Conspiracy Mentality Types Test

In three minutes, the Conspiracy Mentality Types Test uses 16 questions to show how you approach uncertainty, evidence, threats, and outcomes. Your profile can support self-reflection about how you respond to competing explanations and assess your stance toward complex claims.

Questions: 163 minutes

Conspiracy Mentality Types Test: situation and reply bubbles

October 2, 2025October 2, 2025Material has been updatedOctober 2, 2025Material has been published

26,044 views

2,847 completions

2,317 likes

Daniel Hall Psychologist · Test reviewer

2,317 likes

Scale Explorer

How the Scales are Structured

Outcome-OrientedOO

Measures how strongly a person focuses on the real-life consequences and societal impact of conspiracies rather than the theories themselves.

example score7/8

7/8High impact focusexample score

0 – 2Low impact focus

3 – 5Moderate impact focus

6 – 8High impact focus

A score of 7 indicates a high tendency to evaluate conspiracy ideas primarily through their practical effects on personal life and society.

Readily AcceptingRA

Measures how readily a person accepts conspiracy theories as plausible explanations for events.

example score3/8

3/8Cautiously receptiveexample score

0 – 2Skeptical

3 – 5Cautiously receptive

6 – 8Highly receptive

A score of 3 falls in the Cautiously receptive range, suggesting a modest tendency to accept conspiracy explanations without strong endorsement.

SeekerS

Measures the tendency to actively explore and analyze possible explanations behind conspiracy claims rather than accepting or rejecting them immediately.

example score4/8

4/8Moderate seekingexample score

0 – 2Low seeking

3 – 5Moderate seeking

6 – 8High seeking

A score of 4 indicates a moderate tendency to look for motives and alternative explanations, with some analytical interest but not a strong drive to investigate every conspiracy claim.

ResilientR

Measures how consistently a person maintains a detached, critical stance toward conspiracy theories without becoming emotionally involved.

example score5/8

5/8Moderate stabilityexample score

0 – 2Low stability

3 – 5Moderate stability

6 – 8High stability

A score of 5 indicates a moderately stable stance, suggesting you usually evaluate conspiracy claims critically while remaining relatively emotionally detached.

just completed the test

DATA-BASED USER COHORTS

Who Usually Takes This Test?

Skeptical news consumers

41%OF USERS

People who want to check how resistant they are to conspiracy claims and why certain stories still feel convincing.

Mental health professionals

34%OF USERS

Therapists and counselors who use a quick screen to understand a client’s beliefs and tailor communication and support.

Researchers and students

25%OF USERS

Psychology and social science learners running studies who need a fast way to segment attitudes toward conspiracies.

BASED ON AGGREGATED, ANONYMIZED DATA FROM TENS OF THOUSANDS OF FREUDLY USERS.

Benchmarking

See How You Compare

Once you complete the test, your results are compared with real-world data from people in your country.
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.

Shaded area — where most people score

Dot — the average

You — your score lands on each curve after the test— your score, after the test

EffectiveE

You?

Average2.9

Typical rangeTypical1.7 – 4.1

Possible0 – 8

ReadyR

You?

Average4.8

Typical rangeTypical3.3 – 6.3

Possible0 – 8

Seeker/ExplorerS

You?

Average3.3

Typical rangeTypical2.3 – 4.3

Possible0 – 8

StableS

You?

Average2

Typical rangeTypical0.7 – 3.4

Possible0 – 8

Featured On

SAMPLE QUESTIONS

Example Questions From the Test

You will be presented with a series of statements. Select the one that best describes you—that is, the statement you would attribute to yourself in situations involving a choice. For each item, select only one option.

- Uncertainty about whether there is a conspiracy can be irritating.
- Uncertainty about whether there is a conspiracy usually energizes me.
- Life on planet Earth could come to an end.
- Life on planet Earth is eternal.
- I do not believe in any conspiracies.
- I do believe in some specific conspiracies.

These are 3 of the 16 real questions — the rest appear in the test. No sign-up needed to start.

WHAT THE TEST MEASURES

Conspiracy Mentality Types Test - Description and methodology of the test

beliefs

People comparing their responses across several conspiracy-related thinking styles may use the Conspiracy Mentality Types Test to see how a profile is organized. It is suited to readers who want to distinguish a dominant pattern from neighboring tendencies and consider what the balance among dimensions may mean for their own outlook. As a conspiracy mentality questionnaire, it offers a structured profile rather than a fixed identity.

What This Assessment Explores

The test is intended for readers who want to inspect their own stance toward conspiracy explanations, especially when facts are incomplete or events feel threatening. These dimensions capture distinct responses rather than fixed identities. Your conspiracy mentality profile shows whether practical impact, acceptance, exploration, or detachment is most prominent.

The four result dimensions are:

Outcome-Oriented (0-8) assesses attention to consequences: Low impact focus (0-2), Moderate impact focus (3-5), or High impact focus (6-8).
Readily Accepting (0-8) measures endorsement of conspiratorial explanations: Skeptical (0-2), Cautiously receptive (3-5), or Highly receptive (6-8).
Seeker (0-8) reflects active analysis and alternative explanations: Low seeking (0-2), Moderate seeking (3-5), or High seeking (6-8).
Resilient (0-8) reflects critical emotional distance: Low stability (0-2), Moderate stability (3-5), or High stability (6-8).

Methodology and Scientific Basis

Most prompts use paired statements, asking you to choose the option closer to your view; examples address anxiety, uncertainty, threats, evidence, outcomes, and interpersonal consequences. The format produces a pattern of preferences rather than a clinical interview.

The framework distinguishes types of conspiracy mentality through related responses to uncertainty and belief. Its evidence base is closest to Pishchik’s 2023 measurement study, which separates practical, receptive, exploratory, and detached relations to conspiracy beliefs. The 2022 theoretical model and 2025 study of regional students add context, treating conspirativist mentality as a construct with related but distinguishable features. This questionnaire is conceptually comparable to that work, while its four reported dimensions provide the structure for interpreting the result.

Results are reported across four dimension scores. Read the pattern alongside the situations that shaped your answers, and treat the displayed bands as descriptive guides to the strength of each tendency. Self-report results can be affected by response bias, current worries, self-awareness, and willingness to answer candidly.

Author: Jan-Willem van Prooijen, Karen M. Douglas, Robbie M. Sutton

Literature:

Pishchik, V. I. (2023). Measurement of conspirativistic mentality: Primary psychometric verification of diagnostic methodology. Russian Psychological Journal, 20(1), 218-234. 10.21702/rpj.2023.1.14
Pishchik, V. I., Postnikova, M. I., & Cherkasova, Y. A. (2025). Features of Conspirativist Mentality of Students of the Southern and Northern Regions. Russian Psychological Journal, 22(2), 134-150. 10.21702/8zgkdr31
Pishchik, V. I. (2022). The Construct of the Conspirativist Mentality: A Theoretical Model. South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences, 23(4), 27-44.

Updated: 2025-10-02