Creating Positive, Negative, and Neutral God Concept Primes and Testing Their Impact on Scrupulosity Relevant Tasks and Symptoms

IF 1.7 2区 哲学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY International Journal for the Psychology of Religion Pub Date : 2022-01-11 DOI:10.1080/10508619.2021.2015890
Kelsey J. Evey, Shari A. Steinman
{"title":"Creating Positive, Negative, and Neutral God Concept Primes and Testing Their Impact on Scrupulosity Relevant Tasks and Symptoms","authors":"Kelsey J. Evey, Shari A. Steinman","doi":"10.1080/10508619.2021.2015890","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Three studies were conducted to develop primes that activate differing beliefs about God and to determine if these activated beliefs impact scrupulosity symptoms. In Study 1, potential positive, negative, and neutral primes were created from Bible verses and rated on arousal, valence, familiarity, and complexity. In Study 2, the selected primes were tested to determine if they differentially activated positive and negative beliefs about God. In Study 3, participants were randomly assigned to read one of three primes (positive, negative, or neutral). Participants then completed a thought-induction task and measures of scrupulosity and thought-action fusion. There were no significant differences in reactions to the thought-induction task or self-report measures of scrupulosity or thought-action fusion between conditions. An exploratory analysis revealed that participants in the negative condition had higher state anxiety following the prime compared to participants in the positive condition. Results demonstrate the potential of the primes to activate negative beliefs about God and highlight the possible detrimental impact negative beliefs about God may have on state anxiety. However, they do not suggest that the primes impact scrupulosity and related constructs.","PeriodicalId":47234,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for the Psychology of Religion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for the Psychology of Religion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2021.2015890","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Three studies were conducted to develop primes that activate differing beliefs about God and to determine if these activated beliefs impact scrupulosity symptoms. In Study 1, potential positive, negative, and neutral primes were created from Bible verses and rated on arousal, valence, familiarity, and complexity. In Study 2, the selected primes were tested to determine if they differentially activated positive and negative beliefs about God. In Study 3, participants were randomly assigned to read one of three primes (positive, negative, or neutral). Participants then completed a thought-induction task and measures of scrupulosity and thought-action fusion. There were no significant differences in reactions to the thought-induction task or self-report measures of scrupulosity or thought-action fusion between conditions. An exploratory analysis revealed that participants in the negative condition had higher state anxiety following the prime compared to participants in the positive condition. Results demonstrate the potential of the primes to activate negative beliefs about God and highlight the possible detrimental impact negative beliefs about God may have on state anxiety. However, they do not suggest that the primes impact scrupulosity and related constructs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
创造积极、消极和中立的上帝概念素数,并测试它们对与审查相关的任务和症状的影响
摘要:本文进行了三项研究,以开发激活对上帝不同信仰的启动物,并确定这些激活的信仰是否影响严谨症状。在研究1中,从圣经经文中创造了潜在的积极、消极和中性启动,并对其进行了唤醒、效价、熟悉度和复杂性评分。在研究2中,我们对所选择的启动词进行了测试,以确定它们是否不同地激活了对上帝的积极和消极信念。在研究3中,参与者被随机分配阅读三个启动(积极、消极或中性)中的一个。然后,参与者完成了一项思想归纳任务,以及严谨性和思想-行动融合的测量。在不同条件下,对思维诱导任务的反应、对严谨性的自我报告测量或思维-行动融合的反应没有显著差异。一项探索性分析显示,与积极条件下的参与者相比,消极条件下的参与者在启动后的状态焦虑更高。结果表明,启动词具有激活对上帝的消极信念的潜力,并强调了对上帝的消极信念可能对状态焦虑产生的不利影响。然而,他们并不认为启动因子影响审慎性和相关结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
4.50%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion (IJPR) is devoted to psychological studies of religious processes and phenomena in all religious traditions. This journal provides a means for sustained discussion of psychologically relevant issues that can be examined empirically and concern religion in the most general sense. It presents articles covering a variety of important topics, such as the social psychology of religion, religious development, conversion, religious experience, religion and social attitudes and behavior, religion and mental health, and psychoanalytic and other theoretical interpretations of religion. The journal publishes research reports, brief research reports, commentaries on relevant topical issues, book reviews, and statements addressing articles published in previous issues. The journal may also include a major essay and commentaries, perspective papers of the theory, and articles on the psychology of religion in a specific country.
期刊最新文献
God, Can I Give Up?: The Diverging Effects of God-Related Thoughts on Task Persistence in Chinese Buddhists and Taoists The Role of Religion in the Mental Health of Single Adults: A Mixed-Method Investigation Effects of Participating in Religious Groups on Mental Health Issues: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study Enriching the Common Core of Mystical Experience: A Qualitative Analysis of Interviews with Daoist Monks and Nuns The Existential Challenge of Religious Pluralism: Religion, Politics, and Meaning in Life
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1