Conspiracy beliefs and the preference for natural treatments in medical decision-making
Naturalness bias—the tendency to prefer natural products over synthetic alternatives—is a widespread phenomenon in consumer and health decision-making. Despite the lack of a clear scientific definition, the label “natural” evokes strong intuitive associations with purity, safety, and moral value. In...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2025-09-01
|
| Series: | Acta Psychologica |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691825006560 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1839609039339651072 |
|---|---|
| author | Lorenzo Gagliardi |
| author_facet | Lorenzo Gagliardi |
| author_sort | Lorenzo Gagliardi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Naturalness bias—the tendency to prefer natural products over synthetic alternatives—is a widespread phenomenon in consumer and health decision-making. Despite the lack of a clear scientific definition, the label “natural” evokes strong intuitive associations with purity, safety, and moral value. Interestingly, these associations often overlap with conspiratorial thinking, particularly in contexts where synthetic medical treatments are portrayed as harmful or profit-driven. This paper provides a comprehensive literature review on the relationship between naturalness bias and conspiracy beliefs. We included both empirical and theoretical sources across psychology, medicine, and health communication. Based on this review, we propose two complementary theoretical explanations for the causal link between the two phenomena, which go both directions: a consequential account, where conspiracy beliefs foster distrust in institutional medicine and encourage natural preferences; and a justificatory account, where intuitive preferences for natural options are rationalized by the means of conspiratorial narratives. In addition, we identify common psychological antecedents—such as Manichean worldviews, perceived lack of control, and intuitive cognitive styles—that may help explain the co-occurrence of these two tendencies. These insights offer new perspectives on the role of conspiracy beliefs in shaping health behaviors and medical decision-making. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-4c8fa6e9d7ac48c695b9d74a64cdaed2 |
| institution | Matheson Library |
| issn | 0001-6918 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-09-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Acta Psychologica |
| spelling | doaj-art-4c8fa6e9d7ac48c695b9d74a64cdaed22025-07-31T04:52:50ZengElsevierActa Psychologica0001-69182025-09-01259105343Conspiracy beliefs and the preference for natural treatments in medical decision-makingLorenzo Gagliardi0Via Venezia, 8, 35131 Padova PD; Department of Developmental Psychology and Socialization, University of PaduaNaturalness bias—the tendency to prefer natural products over synthetic alternatives—is a widespread phenomenon in consumer and health decision-making. Despite the lack of a clear scientific definition, the label “natural” evokes strong intuitive associations with purity, safety, and moral value. Interestingly, these associations often overlap with conspiratorial thinking, particularly in contexts where synthetic medical treatments are portrayed as harmful or profit-driven. This paper provides a comprehensive literature review on the relationship between naturalness bias and conspiracy beliefs. We included both empirical and theoretical sources across psychology, medicine, and health communication. Based on this review, we propose two complementary theoretical explanations for the causal link between the two phenomena, which go both directions: a consequential account, where conspiracy beliefs foster distrust in institutional medicine and encourage natural preferences; and a justificatory account, where intuitive preferences for natural options are rationalized by the means of conspiratorial narratives. In addition, we identify common psychological antecedents—such as Manichean worldviews, perceived lack of control, and intuitive cognitive styles—that may help explain the co-occurrence of these two tendencies. These insights offer new perspectives on the role of conspiracy beliefs in shaping health behaviors and medical decision-making.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691825006560Naturalness biasConspiracy theoriesConspiracy beliefsMedical decision-makingCognitive biasesMisinformation |
| spellingShingle | Lorenzo Gagliardi Conspiracy beliefs and the preference for natural treatments in medical decision-making Acta Psychologica Naturalness bias Conspiracy theories Conspiracy beliefs Medical decision-making Cognitive biases Misinformation |
| title | Conspiracy beliefs and the preference for natural treatments in medical decision-making |
| title_full | Conspiracy beliefs and the preference for natural treatments in medical decision-making |
| title_fullStr | Conspiracy beliefs and the preference for natural treatments in medical decision-making |
| title_full_unstemmed | Conspiracy beliefs and the preference for natural treatments in medical decision-making |
| title_short | Conspiracy beliefs and the preference for natural treatments in medical decision-making |
| title_sort | conspiracy beliefs and the preference for natural treatments in medical decision making |
| topic | Naturalness bias Conspiracy theories Conspiracy beliefs Medical decision-making Cognitive biases Misinformation |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691825006560 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lorenzogagliardi conspiracybeliefsandthepreferencefornaturaltreatmentsinmedicaldecisionmaking |