IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cra/wpaper/2021-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Early COVID-19 Government Communication is Associated with Reduced Interest in the QAnon Conspiracy Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Ho Fai Chan
  • Stephanie M. Rizio
  • Ahmed Skali
  • Benno Torgler

Abstract

The QAnon conspiracy theory contends, among other things, that COVID-19 is a conspiracy orchestrated by powerful actors and aimed at repressing civil liberties. We hypothesize that, where government risk communication started early, as measured by the number of days between the start of the communication campaign and the first case in the country, citizens are less likely to turn to conspiratorial explanations for the pandemic. In Study 1, we find strong support for our hypothesis in a global sample of 111 countries, using daily Google search volumes for QAnon as a measure of interest in QAnon. The effect is robust to a variety of sensitivity checks. In Study 2, we show that the effect is not explainable by pre-pandemic cross-country differences in interest in QAnon, nor by ‘secular’ rising interest in QAnon amid the pandemic. When evaluated against pre- pandemic levels of interest in QAnon, we find that a one standard deviation (26.2 days) increase in communication lateness predicts a near-tripling (172 percentage points) increase in interest in QAnon (Study 2). In pre-registered Study 3, we find no support for the proposition that early communication reduces self-reported pandemic-related conspiratorial ideation in a sample of respondents from 67 countries. The latter non-result appears to be partially driven by social desirability bias (Study 4). Overall, our results provide evidence that very extreme beliefs like QAnon are highly responsive to government risk communication, while less extreme forms of conspiracism are perhaps less so.

Suggested Citation

  • Ho Fai Chan & Stephanie M. Rizio & Ahmed Skali & Benno Torgler, 2021. "Early COVID-19 Government Communication is Associated with Reduced Interest in the QAnon Conspiracy Theory," CREMA Working Paper Series 2021-12, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
  • Handle: RePEc:cra:wpaper:2021-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.crema-research.ch/papers/2021-12.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.crema-research.ch/abstracts/2021-12.htm
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert C. Feenstra & Robert Inklaar & Marcel P. Timmer, 2015. "The Next Generation of the Penn World Table," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(10), pages 3150-3182, October.
    2. Jutta Bolt & Jan Luiten Zanden, 2014. "The Maddison Project: collaborative research on historical national accounts," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 67(3), pages 627-651, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Farzanegan, Mohammad Reza & Gholipour, Hassan F., 2023. "COVID-19 fatalities and internal conflict: Does government economic support matter?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    2. Kohnert, Dirk, 2023. "L'impact de QAnon et d'autres idéologies du complot sur l'Afrique subsaharienne à l'ère du capitalisme mondial [QAnon and other conspiracy ideologies' impact on Sub-Saharan Africa in the age of Glo," MPRA Paper 115950, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Kohnert, Dirk, 2023. "QAnon and other conspiracy ideologies’ impact on Sub-Saharan Africa in the age of Global capitalism," MPRA Paper 115917, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rok Spruk & Mitja Kovac, 2018. "Inefficient Growth," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 9(2).
    2. Aysit Tansel & Ceyhan Ozturk & Erkan Erdil, 2021. "The Impact of Body Mass Index on Growth, Schooling, Productivity, and Savings: A Cross-Country Study," Koç University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum Working Papers 2118, Koc University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum.
    3. Prados de la Escosura, Leandro, 2014. "Mismeasuring Long Run Growth. The Bias from Spliced National Accounts," CEPR Discussion Papers 10137, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Caravaggio, Nicola, 2020. "A global empirical re-assessment of the Environmental Kuznets curve for deforestation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    5. Sédi-Anne Boukaka & Giulia Mancini & Giovanni Vecchi, 2021. "Poverty and inequality in Francophone Africa, 1960s–2010s," Economic History of Developing Regions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 1-29, January.
    6. Jones, C.I., 2016. "The Facts of Economic Growth," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 3-69, Elsevier.
    7. Gallardo-Albarrán, Daniel, 2019. "Missed opportunities? Human welfare in Western Europe and the United States, 1913–1950," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 57-73.
    8. Daniel Gallardo Albarr‡n, 2017. "Missed opportunities? The development of human welfare in Western Europe, 1913-1950," Working Papers 0114, European Historical Economics Society (EHES).
    9. Gallardo-Albarrán, Daniel, 2018. "Health and economic development since 1900," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 228-237.
    10. Jo Reynaerts & Jakob Vanschoonbeek, 2022. "The economics of state fragmentation: Assessing the economic impact of secession," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(1), pages 82-115, January.
    11. José Luis Cendejas & Félix-Fernando Muñoz & Nadia Fernández-de-Pinedo, 2017. "A contribution to the analysis of historical economic fluctuations (1870–2010): filtering, spurious cycles, and unobserved component modeling," Cliometrica, Springer;Cliometric Society (Association Francaise de Cliométrie), vol. 11(1), pages 93-125, January.
    12. Rok Spruk, 2019. "The rise and fall of Argentina," Latin American Economic Review, Springer;Centro de Investigaciòn y Docencia Económica (CIDE), vol. 28(1), pages 1-40, December.
    13. Daniel Gallardo‐Albarrán & Robert Inklaar, 2021. "The Role Of Capital And Productivity In Accounting For Income Differences Since 1913," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 952-974, July.
    14. Tiago Neves Sequeira & Pedro Mazeda Gil & Óscar Afonso, 2016. "Growth without scale effects due to entropy," CEFAGE-UE Working Papers 2016_07, University of Evora, CEFAGE-UE (Portugal).
    15. Broich, Tobias, 2017. "U.S. and Soviet foreign aid during the Cold War: A case study of Ethiopia," MERIT Working Papers 2017-010, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    16. Giuseppe Orlando & Fabio Della Rossa, 2019. "An Empirical Test on Harrod’s Open Economy Dynamics," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-13, June.
    17. António Afonso & José Alves & Krzysztof Beck, 2022. "Pay and unemployment determinants of migration flows in the European Union," Working Papers REM 2022/0251, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    18. Joan R Rosés & Nikolaus Wolf, 2021. "Regional growth and inequality in the long-run: Europe, 1900–2015," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 37(1), pages 17-48.
    19. Muhammad Shafiullah & Ravinthirakumaran Navaratnam, 2016. "Do Bangladesh and Sri Lanka Enjoy Export-Led Growth? A Comparison of Two Small South Asian Economies," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 17(1), pages 114-132, March.
    20. Kumar, Sanjesh & Singh, Baljeet, 2019. "Barriers to the international diffusion of technological innovations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 74-86.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    conspiracy theories; QAnon; COVID-19; coronavirus; government risk communication;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cra:wpaper:2021-12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anna-Lea Werlen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cremach.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.