The Role of Age, Gender and Education in the Relationship Between Critical Thinking and Conspiracy Belief Susceptibility
Abstract
The article examines the relationship between critical thinking and susceptibility to conspiracy theories in the context of demographic factors such as age, gender, and both the level and type of education. The study, conducted on a sample of 531 participants using the Computer-Assisted Web Interviewing (CAWI) method, indicates that lower levels of critical thinking are associated with greater acceptance of conspiratorial narratives, which has significant implications for education and the functioning of contemporary media culture. The results show that this phenomenon is particularly pronounced among individuals with a background in the humanities and in certain age groups, possibly reflecting differences in how information is acquired and interpreted. The article contributes to the interdisciplinary debate on the role of education and media literacy in building resilience to disinformation, offering new perspectives for research in cultural studies, media studies, and the philosophy of culture. The findings emphasize the need for targeted educational strategies aimed at developing critical thinking skills, which may be crucial in counteracting the influence of conspiracy theories on contemporary societies.
References
Abrami, P., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D., Wade, C., & Persson, T. J. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically. Review of Educational Research, 5(2), 275–314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551063
Bordeleau, J. & Stockemer, D. (2024). On the relationship between age and conspiracy beliefs. Political Psychology. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.13044
Cekule, L. & Cekuls, A. (2022). Understanding the potential of information in decision making. In: Proceedings of 9th SWS International Scientific Conference on Social Sciences - ISCSS 2022. SGEM WORLD SCIENCE (SWS). Scholarly Society. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35603/sws.iscss.2022/s08.090
Czerwonka, M. (2016). Cognitive reflection test in the context of heuristics, religion and gender. Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska, sectio H – Oeconomia, 50(3), 19–28. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/h.2016.50.3.19
DiYanni, R. & Borst, A. (2020). The craft of college teaching: A practical guide. Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691183800.003.0011
Douglas, K. M. & Sutton, R. M. (2018). Why conspiracy theories matter: A social psychological analysis. European Review of Social Psychology, 29(1), 256-298.
Fazio, R. H. & Petty, R. E. (2019). Attitudes: Their structure, function, and consequences. Psychology Press.
Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732
Holmes, N., Wieman, C., & Bonn, D. (2015). Teaching critical thinking. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(37), 11199–11204. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1505329112
Imhoff, R. & Bruder, M. (2014). Speaking (un–) truth to power: Conspiracy mentality as a generalised political attitude. European Journal of Personality, 28(1), 25-43.
Kay, A. C., Whitson, J. A., Gaucher, D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2009). Compensatory control: Achieving order through the mind, our institutions, and the heavens. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(5), 264–268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01649.x
Moore, B. N. & Parker, R. (2009). Critical thinking. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Myers, J. L. & Well, A. D. (2003). Research design and statistical analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Pennycook, G. & Rand, D. G. (2020). Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(6), 2775–2783. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1912444117
Roebianto, A., Savitri, S. I, Aulia, I., Suciyana, A., & Mubarokah, L, (2023). Content validity: Definition and procedure of content validation in psychological research. TPM - Testing 30, 5-18.
Sireci, S. (1998). The Construct of Content Validity. Social Indicators Research. 45, 83-117.
Šrol, J., Ballová Mikušková, E., & Čavojová, V. (2021). When we are worried, what are we thinking? Anxiety, lack of control, and conspiracy beliefs amidst the COVID‐19 pandemic. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35, 720-729. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3798
Stockemer, D. (2023). Conspiracy theories in the US: Who believes in them?. The Forum, 21(4), 529–550. https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2023-2022
Swami, V., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2010). Unanswered questions: A preliminary investigation of personality and individual difference predictors of 9/11 conspiracist beliefs. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24(6), 749–761. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1583
Teovanović, P., Lukić, P., Zupan, Z., Lazić, A., Ninković, M, & Žeželj, I. (2020). Irrational beliefs differentially predict adherence to guidelines and pseudoscientific practices during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35, 486–496.DOI: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3770
Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2014). Assessing miserly information processing: An expansion of the Cognitive Reflection Test. Thinking & Reasoning, 20(2), 147–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2013.844729
Vranić, A., Hromatko, I., & Tonković, M. (2022). “I Did My Own Research”: Overconfidence, (Dis)trust in Science, and Endorsement of Conspiracy Theories. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.931865
Wilson, J.A. (2018). Reducing Pseudoscientific and Paranormal Beliefs in University Students Through a Course in Science and Critical Thinking. Sci & Educ 27, 183–210 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-9956-0
Copyright (c) 2025 Perspectives on Culture
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Autor, zgłaszając swój artykuł, wyraża zgodę na korzystanie przez Wydawnictwo Uniwersystet Ignatianum z utworu na następujących polach eksploatacji:
- utrwalania utworu w formie papierowej, a także na nośniku cyfrowym lub magnetycznym;
- zwielokrotnienia utworu dowolną techniką, bez ograniczenia ilości wydań i liczby egzemplarzy;
- rozpowszechniania utworu i jego zwielokrotnionych egzemplarzy na jakimkolwiek nośniku, w tym wprowadzenia do obrotu, sprzedaży, użyczenia, najmu;
- wprowadzenia utworu do pamięci komputera;
- rozpowszechniania utworu w sieciach informatycznych, w tym w sieci Internet;
- publicznego wykonania, wystawienia, wyświetlenia, odtworzenia oraz nadawania i reemitowania, a także publicznego udostępniania utworu w taki sposób, aby każdy mógł mieć do niego dostęp w miejscu i czasie przez siebie wybranym.
Wydawca zobowiązuje się szanować osobiste prawa autorskie do utworu.
