Pub Date : 2022-01-13DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2022.2065349
B. Purzycki, Theiss Bendixen, Aaron D. Lightner
The target article from Turchin et al. assesses the relationship between social complexity and moralistic supernatural punishment. In our evaluation of their project, we argue that each step of its workflow -- from data production and theory to modeling and reporting -- makes it impossible to test the hypothesis that its authors claim they are testing. We focus our discussion on three important classes of issues: problems of data, analysis, and causal inference.
{"title":"Coding, causality, and statistical craft: the emergence and evolutionary drivers of moralistic supernatural punishment remain unresolved","authors":"B. Purzycki, Theiss Bendixen, Aaron D. Lightner","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2022.2065349","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2022.2065349","url":null,"abstract":"The target article from Turchin et al. assesses the relationship between social complexity and moralistic supernatural punishment. In our evaluation of their project, we argue that each step of its workflow -- from data production and theory to modeling and reporting -- makes it impossible to test the hypothesis that its authors claim they are testing. We focus our discussion on three important classes of issues: problems of data, analysis, and causal inference.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89593256","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2023.2173715
Irene Cristofori, S. Hoogeveen, D. Rohr, Joseph A. Bulbulia, J. Shaver, R. Sosis, W. Wildman
Religion, Brain & Behavior is thrilled to announce that we are expanding and diversifying our team. Two new senior editors, Suzanne Hoogeveen and Irene Cristofori, and a new assistant editor, David Rohr, bring a wealth of expertise and experience to our journal. In this special editorial, our three newest team mates introduce themselves. Before they do so, however, we want to take this opportunity to thank Joel Daniels for his many years of extraordinary service to RBB as our tireless and dependable Assistant Editor. Thank you Joel.
{"title":"Introducing our new editors","authors":"Irene Cristofori, S. Hoogeveen, D. Rohr, Joseph A. Bulbulia, J. Shaver, R. Sosis, W. Wildman","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2023.2173715","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2023.2173715","url":null,"abstract":"Religion, Brain & Behavior is thrilled to announce that we are expanding and diversifying our team. Two new senior editors, Suzanne Hoogeveen and Irene Cristofori, and a new assistant editor, David Rohr, bring a wealth of expertise and experience to our journal. In this special editorial, our three newest team mates introduce themselves. Before they do so, however, we want to take this opportunity to thank Joel Daniels for his many years of extraordinary service to RBB as our tireless and dependable Assistant Editor. Thank you Joel.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76269537","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987308
R. Ross, R. McKay
reading Hearing Voices. Consequently, after having benefited from the philosophical rigor McCauley and Graham apply to such a large array of topics in Hearing Voices, I wish to take this opportunity to ask them to explicate the scientific utility of labeling some mental disorders or symptoms as “religious” and, if they find scientific utility in such labeling, to detail whose labeling criteria should be used and why. Such an explication would help once again demonstrate the important contributions of philosophy to not only the intersection of religion and mental illness but to the cognitive science of religion as a whole.
{"title":"Continuity and credibility in the Cognitive Science of Religion","authors":"R. Ross, R. McKay","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987308","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987308","url":null,"abstract":"reading Hearing Voices. Consequently, after having benefited from the philosophical rigor McCauley and Graham apply to such a large array of topics in Hearing Voices, I wish to take this opportunity to ask them to explicate the scientific utility of labeling some mental disorders or symptoms as “religious” and, if they find scientific utility in such labeling, to detail whose labeling criteria should be used and why. Such an explication would help once again demonstrate the important contributions of philosophy to not only the intersection of religion and mental illness but to the cognitive science of religion as a whole.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80716144","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987310
R. Bentall
As a recent survey of religious artifacts in the British Museum attests (MacGregor, 2018), religions exist in enormous varieties and have been ubiquitous globally and throughout history. This observation has led to the creation of the subdiscipline of psychology focused on religion which, although not as well-established as older subdisciplines such as social, cognitive and developmental psychology, is certainly thriving (Hood et al., 2009). Robert McCauley and George Graham’s book,Hearing voices and other matters of mind: What mental abnormalities teach us about religions, introduces a novel perspective to this field and delivers a thoughtful and stimulating exploration of the borderlines between psychopathology and religious experience and behavior. The authors approach this task within a framework which they describe as ‘ecumenical naturalism’, which stands on three claims. First, they accept the widespread assumption by researchers working on the cognitive science of religion (CSR), that many features of religion are by-products of the mental processes that underpin much of ordinary life. Second, they argue that many religious experiences share features with the experiences of people suffering from psychiatric disorders. Finally, they claim that findings from cognitive science will therefore be informative in understanding features of mental disorders that are also evident in religious experience. Importantly, although they claim that their approach is “free of presumptive ontological commitment or reference to anything supernatural” (p. 214), they say their aim is not to delegitimise or debunk religion, which they see as a natural feature of human life. They contrast this attitude to that taken by some notable previous contributors to what might be called the religion-psychopathology debate (they cite, in particular, Freud’s view that religion is a childish illusion). The core of the book is a series of chapters focusing on four types of mental illness: hearing voices, depression, obsessions and compulsions, and finally autism. In the chapter on hearing voices, they review the research literature showing that auditory-verbal hallucinations (one of the most common experiences reported by patients diagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia) are the consequence of a failure of ‘source monitoring’, which leads to the misattribution of mental events, especially inner speech, to a source external or alien to the self. They then argue that “there is no categorical difference, at a subpersonal level, between the mental systems or cognitive dispositions involved in believing that God is speaking to you... . and the systems involved in believing that a secular agent is talking” (p. 75); religious belief simply provides a context in which the voice-hearer may interpret these experiences and thereby come to the conclusion that they are being addressed by God.
正如最近对大英博物馆宗教文物的调查所证明的那样(MacGregor, 2018)，宗教存在于各种各样的宗教中，并且在全球和整个历史中无处不在。这一观察导致了以宗教为重点的心理学分支学科的创建，尽管它不像社会、认知和发展心理学等较早的分支学科那样成熟，但它肯定是蓬勃发展的(Hood et al.， 2009)。罗伯特·麦考利(Robert McCauley)和乔治·格雷厄姆(George Graham)合著的《听到声音和其他心灵问题:精神异常教给我们的关于宗教的东西》(Hearing voices and other matters: mental abnormal教给我们的东西)为这一领域引入了一种新颖的视角，并对精神病理学与宗教体验和行为之间的界限进行了深思熟虑和令人兴奋的探索。作者在他们称之为“普世自然主义”的框架内完成这项任务，该框架基于三个主张。首先，他们接受研究宗教认知科学(CSR)的研究人员的普遍假设，即宗教的许多特征是支撑日常生活的心理过程的副产品。其次，他们认为许多宗教经历与患有精神疾病的人的经历有共同的特点。最后，他们声称，认知科学的发现因此将有助于理解精神障碍的特征，这些特征在宗教体验中也很明显。重要的是，尽管他们声称他们的方法是“没有假定的本体论承诺或任何超自然的参考”(第214页)，他们说他们的目的不是使宗教合法化或揭穿宗教，他们认为宗教是人类生活的自然特征。他们将这种态度与之前一些可能被称为宗教-精神病理学辩论的著名贡献者的态度进行了对比(他们特别引用了弗洛伊德的观点，即宗教是一种幼稚的幻觉)。这本书的核心是围绕四种精神疾病的一系列章节:幻听、抑郁症、强迫症和强迫症，最后是自闭症。在关于听觉的章节中，他们回顾了研究文献，表明听觉语言幻觉(被诊断为患有精神分裂症的患者报告的最常见的经历之一)是“源监测”失败的结果，这导致精神事件，特别是内心的言语，错误地归因到外部或陌生的自我来源。然后他们认为，“在亚个人层面上，在相信上帝在对你说话的心理系统或认知倾向之间，没有绝对的区别... .。以及相信一个世俗的人在说话的系统"(第75页);宗教信仰只是提供了一个背景，听者可以在其中解释这些经历，从而得出他们是由上帝说话的结论。
{"title":"Commentary on Hearing voices and other matters of mind: What mental abnormalities teach us about religions by Robert McCauley and George Graham","authors":"R. Bentall","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987310","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987310","url":null,"abstract":"As a recent survey of religious artifacts in the British Museum attests (MacGregor, 2018), religions exist in enormous varieties and have been ubiquitous globally and throughout history. This observation has led to the creation of the subdiscipline of psychology focused on religion which, although not as well-established as older subdisciplines such as social, cognitive and developmental psychology, is certainly thriving (Hood et al., 2009). Robert McCauley and George Graham’s book,Hearing voices and other matters of mind: What mental abnormalities teach us about religions, introduces a novel perspective to this field and delivers a thoughtful and stimulating exploration of the borderlines between psychopathology and religious experience and behavior. The authors approach this task within a framework which they describe as ‘ecumenical naturalism’, which stands on three claims. First, they accept the widespread assumption by researchers working on the cognitive science of religion (CSR), that many features of religion are by-products of the mental processes that underpin much of ordinary life. Second, they argue that many religious experiences share features with the experiences of people suffering from psychiatric disorders. Finally, they claim that findings from cognitive science will therefore be informative in understanding features of mental disorders that are also evident in religious experience. Importantly, although they claim that their approach is “free of presumptive ontological commitment or reference to anything supernatural” (p. 214), they say their aim is not to delegitimise or debunk religion, which they see as a natural feature of human life. They contrast this attitude to that taken by some notable previous contributors to what might be called the religion-psychopathology debate (they cite, in particular, Freud’s view that religion is a childish illusion). The core of the book is a series of chapters focusing on four types of mental illness: hearing voices, depression, obsessions and compulsions, and finally autism. In the chapter on hearing voices, they review the research literature showing that auditory-verbal hallucinations (one of the most common experiences reported by patients diagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia) are the consequence of a failure of ‘source monitoring’, which leads to the misattribution of mental events, especially inner speech, to a source external or alien to the self. They then argue that “there is no categorical difference, at a subpersonal level, between the mental systems or cognitive dispositions involved in believing that God is speaking to you... . and the systems involved in believing that a secular agent is talking” (p. 75); religious belief simply provides a context in which the voice-hearer may interpret these experiences and thereby come to the conclusion that they are being addressed by God.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76449664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.1980425
R. Fischer
ABSTRACT This paper presents a bibliometric study and general overview of research on ritual. I searched the Web of Science Core Collection on Nov 22, 2020 for studies published between 2000 and 2020 with the term “ritual*” in the title, keywords or abstract. A data corpus of 16,600 English-language publications was further analysed using publication statistics, citation metrics, co-citation networks and network analyses of keywords. Evolutionary research on religious ritual with an emphasis on signaling was identified as a central area of research with strong impact on the study of ritual overall. Distinct clusters of clinical, neuroscience, developmental and health research using rituals were also identified and these clusters showed high citation metrics. Concerning publication outlets, archaeology journals publish a large number of papers on ritual, but the impact of these publications as measured by citations weakens over time. Changes in research trends suggest a maturation and specialization of ritualistic research over the last 20 years, with greater isolation and disconnectedness of individual research themes. The list of key publications based on contemporary impact metrics and historical co-citation networks can be used to provide a common language and theoretical lens for researchers to facilitate interaction between different disciplines.
本文介绍了文献计量学研究和仪式研究概况。我于2020年11月22日在Web of Science Core Collection检索了2000年至2020年间发表的标题、关键词或摘要中包含“仪式*”一词的研究。使用出版物统计、引文指标、共被引网络和关键词网络分析进一步分析了16,600份英语出版物的数据语料库。以信号为重点的宗教仪式进化研究被认为是对整个仪式研究具有重要影响的核心研究领域。使用仪式的临床、神经科学、发育和健康研究的不同集群也被确定，这些集群显示出高引用指标。就出版渠道而言，考古学期刊发表了大量关于仪式的论文，但这些论文的影响力随着时间的推移而减弱。研究趋势的变化表明，在过去20年中，仪式研究趋于成熟和专业化，个别研究主题更加孤立和脱节。基于当代影响指标和历史共引网络的关键出版物列表可以为研究人员提供共同的语言和理论视角，以促进不同学科之间的互动。
{"title":"Mapping the scientific study of rituals: a bibliometric analysis of research published 2000–2020","authors":"R. Fischer","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.1980425","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.1980425","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\u0000 This paper presents a bibliometric study and general overview of research on ritual. I searched the Web of Science Core Collection on Nov 22, 2020 for studies published between 2000 and 2020 with the term “ritual*” in the title, keywords or abstract. A data corpus of 16,600 English-language publications was further analysed using publication statistics, citation metrics, co-citation networks and network analyses of keywords. Evolutionary research on religious ritual with an emphasis on signaling was identified as a central area of research with strong impact on the study of ritual overall. Distinct clusters of clinical, neuroscience, developmental and health research using rituals were also identified and these clusters showed high citation metrics. Concerning publication outlets, archaeology journals publish a large number of papers on ritual, but the impact of these publications as measured by citations weakens over time. Changes in research trends suggest a maturation and specialization of ritualistic research over the last 20 years, with greater isolation and disconnectedness of individual research themes. The list of key publications based on contemporary impact metrics and historical co-citation networks can be used to provide a common language and theoretical lens for researchers to facilitate interaction between different disciplines.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73166250","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2001259
Joseph A. Bulbulia, U. Schjoedt, J. Shaver, R. Sosis, W. Wildman
The 2021 Nobel prize in economics was awarded to David Card, Joshua Angrist, and Guido Imbens. Card, together with his PhD supervisor the late Alan Krueger, developed empirical methods for investigating how policy interventions affect labor markets. Angrist and Imbens developed methods for identifying causes from real-world complexity. Collectively, this work on causal inference has come to redefine how economists conduct research. A parallel storey for the emergence and growth of causal methods unfolded a quarter-century earlier in the discipline of epidemiology (Hill, 1965). Formal methods for causal inference trace an even longer history, beginning with the work of Sewall Wright on biological development and inheritance (Wright, 1921, 1923, 1934). Most empirical research published in Religion, Brain & Behavior is produced by scientists working in psychology, a field in which methods for causal inference remain poorly developed (see Rohrer, 2018). Here, we offer advice to RBB authors hoping to address causal inference using regression, ANOVA, and structural equation modeling.
{"title":"Causal inference in regression: advice to authors","authors":"Joseph A. Bulbulia, U. Schjoedt, J. Shaver, R. Sosis, W. Wildman","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.2001259","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2001259","url":null,"abstract":"The 2021 Nobel prize in economics was awarded to David Card, Joshua Angrist, and Guido Imbens. Card, together with his PhD supervisor the late Alan Krueger, developed empirical methods for investigating how policy interventions affect labor markets. Angrist and Imbens developed methods for identifying causes from real-world complexity. Collectively, this work on causal inference has come to redefine how economists conduct research. A parallel storey for the emergence and growth of causal methods unfolded a quarter-century earlier in the discipline of epidemiology (Hill, 1965). Formal methods for causal inference trace an even longer history, beginning with the work of Sewall Wright on biological development and inheritance (Wright, 1921, 1923, 1934). Most empirical research published in Religion, Brain & Behavior is produced by scientists working in psychology, a field in which methods for causal inference remain poorly developed (see Rohrer, 2018). Here, we offer advice to RBB authors hoping to address causal inference using regression, ANOVA, and structural equation modeling.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91004480","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987306
Ann Taves
org/10.31234/osf.io/ksfvq. Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716 Quintana, D. S. (2015). From pre-registration to publication: A non-technical primer for conducting a meta-analysis to synthesize correlational data. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01549 Reddish, P., Tok, P., & Kundt, R. (2016). Religious cognition and behaviour in autism: The role of mentalizing. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 26(2), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2014.1003518 Shariff, A. F., Willard, A. K., Andersen, T., & Norenzayan, A. (2016). Religious priming: A meta-analysis with a focus on prosociality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1088868314568811 Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366. https://doi. org/10.1177/0956797611417632 Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2018). False-positive citations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 255–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617698146 van Elk, M., Matzke, D., Gronau, Q. F., Guana, M., Vandekerckhove, J., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2015). Meta-analyses are no substitute for registered replications: A skeptical perspective on religious priming. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01365 van Os, J., Linscott, R. J., Myin-Germeys, I., Delespaul, P., & Krabbendam, L. (2009). A systematic review and metaanalysis of the psychosis continuum: Evidence for a psychosis proneness–persistence–impairment model of psychotic disorder. Psychological Medicine, 39(02), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291708003814 Watanabe, S., & Laurent, S. M. (2021). Past its prime? A methodological overview and critique of religious priming research in social psychology. Journal for the Cognitive Science of Religion, 6(1-2), 31–55. https://doi.org/10.1558/ jcsr.38411
org/10.31234/osf.io/ksfvq。开放科学合作。（2015）． 估计心理科学的可重复性。科学通报，349(6251)，aac4716。https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716 Quintana, d.s.(2015)。从预注册到发表:进行综合相关数据的元分析的非技术入门。心理学前缘，6,1-9。https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01549 Reddish, P.， Tok, P.， & Kundt, R.(2016)。自闭症的宗教认知与行为:心理化的作用。国际宗教心理学杂志，26(2)，95-112。https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2014.1003518 Shariff, a.f, Willard, a.k, Andersen, T， & Norenzayan, A.(2016)。宗教启动:一个关注亲社会性的元分析。人格与社会心理学通报，20(1)，27-48。https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1088868314568811 Simmons, J. P, Nelson, L. D， & simmonsohn, U.(2011)。假阳性心理学:在数据收集和分析方面的未披露的灵活性允许将任何事情呈现为重要的。心理科学，22(11)，1359-1366。https://doi。(2018). simmonsohn, j.p, Nelson, l.d.， and Simonsohn U.。假阳性的引用。心理科学透视，13(2)，255-259。https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617698146 van Elk, M, Matzke, D, Gronau, Q. F, Guana, M, Vandekerckhove, J， & Wagenmakers, E. J(2015)。荟萃分析不能代替已登记的重复实验:对宗教启动的怀疑观点。心理学前沿，6,1-7。https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01365 van Os, J, Linscott, R. J, Myin-Germeys, I.， Delespaul, P.， & Krabbendam, L.(2009)。精神病连续体的系统回顾和荟萃分析:精神障碍的精神病倾向-持续-损害模型的证据。心理医学，39(02)，179-195。https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291708003814 Watanabe, S.， & Laurent, S. M.(2021)。过了黄金时期?社会心理学中宗教启动研究的方法论综述与批判。宗教认知科学学报，6(1-2)，31-55。https://doi.org/10.1558/ jcsr.38411
{"title":"Event cognition (not ecumenical naturalism) integrates individual and cultural differences","authors":"Ann Taves","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987306","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987306","url":null,"abstract":"org/10.31234/osf.io/ksfvq. Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716 Quintana, D. S. (2015). From pre-registration to publication: A non-technical primer for conducting a meta-analysis to synthesize correlational data. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01549 Reddish, P., Tok, P., & Kundt, R. (2016). Religious cognition and behaviour in autism: The role of mentalizing. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 26(2), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2014.1003518 Shariff, A. F., Willard, A. K., Andersen, T., & Norenzayan, A. (2016). Religious priming: A meta-analysis with a focus on prosociality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1088868314568811 Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366. https://doi. org/10.1177/0956797611417632 Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2018). False-positive citations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 255–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617698146 van Elk, M., Matzke, D., Gronau, Q. F., Guana, M., Vandekerckhove, J., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2015). Meta-analyses are no substitute for registered replications: A skeptical perspective on religious priming. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01365 van Os, J., Linscott, R. J., Myin-Germeys, I., Delespaul, P., & Krabbendam, L. (2009). A systematic review and metaanalysis of the psychosis continuum: Evidence for a psychosis proneness–persistence–impairment model of psychotic disorder. Psychological Medicine, 39(02), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291708003814 Watanabe, S., & Laurent, S. M. (2021). Past its prime? A methodological overview and critique of religious priming research in social psychology. Journal for the Cognitive Science of Religion, 6(1-2), 31–55. https://doi.org/10.1558/ jcsr.38411","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74082424","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987311
Jonathan A. Lanman
According to Miller (2003), the field of cognitive science took shape through the combined contributions of scholars in psychology, philosophy, linguistics, anthropology, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence. The sub-field of the Cognitive Science of Religion (CSR), too, has taken shape through the contributions of scholars from a number of disciplines including different branches of psychology, anthropology, neuroscience, history, religious studies, philosophy, biology, computer science, and more. Each discipline brings its own set of perspectives, tools, and evidential base to the scientific study of religion. In Hearing Voices and Other Matters of the Mind: What Mental Abnormalities Can Teach Us About Religions, Robert N. McCauley and George Graham (2020) demonstrate the benefits that philosophers bring to our growing field. Their precision and rigor in evaluating arguments, evidence, and metatheoretical assumptions shines through in both their overall goals for the volume and the particular topics they use to illustrate their perspective. The field is better for it. My wish for their monograph, and what I will ask of the authors below, is for them to utilize that precision and rigor a bit more on an issue I still found unclear in the text: does labeling some symptom or disorder as “religious” have any scientific utility in better understanding its causes or effects? InHearing Voices, McCauley and Graham aim to kickstart the systematic interdisciplinary investigation into “forms of religious and theistic cognition that either strongly resemble or are directly associated with cases of mental illness or disorder” by exploring “why religions around the world and throughout human history have hit upon multiple means for engendering experiences with many of the same features as those associated with various mental disorders” (p. 5) and, by doing so, “illustrate how the scientific field of psychopathology can serve as a robust disciplinary aid to the cognitive science of religion” (p. xiii). Throughout the text, they defend an interdisciplinary framework they call “ecumenical naturalism” or EN and a “byproduct” account of the influence of cognitive mechanisms on the religious phenomena discussed. EN, they tell us, entails bringing the “same theories, findings, and research tools to the study of cognition whether it is normal, pathological, or religious” (p.xiv). The framework is ecumenical “in its attention to normal and abnormal forms of human religiosity” and naturalistic “in its commitment to the science of cognition and the study of mental illness” (p. 211). The byproduct theory, as they relate, holds that the cognitive systems at work in religious contexts are “garden variety” cognitive systems and that their existence owes nothing to religion or each other. It also holds that “religious representations tend to evolve in directions that are consonant with the content biases of human minds” (p. 17). With the framework of ecumenical naturali
Miller(2003)认为，认知科学领域是由心理学、哲学、语言学、人类学、神经科学和人工智能等领域的学者共同贡献形成的。宗教认知科学(CSR)的子领域也通过来自许多学科的学者的贡献而形成，包括心理学、人类学、神经科学、历史、宗教研究、哲学、生物学、计算机科学等不同分支。每个学科都为宗教的科学研究带来了自己的一套观点、工具和证据基础。罗伯特·n·麦考利(Robert N. McCauley)和乔治·格雷厄姆(George Graham)在《听到声音和其他心灵问题:精神异常能教会我们什么关于宗教的东西》(2020)一书中展示了哲学家给我们这个不断发展的领域带来的好处。他们在评估论点，证据和元理论假设的准确性和严谨性在他们的总体目标和他们用来说明他们的观点的特定主题中都得到了体现。这片土地因此变得更好了。我对他们的专著的愿望，以及我对下面作者的要求，是希望他们在一个我在文本中仍然不清楚的问题上更多地利用这种精确性和严谨性:将一些症状或障碍标记为“宗教”是否对更好地理解其原因或影响有任何科学效用?在《幻听》一书中，McCauley和Graham旨在通过探索“为什么世界各地和整个人类历史上的宗教都有多种方式来产生与各种精神障碍相关的许多相同特征的体验”(第5页)，从而启动系统的跨学科研究，研究“宗教和有神论认知的形式，要么与精神疾病或障碍非常相似，要么直接相关”。“说明了精神病理学的科学领域如何能够作为宗教认知科学的有力学科援助”(第13页)。在整个文本中，他们捍卫了一个跨学科的框架，他们称之为“基督教自然主义”或EN，以及对所讨论的宗教现象的认知机制影响的“副产品”解释。他们告诉我们，EN需要将“相同的理论、发现和研究工具带到认知研究中，无论它是正常的、病理的还是宗教的”(第14页)。该框架是普世主义的，“在关注人类宗教的正常和不正常形式方面”，而“在致力于认知科学和精神疾病研究方面”是自然主义的(第211页)。副产品理论认为，在宗教环境中起作用的认知系统是“普通的”认知系统，它们的存在与宗教或彼此无关。它还认为，“宗教表现倾向于朝着与人类思想的内容偏见一致的方向发展”(第17页)。随着大同自然主义框架的就位，以及对副产品方法的描述和辩护，作者在四个章节中运用它们来考察宗教、认知和精神疾病之间纠缠的四个领域。第二章研究了幻听现象，第三章研究了祈祷和抑郁，第四章研究了严谨、仪式和强迫症，第五章研究了自闭症对宗教信仰的影响。在
{"title":"On the benefits of philosophy and the scientific utility of “religious” disorders","authors":"Jonathan A. Lanman","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987311","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987311","url":null,"abstract":"According to Miller (2003), the field of cognitive science took shape through the combined contributions of scholars in psychology, philosophy, linguistics, anthropology, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence. The sub-field of the Cognitive Science of Religion (CSR), too, has taken shape through the contributions of scholars from a number of disciplines including different branches of psychology, anthropology, neuroscience, history, religious studies, philosophy, biology, computer science, and more. Each discipline brings its own set of perspectives, tools, and evidential base to the scientific study of religion. In Hearing Voices and Other Matters of the Mind: What Mental Abnormalities Can Teach Us About Religions, Robert N. McCauley and George Graham (2020) demonstrate the benefits that philosophers bring to our growing field. Their precision and rigor in evaluating arguments, evidence, and metatheoretical assumptions shines through in both their overall goals for the volume and the particular topics they use to illustrate their perspective. The field is better for it. My wish for their monograph, and what I will ask of the authors below, is for them to utilize that precision and rigor a bit more on an issue I still found unclear in the text: does labeling some symptom or disorder as “religious” have any scientific utility in better understanding its causes or effects? InHearing Voices, McCauley and Graham aim to kickstart the systematic interdisciplinary investigation into “forms of religious and theistic cognition that either strongly resemble or are directly associated with cases of mental illness or disorder” by exploring “why religions around the world and throughout human history have hit upon multiple means for engendering experiences with many of the same features as those associated with various mental disorders” (p. 5) and, by doing so, “illustrate how the scientific field of psychopathology can serve as a robust disciplinary aid to the cognitive science of religion” (p. xiii). Throughout the text, they defend an interdisciplinary framework they call “ecumenical naturalism” or EN and a “byproduct” account of the influence of cognitive mechanisms on the religious phenomena discussed. EN, they tell us, entails bringing the “same theories, findings, and research tools to the study of cognition whether it is normal, pathological, or religious” (p.xiv). The framework is ecumenical “in its attention to normal and abnormal forms of human religiosity” and naturalistic “in its commitment to the science of cognition and the study of mental illness” (p. 211). The byproduct theory, as they relate, holds that the cognitive systems at work in religious contexts are “garden variety” cognitive systems and that their existence owes nothing to religion or each other. It also holds that “religious representations tend to evolve in directions that are consonant with the content biases of human minds” (p. 17). With the framework of ecumenical naturali","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86877008","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987309
J. V. Van Slyke
Alderson-Day, B., Bernini, M., & Fernyhough, C. (2017). Uncharted features and dynamics of reading: Voices, characters, and crossing of experiences. Consciousness and Cognition, 49, 98–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog. 2017.01.003 Bechtel, W. (2009). Looking down, around, and up: Mechanistic explanation in psychology. Philosophical Psychology, 22(5), 543–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515080903238948 Butz, M. V., & Kutter, E. F. (2017).How the mind comes into being: Introducing cognitive science from a functional and computational perspective (1st ed.). Oxford University Press. Craver, C. F. (2015). Levels. In T. Metzinger & J. M. Windt (Eds.), Open mind. MIND Group. https://doi.org/10. 15502/9783958570498 Deeley, Q., Oakley, D. A., Walsh, E., Bell, V., Mehta, M. A., & Halligan, P. W. (2014). Modelling psychiatric and cultural possession phenomena with suggestion and fMRI. Cortex, 53, 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2014. 01.004 Garratt, P. (2014, August 22). Hearing voices allowed Charles Dickens to create extraordinary fictional worlds. The Guardian. Glennan, S., & Illari, P. (Eds.). (2020). Routledge handbook of mechanisms and mechanical philosophy. Taylor and Francis. Henrich, J. P. (2016). The secret of our success: How culture is driving human evolution, domesticating our species, and making us smarter. Princeton University Press. Hohwy, J., Hebblewhite, A., & Drummond, T. (2020). Events, event prediction, and predictive processing. Topics in Cognitive Science, tops.12491. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12491 Luhrmann, T. M. (2005). The art of hearing God: Absorption, dissociation, and contemporary American spirituality. Spiritus: A Journal of Christian Spirituality, 5(2), 133–157. https://doi.org/10.1353/scs.2006.0014 Luhrmann, T. M., Nusbaum, H., & Thisted, R. (2010). The absorption hypothesis: Learning to hear god in evangelical christianity. American Anthropologist, 112(1), 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1433.2009.01197.x Luhrmann, T. M., Nusbaum, H., & Thisted, R. (2013). “Lord, teach us to pray”: Prayer practice affects cognitive processing. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 13(1-2), 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685373-12342090 Radvansky, G., & Zacks, J. M. (2011). Event perception.Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2(6), 608– 620. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.133 Taves, A. (2016). Revelatory events: Three case studies of the emergence of new spiritual paths (1st ed.). Princeton University Press. Taves, A., & Asprem, E. (2017). Experience as event: Event cognition and the study of (religious) experiences. Religion, Brain & Behavior, 7(1), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2016.1150327 Whitehouse, H, & Lanman, J. A. (2014). The ties that bind us: Ritual, fusion, and identification. Current Anthropology, 55(6), 674–683. https://doi.org/10.1086/678698 Walsh, E., Oakley, D. A., Halligan, P. W., Mehta, M. A., & Deeley, Q. (2015). The functional anatomy and connectivity of thought insertion an
{"title":"“Hearing voices and other matters of mind” raises important issues in the cognitive science of religion, but also in the psychology and philosophy of religion","authors":"J. V. Van Slyke","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987309","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.1987309","url":null,"abstract":"Alderson-Day, B., Bernini, M., & Fernyhough, C. (2017). Uncharted features and dynamics of reading: Voices, characters, and crossing of experiences. Consciousness and Cognition, 49, 98–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog. 2017.01.003 Bechtel, W. (2009). Looking down, around, and up: Mechanistic explanation in psychology. Philosophical Psychology, 22(5), 543–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515080903238948 Butz, M. V., & Kutter, E. F. (2017).How the mind comes into being: Introducing cognitive science from a functional and computational perspective (1st ed.). Oxford University Press. Craver, C. F. (2015). Levels. In T. Metzinger & J. M. Windt (Eds.), Open mind. MIND Group. https://doi.org/10. 15502/9783958570498 Deeley, Q., Oakley, D. A., Walsh, E., Bell, V., Mehta, M. A., & Halligan, P. W. (2014). Modelling psychiatric and cultural possession phenomena with suggestion and fMRI. Cortex, 53, 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2014. 01.004 Garratt, P. (2014, August 22). Hearing voices allowed Charles Dickens to create extraordinary fictional worlds. The Guardian. Glennan, S., & Illari, P. (Eds.). (2020). Routledge handbook of mechanisms and mechanical philosophy. Taylor and Francis. Henrich, J. P. (2016). The secret of our success: How culture is driving human evolution, domesticating our species, and making us smarter. Princeton University Press. Hohwy, J., Hebblewhite, A., & Drummond, T. (2020). Events, event prediction, and predictive processing. Topics in Cognitive Science, tops.12491. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12491 Luhrmann, T. M. (2005). The art of hearing God: Absorption, dissociation, and contemporary American spirituality. Spiritus: A Journal of Christian Spirituality, 5(2), 133–157. https://doi.org/10.1353/scs.2006.0014 Luhrmann, T. M., Nusbaum, H., & Thisted, R. (2010). The absorption hypothesis: Learning to hear god in evangelical christianity. American Anthropologist, 112(1), 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1433.2009.01197.x Luhrmann, T. M., Nusbaum, H., & Thisted, R. (2013). “Lord, teach us to pray”: Prayer practice affects cognitive processing. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 13(1-2), 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685373-12342090 Radvansky, G., & Zacks, J. M. (2011). Event perception.Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2(6), 608– 620. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.133 Taves, A. (2016). Revelatory events: Three case studies of the emergence of new spiritual paths (1st ed.). Princeton University Press. Taves, A., & Asprem, E. (2017). Experience as event: Event cognition and the study of (religious) experiences. Religion, Brain & Behavior, 7(1), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2016.1150327 Whitehouse, H, & Lanman, J. A. (2014). The ties that bind us: Ritual, fusion, and identification. Current Anthropology, 55(6), 674–683. https://doi.org/10.1086/678698 Walsh, E., Oakley, D. A., Halligan, P. W., Mehta, M. A., & Deeley, Q. (2015). The functional anatomy and connectivity of thought insertion an","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87152408","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.1980426
Md. Rakib Hossain
ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of religiosity and supernatural beliefs on people's visitation to religious healers among the Muslim population using Pew World Muslim Dataset 2012 (N = 31,354). The result of multilevel level logistic regression reveals that religious Muslims are more likely to visit religious healers than non-religious Muslims. Individuals who believe in the supernatural (i.e., evil eye, witchcraft) and that making offerings to them is acceptable in Islam are more likely to visit religious healers than others. Also, a moderation effect indicates these same people are more likely to visit religious healers than religious individuals who do not believe in such supernatural forces. Individuals from lower economic strata and rural areas, females, and non-educated people are more likely to visit religious healers than others. This is the first quantitative study on determinants of people's visitation to religious healers. Limitations and practical implications of the study are also discussed.
{"title":"Impact of religiosity and supernatural belief on individuals’ visitation to religious healers","authors":"Md. Rakib Hossain","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.1980426","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.1980426","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of religiosity and supernatural beliefs on people's visitation to religious healers among the Muslim population using Pew World Muslim Dataset 2012 (N = 31,354). The result of multilevel level logistic regression reveals that religious Muslims are more likely to visit religious healers than non-religious Muslims. Individuals who believe in the supernatural (i.e., evil eye, witchcraft) and that making offerings to them is acceptable in Islam are more likely to visit religious healers than others. Also, a moderation effect indicates these same people are more likely to visit religious healers than religious individuals who do not believe in such supernatural forces. Individuals from lower economic strata and rural areas, females, and non-educated people are more likely to visit religious healers than others. This is the first quantitative study on determinants of people's visitation to religious healers. Limitations and practical implications of the study are also discussed.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72484570","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：