Conspiracy theories in online environments: An interdisciplinary literature review and agenda for future research

Research on conspiracy theories in digital media has grown considerably in recent years. As a result, the field of research has become more multidisciplinary and diverse. To bridge disciplinary boundaries, identify foci of analysis and research gaps, this study provides an interdisciplinary systemat...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:New Media & Society 2023-07, Vol.25 (7), p.1781-1801
Main Authors: Mahl, Daniela, Schäfer, Mike S., Zeng, Jing
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c327t-db43005dd71684c0afa41bf689e8a2f756df0ce39171f1896bf661def39c578c3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c327t-db43005dd71684c0afa41bf689e8a2f756df0ce39171f1896bf661def39c578c3
container_end_page 1801
container_issue 7
container_start_page 1781
container_title New Media & Society
container_volume 25
creator Mahl, Daniela
Schäfer, Mike S.
Zeng, Jing
description Research on conspiracy theories in digital media has grown considerably in recent years. As a result, the field of research has become more multidisciplinary and diverse. To bridge disciplinary boundaries, identify foci of analysis and research gaps, this study provides an interdisciplinary systematic literature review (2007–2020), analyzing current research on conspiracy theorizing online, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Findings show that the majority of studies lack a definition of conspiracy theories and fail to conceptually delineate conspiracy theories from other forms of deceptive content. We also found that while the field employs a variety of methodological approaches, most studies have focused on individual, “mainstream” social media platforms, “Western” countries, English-language communication, and single conspiracy theories. We use the findings of our review to remedy conceptual and empirical shortcomings and to provide suggestions on how to move forward in research on conspiracy theories online.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/14614448221075759
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>sage_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_14614448221075759</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_14614448221075759</sage_id><sourcerecordid>10.1177_14614448221075759</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c327t-db43005dd71684c0afa41bf689e8a2f756df0ce39171f1896bf661def39c578c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UMtKAzEUDaJgrX6Au_zA1NyZTDLjrgy-oOBG10Oa3NiUNqnJtNK_N0O7E1zdw3lcDoeQe2AzACkfgAvgnDdlCUzWsm4vyGTkCllBfXnGo-Ga3KS0ZgwEl-2EfHfBp52LSh_psMIQHSbqPA1-4zxS9AcXg9-iH9IjnfssDRiNS9rtskHFI924zKhhH5FGPDj8ocobqr7QG0VtiNTuz2JCFfXqllxZtUl4d75T8vn89NG9Fov3l7duvih0VcqhMEteMVYbI0E0XDNlFYelFU2LjSqtrIWxTGPVggQLTSuyJsCgrVpdy0ZXUwKnvzqGlCLafhfdNjfugfXjZv2fzXJmdsqk3L9fh330ueI_gV9Wcm8d</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Conspiracy theories in online environments: An interdisciplinary literature review and agenda for future research</title><source>Sage Journals Online</source><creator>Mahl, Daniela ; Schäfer, Mike S. ; Zeng, Jing</creator><creatorcontrib>Mahl, Daniela ; Schäfer, Mike S. ; Zeng, Jing</creatorcontrib><description>Research on conspiracy theories in digital media has grown considerably in recent years. As a result, the field of research has become more multidisciplinary and diverse. To bridge disciplinary boundaries, identify foci of analysis and research gaps, this study provides an interdisciplinary systematic literature review (2007–2020), analyzing current research on conspiracy theorizing online, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Findings show that the majority of studies lack a definition of conspiracy theories and fail to conceptually delineate conspiracy theories from other forms of deceptive content. We also found that while the field employs a variety of methodological approaches, most studies have focused on individual, “mainstream” social media platforms, “Western” countries, English-language communication, and single conspiracy theories. We use the findings of our review to remedy conceptual and empirical shortcomings and to provide suggestions on how to move forward in research on conspiracy theories online.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1461-4448</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1461-7315</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/14614448221075759</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><ispartof>New Media &amp; Society, 2023-07, Vol.25 (7), p.1781-1801</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c327t-db43005dd71684c0afa41bf689e8a2f756df0ce39171f1896bf661def39c578c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c327t-db43005dd71684c0afa41bf689e8a2f756df0ce39171f1896bf661def39c578c3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0847-7503 ; 0000-0002-5330-6885</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>313,314,780,784,792,27922,27924,27925,79364</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mahl, Daniela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schäfer, Mike S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zeng, Jing</creatorcontrib><title>Conspiracy theories in online environments: An interdisciplinary literature review and agenda for future research</title><title>New Media &amp; Society</title><description>Research on conspiracy theories in digital media has grown considerably in recent years. As a result, the field of research has become more multidisciplinary and diverse. To bridge disciplinary boundaries, identify foci of analysis and research gaps, this study provides an interdisciplinary systematic literature review (2007–2020), analyzing current research on conspiracy theorizing online, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Findings show that the majority of studies lack a definition of conspiracy theories and fail to conceptually delineate conspiracy theories from other forms of deceptive content. We also found that while the field employs a variety of methodological approaches, most studies have focused on individual, “mainstream” social media platforms, “Western” countries, English-language communication, and single conspiracy theories. We use the findings of our review to remedy conceptual and empirical shortcomings and to provide suggestions on how to move forward in research on conspiracy theories online.</description><issn>1461-4448</issn><issn>1461-7315</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFRWT</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UMtKAzEUDaJgrX6Au_zA1NyZTDLjrgy-oOBG10Oa3NiUNqnJtNK_N0O7E1zdw3lcDoeQe2AzACkfgAvgnDdlCUzWsm4vyGTkCllBfXnGo-Ga3KS0ZgwEl-2EfHfBp52LSh_psMIQHSbqPA1-4zxS9AcXg9-iH9IjnfssDRiNS9rtskHFI924zKhhH5FGPDj8ocobqr7QG0VtiNTuz2JCFfXqllxZtUl4d75T8vn89NG9Fov3l7duvih0VcqhMEteMVYbI0E0XDNlFYelFU2LjSqtrIWxTGPVggQLTSuyJsCgrVpdy0ZXUwKnvzqGlCLafhfdNjfugfXjZv2fzXJmdsqk3L9fh330ueI_gV9Wcm8d</recordid><startdate>202307</startdate><enddate>202307</enddate><creator>Mahl, Daniela</creator><creator>Schäfer, Mike S.</creator><creator>Zeng, Jing</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>AFRWT</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0847-7503</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5330-6885</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202307</creationdate><title>Conspiracy theories in online environments: An interdisciplinary literature review and agenda for future research</title><author>Mahl, Daniela ; Schäfer, Mike S. ; Zeng, Jing</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c327t-db43005dd71684c0afa41bf689e8a2f756df0ce39171f1896bf661def39c578c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mahl, Daniela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schäfer, Mike S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zeng, Jing</creatorcontrib><collection>Sage Journals GOLD Open Access 2024</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>New Media &amp; Society</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mahl, Daniela</au><au>Schäfer, Mike S.</au><au>Zeng, Jing</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Conspiracy theories in online environments: An interdisciplinary literature review and agenda for future research</atitle><jtitle>New Media &amp; Society</jtitle><date>2023-07</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1781</spage><epage>1801</epage><pages>1781-1801</pages><issn>1461-4448</issn><eissn>1461-7315</eissn><abstract>Research on conspiracy theories in digital media has grown considerably in recent years. As a result, the field of research has become more multidisciplinary and diverse. To bridge disciplinary boundaries, identify foci of analysis and research gaps, this study provides an interdisciplinary systematic literature review (2007–2020), analyzing current research on conspiracy theorizing online, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Findings show that the majority of studies lack a definition of conspiracy theories and fail to conceptually delineate conspiracy theories from other forms of deceptive content. We also found that while the field employs a variety of methodological approaches, most studies have focused on individual, “mainstream” social media platforms, “Western” countries, English-language communication, and single conspiracy theories. We use the findings of our review to remedy conceptual and empirical shortcomings and to provide suggestions on how to move forward in research on conspiracy theories online.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/14614448221075759</doi><tpages>21</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0847-7503</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5330-6885</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1461-4448
ispartof New Media & Society, 2023-07, Vol.25 (7), p.1781-1801
issn 1461-4448
1461-7315
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_14614448221075759
source Sage Journals Online
title Conspiracy theories in online environments: An interdisciplinary literature review and agenda for future research
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T21%3A02%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-sage_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Conspiracy%20theories%20in%20online%20environments:%20An%20interdisciplinary%20literature%20review%20and%20agenda%20for%20future%20research&rft.jtitle=New%20Media%20&%20Society&rft.au=Mahl,%20Daniela&rft.date=2023-07&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1781&rft.epage=1801&rft.pages=1781-1801&rft.issn=1461-4448&rft.eissn=1461-7315&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/14614448221075759&rft_dat=%3Csage_cross%3E10.1177_14614448221075759%3C/sage_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c327t-db43005dd71684c0afa41bf689e8a2f756df0ce39171f1896bf661def39c578c3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_14614448221075759&rfr_iscdi=true