Paper detail

Belief Is All You Need: Modeling Narrative Archetypes in Conspiratorial Discourse

Conspiratorial discourse is increasingly embedded within digital communication ecosystems, yet its structure and spread remain difficult to study. This work analyzes conspiratorial narratives in Singapore-based Telegram groups, showing that such content is woven into everyday discussions rather than confined to isolated echo chambers. We propose a two-stage computational framework. First, we fine-tune RoBERTa-large to classify messages as conspiratorial or not, achieving an F1-score of 0.866 on 2,000 expert-labeled messages. Second, we build a signed belief graph in which nodes represent messages and edge signs reflect alignment in belief labels, weighted by textual similarity. We introduce a Signed Belief Graph Neural Network (SiBeGNN) that uses a Sign Disentanglement Loss to learn embeddings that separate ideological alignment from stylistic features. Using hierarchical clustering on these embeddings, we identify seven narrative archetypes across 553,648 messages: legal topics, medical concerns, media discussions, finance, contradictions in authority, group moderation, and general chat. SiBeGNN yields stronger clustering quality (cDBI = 8.38) than baseline methods (13.60 to 67.27), supported by 88 percent inter-rater agreement in expert evaluations. Our analysis shows that conspiratorial messages appear not only in clusters focused on skepticism or distrust, but also within routine discussions of finance, law, and everyday matters. These findings challenge common assumptions about online radicalization by demonstrating that conspiratorial discourse operates within ordinary social interaction. The proposed framework advances computational methods for belief-driven discourse analysis and offers applications for stance detection, political communication studies, and content moderation policy.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.