Summary: Belief in conspiracy theories may arise from a combination of genetic predispositions, cognitive capacity, and emotional responses. Researchers propose that memes can form quasi-stable attractor states in neural networks, helping to explain how conspiracy beliefs consolidate in the brain.
Source: Nicolaus Copernicus University
Across the world, the range and persistence of conspiracy theories accompanying major events is striking. Whether in the wake of disasters, high-profile deaths, or public health crises such as the Covid-19 pandemic, distorted narratives and alternative explanations proliferate.
Because distorted perceptions of reality are so common, researchers from many disciplines — psychology, sociology, political science and anthropology — have examined conspiracy beliefs. Still, the neural and biological mechanisms that enable these beliefs to form and persist remain largely speculative, in part because few natural science studies have focused on this problem.
Memes inside the brain
One notable exception is Professor Wlodzislaw Duch from the Department of Informatics at the Faculty of Physics, Astronomy and Informatics, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun, Poland. His work spans artificial intelligence, neural networks, quantum physics and cognitive science. About a decade ago he began exploring memetics, modeling how memes might be represented as attractor states in neural networks and how these representations could underlie the formation of conspiracy theories.
His article, “Memetics and Neural Models of Conspiracy Theories,” has been published in the journal Patterns.
“This has been a long-term project in my professional life,” Prof. Duch says. “For many years I struggled to find suitable reviewers — the idea was considered unconventional. Neuroscientists tend to focus on animal experiments, and computational researchers often do not address the subtle cognitive processes that memetics concerns.”
The modern idea of memetics traces to Richard Dawkins, who coined the term “meme” to describe a unit of cultural information that is copied and transmitted between minds, analogous in some ways to genes. Memes are bits of information that become embedded in neural connection patterns and spread through imitation.
“Memetics aims to offer a common framework for cultural and social studies by describing how ideas reproduce and spread,” Prof. Duch explains. “A central challenge is to identify what a meme is from a physical, neuroscientific perspective — something that has not yet been fully described.”
Brain determinants
Why do some people adopt conspiracy theories while others do not?
“Part of the answer lies in how brains work,” Prof. Duch says. “Our thought processes are constrained by the neural systems we possess.” Genetic variation contributes to differences in cognitive abilities and emotional reactivity. Genes that influence dopamine systems, such as COMT, DARPP-32 and DRD2, shape aspects of personality and predisposition, though they do not determine specific choices.
Beyond genetics, a person’s individual neuronal wiring is shaped by life experiences, upbringing, culture and religion. “We cannot think in ways that our neuronal activity does not permit,” Prof. Duch notes. Early experiences — even those before birth — can make certain neural patterns easier to activate while others remain difficult to recruit. Understanding why some incoming information becomes a lasting meme while other information is ignored is a key question.
The biological and psychological mechanisms that give rise to false beliefs and conspiracy thinking are complex. Factors such as education, social environment and prior experience can all contribute. Simpler explanations are often appealing because they require less cognitive effort and provide a satisfying sense of understanding, even if they are inaccurate.
Sinks of false beliefs
In his paper, Prof. Duch proposes a concrete neural mechanism by which conspiracy beliefs can form and stabilize.
“Emotional arousal or stressful situations temporarily increase brain plasticity, making those moments more likely to be remembered,” he explains. “If, after a traumatic or confusing event, a rapid explanation emerges, it can coincide with a drop in plasticity and effectively ‘freeze’ a false representation in place.”
New information becomes linked to emotionally charged memories. Over time, these associations can self-organize into robust patterns: memes that attract many accidental and false associations. In neural network terms, these patterns resemble attractors — stable states of the system that draw in nearby activations.
“I call this process rapid freezing of high neuroplasticity (RFHN),” Prof. Duch says. “It can produce highly condensed conceptual states in which many unrelated observations become associated with the same memory trace.”
In computational simulations Prof. Duch demonstrates how learning dynamics can create attractor states so condensed with associations that many memory patterns merge into a single “sink.” Once such a memeplex — a tight cluster of related memes — forms, it becomes self-reinforcing. Every activation strengthens the neural pattern, enlarging its basin of attraction so that more thoughts and observations fall under its influence.
Because these are physical changes in brain connectivity, they are not easily altered by simple argument or persuasion. Rewiring such patterns requires energy-intensive neural processes, which helps explain why entrenched conspiracy beliefs are resilient even when confronted with contradictory evidence.
Subtle processes and future work
Prof. Duch acknowledges the ethical and technical challenges of studying these processes directly in humans. Experiments that would intentionally induce confusion or false beliefs would raise ethical concerns, and current neuroimaging methods may lack the sensitivity to reveal the fine-grained neuronal changes he models. Nonetheless, he hopes that growing methodological sophistication and interdisciplinary collaboration will enable further progress.
The simulations presented in his paper are intended to highlight the kinds of distortions that can develop in neural networks under certain conditions. More complex, biologically informed models will be necessary to make predictions comparable to neuroimaging and behavioral results. Even simple models, however, can illustrate plausible mechanisms that produce persistent conspiracy beliefs, and they provide a foundation for more elaborate simulations in future research.
About this psychology and neuroscience research news
Author: Żaneta Kopczyńska
Source: Nicolaus Copernicus University
Contact: Żaneta Kopczyńska – Nicolaus Copernicus University
Image: The image is in the public domain
Original Research: Open access. “Memetics and neural models of conspiracy theories” by Wlodzislaw Duch. Patterns. DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2021.100353
Abstract
Memetics and neural models of conspiracy theories
Conspiracy theories are widespread, yet most research has emphasized psychological, sociological, and political perspectives. The neural processes that facilitate the formation of conspiracy beliefs remain poorly understood. In neural systems, a meme may correspond to a quasi-stable associative memory attractor. Creation of memes with numerous spurious associations can distort relationships between stable memory states.
Simulations of neural network models trained with competitive Hebbian learning (CHL) on both stationary and non-stationary inputs demonstrate the emergence of distorted memory states. In non-stationary scenarios, rapid learning during periods of high plasticity followed by stepwise reductions in plasticity produces many overlapping attraction basins, which distorts associative memory patterns.
These system-level models help identify conditions under which memplexes with distorted memory patterns emerge, offering a mechanistic account of how deeply held conspiracy beliefs might form and persist.