- New paper out in @jexpsocpsych.bsky.social ! We (@kwinter.bsky.social, @kaiepstude.bsky.social , Bob Fennis and I) found that encouraging counterfactual thinking reduces engagement with conspiracy theories (i.e., clicks on, and reading times for, conspiracy articles). A 🧵 1/nNov 27, 2025 09:40
- If you are interested in conspiracy beliefs (and how to fight them), counterfactual thinking, or selective exposure (i.e., people's preference for information confirming their views), read the paper here: authors.elsevier.com/sd/article/S... Below is a summary of the most important findings. 2/n
- Key findings: 1) Encouraging counterfactual thinking about conspiracy beliefs (e.g., "If only I had not fallen down the rabbit hole ...") makes people consider opposing viewpoints and reflect on their views on conspiracy theories. 2) Reading counterfactuals does not reduce conspiracy beliefs. 3/n
- 3) Reading counterfactuals reduces engagement with conspiracy theories: - It reverses people's default preference for conspiracy over non-conspiracy articles (in terms of clicks and reading times) - It makes people spend less time reading conspiracy (but not non-conspiracy) articles 4/n
- We also find that high conspiracy mentality: - Makes people click on fewer non-conspiracy headlines (but not more conspiracy headlines) - Reduces reading times for conspiracy articles (but not non-conspiracy articles) - Does not change the effects of counterfactual thinking manipulations 5/n
- More research is certainly needed before using counterfactual thinking to tackle conspiracy theories in the field, but our paper provides a promising first step. Again, if you want to know more, read the paper here: authors.elsevier.com/sd/article/S... n/n
- Edit: The 2nd point in post 5 should read "Is positively (vs. not significantly) associated with reading times for conspiracy (vs. non-conspiracy) articles"
