Cognitive preferences for order drive belief in conspiracy theories, impacting public trust and health outcomes
Original framing: “Why conspiracy theories can be so irresistible” — Phys.org
The original framing omits the role of historical and structural factors such as systemic inequality, eroded trust in institutions, and the influence of corporate and political actors in spreading disinformation. It also neglects the insights of marginalized communities who have long used alternative narratives to resist dominant power structures.
Medium structural omission detected in mainstream coverage.
This narrative is produced by academic researchers and science communicators, primarily for public and policy audiences. It frames conspiracy theories as a cognitive trait rather than a systemic response to inequality, misinformation infrastructure, or institutional failures. By focusing on individual psychology, it obscures the role of media ecosystems, corporate disinformation campaigns, and historical distrust in marginalized communities.
Marginalized communities often develop alternative narratives as a form of resistance and survival. These narratives are dismissed as 'conspiracy theories' in mainstream discourse, despite their role in preserving cultural identity and challenging systemic oppression.
Conspiracy theories are not irrational but are systemic responses to perceived chaos, rooted in cognitive preferences for order and shaped by historical and structural factors.