Randomness, Attributions of Arousal, and Belief in God

Kay, Aaron C.; Moscovitch, David A.; Laurin, Kristin

doi:10.1177/0956797609357750

Cited by 135 publications

(130 citation statements)

References 14 publications

(13 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

119

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, overall, our findings indicate that the global prevalence of societies that believe in moralizing high gods is associated with higher prospects of ecological duress (i.e., conditions that are more likely to vary in reasonably productive environments or more likely to stay the same in environments that are already quite poor). In addition, the findings suggest that isolated reports of a soothing effect of ritualistic behavior in the face of randomness (48), or of the intensification of religious beliefs (22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27) and the propensity to cooperate (28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33) in riskier environments, are likely to be reflections of a general human response to threat. Other potentially important mechanisms that could help explain the global distribution of beliefs in moralizing high gods are cultural diffusion and shared ancestry.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The ecology of religious beliefs

Botero

Gardner

Kirby

et al. 2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

182

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although ecological forces are known to shape the expression of sociality across a broad range of biological taxa, their role in shaping human behavior is currently disputed. Both comparative and experimental evidence indicate that beliefs in moralizing high gods promote cooperation among humans, a behavioral attribute known to correlate with environmental harshness in nonhuman animals. Here we combine fine-grained bioclimatic data with the latest statistical tools from ecology and the social sciences to evaluate the potential effects of environmental forces, language history, and culture on the global distribution of belief in moralizing high gods (n = 583 societies). After simultaneously accounting for potential nonindependence among societies because of shared ancestry and cultural diffusion, we find that these beliefs are more prevalent among societies that inhabit poorer environments and are more prone to ecological duress. In addition, we find that these beliefs are more likely in politically complex societies that recognize rights to movable property. Overall, our multimodel inference approach predicts the global distribution of beliefs in moralizing high gods with an accuracy of 91%, and estimates the relative importance of different potential mechanisms by which this spatial pattern may have arisen. The emerging picture is neither one of pure cultural transmission nor of simple ecological determinism, but rather a complex mixture of social, cultural, and environmental influences. Our methods and findings provide a blueprint for how the increasing wealth of ecological, linguistic, and historical data can be leveraged to understand the forces that have shaped the behavior of our own species.religion | cultural evolution | environmental effects | ecological risk | supernatural beliefs

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent empirical findings indicate that beliefs in moralizing high gods not only intensify (22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27), but also promote cooperation (28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33) in situations of increased environmental risk. In addition, these findings indicate that ecological threats can strengthen mechanisms of norm enforcement in human groups (34).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The ecology of religious beliefs

Botero

Gardner

Kirby

et al. 2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

182

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People who lack personal control perceive increased structure in random arrays (i.e., see pictures in static; Whitson & Galinsky, 2008) and believe more strongly in agents that impose structure on the world, such as a controlling god or a controlling government (Kay, Gaucher, Napier, Callan, & Laurin, 2008;Kay, Moscovitch, & Laurin, 2010;Kay, Shepherd, Blatz, Chua, & Galinsky, 2010;Shepherd, Kay, Landau, & Keefer, 2011). People lacking personal control also endorse scientific theories that suggest orderliness rather than randomness (Rutjens, van Harreveld, & van der Plight, 2010;Rutjens, van Harreveld, van der Plight, Kreemers, & Noordeweir, 2013;Rutjens, van der Plight, & van Harreveld, 2010), and folk beliefs that provide orderly explanations for negative events (e.g., that they are "a blessing in disguise") can foster a more global sense of control (Chipperfield et al, 2012).…”

Section: Compensatory Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeking structure in social organization: Compensatory control and the psychological advantages of hierarchy.

Friesen

Kay

Eibach

et al. 2014

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Self Cite

175

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hierarchies are a ubiquitous form of human social organization. We hypothesized that 1 reason for the prevalence of hierarchies is that they offer structure and therefore satisfy the core motivational needs for order and control relative to less structured forms of social organization. This hypothesis is rooted in compensatory control theory, which posits that (a) individuals have a basic need to perceive the world as orderly and structured, and (b) personal and external sources of control are capable of satisfying this need because both serve the comforting belief that the world operates in an orderly fashion. Our first 2 studies confirmed that hierarchies were perceived as more structured and orderly relative to egalitarian arrangements (Study 1) and that working in a hierarchical workplace promotes a feeling of self-efficacy (Study 2). We threatened participants’ sense of personal control and measured perceptions of and preferences for hierarchy in 5 subsequent experiments. Participants who lacked control perceived more hierarchy occurring in ambiguous social situations (Study 3) and preferred hierarchy more strongly in workplace contexts (Studies 4–5). We also provide evidence that hierarchies are indeed appealing because of their structure: Preference for hierarchy was higher among individuals high in Personal Need for Structure and a control threat increased preference for hierarchy even among participants low in Personal Need for Structure (Study 5). Framing a hierarchy as unstructured reversed the effect of control threat on hierarchy (Study 6). Finally, hierarchy-enhancing jobs were more appealing after control threat, even when they were low in power and status (Study 7).

show abstract

“…Perhaps this is because religion compensates for the loss of control that results from epistemic uncertainty (Kay, Gaucher, Napier, Callan, & Laurin, 2008;Kay, Moscovitch, & Laurin, 2010;Kay, Shepherd, Blatz, Chua, & Galinsky, 2010). However, the possibility remains that religious belief systems are especially appealing under circumstances of uncertainty and threat because of the fact that they contain a great deal of system-justifying content, such as the belief that God is fair and that people will receive their just deserts in the afterlife (e.g., see Lerner, 1980;Weber, 1922Weber, /1963.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Not All Ideologies are Created Equal: Epistemic, Existential, and Relational Needs Predict System-Justifying Attitudes

Hennes¹,

Nam²,

Stern³

et al. 2012

Social Cognition

183

229

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whereas most social psychological perspectives assume that needs to manage uncertainty, existential anxiety, and social cohesion should motivate any form of ideological zeal, System Justification Theory predicts that these needs are positively associated with the endorsement of system-justifying beliefs, opinions, and values but negatively associated with the endorsement of system-challenging ideological outcomes. For the first time we test a full theoretical model in which system justification mediates the effects of individual differences in epistemic, existential, and relational needs on attitudes toward public policy issues and social movements. Specifically, we conducted a national survey of 182 americans and found that, as hypothesized, lower need for cognition, greater death anxiety, and a stronger desire to share reality each contributed significantly and independently to economic system justification, which, in turn, contributed to support for the Tea Party (a movement aimed at restoring america's "traditional values") and opposition to Occupy Wall Street (a movement seeking to reduce social and economic inequality and minimize corporate influence on government). economic system justification also mediated the effects of these needs on the endorsement of status quo positions with respect to health care, immigration, global climate change, and the "Ground Zero mosque." These findings suggest that epistemic, existential, and relational needs lead disproportionately to support for system-justifying, rather than system-challenging, policies and movements.[A]s a prominent ultra-conservative radio commentator observed recently: "There is nothing wrong with our American system. It is as good as it ever was, but we must

show abstract

Randomness, Attributions of Arousal, and Belief in God

Cited by 135 publications

References 14 publications

The ecology of religious beliefs

The ecology of religious beliefs

Seeking structure in social organization: Compensatory control and the psychological advantages of hierarchy.

Not All Ideologies are Created Equal: Epistemic, Existential, and Relational Needs Predict System-Justifying Attitudes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About