Making better decisions, eschewing conspiracy, populism and science denial: analysing the attributes of individuals who engage effectively with ideas

How can we encourage individuals to engage with beneficial ideas, while eschewing dark ideas such as science denial, conspiracy theories, or populist rhetoric? This paper investigates the mechanisms underpinning individuals' engagement with ideas, proposing a model grounded in education, social networks, and pragmatic prospection. Beneficial ideas enhance decision-making, improving individual and societal outcomes, while dark ideas lead to suboptimal consequences, such as diminished trust in institutions and health-related harm. Using a Structural Equation Model (SEM) based on survey data from 7,000 respondents across seven European countries, we test hypotheses linking critical thinking, network dynamics, and pragmatic prospection (i.e. forward-looking mindsets) to the value individuals ascribe to engaging with ideas, their ability to identify positive and dark ideas effectively and how individuals subsequently engage with ideas and who they engage in them with. Our results highlight two key pathways: one linking pragmatic prospection to network-building and idea-sharing, and another connecting critical reasoning and knowledge acquisition to effective ideas engagement. Together, these pathways illustrate how interventions in education, network development, and forward-planning can empower individuals to critically evaluate and embrace positive ideas while rejecting those that might be detrimental. The paper concludes with recommendations for policy and future research to support an ideas-informed society.