You will be provided with a reference and some statements. Please determine whether each statement is 'supported', 'unsupported', or 'unknown' with respect to the reference. Please note:
First, assess whether the reference contains any valid content. If the reference contains no valid information, such as a 'page not found' message, then all statements should be considered 'unknown'.
If the reference is valid, for a given statement: if the facts or data it contains can be found entirely or partially within the reference, it is considered 'supported' (data accepts rounding); if all facts and data in the statement cannot be found in the reference, it is considered 'unsupported'.

You should return the result in a JSON list format, where each item in the list contains the statement's index and the judgment result, for example:
[
    {
        "idx": 1,
        "result": "supported"
    },
    {
        "idx": 2,
        "result": "unsupported"
    }
]

Below are the reference and statements:
<reference>
1. Psychol Bull. 2023 May-Jun;149(5-6):259-293. doi: 10.1037/bul0000392. Epub
2023  Jun 26.

The conspiratorial mind: A meta-analytic review of motivational and 
personological correlates.

Bowes SM(1), Costello TH(1), Tasimi A(1).

Author information:
(1)Department of Psychology, Emory University.

A tidal wave of research has tried to uncover the motivational and 
personological correlates of conspiratorial ideation, often studying these two 
classes of correlates in parallel. Here, we synthesize this vast and piecemeal 
literature through a multilevel meta-analytic review that spanned 170 studies, 
257 samples, 52 variables, 1,429 effect sizes, and 158,473 participants. 
Overall, we found that the strongest correlates of conspiratorial ideation 
pertained to (a) perceiving danger and threat, (b) relying on intuition and 
having odd beliefs and experiences, and (c) being antagonistic and acting 
superior. Considerable heterogeneity was found within these 
relations--especially when individual variables were lumped together under a 
single domain--and we identified potential boundary conditions in these 
relations (e.g., type of conspiracy). Given that the psychological correlates of 
conspiratorial ideation have often been classified as belonging to one of two 
broad domains-motivation or personality-we aim to understand the implications of 
such heterogeneity for frameworks of conspiratorial ideation. We conclude with 
directions for future research that can lead to a unified account of 
conspiratorial ideation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights 
reserved).

DOI: 10.1037/bul0000392
PMID: 37358543
</reference>

<statements>
1. A multilevel meta-analysis of 170 studies and 158,473 participants found that the strongest correlates of conspiratorial ideation pertained to perceived danger and threat, reliance on intuition and odd beliefs/experiences, and antagonism/acting superior, with considerable heterogeneity
2. The supplied abstract does not report a closure-specific pooled estimate
</statements>

Begin the assessment now. Output only the JSON list, without any conversational text or explanations.