Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Political consequences of conspiratorial thinking: evidence from 2016 Italian constitutional referendum

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Acta Politica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, the literature has devoted increasing attention to beliefs in conspiracy theories. Among various aspects of the phenomenon, it was found that conspiratorial attitudes are associated with political behaviour. In Italy, previous research found that Five Star Movement and right-wing parties' voters tend to show higher levels of conspiratorial thinking than other voters. However, the relationship between conspiracism and vote choice remains obscure. By analysing an Italian panel survey data collected before and after 2016 constitutional referendum, we show that the belief in conspiracy theories is associated with referendum vote choices, even when controlling for partisan opinions, leaders’ evaluations, and perceived economic wealth. Moreover, the effect of conspiracism on referendum vote choice proves to be stronger among the supporters of the government, which promoted the referendum. This paper aims at shedding light on the processes of opinion formation and how these are affected by external attitudes, such as conspiratorial ones.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. During the referendum campaign, Gustavo Zagrebelsky was even involved in a tv-debate against Matteo Renzi, the leading figure in the campaign for Yes vote. The debate, broadcast on September 30, 2016, by the private channel La7, represented one of the most relevant media events of the campaign.

  2. http://www.libertaegiustizia.it/2016/10/15/ancora-cinquanta-giorni-di-lotta-per-dire-no-ai-nemici-della-costituzione-piu-bella-del-mondo/.

  3. https://www.facebook.com/960162547429143.

  4. http://www.ilblogdellestelle.it/2016/11/_la_riforma_la_vuole_la_jp_morgan_10_indizi_iodicono.html.

  5. Adusbef is an association for consumers’ protection whose president was the MP Elio Lannutti.

  6. Descriptives are computed on the 2,843 individuals interviewed both in the pre- and in the post-referendum surveys.

  7. The three items are: parties are necessary to defend special interests of groups and social classes; parties guarantee that people can participate to politics in Italy; without parties there cannot be democracy.

References

  • Abalakina-Paap, M., W.G. Stephan, T. Craig, and W.L. Gregory. 1999. Beliefs in conspiracies. Political Psychology 20 (3): 637–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ai, C., and E.C. Norton. 2003. Interaction terms in logit and probit models. Economics Letters 80 (1): 123–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aro, J. 2016. The cyberspace war: Propaganda and trolling as warfare tools. European View 15 (1): 121–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron, D., K. Morgan, T. Towell, B. Altemeyer, and V. Swami. 2014. Associations between schizotypy and belief in conspiracist ideation. Personality and Individual Differences 70: 156–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biden, Jr., J.R., and Carpenter, M. 2018. How to stand up to the kremlin. Foreign affairs, (January/February). Retrieved July 2, 2018, from https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2017-12-05/how-stand-kremlin.

  • Brotherton, R., C.C. French, and A.D. Pickering. 2013. Measuring belief in conspiracy theories: The generic conspiracist beliefs scale. Frontiers in Psychology 4 (279): 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, M. 2018. ‘Twitter has admitted Russian trolls targeted the Brexit vote (a little bit)’, Wired, February 8. Retrieved July 2, 2018 from http://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-russia-brexit-fake-news-facebook-russia.

  • Cassino, D., and Jenkins, K. 2013. Conspiracy theories prosper: 25% of Americans are ‘truthers’. Fairleigh Dickinson University’s Public Mind Poll. January, 17.

  • Castanho-Silva, B., F. Vegetti, and L. Littvay. 2017. The elite is up to something: Exploring the relation between populism and belief in conspiracy theories. Swiss Political Science Review 23 (4): 423–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarini, L., and F. Bordignon. 2017. Referendum on Renzi: The 2016 vote on the Italian constitutional revision. South European Society and Politics 22 (3): 281–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Alimonte, R. 2015. The new Italian electoral system: Majority-assuring but minority-friendly. Contemporary Italian Politics 7 (3): 286–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, H., N. Neave, and J. Holmes. 2011. Belief in conspiracy theories. The role of paranormal belief, paranoid ideation and schizotypy. Personality and Individual Differences 50 (8): 1289–1293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Mauro, D., and V. Memoli. 2018. Targeting the government in the referendum: The aborted 2016 Italian constitutional reform. Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana Di Scienza Politica 48 (2): 133–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, K.L., and D.M. Glick. 2015. Do I think BLS data are BS? The consequences of conspiracy theories. Political Behavior 37 (3): 679–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enders, AM, Smallpage, SM (2019) Polls, plots, and party politics. Cosnspiracy theories in contemporary America, in Uscinski, JE (Ed.) Conspiracy Theories & People who Believe Them. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Fusaro, D. 2016. Referendum costituzionale, la riforma è voluta dalla finanza di JP Morgan. Il fatto quotidiano, September 22. Retrieved July 2018, from http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2016/09/22/referendum-costituzionale-la-riforma-e-voluta-dalla-finanza-di-jp-morgan/3047056/.

  • Hibbing, J.R., and E. Theiss-Morse. 2002. Stealth democracy: Americans’ beliefs about how government should work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hobolt, S.B. 2007. Taking cues on Europe? Voter competence and party endorsements in referendums on European integration. European Journal of Political Research 46 (2): 151–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, R. 1996. The paranoid style in American politics and other essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingroia, A (2016), Dalla parte della Costituzione. Da Gelli a Renzi: quarant’anni di attacco alla Costituzione, Reggio Emilia: Imprimatur.

  • Jolley, D., and K.M. Douglas. 2014. The social consequences of conspiracism: Exposure to conspiracy theories decreases intentions to engage in politics and to reduce one's carbon footprint. British Journal of Psychology 105 (1): 35–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makarovs, K., and P. Achterberg. 2017. Contextualizing educational differences in “vaccination uptake”: A thirty nation survey. Social Science and Medicine 188: 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mancosu, M., S. Vassallo, and C. Vezzoni. 2017. Believing in conspiracy theories: Evidence from an exploratory analysis of Italian survey data. South European Society and Politics 22 (3): 327–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J.M., K.L. Saunders, and C.E. Farhart. 2016. Conspiracy endorsement as motivated reasoning: The moderating roles of political knowledge and trust. American Journal of Political Science 60 (4): 824–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Negri, F., and E. Rebessi. 2018. Was Mattarella worth the trouble? Explaining the failure of the 2016 Italian constitutional referendum. Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana Di Scienza Politica 48 (3): 177–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, J.E., and T.J. Wood. 2014. Conspiracy theories and the paranoid style(s) of mass opinion. American Journal of Political Science 58 (4): 952–966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pasek, J., T.H. Stark, J.A. Krosnick, and T. Tompson. 2015. What motivates a conspiracy theory? Birther beliefs, partisanship, liberal-conservative ideology, and anti-Black attitudes. Electoral Studies 40: 482–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pasquino, G. 2016. No positivo: Per la Costituzione. Per le buone riforme. Per migliorare la politica e la vita. Novi Ligure: Edizioni Epoké.

  • Persily, N. 2017. Can democracy survive the Internet? Journal of Democracy 28 (2): 63–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plencner, A. 2014. Critical thinking and the challenges of internet. Communication Today 5 (2): 4–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quaranta, M., Mancosu, M., & Martini, S. 2019. A tale of bias: Longitudinal evidence of the effect of electoral defeat on citizens. Evaluations of the economy. International Journal of Public Opinion Research. EarlyView.

  • Rubechi, M. (ed.). 2016. Perché sì: le ragioni della riforma costituzionale. Roma-Bari: Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swami, V., D. Barron, L. Weis, and A. Furnham. 2018. To Brexit or not to Brexit: The roles of Islamophobia, conspiracist beliefs, and integrated threat in voting intentions for the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum. British Journal of Psychology 109 (1): 156–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swami, V., D. Barron, L. Weis, M. Voracek, S. Stieger, and A. Furnham. 2017. An examination of the factorial and convergent validity of four measures of conspiracist ideation, with recommendations for researchers. PLoS ONE 12 (2): e0172617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swami, V., R. Coles, S. Stieger, J. Pietschnig, A. Furnham, S. Rehim, and M. Voracek. 2011. Conspiracist ideation in Britain and Austria: Evidence of a monological belief system and associations between individual psychological differences and real-world and fictitious conspiracy theories. British Journal of Psychology 102 (3): 443–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, G. 2017. Compromesso astorico: The role of the Senate after the Italian constitutional reform. Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana Di Scienza Politica 47 (1): 87–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uscinski, J.E., and J.M. Parent. 2014. American conspiracy theories. Oxford University Press.

  • Uscinski, J.E., C. Klofstad, and M.D. Atkinson. 2016. What drives conspiratorial beliefs? The role of informational cues and predispositions. Political Research Quarterly 69 (1): 57–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.W. 2017. Why education predicts decreased belief in conspiracy theories. Applied Cognitive Psychology 31 (1): 50–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.W., A.P.M. Krouwel, and T.V. Pollet. 2015. Political extremism predicts belief in conspiracy theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science 6 (5): 570–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vassallo, S. 1998. The third bicamerale. In Italian politics: Mapping the future, ed. L. Bardi and M. Rhodes, 111–131. Boulder: West View Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vassallo, S. 2005. The constitutional reforms of the center-right. In Italian Politics: Quo vadis?, ed. C. Guarnieri and J.L. Newell, 117–135. New York: Berghan Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vassallo, S. 2015. Parliament. In The oxford handbook of Italian politics, ed. E. Jones and G. Pasquino, 107–119. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zagrebelsky, G., and F. Pallante. 2016. Loro diranno, noi diciamo: vademecum sulle riforme istituzionali. Roma-Bari: Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Turin, Lungo Dora Siena 100, Turin, Italy

    Moreno Mancosu

  2. University of Milan, Via Conservatorio 7, Milan, Italy

    Riccardo Ladini

  3. University of Bologna, Strada Maggiore 45, Bologna, Italy

    Salvatore Vassallo

Authors
  1. Moreno Mancosu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Riccardo Ladini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Salvatore Vassallo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moreno Mancosu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 1783 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mancosu, M., Ladini, R. & Vassallo, S. Political consequences of conspiratorial thinking: evidence from 2016 Italian constitutional referendum. Acta Polit 56, 69–88 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41269-019-00146-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41269-019-00146-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation