New research from the Journal of Applied Social Psychology presents causal evidence that conspiracy beliefs can damage relationships. Using a series of experiments, the study found that when one person expresses conspiracy beliefs, relationship satisfaction decreases—unless both individuals hold similar beliefs. The study moves beyond correlation, offering proof that the endorsement of conspiracy theories can impact the quality of interpersonal connections.
The motivation for the research stems from growing concerns about how conspiracy beliefs, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic and surrounding political movements like QAnon, appear to strain interpersonal relationships. While anecdotal evidence suggests that conspiracy beliefs can lead to relationship breakdowns, there has been limited empirical research on this phenomenon.
“As a member of the CONSPIRACY_FX research group, my current research interests are mainly focused on the consequences of conspiracy beliefs,” said study author Daniel Toribio-Flórez, a postdoctoral research associate at the University of Kent’s School of Psychology. “One of the most pervasive consequences refers to the effect that conspiracy beliefs seem to have in the interpersonal relationships of some people.”
“Our main motivation to further examine this issue was the growing amount of anecdotal evidence about people who, by contacting us directly or posting in online media, reported having experienced a substantial erosion of their relationships with parents, friends, or partners who started to believe in specific conspiracy theories (especially, during the COVID-19 pandemic or the evolution of the QAnon movement). Thus, we decided it was necessary to test more systematically whether an association between conspiracy beliefs and people’s perceived satisfaction in their interpersonal relationships existed.”
The research involved two pilot studies and five main studies, which included both correlational and experimental approaches.
In Pilot Studies 1 and 2, the researchers aimed to gather preliminary evidence on the association between conspiracy beliefs and relationship satisfaction. The pilot studies included 447 U.K. participants recruited via Prolific, an online research platform, and used a correlational design to explore how individuals’ perceptions of others’ conspiracy beliefs might relate to their satisfaction in those relationships.
Both pilot studies found evidence of a negative association between belief in conspiracy theories and relationship satisfaction. In other words, participants reported lower satisfaction with alters who they perceived as conspiracy believers. These preliminary findings provided support for the hypothesis that conspiracy beliefs could negatively affect interpersonal relationships, especially when beliefs were not shared within the relationship.
Study 1 was a conceptual replication of one of the pilot studies, designed to further examine the association between conspiracy beliefs and relationship satisfaction. The researchers recruited 201 participants. Each participant was asked to provide data on two people from their social network. Participants were instructed to think of one person who they believed endorsed conspiracy theories (the “conspiracy believer”) and one person who they believed did not endorse such theories (the “non-believer”).
After identifying these individuals, participants were asked to rate their relationship satisfaction with each of them. Additionally, participants rated their relational, emotional, and attitudinal closeness with each person. These dimensions of closeness were rated on separate 100-point scales, helping the researchers differentiate between how participants felt emotionally connected to the person, how close they felt to them overall, and how aligned they were in their attitudes.
In line with the pilot studies, participants reported significantly lower relationship satisfaction with the person they perceived to hold conspiracy beliefs, compared to the non-believer. Additionally, participants felt less attitudinal and relational closeness with the conspiracy believer, suggesting that differences in attitudes, especially related to conspiracy theories, might strain relationships.
An important finding was that the degree of this effect depended on the participants’ own conspiracy beliefs: those with weaker conspiracy beliefs showed a much stronger negative association between others’ conspiracy beliefs and their relationship satisfaction.
“Our results suggest that there is indeed an association between conspiracy beliefs and relationship satisfaction, yet this association depends on whether or not conspiracy beliefs are shared within a relationship,” Toribio-Flórez told PsyPost.
However, the findings thus far only established a correlation between perceiving someone as a conspiracy believer and lower relationship satisfaction. To explore the causal impact of conspiracy beliefs on relationships, the researchers designed subsequent studies using experimental methods. This allowed them to directly manipulate the expression of conspiracy beliefs and observe its effect on relationship satisfaction.
Study 2 employed an experimental design to further explore how the explicit expression of conspiracy beliefs by someone in a participant’s social network might affect relationship satisfaction. A larger sample of 801 participants was recruited. The study followed a pre-post design where participants first listed one person from their social network without being prompted to think about conspiracy beliefs. They then rated their existing relationship satisfaction with that person using the Relationship Assessment Scale and completed measures of relational and attitudinal closeness.
Participants were then randomly assigned to one of two experimental conditions. In one condition, participants were asked to imagine a scenario where the person they had listed explicitly endorsed a conspiracy theory during a conversation (the “pro-conspiracy” condition). In the other condition, participants were asked to imagine the person explicitly rejecting the conspiracy theory (the “anti-conspiracy” condition). After imagining this interaction, participants re-evaluated their relationship satisfaction and closeness with the person.
The findings showed that participants anticipated a decline in relationship satisfaction when they imagined the person endorsing conspiracy theories, particularly among participants with weaker conspiracy beliefs. Participants in the anti-conspiracy condition, where the person opposed the conspiracy theory, did not show a significant change in their relationship satisfaction.
Studies 3a and 3b expanded on the findings from Study 2 by introducing additional measures of behavioral reactions and trust to understand how people expected to behave or be treated when someone in their social network endorsed conspiracy beliefs. Study 3a recruited 310 undergraduate students, while Study 3b recruited 300 participants from the general public via Prolific to ensure the results applied to a broader population.
In both studies, participants first listed one person from their social network and rated their relationship satisfaction, relational closeness, and attitudinal closeness with that person. Participants were then randomly assigned to one of two conditions: they were asked to imagine the person either endorsing a conspiracy theory (pro-conspiracy) or rejecting it (anti-conspiracy).
After imagining this scenario, participants completed additional measures of expected behavioral reactions (e.g., whether they thought they or the other person would try to interact more or less) and interpersonal trust (i.e., how trustworthy they found the person and how trustworthy they thought the person found them).
In Study 3a, the findings were somewhat surprising. Contrary to earlier studies, many participants reported higher relationship satisfaction and closeness when they imagined someone in their network endorsing conspiracy beliefs. This effect was especially pronounced for participants who themselves held strong conspiracy beliefs, suggesting that shared beliefs in conspiracy theories might actually enhance relationship satisfaction in certain contexts. But for those with weaker conspiracy beliefs, the endorsement of conspiracy theories still tended to lower satisfaction and closeness, though this effect was less pronounced than expected.
Study 3b produced results more in line with the prior studies. Participants in the pro-conspiracy condition reported lower relationship satisfaction, lower relational closeness, and lower trust than those in the anti-conspiracy condition. The negative effects were more pronounced among participants with weaker conspiracy beliefs. These results reinforced the idea that conspiracy beliefs can erode trust and relationship satisfaction, particularly when they are not shared.
“We were surprised to see such a clear distinction between relationships in which conspiracy beliefs are shared, relative to relationships in which conspiracy beliefs are not shared,” Toribio-Flórez explained. “For example, in Studies 3A and 3B, we had two distinct samples of participants with different levels of endorsement of conspiracy beliefs.”
“We observed that for the sample with lower conspiracy beliefs, perceiving that people they have a relationship with had endorsed conspiracy beliefs decreased their perceived relationship satisfaction. The opposite was true for the sample with higher conspiracy beliefs. This suggests that, despite the generalized stigmatizing value of conspiracy beliefs, the latter can also be part of the foundation of some interpersonal relationships where people share similar conspiracy worldviews.”
Study 4 focused on how conspiracy beliefs influence first impressions in the context of potential new relationships. This study was set in an online dating scenario to see how the explicit endorsement of conspiracy beliefs might affect hypothetical relationship satisfaction with strangers. A total of 467 single participants from the United States were recruited via Prolific.
Each participant was shown a mock dating profile (either male or female), which included generic information about the person’s hobbies and interests. The profiles also varied in one key aspect: in one condition, the profile included a statement endorsing a conspiracy theory about the 2020 US presidential election (“The 2020 election was rigged”). In another condition, the profile contained a statement rejecting the conspiracy theory, and in the control condition, no mention of conspiracy theories was made.
After viewing the profile, participants were asked to rate how satisfied they thought a relationship with the person would be, using a modified version of the Relationship Assessment Scale. Participants also completed measures of their own conspiracy beliefs and political orientation to control for any potential political bias in their responses.
The results showed that participants anticipated lower relationship satisfaction with someone who explicitly endorsed a conspiracy theory compared to those who either rejected the conspiracy theory or made no mention of it. This negative effect was strongest among participants with weaker conspiracy beliefs. Interestingly, participants’ own political orientation did not significantly influence these results, suggesting that the effects of conspiracy beliefs on relationship satisfaction extend beyond mere political alignment.
In summary, “in our studies, we found that if a person perceives the other person in the relationship to believe in or to explicitly endorse conspiracy theories, the former will likely perceive lower relationship satisfaction and the other person as less close, relationally and attitudinally,” Toribio-Flórez told PsyPost. “However, if the two people within the relationship share a belief in conspiracy theories, the perceived relationship satisfaction will likely be similar, and it can even improve, accompanied by the perception of the other person as relationally and attitudinally closer.”
While the findings provide important insights into the link between conspiracy beliefs and relationship satisfaction, the study — like all research — has limitations. One of the main limitations is that many of the studies relied on hypothetical scenarios. This introduces a degree of speculation into the findings, as people may not always act in real life the way they predict they would in a survey.
“It could be considered a caveat the fact that our studies do not examine the effect of conspiracy beliefs on relationship satisfaction directly (e.g., through an experiment where one part of the relationship is persuaded to endorse conspiracy theories), due to methodological constraints and ethical reasons,” Toribio-Flórez noted. “Instead, the evidence we provide is based on people’s perceptions and hypothetical judgments of what conspiracy beliefs represent and how they expect them to affect their interpersonal relationships, perceptions and judgments that are arguably grounded on people’s previous relationships and experiences.”
“Note that research in interpersonal relationships has repeatedly shown how people’s perceptions, attitudes and judgments are still valuable information to predict relationship satisfaction and success, as individuals usually operate with representations of their context (e.g., whether I think my friend believes in conspiracy theories), rather than objective information about such context (e.g., whether my friend actually believes in conspiracy theories). In any case, we think it is important for future research to provide further evidence through more direct methodologies (e.g., experience sampling with dyadic relationships).”
The study opens the door for further exploration into how attitudinal alignment and shared beliefs shape our social connections, especially in a world where misinformation and conspiracy theories are increasingly prevalent.
“Our first goal was to create awareness about the potential implications of conspiracy beliefs in the most primary tissue of our social context, that is, our interpersonal relationships with one another,” Toribio-Flórez explained. “We hope to achieve this outcome in the general public, but also in the academic community, to inspire further investigation of the consequences of conspiracy beliefs on people’s relationships.”
“A second goal would be to investigate further what sociopsychological mechanisms are involved in the effects conspiracy beliefs might have on relationships. Understanding what occurs (and how it occurs) at the individual/relational level can also help to comprehend other social and political implications of conspiracy beliefs.”
The study, “Belief in conspiracy theories and satisfaction in interpersonal relationships,” was authored by Daniel Toribio-Flórez, Ricky Green, and Karen M. Douglas
