scholarly journals The Origins of Religious Disbelief: A Dual Inheritance Approach

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Will M Gervais ◽  
Maxine Belén Najle ◽  
Nava Caluori
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Transmission ◽  
Religious Commitment ◽  
Dual Roles ◽  
Cognitive Reflection ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Cultural Exposure ◽  
Theories Of Religion ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
Cultural Cues ◽  
Dual Inheritance

Widespread religious disbelief represents a key testing ground for theories of religion. We evaluated the predictions of three prominent theoretical approaches – secularization, cognitive byproduct, and dual inheritance – in a nationally representative (USA, N = 1417) dataset with preregistered analyses, and found considerable support for the dual inheritance perspective. Of key predictors of religious disbelief, witnessing fewer credible cultural cues of religious commitment was the most potent, β = 0.28, followed distantly by reflective cognitive style, β = 0.13, and less advanced mentalizing, β = 0.05. Low cultural exposure predicted about 90% higher odds of atheism than did peak cognitive reflection, and cognitive reflection only predicted disbelief among those relatively low in cultural exposure to religion. This highlights the utility of considering both evolved intuitions and transmitted culture, and emphasizes the dual roles of content- and context-biased social learning in the cultural transmission of disbelief.

scholarly journals The Origins of Religious Disbelief: A Dual Inheritance Approach

2021 ◽  
pp. 194855062199400 ◽  
Author(s):  
Will M. Gervais ◽  
Maxine B. Najle ◽  
Nava Caluori
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Transmission ◽  
Religious Commitment ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Cognitive Reflection ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Cultural Exposure ◽  
Theories Of Religion ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
Cultural Cues ◽  
Dual Inheritance

Widespread religious disbelief represents a key testing ground for theories of religion. We evaluated the predictions of three prominent theoretical approaches—secularization, cognitive byproduct, and dual inheritance—in a nationally representative (United States, N = 1,417) data set with preregistered analyses and found considerable support for the dual inheritance perspective. Of key predictors of religious disbelief, witnessing fewer credible cultural cues of religious commitment was the most potent, β = .28, followed distantly by reflective cognitive style, β = .13, and less advanced mentalizing, β = .05. Low cultural exposure predicted about 90% higher odds of atheism than did peak cognitive reflection, and cognitive reflection only predicted disbelief among those relatively low in cultural exposure to religion. This highlights the utility of considering both evolved intuitions and transmitted culture and emphasizes the dual roles of content- and context-biased social learning in the cultural transmission of disbelief (preprint https://psyarxiv.com/e29rt/ ).

scholarly journals How many atheists are there?

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Will M Gervais ◽  
Maxine Belén Najle
Keyword(s):  
Bayesian Estimation ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Prevalence Estimates ◽  
Theories Of Religion ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
Representative Samples

One crucible for theories of religion is their ability to predict and explain patterns of belief and disbelief. Yet, religious nonbelief is often heavily stigmatized, potentially leading many atheists to refrain from outing themselves even in anonymous polls. We used the unmatched count technique and Bayesian estimation to indirectly estimate atheist prevalence in two nationally representative samples of 2000 U.S. adults apiece. Widely-cited telephone polls (e.g., Gallup, Pew) suggest USA atheist prevalence of only 3-11%. In contrast, our most credible indirect estimate is 26% (albeit with considerable estimate and method uncertainty). Our data and model predict that atheist prevalence exceeds 11% with greater than .99 probability, and exceeds 20% with roughly .8 probability. Prevalence estimates of 11% were even less credible than estimates of 40%, and all intermediate estimates were more credible. Some popular theoretical approaches to religious cognition may require heavy revision to accommodate actual levels of religious disbelief.

scholarly journals How Many Atheists Are There?

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Will M. Gervais ◽  
Maxine B. Najle
Keyword(s):  
Bayesian Estimation ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Prevalence Estimates ◽  
Theories Of Religion ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
Representative Samples

One crucible for theories of religion is their ability to predict and explain the patterns of belief and disbelief. Yet, religious nonbelief is often heavily stigmatized, potentially leading many atheists to refrain from outing themselves even in anonymous polls. We used the unmatched count technique and Bayesian estimation to indirectly estimate atheist prevalence in two nationally representative samples of 2,000 U.S. adults apiece. Widely cited telephone polls (e.g., Gallup, Pew) suggest U.S. atheist prevalence of only 3–11%. In contrast, our most credible indirect estimate is 26% (albeit with considerable estimate and method uncertainty). Our data and model predict that atheist prevalence exceeds 11% with greater than .99 probability and exceeds 20% with roughly .8 probability. Prevalence estimates of 11% were even less credible than estimates of 40%, and all intermediate estimates were more credible. Some popular theoretical approaches to religious cognition may require heavy revision to accommodate actual levels of religious disbelief.

scholarly journals To Conscience First, and to the Pope (Long) Afterwards? British Catholics and Their Attitudes Towards Morality and Structural Issues Concerning the Catholic Church

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Clements ◽  
Stephen Bullivant
Keyword(s):  
Catholic Church ◽  
Religious Commitment ◽  
Roman Catholic ◽  
Religious Community ◽  
Roman Catholic Church ◽  
Personal Morality ◽  
Sources Of Variation ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
The Church ◽  
The Catholic Church

Abstract Background The attitudes of Catholics in Britain have undergone significant liberalisation on social moral issues across recent decades, whilst the reputation of the Catholic Church has suffered due to public opposition to its traditional teachings on such issues. But there has been comparatively little recent investigation into British Catholics’ views on these debates using surveys aimed at this religious community. Purpose This article examines the sources of attitudinal heterogeneity amongst Catholics in Britain on core debates affecting the Catholic Church. The aims are to examine, firstly, which groups within the British Catholic Community are more likely to conform to or to dissent from the Church’s teachings and, secondly, whether the socio-demographic and religious correlates of attitudes vary across different types of issue. Methods This article uses a new, nationally representative survey of Catholic adults in Britain (n = 1823). The survey is used to examine the sources of variation in Catholics’ attitudes towards a range of issues relating to the Roman Catholic Church. These issues relate to the priesthood, personal morality, and sinful behaviours. OLS models are used to assesses the relative impact of socio-demographic, religious socialisation, and religious commitment variables. Results The findings show that women are consistently more liberal in their views than men. Greater religious commitment is always associated with support for the traditional teachings of the Church. Conclusions and Implications Exploring the sources of attitudinal heterogeneity among Catholics, we provide new insights into the internal dynamics of ‘Britain’s largest minority’. We conclude by discussing the potential effects of increasing ‘nonversion’ for interpreting religious statistics—a topic of relevance beyond the denominational and geographical confines of this study’s explicit focus.

To What Extent Is Trust a Prerequisite for Charitable Giving? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 089976402110032
Author(s):  
Cassandra M. Chapman ◽  
Matthew J. Hornsey ◽  
Nicole Gillespie
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Charitable Giving ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Actual Behavior ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Representative Samples

Trust is assumed to be important for charitable giving. However, disparate associations have been found, and recent theoretical approaches emphasize motives for giving that do not rely on trust. To resolve this tension, we conducted a systematic review of evidence generated between 1988 and 2020. A meta-analysis of 69 effect sizes from 42 studies sampling 81,604 people in 31 countries confirmed a positive association between trust and giving across diverse measures, r = .22. Meta-regressions showed that organizational ( r = .35) and sectoral trust ( r = .27) were more strongly associated with giving than were generalized ( r = .11) or institutional trust ( r = .14). The relationship was also stronger in non-western (vs Western) countries and in nonrepresentative (vs nationally representative) samples. All evidence was correlational, and few studies measured actual behavior. We discuss implications for theories of trust and for fundraising practice, and highlight critical gaps in evidence.

scholarly journals The Oxford Handbook of the Study of Religion

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Social Theory ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Nature Medicine ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Emotion Experience ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Theories Of Religion ◽  
Time Part ◽  
Narrative Performance

This Handbook offers an authoritative and up-to-date survey of original research in the study of religion. Its fifty-one chapters, written by authors from twelve countries, are organized into seven systematic parts. Part I (“Religion”) comprises chapters on definitions and theories of religion, history/translation, spirituality, and non-religion. Part II (“Theoretical Approaches”) reviews cognitive science, economics, evolutionary theory, feminism/gender theory, hermeneutics, Marxism, postcolonialism, semantics, semiotics, structuralism/poststructuralism, and social theory. Part III (“Modes”) addresses communication, materiality, narrative, performance, sound, space, and time. Part IV (“Environments”) relates religion to economy, law, media, nature, medicine, politics, science, sports, and tourism. Part V (“Topics”) discusses belief, emotion, experience, gift and sacrifice, gods, initiations and transitions, priests/prophets/sorcerers, purity, and salvation. Part VI (“Processes”) deals with differentiation, the disintegration and death of religions, expansion, globalization, individualization/privatization, innovation/tradition, objectification/commoditization, and syncretism/hybridization. Part VII (“The Discipline”) discusses the history and relevance of the study of religion.

Evaluating CoPs in Cancer Surgery

2011 ◽  
pp. 456-466
Author(s):  
Michael Fung-Kee-Fung ◽  
Robin Morash ◽  
Elena Goubanova
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Cultural Transmission ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Evaluation Tool ◽  
Healthcare Organizations ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Managerial Implications ◽  
Adequate Evaluation ◽  
Local Healthcare

This chapter describes a framework for developing and evaluating Communities of Practice initiated by local healthcare organizations and groups. The framework explores specific features of a CoP in the field of quality improvement and the managerial implications of utilizing traditional forms of medical socialization and cultural transmission. The authors describe their own experiences with a CoP in one of the health regions of Ontario, Canada, and compare them to other conceptual and theoretical approaches in the field. The chapter breaks down the implementation of CoP projects in medicine into manageable steps and presents an evaluation tool that could help develop an adequate evaluation process.

scholarly journals Underappreciated features of cultural evolution

2021 ◽  
Vol 376 (1828) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Smolla ◽  
Fredrik Jansson ◽  
Laurent Lehmann ◽  
Wybo Houkes ◽  
Franz J. Weissing ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Cultural Transmission ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Evolutionary Dynamics ◽  
Research Programme ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Combinatorial Properties ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Cultural Systems

Cultural evolution theory has long been inspired by evolutionary biology. Conceptual analogies between biological and cultural evolution have led to the adoption of a range of formal theoretical approaches from population dynamics and genetics. However, this has resulted in a research programme with a strong focus on cultural transmission. Here, we contrast biological with cultural evolution, and highlight aspects of cultural evolution that have not received sufficient attention previously. We outline possible implications for evolutionary dynamics and argue that not taking them into account will limit our understanding of cultural systems. We propose 12 key questions for future research, among which are calls to improve our understanding of the combinatorial properties of cultural innovation, and the role of development and life history in cultural dynamics. Finally, we discuss how this vibrant research field can make progress by embracing its multidisciplinary nature. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Foundations of cultural evolution’.

scholarly journals París, California y la búsqueda por una teoría del cambio cultural

2019 ◽  
pp. 223
Author(s):  
Lorenzo Baravalle
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Cultural Change ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Cultural Transmission ◽  
Genetic Inheritance ◽  
Dual Inheritance Theory ◽  
Cultural Epidemiology ◽  
Dan Sperber ◽  
Dual Inheritance

The debate on the possibility of an evolutionary theory of cultural change has heated up, over the last years, due to the supposed incompatibilities between the two main theoretical proposals in the field: dual inheritance theory and cultural epidemiology. The former, first formulated in the 1980’s by a group of biologists and anthropologists mostly hosted at Californian universities, supports an analogy between genetic inheritance and cultural transmission. Cultural epidemiology, more recently formulated by Dan Sperber and his collaborator (mostly hosted at Parisian universities), denies the defensibility of such an analogy and put forward a partially alternative model. But how much do these proposals actually differ with each other? In this article, I shall argue that less than what cultural epidemiologists use to think.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document