A neuroscientist explains how Donald Trump exploits the minds of conspiracy theorists

According to recent 2024 presidential polls, Donald Trump is leading Joe Biden, meaning the former president could indeed become the president of the United States once again.

If that thought terrifies you, you are not alone. So, the question is, what can we do to stop the nation from racing toward an authoritarian regime ruled by a pathological narcissist? If we can understand the psychological factors underlying Trump’s enduring appeal, then we may be able to see a way to exploit that scientific knowledge.

Doing so is more than an academic exercise — the future of our nation may depend on it.

While the left often focuses on Trump’s right wing stances and xenophobic rhetoric, one of the main reasons he remains popular is that he is perceived to be the anti-establishment candidate. This phenomenon is a facet of a broader populist wave that has been gaining momentum worldwide — one that is not exclusive to any single nation or political ideology. In the United States, both Trump and left-wing figures such as Sen. Bernie Sanders have tapped into a deep-seated frustration with what is perceived as a self-serving system composed of powerful corporations and politicians.

It is within this backdrop of disillusionment that fertile ground for conspiracy theories and authoritarian fantasies has emerged. The knowledge of corruption breeds speculation, giving rise to movements such as QAnon as manifestations of this anti-establishment sentiment.

The question then arises: What draws individuals toward this nexus of anti-establishment fervor and conspiratorial thinking? This article seeks to unravel this enigma through the lens of cognitive neuroscience. We will explore how our brains process the complexities of corruption and conspiracy, and why, in a time of uncertainty, the allure of political fiction and imagined enemies becomes increasingly potent.

The Bayesian Brain Hypothesis, the current leading neuroscientific theory of how the brain works, provides a compelling framework for this exploration, especially in the context of political discourse and the proliferation of conspiracy theories.

This hypothesis proposes that the human brain operates much like a scientist in a laboratory: it is a prediction machine that continuously generates, tests and updates theories about the world. These theories are part of a “world model” constructed by the mind – a rich, internal representation of reality, formed by a lifetime of learning. This model informs our understanding of how things are and predicts how they will be. It is a dynamic construct, continuously refined by the influx of new data coming in from the senses, much like a scientist revising a theory in light of new experimental data.

ALSO READ: George Santos’ potential replacement also has financial ethics issues

The process is “Bayesian” — named for English mathematician Thomas Bayes — meaning it is statistical at its heart. Bayesian inference is a method of statistical inference that uses a mathematical formula, known as Bayes' theorem, to update the probability that a theory is true as more evidence or information becomes available. Neuroscientists now believe that the brain uses a very basic form of this general statistical method to calculate the likelihood of different possible outcomes. This allows the brain to make educated guesses about the future based on past experiences. The brain assesses the probability of an event by taking into account the prior evidence (what we know) and the new evidence (the incoming information).

When new information aligns with the brain's predictions, it reinforces the current “world model,” increasing a person’s confidence in their beliefs.

However, when incoming data contradicts the model's predictions, the brain experiences a mismatch, known as prediction error. It is at this juncture that cognitive dissonance arises – the mental discomfort experienced when holding two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas or values.

ALSO READ: Nazis bullied a conservative Tennessee town. Locals punched back. Trump should be worried.

When this happens, the brain has a choice: either revise one’s world model to accommodate the new information (thereby reducing the prediction error), or increase the model's resistance to change by discounting or ignoring the contradictory data.

This Bayesian Brain framework is particularly illuminating when considering the allure and persistence of conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories often arise in the context of events or information that starkly contradict a person's established narrative or world model.

When individuals encounter such anomalies, their brains are compelled to reduce the resulting prediction error either by assimilating the new facts (which may involve elaborate rationalizations) or by adopting a new model that accounts for these facts (which may involve turning to conspiracy theories).

If the existing, accepted narrative – be it from media, authorities or common wisdom – is perceived as unreliable or deceptive, the brain may lean towards alternative explanations to restore coherence to its worldview, even if those explanations previously seemed implausible. These alternative theories may take the form of conspiracy theories — veritable fuel for Trump’s political ambitions — especially if it offers an easy explanation of a perceived deception and aligns with one's underlying suspicions or mistrust of the establishment.

Take, for example, the case of the opioid crisis, caused in part by irresponsible practices of pharmaceutical companies. This crisis was not a mere corporate scandal; it represented a fundamental breach of public trust. The pharmaceutical industry, once regarded by most as a bastion of scientific advancement and health, was exposed for prioritizing profit over public well-being, leading to widespread addiction and loss of life.

The stark contrast between the pharmaceutical industry's professed commitment to health and the grim reality of the opioid crisis created a significant discrepancy in the public’s mental model of the healthcare sector, leaving a palpable dissonance in the public's perception of healthcare.

Amid this climate of distrust, the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic presented a fresh wave of prediction errors for the global population's collective “world model.” The rapid spread of the deadly virus globally — something difficult to comprehend since we’ve never experienced it before in our lives — coupled with changing guidelines and advice from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, created a fertile environment for misinformation.

ALSO READ: Revealed: How South Carolina’s capital city accommodated Trump ‘patriots’

As the pharmaceutical industry raced to develop vaccines, many individuals, already disillusioned by the opioid crisis and similar revelations, viewed these efforts through a lens of suspicion. The lack of a cohesive and transparent response from health authorities and the pharmaceutical industry, especially in light of their historical silence on past misdeeds, did little to satisfy public concerns.

In the Bayesian brain's attempt to minimize prediction errors and make sense of the unfolding crisis, some segments of the population turned to alternative narratives that seemingly offered clarity and certainty. The brain's natural quest for coherence, combined with a deep-seated distrust in health institutions, led some Americans to find more sinister theories about the pandemic's origin and the vaccines' purpose — like the notion of an Illuminati-led population control plan — surprisingly believable.

All the while, Trump, as president, exploited the situation for his perceived political gain, personally and publicly contradicting his medical advisers and public health officials, and often just plain common sense.

ALSO READ: How Trump’s mouth is killing American exceptionalism

In this environment of skepticism, Bayesian reasoning leads some people to question mainstream sources and seek alternative explanations. However, the brain's tendency to "connect the dots" can lead to incorrect inferences. The brain's predictive model can become so skewed by distrust that even the most bizarre theories can seem plausible.

This phenomenon is not just about misinformation or lack of knowledge; it's about a crisis of meaning and trust. We live in what some have termed a “post-truth era,” where the traditional bastions of factual information — schools, mainstream media organizations and government experts — are doubted, and subjective belief often overrides objective evidence. While a certain amount of skepticism is absolutely necessary given the corruption and media bias that actually exists, doubting everything leads to a mindset that is more irrational than blindly believing everything.

In this landscape, outlandish theories — like those peddled by deceptive sources such as Q and Alex Jones — can gain traction. This is not necessarily because they are believed in their entirety, but because they offer a simpler narrative in a world where the “official story” is viewed with suspicion.

The rise of conspiracy theories in the context of Trump's presidency can be seen through this lens. Trump’s often confrontational and contradictory statements further muddled the waters of public discourse. He challenged established narratives and institutions with strongman confidence. For many, Trump’s bombastic rhetoric resonated not because it offered factual clarity or even approached something resembling truth. It resonated because it echoed their disillusionment with a system they perceived as fundamentally deceptive.

Of course, the existence of corruption in Washington is not a myth; instances of political scandals, lobbying influence and ethical breaches are well-documented and systemic. These realities, albeit often less dramatic than portrayed in conspiracy theories, provide the seeds from which such theories sprout. When these issues are not addressed transparently and proactively by political leaders and institutions, they leave room for speculation and exaggeration.

Taking the nation beyond the post-truth era — a post-post-truth era, if you will — requires more than debunking individual theories; it calls for a systematic approach to rebuild trust.

All political and corporate entities must recognize the role they play in either exacerbating or alleviating this crisis of trust. This involves not only future transparency from institutions but also acknowledgement of past deceptions. This has not happened so far — we have not seen a high-profile public apology from the pharmaceutical companies for their role in the opioid crisis, and government agencies such as the CDC have not acknowledged how poorly executed the response to COVID really was (even if Trump and his administration was to blame for much of it).

ALSO READ: Here's why taxpayers just paid another $1.3 million into an unused government fund

Admission of past wrongdoings or incompetency combined with promises of future transparency and open dialogue are necessary for rebuilding trust.

This, however, is only part of the solution. There must also be a concerted effort to educate the public on critical thinking and how our cognitive processes can lead us astray. Education in critical thinking and media literacy becomes paramount in empowering individuals to navigate this complex information landscape. By understanding the workings of our own minds, we can be better equipped to discern truth from fiction and make informed choices in our lives and in our politics.

The brain's attempt to make sense of a world full of contradictory information can lead to the acceptance of implausible theories, particularly in an environment where official narratives are viewed with skepticism. Addressing this challenge requires a multifaceted approach, including institutional transparency, educational initiatives in critical thinking, and a deeper public understanding of our cognitive processes.

Failure to address these issues risks a further descent into a world where unfounded speculation reigns and figures such as Trump, who will continue to exploit these divisions for as long as he’s in the public arena, can thrive.

If we don't confront these challenges, we risk spiraling further into a realm dominated by baseless conjecture and disinformation. In this environment, figures such as Trump, who hide authoritarian tendencies under an anti-establishment facade, are poised to succeed by exploiting these divisions as long as they remain in the public eye.

Bobby Azarian is a cognitive neuroscientist and the author of the book The Romance of Reality: How the Universe Organizes Itself to Create Life, Consciousness, and Cosmic Complexity. He is also a blogger for Psychology Today and the creator of the Substack Road to Omega. Follow him on X and Instagram @BobbyAzarian.