RESUMEN

Cryptocurrency is a digital asset secured by cryptography that has become a popular medium of exchange and investment known for its anonymous transactions, unregulated markets, and volatile prices. Given the popular subculture of traders it has created, and its implications for financial markets and monetary policy, scholars have recently begun to examine the political, psychological, and social characteristics of cryptocurrency investors. A review of the existing literature suggests that cryptocurrency owners may possess higher-than-average levels of nonnormative psychological traits and exhibit a range of non-mainstream political identities. However, this extant literature typically employs small nonrepresentative samples of respondents and examines only a small number of independent variables in each given study. This presents the opportunity for both further testing of previous findings as well as broader exploratory analyses including more expansive descriptive investigations of cryptocurrency owners. To that end, we polled 2,001 American adults in 2022 to examine the associations between cryptocurrency ownership and individual level political, psychological, and social characteristics. Analyses revealed that 30% of our sample have owned some form of cryptocurrency and that these individuals exhibit a diversity of political allegiances and identities. We also found that crypto ownership was associated with belief in conspiracy theories, "dark" personality characteristics (e.g., the "Dark Tetrad" of narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadism), and more frequent use of alternative and fringe social media platforms. When examining a more comprehensive multivariate model, the variables that most strongly predict cryptocurrency ownership are being male, relying on alternative/fringe social media as one's primary news source, argumentativeness, and an aversion to authoritarianism. These findings highlight numerous avenues for future research into the people who buy and trade cryptocurrencies and speak to broader global trends in anti-establishment attitudes and nonnormative behaviors.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Despite hundreds of studies examining belief in conspiracy theories, it is still unclear who-demographically-is most likely to believe such theories. To remedy this knowledge gap, we examine survey data containing various operationalizations of conspiracism across diverse sociopolitical contexts. Study 1 employs a 2021 U.S. survey (n = 2021) to examine associations between sociodemographic characteristics and beliefs in 39 conspiracy theories. Study 2 similarly employs a survey of 20 countries (n = 26,416) and 11 conspiracy theory beliefs. Study 3 reports results from a 2020 U.S. survey (n = 2015) measuring perceptions about which groups are engaging in conspiracies. Study 4 interrogates data from nine U.S. surveys (2012-2022; n = 14,334) to examine the relationships between sociodemographic characteristics and generalized conspiracy thinking. Study 5 synchronizes studies 1-4 to provide an intersectional analysis of conspiracy theory belief. Across studies, we observe remarkably consistent patterns: education, income, age (older), and White identification are negatively related to conspiracism, while Black identification is positively related. We conclude by discussing why conspiracy theories may appeal most to historically marginalized groups and how our findings can inform efforts to mitigate the negative effects of conspiracy theories.

RESUMEN

Scholars have rapidly produced a robust body of literature addressing the public's beliefs in, and interactions with "misinformation." Despite the literature's stated concerns about the underlying truth value of the information and beliefs in question, the field has thus far operated without a reliable epistemology for determining the truth of the information and beliefs in question, often leaving researchers (or third parties) to make such determinations based on loose definitions and a naïve epistemology. We argue that, while this area of research has made great strides in recent years, more attention to definitions, epistemology, and terminology would both improve the validity of the literature and prevent the field of misinformation studies from becoming political conflict by another name.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Research into both receptivity to falling for bullshit and the propensity to produce it have recently emerged as active, independent areas of inquiry into the spread of misleading information. However, it remains unclear whether those who frequently produce bullshit are inoculated from its influence. For example, both bullshit receptivity and bullshitting frequency are negatively related to cognitive ability and aspects of analytic thinking style, suggesting that those who frequently engage in bullshitting may be more likely to fall for bullshit. However, separate research suggests that individuals who frequently engage in deception are better at detecting it, thus leading to the possibility that frequent bullshitters may be less likely to fall for bullshit. Here, we present three studies (N = 826) attempting to distinguish between these competing hypotheses, finding that frequency of persuasive bullshitting (i.e., bullshitting intended to impress or persuade others) positively predicts susceptibility to various types of misleading information and that this association is robust to individual differences in cognitive ability and analytic cognitive style.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Recent psychological research has identified important individual differences associated with receptivity to bullshit, which has greatly enhanced our understanding of the processes behind susceptibility to pseudo-profound or otherwise misleading information. However, the bulk of this research attention has focused on cognitive and dispositional factors related to bullshit (the product), while largely overlooking the influences behind bullshitting (the act). Here, we present results from four studies focusing on the construction and validation of a new, reliable scale measuring the frequency with which individuals engage in two types of bullshitting (persuasive and evasive) in everyday situations. Overall, bullshitting frequency was negatively associated with sincerity, honesty, cognitive ability, open-minded cognition, and self-regard. Additionally, the Bullshitting Frequency Scale was found to reliably measure constructs that are (1) distinct from lying and (2) significantly related to performance on overclaiming and social decision tasks. These results represent an important step forward by demonstrating the utility of the Bullshitting Frequency Scale as well as highlighting certain individual differences that may play important roles in the extent to which individuals engage in everyday bullshitting.

Asunto(s)