arbiter
JournalsAccount

From curiosity to conspiracy: How epistemic motivation shapes competing ways of knowing

Bruno Gabriel Salvador Casara et al.

British Journal of Social Psychology2026https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.70038article
AJG 3ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Through three studies (Ntot = 2338), the present research examines the relationship between epistemic psychological needs, conspiratorial beliefs and trust in science, specifically investigating how these factors influence preferences for online content marked by conspiratorial or scientific rhetoric. Study 1 reveals that conspiratorial beliefs are positively associated with insecure epistemic needs, and Study 2 replicates and deepens these findings by introducing behavioural measures of engagement with Google-like headlines presenting conspiratorial or scientific claims. Finally, Study 3 further confirms the link between epistemic needs and conspiracy beliefs, using curiosity as a predictor of conspiratorial beliefs, trust in science and engagement with online content while also considering hostile attribution bias and cognitive reflection as influential variables. The results suggest that different dimensions of epistemic psychological needs can lead to the adoption of divergent belief systems, offering new perspectives on understanding the dynamics between conspiratorial beliefs and trust in science.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.70038

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{bruno2026,
  title        = {{From curiosity to conspiracy: How epistemic motivation shapes competing ways of knowing}},
  author       = {Bruno Gabriel Salvador Casara et al.},
  journal      = {British Journal of Social Psychology},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.70038},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

From curiosity to conspiracy: How epistemic motivation shapes competing ways of knowing

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.