Analytic thinking is reliably associated with lower belief in conspiracy theories. However, evidence for whether increasing analytic thinking can reduce belief in conspiracies is sparse. As an exception to this, Swami et al. (2014) showed that priming analytical thinking through a verbal fluency task (i.e., scrambled sentence task) or a processing fluency manipulation (i.e., difficult-to-read fonts) reduced belief in conspiracy theories. To probe the robustness of these effects, in this Registered Report, we present two highly powered (i.e., 95%) direct replications of two of the original studies (i.e., Studies 2 and 4). We found no evidence that priming analytic thinking through the scrambled sentence task (N = 302), nor the difficult-to-read fonts (N = 488) elicited more analytic thinking, nor reduced belief in conspiracy theories. This work highlights the need for further research to identify effective ways of inducing analytic thinking in order to gauge its potential causal impact on belief in conspiracies.

分析性思维与阴谋论的较低信仰密切相关。然而，关于增加分析思维是否可以减少对阴谋论的信念的证据很少。作为一个例外，斯瓦米等人。（2014）表明，通过语言流畅性任务（即乱序句子任务）或处理流畅性操作（即难以阅读的字体）来启动分析思维可以减少对阴谋论的信任。为了探讨这些影响的稳健性，在本注册报告中，我们提出了两项​​原始研究（即研究 2 和 4）的两项高功效（即 95%）直接复制。我们没有发现任何证据表明通过打乱的句子任务（N  = 302）启动分析思维，也没有发现难以阅读的字体（N  = 488）引发更多的分析思维，也没有减少对阴谋论的信仰。这项工作强调需要进一步研究，以确定诱导分析思维的有效方法，以衡量其对阴谋信仰的潜在因果影响。