Associations between Endorsement of Conspiracy Theories and Sympathy for Violent Radicalization in Young Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Moderation by Psychological Distress
preprint
OA: closed
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has spread uncertainty, promoted psychological distress and fuelled conflict. The concomitant upsurge in endorsement of COVID-19 conspiracy theories is worrisome because they are associated with both non-adherence to public health guidelines and intention to commit violence. This study investigates associations between endorsement of COVID-19 conspiracy theories, support for violent radicalization (VR) and psychological distress among young adults in Canada. We hypothesized that a) endorsement of COVID-19 conspiracy theories is positively associated with support for VR, and b) psychological distress modifies the relationship between COVID-19 conspiracy theories and support for VR.Methods: A total of 6003 participants aged 18-35 years old in four Canadian cities completed an online survey that included questions about endorsement of COVID-19 conspiracy theories, support for VR, psychological distress, and socio-economic status.Outcomes: Support for VR was associated with endorsement of conspiracy theories in multivariate regression (β=0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80-0.96). The magnitude of the association was stronger in individuals reporting high psychological distress (β=1.36, 95% CI 1.26-1.46) compared to those reporting low psychological distress (β=0.47, 95% CI 0.35-0.59).Interpretation: The association between endorsement of COVID-19 conspiracy theories and VR represents a public health challenge requiring immediate attention. The interaction with psychological distress suggests that policy efforts should combine communication and psychological strategies to mitigate the legitimation of violence.Funding: Fonds Québécois de Recherche en Santé et Culture grant #2017-SE-196373 and Équipe de Recherche et Action sur les Polarisations Sociales grant #180645.Declaration of Interests: None to declare. Ethics Approval Statement: Ethics approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board ofthe Faculty of Medicine at McGill University before initiating the study, and all participants provided an electronic informed consent.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.
Source provenance
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-05-19T01:45:01.086888+00:00