Some Dare Call It Conspiracy: Labeling Something a Conspiracy Theory Does Not Reduce Belief in It
"Conspiracy theory" is widely acknowledged to be a loaded term. Politicians use it to mock and dismiss allegations against them, while philosophers and political scientists warn that it could be used as a rhetorical weapon to pathologize dissent. In two empirical studies conducted on Amazon Mechanical Turk, I present an initial examination of whether this concern is justified. In Experiment 1, 150 participants judged a list of historical and speculative theories to be no less likely when they were labeled "conspiracy theories" than when they were labeled "ideas." In Experiment 2 (N5802) participants who read a news article about fictitious "corruption allegations" endorsed those allegations no more than participants who saw them labeled "conspiracy theories." The lack of an effect of the conspiracy theory label in both experiments was unexpected and may be due to a romanticized image of conspiracy theories in popular media or a dilution of the term to include mundane speculation regarding corruption and political intrigue.