Conspiracy Beliefs May Be Linked To A Love Of Rules And Order – Not A Lack Of Critical Thinking

Why do some people hold to conspiracy theories while others don’t? It’s a basic question, but one that has become increasingly significant with the rise of mis- and disinformation. Of course, conspiracy theories are not new. Such beliefs, which try to explain specific events as the result of secretive or otherwise hidden parties with corrupt or evil ambitions, have existed on the fringes of public opinion for centuries. However, every now and then, this type of thinking makes its way into the mainstream.

It appears that we are currently experiencing one of these periods, as the internet and social media has enabled disparate groups to share ideas with ease. And as conspiracy theories have become more prominent in the mainstream over the last decade, more researchers are trying to understand where they have come from. 

Previous research has looked into the origins of modern conspiracy theories related to subjects like science, medicine, politics, and commerce, as well as the nature of the beliefs themselves and the types of behavioral or personality traits shared by believers.

Now, according to research from Flinders University, South Australia, we have new insights into the thinking styles that may make someone more susceptible to conspiracy beliefs.

The research found that people who have a “systemizing” thinking style – characterized by a strong drive to identify patterns and make sense of events through consistent rules – may see conspiracy beliefs as more appealing.

This flies in the face of the commonly held argument that conspiracy theorists simply lack reasoning skills or have biased information processing approaches. According to this typical interpretation, people who hold conspiracy theories are less educated and do not engage with analytical thinking that might otherwise challenge such ideas.

“People often assume conspiracy beliefs form because someone isn’t thinking critically,” lead researcher Dr Neophytos Georgiou from Flinders University’s College of Education, Psychology and Social Work explained in a statement.

“But our findings show that for those who prefer systematic structure, conspiracy theories can feel like a highly organised way to understand confusing or unpredictable events.”

Prior to this latest work, Georgiou and others identified something of a paradox. They found that those with higher autistic traits who had a strong preference for analytical thinking were actually more likely to endorse conspiracy theories, while also rejecting counterevidence that debunks them.

This led the team to wonder whether a preference for systematic thinking – which is something often observed in individuals with higher autistic traits – may serve as a pathway to conspiracy thinking. To test this, Georgiou and colleagues examined over 550 people to understand why some people show a heightened interest in conspiracy explanations. 

They identified various thinking profiles and found that those who strongly preferred patterns and structure were more likely to believe conspiracy theories, even if they otherwise had good scientific reasoning skills.

“What stood out is that people who systemise strongly want the world to make sense in a very consistent way,” Georgiou added.

“Conspiracy theories often offer that sense of order. They tie loose ends together. Even when someone has strong reasoning ability, their desire for strict explanations can overshadow their ability to question those beliefs.”

The researchers also discovered that people who had a systemizing thinking style were also less likely to regulate their beliefs in response to countervailing evidence.

“In tasks that required participants to revise their views when presented with new information, those with high systemising tendencies were less likely to shift their perspective. This may help explain why conspiracy beliefs can persist even when contradictory information is available,” Georgiou explained.

“It’s about the cognitive style someone brings to information. For people who naturally seek structure and predictability, conspiracy theories can be appealing because they feel ordered, logical and consistent for events that feel chaotic.”

This research highlights the importance different thinking styles play when it comes to conspiracy theories. The team hope their findings will help inform new approaches that challenge misinformation.

“Rather than relying only on fact‑checking or logic‑based interventions, strategies may need to reflect how people prefer to process information,” Georgiou.

“Conspiracy beliefs meet psychological needs, and if we ignore that, we overlook what actually makes these narratives persuasive.”

The study is published in the journal Cognitive Processing.