Spite takes many forms. You might take a little longer at the self-checkout when someone is waiting. You might increase the TV volume when someone complains about the sound. And you might turn to conspiracy theories. According to a new study in the Journal of Social Issues, that’s a distinct possibility, as spitefulness plays an important part in conspiracy thinking.

“Spite is the desire to ‘level the playing field’ by trying to knock someone else down,” said David Gordon, a study author and a researcher and lecturer at the University of Staffordshire, in a press release. “Conspiracy theories can serve as a way for individuals to satisfy this desire through rejecting expert opinion and scientific consensus.”

Read More: How To Tell If A Conspiracy Theory Is Probably False

Spiting and Rejecting Science

Whenever we deliberately dismiss an evidence-based explanation for an event or a series of events in favor of an implausible, illogical, or baseless explanation, we are exhibiting a belief in a conspiracy theory. Such beliefs are always popular — at least 50 percent of people in the U.S. accepts at least one of them — and are particularly prevalent in times of trouble, like in wars or worldwide pandemics.

Often, these beliefs are based on a denial of science, whether that’s the specific dismissal of climate change or vaccination safety or the broader dismissal of scientists and their work as a whole. But what pushes people to these rejections, whether they’re specific or broad?

To find out, the authors of the new study turned to spite — basically, the desire to harm, or to displease, distress, or offend, others. Working with a total of 1,000 participants, they found that their participants’ levels of spite and conspiracy thinking were linked. While individuals with low levels of spite tended to exhibit lower levels of conspiracy thinking, individuals with high levels of spite tended to exhibit higher levels of conspiracy thinking.

“Spiteful psychological motives tend to emerge when people feel at a competitive disadvantage, often when we feel uncertain, threatened, or undervalued,” Gordon said in the release, with conspiracy theories appearing to soothe those feelings, partly through the rejection of science.

Read More: Why People Become Overwhelmed by Conspiracy Theories — and How To Help Them

Spite and Conspiracy Theories

In addition to the link between spite and conspiracy-theory belief, the study authors also found that those two factors were tied to three traditional indicators of conspiracy thinking: a desire for understanding (that is, an epistemic desire), a desire for security (an existential desire), and a desire for social significance (a social desire).

Though spite mediated the connection between conspiracy thinking and all three indicators, the associations between spite, conspiracy thinking, and the desire to understand the world were the strongest, suggesting that changes in science communication could combat the spread of these theories.

“We are not suggesting that people consciously choose to be spiteful when believing and spreading conspiracy theories,” said Megan Birney, another study author and a professor at the University of Birmingham, according to the release. “Instead, our findings suggest that feelings of disadvantage in those three areas can provoke a common psychological — spiteful — response, one that makes individuals more receptive to believing conspiracy theories.”

According to the study authors, the results suggest that changes to science communication aren’t the only solution to conspiracy thinking, as any attempts to combat conspiracy theories should also combat the social and economic conditions that cause people to feel a lack of understanding, a lack of security, and a lack of social significance in their day-to-day lives.

“If we understand conspiracy beliefs as a manifestation of spite — a reaction to real or perceived social and economic disadvantage — then tackling misinformation is inseparable from addressing broader societal issues such as financial insecurity and inequality,” Gordon said in the release.

Read More: Debunking 3 Common Climate Change Myths

Article Sources

Our writers at Discovermagazine.com use peer-reviewed studies and high-quality sources for our articles, and our editors review for scientific accuracy and editorial standards. Review the sources used below for this article:

Sam Walters is a journalist covering archaeology, paleontology, ecology, and evolution for Discover, along with an assortment of other topics. Before joining the Discover team as an assistant editor in 2022, Sam studied journalism at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois.