXctOvQcBvT3JZeKP9YYtnFckAVXE4GO4IJcq4QgLqtwc46xENCb2I5OI8Sg==) 40. [nationalacademies.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGbyrVC5U6PXtdO0pdjnvPA91z-P9Xnw0NJH2gLXhCLbGFH-6wqwPYQWNq2mJi6HKlnRyblaKNIhsQ3i6tUMHPd-jlsYM7yW00rptbizN-jlcttzITfe8M9-G5CnvZVNvHXuGnTP1XEFcQ34hU=) 41. [tandfonline.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQE6OBeJq1Cps2onSRe1HSJBqRc34ZaFk_1fu_KCcbqJlfBYeMdVARD5ETFpcANE6gNSAAistOoEolqxg79hWfz24usaeJJF-LGUQnSOFlhDzTFXaUsjTPC71wQOQX5nxa-E5jxlbfJt62luSw2W16m0zH_pioKlDUk=) 42. [mdpi.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQErLO5HXN94aJPmysGS9wQYPbZUPCGNdmOrdXLw4pQ4PtbFPutTZ9S4XjBe_dqFEC5r34RNJCiZD6t4Xj9I6g2J314Sn-Y9T2Kds0Tb49bPv70HSTVE2UUj_mD9) 43. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQG6ng4y13NtCujEWraYp9vKMG5alDTFzs-WFveIqvwfu6aY7ehPD2ggDaHMM-L0YeDMa3JOLcNGNDa8YTiU3ewy8mC7u7yesNA7rVApc-wTIeCLii2cbjOxBg64EbFV0OcLr4OQ0NAZSw==) 44. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGlpyHk3EWE0Dr05ggVqlPkpSQSxo0Q9itThPIwnNjEgfn9XbbHW2Za1FyjFCoEI8mOFvOTQfhsAWfhbOp8-SAM3SGFp-tbNVnVkBq9m7KB0Z_CHuyfmHsy7SsjU4W8A1dXHxNXT4V5) 45. [psychopen.eu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEwAsXnDMr6MR_oZOE61KqRw1KVOnmeEvL6WZ7QRzz5BEuXC1zWOqbVojNtG3BOgIRmHZ3PiuyZBrqnZboVmv-98o2CL8xkykq0aPHvtC4PnuJUUbSGaYRbsGEKyb8iEKUE38wsJQjGffEXCNy0U1dW6zn6AYWM_wGG_E_i) 46. [mdpi.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQF4HTMmL88oTtCZyAcmgBTnyaCo7ahrc_4M4A-bcA0KAA-vctDeR8-P0lI4wdzjUYbKrnARc3uqmwbDJcipbnnVCVLMxdt_CJxqOMDk52WTbTjDkTtOBWQYu0yT71c=) 47. [harvard.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQG_aNUQXWd9S0qO9wy55feVmZ7HErQzEWFUF0iYmctIvmSAbYrj7LP7wIB4lDjv9sxTlKoEm2djqQgKVsimTXTdj_zOceY-NbiPQ8SZy_e9ne-1ckBk1-ag18hPZ-vRYyRvCp8C_CmPVHEMaMZ9VbmPxWpzcl9M4MLzg0qtjyf90ODb8wVsByA=) 48. [dartmouth.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEc_y3wCIBfnbzPr2_3ErBXe3tPoK3dxSQQc0W-tgnPKsvut_or9UAbc0P5lqYNtN3EnMYP5OIXOGPTbIYlGkimWun-uUBCAjQTDCZXhLWB9mufARiA3ZXXORTrwkIQGzv4suJO_rytBdNmK6ftJXuRIwsjs6tSckn7) 49. [arxiv.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHGX3TCc5IdOZGYctEiV1mxQz8VzjNUxIZ-Vdz9BeyHtyiRJHOXxuECL5sanlTBBwx_XAnYsJccVHP8FEFBmSr5MpeM9LFae1jnDW0eIjA3hf9JUIrusA==) 50. [Link](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHry7SrjYelW-H6YR73e1XFK074l_A10qPM6jf2KZnlhS-s3eKxiUhakwGSWAB97uW9jXKONU4id6PtfaR-A7pQfqG6THVJcUKQTNGSzfNJ98WV8AIfa2A5jEYogs37CwJgylK2SJkfK9TqZ-0ykbBgAnZDbztNTvkCU1_QuRIDvbpKEgXG05Sxjf_0xpmQjYlvTPPDDiA=) 51. [unc.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGAF4HPPyKHFVPOCr4jNoxkM9iYUeSVSpwi3VDm5KUle6fpwALVXrB_KwxXOBAW3Z8fgjzsx1v4MoWcg32G-Ewi0iwyawtVPlPdB0ZolZN5lAdtQPeUPrzbc1EH0WKDDozOS-vGQ5hY5Jvxzl1SgJeg-NFzS0l14umEyyiaQuZXIgBjg0_YCyLowWePEQ==) 52. [psychopen.eu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQG8lwr_4fpplp8v3HtwGzwjQhHamcplW1TAc1Ufh2qrfQFndRgd9gopEB7hvNtIxxdARPi4-ISieaIP7UhWUecdLXTkZCCRc_Tp7f9Hx_EJIGM8nwBTKVSfb5dkdkwF9DD_cIjEA1dQPz2M6tJ9zAfyk3S4w83Yl6CKhA==) 53. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFFX4Wk32AqCOBdjAyOwBeZ26fN9i58fSz-eA6lo2_qjxz5jvy0x69Jak9BZCWyQTz9g2TbnKH0rqvjt9my2xsH-jTxWlPRrs8TNITjcZmu2NZDxZMui__jge6bxGnjUS2Nf9hGd8gY) 54. [flvc.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHaT4nF_vzim6EiWR2CCNMTECcqficRb5ibdE4c439UrLncRBURzIvZuIkDlTexD7f0OIziXRsCLzrx1AWeHoB71OmAefNXy18oh0Bit9Re4bWlEYsjHf-w66MA8Xljpp50ABASogtNflwrUR3UhonTYr58DbZ6o9RgPw==) 55. [apa.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHA44KdbK6SACf44cYAd7LD9DxIWU67x5ZZGfTkNz6qoIa7DfDw2cttsYCPCg9jzH9O8zJaFosrqUezfGVJDfeKiOgkinMjefGdEnEOBQV1M_IESTN7kM40dlu0OqgrLkpTUqzbU8lIrizah7SMAg6jKssYw4pZ-oiIUJ1FgnySNQRUhqWysfLa4R8=) 56. [psu.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEsICQNihqx8RMnMYmpY8oM4JhfYNS3r0pOFPY9Pzcp-HxQsWarlBXoR-9AihRwbtj29wHSclJZ2eGMG5ICdc9m56qjH1FNlCenBRrfQt3hGQlCnnFbfug_V8K_EcY2CceY8zUo9jqzrvKCRrtzQ4UcUplkryuaPhYUEOZl4loUn5EWtxuOAjKPaSgaLDWAKtpyA_SO2a-PXJ1_UTkl) 57. [pew.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEAt_HjsbXn5Lx1GG4jSoZdpXQfF8vrBFJwd9b88RhishuS5ZGuk7LAsBgcSJRqZ0RFa-RaTd5sQofMJlh-DnjC3jrT7dz84Uk_SWyOHEXF81ch-2H1y7FRLM0W6gttuRs6RsMJg2QQIUGXs5FM7VcGQM1ceeAHjqNxTi5CyvmMNfoAzdCMbxiXss4qkCnSxoaE) 58. [mit.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHyrlQCef1f78WXhfMsc_C0Ds5HvFmTTtzX49LOh2VPcz9pA7QQ9xycGCmGzoaS2fe_DB6JdS6nSoiiqiA77cPz8zrRY4VJe06YkQLa3p4mlsJry6WRpKqtoPOPzZse2NTVsGKkLVKLgn42NQTpyM-d_5EiBFuBsRoUD8-3hg==) 59. [researchgate.net](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQF3P03mB8aVc4IBOeOckiFRvQu7txDfOHSGXVIPxKF9bBk_vNbRbvCEvHfUQB5GLfxhzfsbwSZRxzU-n2wM8sK9qStG_KNzmtebW9NMOmoUZPtPi0KctfzBEzvtlz71f-RLGkU0Fl4uBZHcdSO-myWALtMeChtVa2rSBQ01mahpR3uMOmvTUWQYnHPiqwpVo3h7mq57Xp9cQKs8gXgfRR0L2Ze_AvwzxCHPWJ2PwFz5yCpxl23UsHz9sfg=) 60. [uni-muenster.de](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHsh2d6k4PHyVM4It9HpwWUZdGmKkkc5iNCxj3ZuR7Nf4MJG5j71TIShzXOZ-yT2wxFxWtRgS1PfisA1Q5lFE3KIff3UouYgUynnOKeDsUapDXVZDVjJO6QVTN_XPhS7lr78ySVsmHRFHfwK_lrhFmP4LkHzjm59eeq5VtBwxY0naSkG9Tmy6GDUlfNRYz-LI697sqrxD4Io4KJHntTADlSY_UMzb4-) 61. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEUc71DdSGkrw2M550fESI3KtLm_L6yN_fxzWiNu9zktQ1gwHleKUyeuAFe2FfXFKWT9mkb4CpGUiqMjB8_q12AA2WcF5-G9wjalZrmM75l-35BZJxRwusCx5DWQ0nAyxHRW-tNCctA8w==) 62. [grokipedia.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQH83FBmUjkYR9zj_FoOd-R_pltxxzT8Xd8HjRTojOz_s4u-lJVk2Pzd19D63DKzjwyLv-g2JmcRkPf_A9um0wsgcC8iarNkFCEvuBFc9lPy2iK0levptcUz25UMG998mycGesVsETJolmK4MjUBl5cy) 63. [uq.edu.au](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFQEWp74l01v8ZD5KlxqptBm6ckIjMGX58lQZWCaMcLUaEdPWjqcLjGFpw5eC73a1lPHZKrBVX7nzZAvDbrw7p1xxaFb6aU2fPTrZSPKLO7jPqDYPRDBIWEBdM0Sg5ewcJZ46qgCVa5-P2jOAnQfpMi-UByKzUcDg==) 64. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFariqkJ1Sn1USHiXEkp1xE3EExdybPfSoN-YTJpfyeUqf9cEzmuYStjMKZY09y0yDKXh0tdp-41ra0Q_b2L6OhyNwj-n5gWy7nkb0CHngleZoRggrXFl5HTW8Kh3EiYQ==) 65. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFJMVpvfZ3W9PyHgzI6HjBjnqMfO40wjSy0m8BwG267snxhLNZpF4FZOsnV2Al-9mxUdvhZE_4YNrkJOP9-Zp6gUiS8o5__kafhpgeD8T_94Wzg6RIW9WGxxvbCy_YdYrX_mGqgN72z-Q==) 66. [wikipedia.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGgytbX5p2-yGhiFMNnguFlTXtCGQAws84-omHghwt2Cz9gxrCWKLRb3WuIFiHEmzcJZ7O-Zyp0KfJAYoqtq-ehql0JsLaAE6kR97CLvL2k8w9uxZqCiPfMN-EC8vRMKApPKfQ2QMDs_FHdGqW6ropwRlAczCdUrKR_) 67. [researchgate.net](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFsorh8MCxTR5W6muIHBH2Sfz2BPyJpDQnV0CIv3bqeUMpPJYr9yjzPXEly9ekqHxe4bAxduGOjdRB0AA_4WxMOlF4JGEf2sX0ZCarCDBTfccvpQ5_KAJV7SI9Yie9fP5MAKOMB1GpkwlgaIjldPFGyRCs0BWte_gE05qqVszMryMJgszsI5q5etRL6LE967FjtKnY9TSKHbEOgpsAzIneQbptJR3INCvt8bcVr4ViJ-w==)