Pub Date : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006282
Caitlyn D. Placek, Aaron D. Lightner
ABSTRACT Cultural evolutionary approaches to religion have found that in small-scale societies, “local gods” (LGs) usually care about ritual, in-group cooperation, and ecological challenges, whereas in large-scale societies, “moralizing gods” (MGs) are more concerned with prosociality. In contrast, Hindu deities are considered aspects of one god, and urban regions include LGs, complicating the prevailing distinction. The current study investigated perceptions of deities in Mysore, India, among Hindus (N = 165) who primarily worship Shiva, a prototypical MG, and Chamundeshwari, the LG. Using surveys and experimental games, our results indicated that Chamundeshwari is perceived as possessing characteristics typical of both LGs and MGs. Furthermore, beliefs about Shiva as a moralizing and punitive god were associated with prosocial game allocations in three experimental economic games, but similar beliefs about Chamundeshwari were not. Participation in rituals for Shiva predicted allocations toward outgroup members in one game, whereas participation in rituals for Chamundeshwari predicted selfish allocations in one game. These mixed results demonstrate the challenges that demographic and cultural variation can impose on dichotomous models of deities to explain religious variation, and we offer directions for future research to better understand such complexity.
{"title":"Moralizing gods, local gods, and complexity in Hindu god concepts: evidence from South India","authors":"Caitlyn D. Placek, Aaron D. Lightner","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006282","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006282","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Cultural evolutionary approaches to religion have found that in small-scale societies, “local gods” (LGs) usually care about ritual, in-group cooperation, and ecological challenges, whereas in large-scale societies, “moralizing gods” (MGs) are more concerned with prosociality. In contrast, Hindu deities are considered aspects of one god, and urban regions include LGs, complicating the prevailing distinction. The current study investigated perceptions of deities in Mysore, India, among Hindus (N = 165) who primarily worship Shiva, a prototypical MG, and Chamundeshwari, the LG. Using surveys and experimental games, our results indicated that Chamundeshwari is perceived as possessing characteristics typical of both LGs and MGs. Furthermore, beliefs about Shiva as a moralizing and punitive god were associated with prosocial game allocations in three experimental economic games, but similar beliefs about Chamundeshwari were not. Participation in rituals for Shiva predicted allocations toward outgroup members in one game, whereas participation in rituals for Chamundeshwari predicted selfish allocations in one game. These mixed results demonstrate the challenges that demographic and cultural variation can impose on dichotomous models of deities to explain religious variation, and we offer directions for future research to better understand such complexity.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":"13 1","pages":"97 - 115"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88399872","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006285
Montserrat Soler, B. Purzycki, M. Lang
ABSTRACT Evolutionary theories suggest that gods of world religions are associated with moralizing qualities and impartial behavior toward co-religionists, and that secular authorities approximate this effect. However, there is a lack of theorizing and experimental studies regarding the influence of local religions on inter-personal conduct. In the current research, we obtained data on beliefs regarding the moralizing qualities of the Christian god, a local god (Ogum), and police in a sample from Northeastern Brazil (n = 193). We used these beliefs as predictors of behavior in Dictator Games where players distributed endowed money between anonymous individuals belonging to local and distant communities. We used subtle reminders of the Christian god, Ogum, and police to investigate their influence on game behavior. The correlational and priming results are mostly in agreement, revealing that: (a) the Christian god is perceived as most moralizing, but (b) has only limited impact on game behavior, while (c) adherence to Ogum is associated with ingroup favoritism, as is (d) priming with secular authority. These results illustrate the differential effects of belief in moralizing and local deities on extended prosociality but show that in specific contexts, secular authorities may emulate the effects of local rather than moralizing deities.
{"title":"Perceptions of moralizing agents and cooperative behavior in Northeastern Brazil","authors":"Montserrat Soler, B. Purzycki, M. Lang","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006285","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006285","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Evolutionary theories suggest that gods of world religions are associated with moralizing qualities and impartial behavior toward co-religionists, and that secular authorities approximate this effect. However, there is a lack of theorizing and experimental studies regarding the influence of local religions on inter-personal conduct. In the current research, we obtained data on beliefs regarding the moralizing qualities of the Christian god, a local god (Ogum), and police in a sample from Northeastern Brazil (n = 193). We used these beliefs as predictors of behavior in Dictator Games where players distributed endowed money between anonymous individuals belonging to local and distant communities. We used subtle reminders of the Christian god, Ogum, and police to investigate their influence on game behavior. The correlational and priming results are mostly in agreement, revealing that: (a) the Christian god is perceived as most moralizing, but (b) has only limited impact on game behavior, while (c) adherence to Ogum is associated with ingroup favoritism, as is (d) priming with secular authority. These results illustrate the differential effects of belief in moralizing and local deities on extended prosociality but show that in specific contexts, secular authorities may emulate the effects of local rather than moralizing deities.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":"40 1","pages":"132 - 149"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83108226","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006284
Alexander H. Bolyanatz
ABSTRACT The influence of religious beliefs on social complexity is a fairly straightforward account. The possibility of social life beyond a face-to-face community exists when supernaturally sanctioned prosocial moral norms include an expanding circle of humanity—that is, when non-kin are treated as kin. This paper describes an effort to gain a clearer picture of the ways in which belief in a moralistic deity affects people’s behavior toward others, including distant coreligionists and faraway strangers, using Dictator Game (DG) play among the Sursurunga of New Ireland, Papua New Guinea. The DG experiments employed two conditions: a Local God condition and a Big God condition. Two predictions were made about the recipients of greater allocations of money in the Big God condition: (1) a distant coreligionist over a member of one’s kin group, and (2) a faraway stranger over a distant coreligionist. A final prediction was that (3) all allocations to oneself would be lower in the Big God condition than in the Local God condition. Only predictions (2) and (3) were supported by the results. An unexpected and surprising outcome was that after playing DG, participants who kept more for themselves tended to view God as less moralistic and less punitive.
{"title":"When god is watching: dictator game results from the Sursurunga of New Ireland, Papua New Guinea","authors":"Alexander H. Bolyanatz","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006284","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006284","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The influence of religious beliefs on social complexity is a fairly straightforward account. The possibility of social life beyond a face-to-face community exists when supernaturally sanctioned prosocial moral norms include an expanding circle of humanity—that is, when non-kin are treated as kin. This paper describes an effort to gain a clearer picture of the ways in which belief in a moralistic deity affects people’s behavior toward others, including distant coreligionists and faraway strangers, using Dictator Game (DG) play among the Sursurunga of New Ireland, Papua New Guinea. The DG experiments employed two conditions: a Local God condition and a Big God condition. Two predictions were made about the recipients of greater allocations of money in the Big God condition: (1) a distant coreligionist over a member of one’s kin group, and (2) a faraway stranger over a distant coreligionist. A final prediction was that (3) all allocations to oneself would be lower in the Big God condition than in the Local God condition. Only predictions (2) and (3) were supported by the results. An unexpected and surprising outcome was that after playing DG, participants who kept more for themselves tended to view God as less moralistic and less punitive.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":"78 4 1","pages":"61 - 78"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83493279","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006291
B. Purzycki, A. Willard, E. Klocová, C. Apicella, Q. Atkinson, Alexander H. Bolyanatz, Emma Cohen, C. Handley, J. Henrich, M. Lang, C. Lesorogol, Sarah Mathew, R. McNamara, Cristina Moya, A. Norenzayan, Caitlyn D. Placek, Montserrat Soler, Tom Vardy, Jonathan L. Weigel, D. Xygalatas, Cody T Ross
ABSTRACT There are compelling reasons to expect that cognitively representing any active, powerful deity motivates cooperative behavior. One mechanism underlying this association could be a cognitive bias toward generally attributing moral concern to anthropomorphic agents. If humans cognitively represent the minds of deities and humans in the same way, and if human agents are generally conceptualized as having moral concern, a broad tendency to attribute moral concern—a “moralization bias”—to supernatural deities follows. Using data from 2,228 individuals in 15 different field sites, we test for the existence of such a bias. We find that people are indeed more likely than chance to indicate that local deities care about punishing theft, murder, and deceit. This effect is stable even after holding beliefs about explicitly moralistic deities constant. Additionally, we take a close look at data collected among Hadza foragers and find two of their deities to be morally interested. There is no evidence to suggest that this effect is due to direct missionary contact. We posit that the “moralization bias of gods’ minds” is part of a widespread but variable religious phenotype, and a candidate mechanism that contributes to the well-recognized association between religion and cooperation.
{"title":"The moralization bias of gods’ minds: a cross-cultural test","authors":"B. Purzycki, A. Willard, E. Klocová, C. Apicella, Q. Atkinson, Alexander H. Bolyanatz, Emma Cohen, C. Handley, J. Henrich, M. Lang, C. Lesorogol, Sarah Mathew, R. McNamara, Cristina Moya, A. Norenzayan, Caitlyn D. Placek, Montserrat Soler, Tom Vardy, Jonathan L. Weigel, D. Xygalatas, Cody T Ross","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006291","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006291","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT There are compelling reasons to expect that cognitively representing any active, powerful deity motivates cooperative behavior. One mechanism underlying this association could be a cognitive bias toward generally attributing moral concern to anthropomorphic agents. If humans cognitively represent the minds of deities and humans in the same way, and if human agents are generally conceptualized as having moral concern, a broad tendency to attribute moral concern—a “moralization bias”—to supernatural deities follows. Using data from 2,228 individuals in 15 different field sites, we test for the existence of such a bias. We find that people are indeed more likely than chance to indicate that local deities care about punishing theft, murder, and deceit. This effect is stable even after holding beliefs about explicitly moralistic deities constant. Additionally, we take a close look at data collected among Hadza foragers and find two of their deities to be morally interested. There is no evidence to suggest that this effect is due to direct missionary contact. We posit that the “moralization bias of gods’ minds” is part of a widespread but variable religious phenotype, and a candidate mechanism that contributes to the well-recognized association between religion and cooperation.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":"69 1","pages":"38 - 60"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74623396","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006292
Tom Vardy, Cristina Moya, Caitlyn D. Placek, C. Apicella, Alexander H. Bolyanatz, Emma Cohen, C. Handley, E. Kundtová Klocová, C. Lesorogol, Sarah Mathew, Sarah A. McNamara, B. Purzycki, Montserrat Soler, Jonathan L. Weigel, A. Willard, D. Xygalatas, A. Norenzayan, J. Henrich, M. Lang, Q. Atkinson
ABSTRACT Scholars of religion have long sought to explain the persistent finding that women tend to report greater religiosity than men. However, the size of this “gender gap” may depend on the measure of religiosity employed, the religious tradition being sampled, and socio-demographic factors. Here, we conduct a systematic cross-cultural investigation into the prevalence of, and explanations for, the religiosity gender gap in 2,002 individuals from 14 diverse societies. While variation exists across societies, women in general indicate greater mental commitment (i.e., thinking and worrying more about) to their community’s moralistic god, more frequent participation in rituals for their community’s moralistic god, and more frequent prayer. While we find that the gender gap extends beyond the Christian world, no such difference was seen in religious commitment towards more local gods, to which men tend to show greater commitment. Tentative support is provided for explanations relating gender differences in religiosity to lower formal education and greater mentalizing among women, however an explanation for greater religious commitment to local gods among men remains elusive. Nevertheless, our data suggest that the moralizing gods of some contemporary world religions, unlike local deities and traditions, have evolved in ways that make them more appealing to women.
{"title":"The religiosity gender gap in 14 diverse societies","authors":"Tom Vardy, Cristina Moya, Caitlyn D. Placek, C. Apicella, Alexander H. Bolyanatz, Emma Cohen, C. Handley, E. Kundtová Klocová, C. Lesorogol, Sarah Mathew, Sarah A. McNamara, B. Purzycki, Montserrat Soler, Jonathan L. Weigel, A. Willard, D. Xygalatas, A. Norenzayan, J. Henrich, M. Lang, Q. Atkinson","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006292","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006292","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Scholars of religion have long sought to explain the persistent finding that women tend to report greater religiosity than men. However, the size of this “gender gap” may depend on the measure of religiosity employed, the religious tradition being sampled, and socio-demographic factors. Here, we conduct a systematic cross-cultural investigation into the prevalence of, and explanations for, the religiosity gender gap in 2,002 individuals from 14 diverse societies. While variation exists across societies, women in general indicate greater mental commitment (i.e., thinking and worrying more about) to their community’s moralistic god, more frequent participation in rituals for their community’s moralistic god, and more frequent prayer. While we find that the gender gap extends beyond the Christian world, no such difference was seen in religious commitment towards more local gods, to which men tend to show greater commitment. Tentative support is provided for explanations relating gender differences in religiosity to lower formal education and greater mentalizing among women, however an explanation for greater religious commitment to local gods among men remains elusive. Nevertheless, our data suggest that the moralizing gods of some contemporary world religions, unlike local deities and traditions, have evolved in ways that make them more appealing to women.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":"35 1","pages":"18 - 37"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91118602","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2021551
Rebekah A. Richert
The Evolution of Religion and Morality project highlights the critical need for, and signi fi cant chal-lenges in, building and executing global research e ff orts that are both rigorous and meaningful. Although this special issue is meant to signal the conclusion of this research e ff ort, the authors are candid that the Evolution of Religion and Morality project raises perhaps more questions than it has yet answered about the nature of belief in moralizing gods and the evolution of morality. The project also raises the need for clarity in research programs that incorporate variation in cultural beliefs and practices.
{"title":"Depth vs. breadth: lessons from the Evolution of Religion and Morality project","authors":"Rebekah A. Richert","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.2021551","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2021551","url":null,"abstract":"The Evolution of Religion and Morality project highlights the critical need for, and signi fi cant chal-lenges in, building and executing global research e ff orts that are both rigorous and meaningful. Although this special issue is meant to signal the conclusion of this research e ff ort, the authors are candid that the Evolution of Religion and Morality project raises perhaps more questions than it has yet answered about the nature of belief in moralizing gods and the evolution of morality. The project also raises the need for clarity in research programs that incorporate variation in cultural beliefs and practices.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":"22 1","pages":"221 - 223"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76597703","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006290
Tom Vardy, Q. Atkinson
ABSTRACT The co-existence of Christian and indigenous “Kastom” belief systems on Tanna Island, Vanuatu provides a rare opportunity to explore the relationship between cooperation and religion. Here, we use data on religious beliefs and practices, religious priming, and four versions of a dictator game at two sites—one predominantly Christian and one predominantly Kastom—to test a suite of hypotheses linking prosocial behavior to beliefs about and commitment to both a powerful moralistic god and a less morally concerned local supernatural force. We found belief that the moralistic god was more punitive did not predict increased giving towards co-religionists but did predict giving more to a religious outgroup member over a co-religionist. Belief that the moralistic god was more rewarding predicted less giving towards a distant coreligionist or outgroup member. Religious commitment predicted giving to a distant coreligionist over someone from one's own village. We did not find any effect of beliefs about and commitment to less morally-concerned local supernatural forces on giving. We also did not find the predicted effects of religious priming on giving. These findings suggest a more complex relationship between religious beliefs and prosocial behavior than current theory can accommodate.
{"title":"Moralistic and local god beliefs and the extent of prosocial preferences on Tanna Island, Vanuatu","authors":"Tom Vardy, Q. Atkinson","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006290","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006290","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The co-existence of Christian and indigenous “Kastom” belief systems on Tanna Island, Vanuatu provides a rare opportunity to explore the relationship between cooperation and religion. Here, we use data on religious beliefs and practices, religious priming, and four versions of a dictator game at two sites—one predominantly Christian and one predominantly Kastom—to test a suite of hypotheses linking prosocial behavior to beliefs about and commitment to both a powerful moralistic god and a less morally concerned local supernatural force. We found belief that the moralistic god was more punitive did not predict increased giving towards co-religionists but did predict giving more to a religious outgroup member over a co-religionist. Belief that the moralistic god was more rewarding predicted less giving towards a distant coreligionist or outgroup member. Religious commitment predicted giving to a distant coreligionist over someone from one's own village. We did not find any effect of beliefs about and commitment to less morally-concerned local supernatural forces on giving. We also did not find the predicted effects of religious priming on giving. These findings suggest a more complex relationship between religious beliefs and prosocial behavior than current theory can accommodate.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":"66 1","pages":"79 - 96"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80231920","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2021546
B. Purzycki, M. Lang, J. Henrich, A. Norenzayan
ABSTRACT This special issue marks the formal end to the Evolution of Religion and Morality project and highlights the overall findings with particular attention to our second wave of data collection. In this concluding article, we first briefly detail how the project came about and how it developed. We then catalogue our contributions, summarizing the empirical results of key synthetic investigations that were part of the overall project. In an effort to shed some light on issues future researchers might benefit from knowing about, we also discuss some of the limitations and problems in design and execution of our effort. We conclude with a discussion of current, ongoing works, and our vision for the future of the cognitive and evolutionary studies of religion.
{"title":"The Evolution of Religion and Morality project: reflections and looking ahead","authors":"B. Purzycki, M. Lang, J. Henrich, A. Norenzayan","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.2021546","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2021546","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This special issue marks the formal end to the Evolution of Religion and Morality project and highlights the overall findings with particular attention to our second wave of data collection. In this concluding article, we first briefly detail how the project came about and how it developed. We then catalogue our contributions, summarizing the empirical results of key synthetic investigations that were part of the overall project. In an effort to shed some light on issues future researchers might benefit from knowing about, we also discuss some of the limitations and problems in design and execution of our effort. We conclude with a discussion of current, ongoing works, and our vision for the future of the cognitive and evolutionary studies of religion.","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":"81 1","pages":"190 - 211"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86096632","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2022.2038096
R. Sosis, Joseph A. Bulbulia, W. Wildman, U. Schjoedt, J. Shaver
This special double issue, Religion, Brain & Behavior’s first ever double issue, presents results from the second phase of the Evolution of Religion and Morality (ERM) project. Results from the first phase of this pioneering and influential project were published in a previous special issue of RBB (2018, volume 8, issue 2) and elsewhere (e.g., Purzycki et al., 2016). The core of this second wave of research employs experimental games—the Dictator Game and Random Allocation Game—as well as demographic and economic data to explore the relationship between beliefs in particular types of supernatural agents and cooperative behavior. Similar to the previous RBB special issue on the ERM project, this issue presents independent articles on each of the field sites from the project. These articles allowed the ERM researchers to describe the cultural and historical context of their field studies, and offered an opportunity to conduct more rigorous intra-field site analyses in ways that were not possible in the synthetic cross-cultural study previously published with the second-wave data (Lang et al., 2019). Each of these studies explores ethnographically-derived questions that afford rich insights about the subsistence, ecological, and economic variation in the collective ERM data set. In addition to these experimental and interview studies, this issue also offers four new synthetic pieces. First, Baimel et al. analyze the relationship between religious commitments and material insecurity. They show that across the 15 ERM field sites, Christian sites exhibit the strongest relationship between religious commitment and belief in a moralizing god, and this relationship is positively predicted by material insecurity. Second, Vardy et al. use the collective ERM data set to explore the oft-cited gender gap in which women exhibit higher levels of religious commitment than men. Consistent with previous research, the ERM findings support a religious gender gap. However, this gap only arises for traditions with a moralizing god. Women do not exhibit greater religious commitments in traditions that worship local gods. Third, Purzycki et al. assess whether the supernatural agents that elicit commitments across the 15 field sites are interested in human morality. As anticipated, even when “official” or “theologically correct” claims deny that the gods maintain moral interest, across the ERM field sites study participants inferred that their gods, even local gods, were generally interested in their moral actions. In the final paper of this special issue, Purzcyki et al. wrap up the 10-year ERM project with a summary target article that examines the methodological and analytic challenges of a large multi-field site cross-disciplinary study. This article assesses the strengths and limitations of both phases of the ERM project, as well as offers advice for researchers aiming to pursue similarly ambitious projects. It provides a rare glimpse into the behind-the-scenes machi
《宗教，大脑与行为》是《宗教，大脑与行为》的第一期双刊，本期特刊介绍了宗教与道德进化(ERM)项目第二阶段的研究结果。这个开创性和有影响力的项目的第一阶段的结果发表在RBB的上一期特刊(2018年，第8卷，第2期)和其他地方(例如，Purzycki等人，2016年)。第二波研究的核心是利用实验游戏——独裁者游戏和随机分配游戏——以及人口和经济数据来探索特定类型的超自然行为者的信仰与合作行为之间的关系。与之前关于ERM项目的RBB特刊类似，这期特刊提供了关于项目中每个现场站点的独立文章。这些文章使ERM研究人员能够描述他们实地研究的文化和历史背景，并提供了一个机会，以先前用第二波数据发表的综合跨文化研究无法实现的方式进行更严格的实地现场分析(Lang et al.， 2019)。这些研究中的每一项都探索了民族志衍生的问题，这些问题为集体ERM数据集中的生存、生态和经济变化提供了丰富的见解。除了这些实验和访谈研究外，本期还提供了四个新的合成片段。首先，Baimel等人分析了宗教承诺与物质不安全感之间的关系。他们发现，在15个ERM研究地点中，基督教地点在宗教承诺和对道德上帝的信仰之间表现出最强的关系，这种关系与物质不安全感呈正相关。其次，Vardy等人使用集体ERM数据集来探索经常被引用的性别差距，其中女性表现出比男性更高的宗教承诺水平。与之前的研究一致，ERM的研究结果支持宗教上的性别差异。然而，这种差距只会出现在有道德上帝的传统中。在崇拜当地神灵的传统中，女性没有表现出更大的宗教信仰。第三，Purzycki等人评估了在15个实地地点引发承诺的超自然主体是否对人类道德感兴趣。正如预期的那样，即使“官方”或“神学上正确”的说法否认神保持道德利益，在整个ERM现场研究的参与者推断，他们的神，甚至是当地的神，通常对他们的道德行为感兴趣。在本期特刊的最后一篇论文中，Purzcyki等人用一篇总结性的目标文章总结了10年的ERM项目，该文章研究了一项大型多领域跨学科研究的方法和分析挑战。本文评估了ERM项目的两个阶段的优势和局限性，并为致力于类似雄心勃勃的项目的研究人员提供了建议。它提供了对长期大规模研究努力的幕后阴谋的罕见一瞥。我们从人类学、认知科学、哲学和心理学等五位宗教科学研究领域的知名学者那里获得了评论，对这篇文章和ERM项目进行了总体评论。本期特刊最后对Purzycki等人的评论进行了回应。ERM对宗教生物文化研究的影响，尤其是对宗教学术研究的影响，才刚刚开始。除了他们的研究结果引发的各种学术辩论外，ERM还加强了旨在理解宗教表达、承诺和行为变化的跨文化项目的趋势。的确，科学研究
{"title":"Introducing a special issue on phase two of the Evolution of Religion and Morality project","authors":"R. Sosis, Joseph A. Bulbulia, W. Wildman, U. Schjoedt, J. Shaver","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2022.2038096","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2022.2038096","url":null,"abstract":"This special double issue, Religion, Brain & Behavior’s first ever double issue, presents results from the second phase of the Evolution of Religion and Morality (ERM) project. Results from the first phase of this pioneering and influential project were published in a previous special issue of RBB (2018, volume 8, issue 2) and elsewhere (e.g., Purzycki et al., 2016). The core of this second wave of research employs experimental games—the Dictator Game and Random Allocation Game—as well as demographic and economic data to explore the relationship between beliefs in particular types of supernatural agents and cooperative behavior. Similar to the previous RBB special issue on the ERM project, this issue presents independent articles on each of the field sites from the project. These articles allowed the ERM researchers to describe the cultural and historical context of their field studies, and offered an opportunity to conduct more rigorous intra-field site analyses in ways that were not possible in the synthetic cross-cultural study previously published with the second-wave data (Lang et al., 2019). Each of these studies explores ethnographically-derived questions that afford rich insights about the subsistence, ecological, and economic variation in the collective ERM data set. In addition to these experimental and interview studies, this issue also offers four new synthetic pieces. First, Baimel et al. analyze the relationship between religious commitments and material insecurity. They show that across the 15 ERM field sites, Christian sites exhibit the strongest relationship between religious commitment and belief in a moralizing god, and this relationship is positively predicted by material insecurity. Second, Vardy et al. use the collective ERM data set to explore the oft-cited gender gap in which women exhibit higher levels of religious commitment than men. Consistent with previous research, the ERM findings support a religious gender gap. However, this gap only arises for traditions with a moralizing god. Women do not exhibit greater religious commitments in traditions that worship local gods. Third, Purzycki et al. assess whether the supernatural agents that elicit commitments across the 15 field sites are interested in human morality. As anticipated, even when “official” or “theologically correct” claims deny that the gods maintain moral interest, across the ERM field sites study participants inferred that their gods, even local gods, were generally interested in their moral actions. In the final paper of this special issue, Purzcyki et al. wrap up the 10-year ERM project with a summary target article that examines the methodological and analytic challenges of a large multi-field site cross-disciplinary study. This article assesses the strengths and limitations of both phases of the ERM project, as well as offers advice for researchers aiming to pursue similarly ambitious projects. It provides a rare glimpse into the behind-the-scenes machi","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":"23 1","pages":"1 - 3"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86561380","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2021548
T. Luhrmann
A., & Henrich, J. (2016). Moralistic gods, supernatural punishment and the expansion of human sociality. Nature, 530(7590), 327–330. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16980 Roos, P., Gelfand, M., Nau, D., & Lun, J. (2015). Societal threat and cultural variation in the strength of social norms: An evolutionary basis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 129, 14–23. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.obhdp.2015.01.003 Swanson, G. E. (1960). The birth of the gods: The origin of primitive beliefs (Vol. 93). University of Michigan Press. Watts, J., Bulbulia, J., Gray, R. D., & Atkinson, Q. D. (2016). Clarity and causality needed in claims about big Gods. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X15000576 Watts, J., Greenhill, S. J., Atkinson, Q. D., Currie, T. E., Bulbulia, J., & Gray, R. D. (2015). Broad supernatural punishment but not moralizing high gods precede the evolution of political complexity in Austronesia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282(1804), 20142556. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.2556 Watts, J., Sheehan, O., Bulbulia, J., Gray, R. D., & Atkinson, Q. D. (2018). Christianity spread faster in small, politically structured societies. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(8), 559–564. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0379-3
{"title":"Big comparison","authors":"T. Luhrmann","doi":"10.1080/2153599X.2021.2021548","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2021548","url":null,"abstract":"A., & Henrich, J. (2016). Moralistic gods, supernatural punishment and the expansion of human sociality. Nature, 530(7590), 327–330. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16980 Roos, P., Gelfand, M., Nau, D., & Lun, J. (2015). Societal threat and cultural variation in the strength of social norms: An evolutionary basis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 129, 14–23. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.obhdp.2015.01.003 Swanson, G. E. (1960). The birth of the gods: The origin of primitive beliefs (Vol. 93). University of Michigan Press. Watts, J., Bulbulia, J., Gray, R. D., & Atkinson, Q. D. (2016). Clarity and causality needed in claims about big Gods. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X15000576 Watts, J., Greenhill, S. J., Atkinson, Q. D., Currie, T. E., Bulbulia, J., & Gray, R. D. (2015). Broad supernatural punishment but not moralizing high gods precede the evolution of political complexity in Austronesia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282(1804), 20142556. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.2556 Watts, J., Sheehan, O., Bulbulia, J., Gray, R. D., & Atkinson, Q. D. (2018). Christianity spread faster in small, politically structured societies. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(8), 559–564. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0379-3","PeriodicalId":45959,"journal":{"name":"Religion Brain & Behavior","volume":"62 1","pages":"219 - 221"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73592840","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：