Science

4334 readers

17 users here now

General discussions about "science" itself

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

https://lemmy.ml/c/science

https://beehaw.org/c/science

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Sal@mander.xyz

fossilesque@mander.xyz

Conspiracy theorists less likely to believe in misinformation if they experience rewarding romantic connections (www.psypost.org)

submitted 2 years ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science@mander.xyz

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] baseless_discourse@mander.xyz 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

That is a very long statement for "crazy people don't get laid"

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Not really, all of the participants were in long-term heterosexual relationships.

Relationships averaged 13.3 (SD=10.2) years in length (130 dating, 36 engaged, 389 married).

They did not investigate how often these couples slept together. However, they do state the following:

Participants in the experimental condition did not report significantly greater trust in their romantic partner, as compared to control participants, likely because participants were already, unsurprisingly, highly trusting of their romantic partners.

So I don't think it is fair to assume that these people were not getting laid.

As for 'crazy people', the paper does not call anyone crazy. They also do not apply an absolute negative connotation to the word, they state:

Like moths to flames, conspiracy theorists gravitate to any whisper of information that fuels their suspicions and distrust. While such inclinations might be advantageous when the government is actually behaving duplicitously, they are less advantageous in the context of a global health pandemic where resistance to public health advice directly compounds death rates (Robertson, 2021; VoPham et al., 2020).

[–] baseless_discourse@mander.xyz 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You are truly the spiritual guidence of this instance. I appreciate it. (Very big not /s)

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

[–] fossilesque@mander.xyz 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This is now my mental image of you.

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Well, that's exactly what I look like! Look at my profile picture for proof.

[–] fossilesque@mander.xyz 3 points 2 years ago

Yas, our wizard overlord.

[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 1 points 2 years ago

I'm going to have a nightmare about this and I blame you for it.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 years ago

I appreciate the nuance. Thanks!

That said, I listen to a podcast that focuses on (victims of) conspiratorial thinking and some of the stuff people believe is wild. The recurring theme is that conspiracy-types are most-often looking for control or meaning because their lives are not where they'd like to be. I suspect this is true for people in relationships, too.