Oh, forgot to mention, Wood and Douglas seem to miss a trick here -
A fairly recent development in the field has been an acknowledgement that in addition to trait-like variables and transient psychological states, ideologies and broad belief systems play a substantial role in conspiracy theory belief. For example, in an examination of conspiracy theories regarding an alleged cover-up of the divinity of Mary Magdalene and the bloodline of Christ, Newheiser et al. (2011) demonstrated that the plausibility of these theories hinged largely on broader beliefs about the world. People with traditional Christian beliefs were likely to reject such theories out of hand, while those with a more New Age approach were much more receptive. In a similar vein, Lewandowsky et al. (2013b) demonstrated that rejection of climate science (though not explicitly conspiracist) is determined in part by ideological concerns, with libertarian free-market ideology, apparently predisposing people to believe that anthropogenic global warming is an unscientific hoax. It is clear, then, that individual conspiracy theories or related counter-normative explanations can seem more or less likely depending on how they comport with other beliefs held by the audience.
This may well be true, but why do people who do not share these ideologies still believe these theories? You get plenty of non-Christians believing 'the elite' are Luciferians, and plenty of people who criticise capitalist free market ideology supporting capitalist free market ideology driven climate change denial.
They acknowledge it's not a given, but I think that the question of why people support theories arising from antithetical ideologies is more interesting than observing the kind of trend you'd expect anyway.