Conspiratorial thinking and foreign policy views: evidence from Central Europe

Figures & data

Table 1. Results from multinomial logit model.

	Balanced position		Stand by Russia
	Risk ratio	SE	Risk ratio	SE
Conspiratorial thinking	1.29**	(0.10)	1.16	(0.14)
Respondent has no PID	1.23	(0.26)	1.37	(0.45)
R supports anti-Western party	0.63	(0.16)	0.75	(0.30)
Left right ideology	0.84***	(0.03)	0.84**	(0.05)
EU support	0.87***	(0.03)	0.77***	(0.05)
Trust in parties	0.83	(0.10)	0.92	(0.18)
Education	1.39	(0.26)	1.48	(0.43)
Age	1.02***	(0.01)	1.02	(0.01)
Female	1.21	(0.22)	0.75	(0.21)
Constant	1.83	(1.99)	0.75	(0.64)
Log likelihood	−611.65265
Observations	740

Reference category of the dependent variable: stand by West. Reference categories of independent variables: respondent backs party that supports a Western alignment, male; coefficients display relative risk ratios; Standard errors in parentheses, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. Unweighted sample (see Appendix A2 for weighted results)

Figure 1. Predicted probabilities based on results from Table 1.

Note: Grey area shows 95 percent confidence interval.

Figure 2. Marginal effects of a two standard deviation change of independent variables.

Note: Marginal effects of a two standard deviation change of independent variables on each of the categories of the dependent variable. Lines represent 95 percent confidence intervals.