{"title":"Supplemental Material for Religious and Spiritual Struggles Around the 2016 and 2020 U.S. Presidential Elections","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/rel0000449.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000449.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47450,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality","volume":"128 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87636310","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Julie J. Exline, J. Wilt, Nick Stauner, K. Pargament
{"title":"Approach, disengagement, protest, and suppression: Four behaviors toward God in the context of religious/spiritual struggle.","authors":"Julie J. Exline, J. Wilt, Nick Stauner, K. Pargament","doi":"10.1037/rel0000445","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000445","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47450,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82440769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for Approach, Disengagement, Protest, and Suppression: Four Behaviors Toward God in the Context of Religious/Spiritual Struggle","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/rel0000445.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000445.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47450,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality","volume":"133 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76661312","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jennifer E. Brown, V. van Mulukom, S. Charles, M. Farias
{"title":"Do you need religion to enjoy the benefits of Church services? Social bonding, morality and quality of life among religious and secular congregations.","authors":"Jennifer E. Brown, V. van Mulukom, S. Charles, M. Farias","doi":"10.1037/rel0000447","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000447","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47450,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality","volume":"155 2-4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72482194","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Secular worldviews are widespread and growing. What are the differences between secular self-identi fi cations? This study examined if self-identi fi ed atheists, agnostics, and humanists differed systematically with regard to worldview dimensions. Cultural and gender effects were examined as secondary study objectives. A total of 1,814nonreligiousindividualsfromGermany,Austria,andtheNetherlandscompletedquestionnairesmeasuringdegreesofatheism,agnosticism,humanism,personalresponsibility,scientism,economicmaterialism,skepticism,dogmatism,existentialsearch,andconcealmentanddisclosureofconvictions.Asexpected,self-identi fi ed atheists,agnostics,andhumanistsdifferedsubstantiallyintheirworldviewpositionsandcommunication.Acrossallthreecountries,atheistsendorsedatheismtoaveryhighdegree.Comparedtoagnosticsandhumanists,they were more convinced of scientism and less of skepticism. Agnostics scored highest in agnosticism and skepticism and lowest in dogmatism. Humanists mostly held distinguishable middle positions between atheists and agnostics. Analyses of cultural differences supported the hypothesis that more religious contexts give rise to secular countermovements: In (more religious/less secular) Austria and Germany, atheism, scientism, personal responsibility, and disclosure were more pronounced than in the (secular) Netherlands, where agnosticism and skepticismweremoreprevalent.Regardinggender,menscoredhigheronatheismandscientism,andwomenon skepticism. The fi ndings suggest a continuum from decided to open secularity, two clearly distinct positions. Decided (atheist, scientist, disclosing) secularity was more common among self-identi fi ed atheists, men, and in morereligiouscontexts.Open(agnostic,skeptic)secularitywasmoreprominentamongself-identi fi edagnostics, women, and in the more secular culture. Self-identi fi ed humanists occupied a middle position.
{"title":"Worlds apart? Atheist, agnostic, and humanist worldviews in three European countries.","authors":"T. Schnell, Elpine de Boer, H. Alma","doi":"10.1037/rel0000446","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000446","url":null,"abstract":"Secular worldviews are widespread and growing. What are the differences between secular self-identi fi cations? This study examined if self-identi fi ed atheists, agnostics, and humanists differed systematically with regard to worldview dimensions. Cultural and gender effects were examined as secondary study objectives. A total of 1,814nonreligiousindividualsfromGermany,Austria,andtheNetherlandscompletedquestionnairesmeasuringdegreesofatheism,agnosticism,humanism,personalresponsibility,scientism,economicmaterialism,skepticism,dogmatism,existentialsearch,andconcealmentanddisclosureofconvictions.Asexpected,self-identi fi ed atheists,agnostics,andhumanistsdifferedsubstantiallyintheirworldviewpositionsandcommunication.Acrossallthreecountries,atheistsendorsedatheismtoaveryhighdegree.Comparedtoagnosticsandhumanists,they were more convinced of scientism and less of skepticism. Agnostics scored highest in agnosticism and skepticism and lowest in dogmatism. Humanists mostly held distinguishable middle positions between atheists and agnostics. Analyses of cultural differences supported the hypothesis that more religious contexts give rise to secular countermovements: In (more religious/less secular) Austria and Germany, atheism, scientism, personal responsibility, and disclosure were more pronounced than in the (secular) Netherlands, where agnosticism and skepticismweremoreprevalent.Regardinggender,menscoredhigheronatheismandscientism,andwomenon skepticism. The fi ndings suggest a continuum from decided to open secularity, two clearly distinct positions. Decided (atheist, scientist, disclosing) secularity was more common among self-identi fi ed atheists, men, and in morereligiouscontexts.Open(agnostic,skeptic)secularitywasmoreprominentamongself-identi fi edagnostics, women, and in the more secular culture. Self-identi fi ed humanists occupied a middle position.","PeriodicalId":47450,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89808772","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Julie J. Exline, J. Wilt, Nick Stauner, William A. Schutt, K. Pargament, F. Fincham, R. May
How do people decide whether a supernatural entity (God, the devil, ghosts/spirits, fate/destiny, karma, or luck) has intervened in their lives? Their decisions may depend partly on how well the event fits with beliefs about the entity’s supernatural operating rules, such as the entity’s power, scope of communication, and intent. We examined these ideas among undergraduates from three U.S. universities (N = 3840). To assess beliefs about power, we asked questions like these: Do you believe that God has the power to violate natural laws and to work indirectly through nature? Can the devil affect many parts of people’s lives, such as thoughts, relationships, and health? To assess beliefs about scope of communication, we asked about frequency (How often do ghosts/spirits try to communicate with people?), breadth (Does God try to communicate with many people, or just a few?), and modes (Does the devil communicate in multiple ways?). To assess intent, we asked about positive, negative, and justice-maintaining intentions ascribed to the entities. God was clearly seen as most powerful and intentional, with the broadest scope of communication. In most ways, ghosts/spirits were rated least influential. Impersonal forces and the devil were rated between God and ghosts/spirits in terms of influence. Correlations and regressions confirmed that beliefs about power, scope of communication, and intent all predicted more perceived experiences with entities. These findings, coupled with other research on supernatural beliefs and attributions, help to explain why some people perceive high levels of supernatural activity and communication while others do not. (250 words)
{"title":"Supernatural operating rules: How people envision and experience God, the devil, ghosts/spirits, fate/destiny, karma, and luck.","authors":"Julie J. Exline, J. Wilt, Nick Stauner, William A. Schutt, K. Pargament, F. Fincham, R. May","doi":"10.1037/rel0000444","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000444","url":null,"abstract":"How do people decide whether a supernatural entity (God, the devil, ghosts/spirits, fate/destiny, karma, or luck) has intervened in their lives? Their decisions may depend partly on how well the event fits with beliefs about the entity’s supernatural operating rules, such as the entity’s power, scope of communication, and intent. We examined these ideas among undergraduates from three U.S. universities (N = 3840). To assess beliefs about power, we asked questions like these: Do you believe that God has the power to violate natural laws and to work indirectly through nature? Can the devil affect many parts of people’s lives, such as thoughts, relationships, and health? To assess beliefs about scope of communication, we asked about frequency (How often do ghosts/spirits try to communicate with people?), breadth (Does God try to communicate with many people, or just a few?), and modes (Does the devil communicate in multiple ways?). To assess intent, we asked about positive, negative, and justice-maintaining intentions ascribed to the entities. God was clearly seen as most powerful and intentional, with the broadest scope of communication. In most ways, ghosts/spirits were rated least influential. Impersonal forces and the devil were rated between God and ghosts/spirits in terms of influence. Correlations and regressions confirmed that beliefs about power, scope of communication, and intent all predicted more perceived experiences with entities. These findings, coupled with other research on supernatural beliefs and attributions, help to explain why some people perceive high levels of supernatural activity and communication while others do not. (250 words)","PeriodicalId":47450,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75039378","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A longitudinal investigation of religious prosociality: What predicts it and who benefits?","authors":"P. Reddish, E. M. Tong","doi":"10.1037/rel0000442","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000442","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47450,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88299908","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for A Longitudinal Investigation of Religious Prosociality: What Predicts It and Who Benefits?","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/rel0000442.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000442.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47450,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality","volume":"72 5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84722009","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Elisabeth R. Kimball, L. Marks, D. Dollahite, Chelom E. Leavitt, H. Kelley
{"title":"Why do the devout remain devoted? Exploring religious expectations and relational compensators.","authors":"Elisabeth R. Kimball, L. Marks, D. Dollahite, Chelom E. Leavitt, H. Kelley","doi":"10.1037/rel0000439","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000439","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47450,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality","volume":"31 2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82950047","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"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：