These do a pretty good job of explaining, I think. I cut and pasted parts of the articles bellow each...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6354139.stm
"But in the 20th Century, and particularly since the 1960s, conspiracy theories have increasingly pointed the finger of blame at the powerful, usually the government and the intelligence agencies.
In effect, the principal target of conspiracy theories has shifted from the "red scare" of McCarthy's distrust of communism to the "fed scare" - a deep distrust of anything official.
This is partly a result of a loss of faith in authorities in recent decades: opinion polls show that in the US in the early 1960s three quarters of Americans trusted the government, but by the 1990s only a quarter claimed to do so. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6213226.stm
"Conspiracy theories abound all across the world and psychologists have begun to try to understand why people believe in conspiracy theories.
My own research suggests that people think that a major or significant event must have been caused by something similarly major, significant or powerful.
Magnitude of explanation
However, often official accounts for events, or more mundane, everyday explanations, fail to seem big enough.
We do not feel particularly comfortable with the idea that something unpredictable or accidental like a car crash could have a big effect like the death of a Princess, or that a single mad gunman could assassinate the most powerful man in the world.
That troubles our sense of the world as being a relatively stable, safe place to live in.
Sometimes we try and cast around for an explanation that matches the magnitude of the event that we see in front of us, and conspiracy theories can provide that explanation.
Psychological tests I have carried out suggest that the more you believe in conspiracy theories the more likely you are to mistrust reported facts.
This is, on one level at least, obvious. But it is important to help us to understand how conspiracy theorists often deal with those taking a critical position.
For instance, when I first started working in the area I received a number of messages from individuals implying I was working for some secretive government organization or another. This, they claimed, must explain why I was asking the questions I was."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6368341.stm
"I think the most potent targets for conspiracy theories are events of disproportionate tragedy. For example, the president of the United States is assassinated by a lone gunman. It doesn't seem fair, it doesn't seem right, it can't be. This one guy couldn't have done it - there must be larger forces at work."
The most potent targets for conspiracy theory are events of disproportionate tragedy
Frank Spotnitz, The X Files writer
Frank Spotnitz on conspiracy theories
And so we take comfort in complicated stories about wider conspiracies, usually involving remote, distant figures.
In the past it was mythical gods and monsters. In the more secular modern world, ancient superstitions have been discarded - now it's out-of-touch leaders and unseen government agencies who fill the role of the bogeymen.
We find it reassuring to create an explanation that vindicates our world view. It reinforces our beliefs, suspicions and, yes, even our prejudices.
http://www.economist.com/science/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=1648616
Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, Patrick Leman of Royal Holloway, a college of the University of London, has presented the results of his research into conspiracy theories to the annual meeting of the British Psychological Society, which was held last week in Bournemouth. He thinks the reason people believe in conspiracy theories is that humans have an innate tendency to try to link major events with major causes.
To test this idea Dr Leman presented 64 students with clippings of articles that looked as though they had been taken from a newspaper. In fact, the articles had been made up. They were about the president of a fictional country, and they came in four versions, of which each student saw but one. In the first version, the president was shot and killed. In the second, he was shot but survived. In the third, the shot missed, but he died shortly afterwards from an unrelated cause. In the fourth, the shot missed and he lived. The students were asked to rate the likely truth of six statements on the subject of whether the assassin was a gunman acting alone, or whether there was a conspiracy at work. They were also asked to rate the accuracy of the ?facts? in the article.
Some of the results were unsurprising. For example, subjects with high general levels of belief in conspiracy theories were much more doubting of the facts in the articles. That fits with what is already known?that people who like conspiracy theories tend to bat away any evidence that contradicts their point of view.
More surprisingly, Dr Leman found that if the fictional president ?died? after the shooting, readers were much more likely to believe that the gunman was part of a conspiracy. This was true even though the other facts in the story were unchanged, and even if the death was due to an unrelated cause, such as a heart attack. This curious observation is the basis of Dr Leman's hypothesis that there is some underlying process in human psychology that assumes that the bigger the effect is, the bigger the cause must have been.
Don't know who this guy is, but the research is interesting...
http://www.world-mysteries.com/newgw/gw_rmd1.htm
Given the number of respondents who admit believing that the four above-mentioned conspiracy theories may be true, we may now examine the possible reasons behind why such a significant portion of the population hold such beliefs.
Goertzel identified three traits as being correlated with a belief in conspiracy theories:
anomia, the respondent stated a belief that he/she felt alienated or disaffection relative to ?the system;?
a tendency to distrust other people; and
a feeling of insecurity regarding continued employment.
Citing Volkan5, who suggested that insecure and/or discontented people very often feel a need for a tangible enemy on which to externalize their anger, Goertzel notes that conspiracy theories may serve to provide an ?enemy? to blame for problems which ?otherwise seem too abstract and impersonal.? He further observes that conspiracy theories also provide ready answers for the believer?s unanswered questions and help to resolve contradictions between known ?facts? and an individual's belief system. The latter observation seems to be verified by the widespread acceptance within the Muslim world of the contention that the September 11 attacks were the work of Israel, in conjunction with the Bush Administration, in order to increase anti-Muslim sentiments abroad.6
Surprisingly, Goertzel found that there was no correlation between race, age, and economic status and the latter two traits. Although he did not suggest that the two latter traits mentioned above may be self-perpetuating (people who have experienced employment difficulties in the past may be more distrusting of others which, in turn, may lead to future interpersonal issues that can have a negative impact on employment), intuitive reasoning suggests that this could be possible.
In summary, I accept the published findings and opinions of Goertzel et al as being at least subjectively valid. Successful conspiracy theories are those that to some degree empower the believer against what are perceived as external forces that he/she blames for some unpleasant or undesirable facet of their lives. In addition conspiracy theories serve to absolve the individual of some degree of self-accountability since, if the individual is being ?oppressed? by some powerful conspiracy, the individual?s efforts at self-advancement will always be futile and thus become nothing more than ?a waste of time.? Sadly, it seems that conspiracy theories and their advocates are now deeply engrained in the popular psyche and without prospects for their ultimate refutation.
And, no, I?m not part of some conspiracy against conspiracy theories
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6354139.stm
"But in the 20th Century, and particularly since the 1960s, conspiracy theories have increasingly pointed the finger of blame at the powerful, usually the government and the intelligence agencies.
In effect, the principal target of conspiracy theories has shifted from the "red scare" of McCarthy's distrust of communism to the "fed scare" - a deep distrust of anything official.
This is partly a result of a loss of faith in authorities in recent decades: opinion polls show that in the US in the early 1960s three quarters of Americans trusted the government, but by the 1990s only a quarter claimed to do so. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6213226.stm
"Conspiracy theories abound all across the world and psychologists have begun to try to understand why people believe in conspiracy theories.
My own research suggests that people think that a major or significant event must have been caused by something similarly major, significant or powerful.
Magnitude of explanation
However, often official accounts for events, or more mundane, everyday explanations, fail to seem big enough.
We do not feel particularly comfortable with the idea that something unpredictable or accidental like a car crash could have a big effect like the death of a Princess, or that a single mad gunman could assassinate the most powerful man in the world.
That troubles our sense of the world as being a relatively stable, safe place to live in.
Sometimes we try and cast around for an explanation that matches the magnitude of the event that we see in front of us, and conspiracy theories can provide that explanation.
Psychological tests I have carried out suggest that the more you believe in conspiracy theories the more likely you are to mistrust reported facts.
This is, on one level at least, obvious. But it is important to help us to understand how conspiracy theorists often deal with those taking a critical position.
For instance, when I first started working in the area I received a number of messages from individuals implying I was working for some secretive government organization or another. This, they claimed, must explain why I was asking the questions I was."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6368341.stm
"I think the most potent targets for conspiracy theories are events of disproportionate tragedy. For example, the president of the United States is assassinated by a lone gunman. It doesn't seem fair, it doesn't seem right, it can't be. This one guy couldn't have done it - there must be larger forces at work."
The most potent targets for conspiracy theory are events of disproportionate tragedy
Frank Spotnitz, The X Files writer
Frank Spotnitz on conspiracy theories
And so we take comfort in complicated stories about wider conspiracies, usually involving remote, distant figures.
In the past it was mythical gods and monsters. In the more secular modern world, ancient superstitions have been discarded - now it's out-of-touch leaders and unseen government agencies who fill the role of the bogeymen.
We find it reassuring to create an explanation that vindicates our world view. It reinforces our beliefs, suspicions and, yes, even our prejudices.
http://www.economist.com/science/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=1648616
Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, Patrick Leman of Royal Holloway, a college of the University of London, has presented the results of his research into conspiracy theories to the annual meeting of the British Psychological Society, which was held last week in Bournemouth. He thinks the reason people believe in conspiracy theories is that humans have an innate tendency to try to link major events with major causes.
To test this idea Dr Leman presented 64 students with clippings of articles that looked as though they had been taken from a newspaper. In fact, the articles had been made up. They were about the president of a fictional country, and they came in four versions, of which each student saw but one. In the first version, the president was shot and killed. In the second, he was shot but survived. In the third, the shot missed, but he died shortly afterwards from an unrelated cause. In the fourth, the shot missed and he lived. The students were asked to rate the likely truth of six statements on the subject of whether the assassin was a gunman acting alone, or whether there was a conspiracy at work. They were also asked to rate the accuracy of the ?facts? in the article.
Some of the results were unsurprising. For example, subjects with high general levels of belief in conspiracy theories were much more doubting of the facts in the articles. That fits with what is already known?that people who like conspiracy theories tend to bat away any evidence that contradicts their point of view.
More surprisingly, Dr Leman found that if the fictional president ?died? after the shooting, readers were much more likely to believe that the gunman was part of a conspiracy. This was true even though the other facts in the story were unchanged, and even if the death was due to an unrelated cause, such as a heart attack. This curious observation is the basis of Dr Leman's hypothesis that there is some underlying process in human psychology that assumes that the bigger the effect is, the bigger the cause must have been.
Don't know who this guy is, but the research is interesting...
http://www.world-mysteries.com/newgw/gw_rmd1.htm
Given the number of respondents who admit believing that the four above-mentioned conspiracy theories may be true, we may now examine the possible reasons behind why such a significant portion of the population hold such beliefs.
Goertzel identified three traits as being correlated with a belief in conspiracy theories:
anomia, the respondent stated a belief that he/she felt alienated or disaffection relative to ?the system;?
a tendency to distrust other people; and
a feeling of insecurity regarding continued employment.
Citing Volkan5, who suggested that insecure and/or discontented people very often feel a need for a tangible enemy on which to externalize their anger, Goertzel notes that conspiracy theories may serve to provide an ?enemy? to blame for problems which ?otherwise seem too abstract and impersonal.? He further observes that conspiracy theories also provide ready answers for the believer?s unanswered questions and help to resolve contradictions between known ?facts? and an individual's belief system. The latter observation seems to be verified by the widespread acceptance within the Muslim world of the contention that the September 11 attacks were the work of Israel, in conjunction with the Bush Administration, in order to increase anti-Muslim sentiments abroad.6
Surprisingly, Goertzel found that there was no correlation between race, age, and economic status and the latter two traits. Although he did not suggest that the two latter traits mentioned above may be self-perpetuating (people who have experienced employment difficulties in the past may be more distrusting of others which, in turn, may lead to future interpersonal issues that can have a negative impact on employment), intuitive reasoning suggests that this could be possible.
In summary, I accept the published findings and opinions of Goertzel et al as being at least subjectively valid. Successful conspiracy theories are those that to some degree empower the believer against what are perceived as external forces that he/she blames for some unpleasant or undesirable facet of their lives. In addition conspiracy theories serve to absolve the individual of some degree of self-accountability since, if the individual is being ?oppressed? by some powerful conspiracy, the individual?s efforts at self-advancement will always be futile and thus become nothing more than ?a waste of time.? Sadly, it seems that conspiracy theories and their advocates are now deeply engrained in the popular psyche and without prospects for their ultimate refutation.
And, no, I?m not part of some conspiracy against conspiracy theories
