Matching Items (3)
Description
Recent research has identified affirmation of transcendence and exposure to violent Bible verses as being related to greater prejudice toward value-violating out-groups (Blogowska & Saroglou, 2012; Shen et al., 2013). Effects of exposure to specific Bible verses on attitudes toward out-groups have not been measured in combination with the Post-Critical Belief Scale developed by Hutsebaut (1996). The relationships between exposure to scriptural endorsements of prejudice, affirmation vs. disaffirmation of transcendence, literal vs. symbolic processing of religious content, and prejudice toward value-violating out-groups were examined using an online survey administered to a sample of U.S. adults (N=283). Greater affirmation of transcendence scores were linked to greater prejudice toward atheists and homosexuals and more favorable ratings of Christians and highly religious people. Lower affirmation of transcendence scores were linked to less favorable ratings of Christians and highly religious people and more favorable ratings of atheists. Exposure to scriptural endorsements of prejudice did not have a significant effect on levels of prejudice in this study.
ContributorsGrove, Richard (Author) / Robles, Elías (Thesis advisor) / Hall, Deborah (Committee member) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
The purpose of this study was to create a brief strength of religious
onreligious
worldview scale that has language inclusive for nontheistic populations. An exploratory
factor analysis was conducted using 207 participants from a major public southwestern
university and a public midwestern university in the United States. It was determined
that the Strength of Worldview Scale (SOWS) is a single-factor measure, which also
demonstrated high test-retest reliability. It was hypothesized that scores on the SOWS
would be negatively correlated with the Depression, Stress, and Anxiety Scale (DASS),
positively correlated with the Purpose in Life Subscale, and not correlated with the
Extraversion Subscale of the Big Five Inventory (BFI). Only a modest statistically
significant correlation between the SOWS and Purpose in life was found. A regression
analysis was also conducted with theistic/atheistic belief as a predictor of scores on the
SOWS. A curvilinear relationship was found, indicating that strong theists and atheists
score more highly in the SOWS than those who are unsure of their beliefs on the
existence of a God, Gods, or Higher Power. Preliminary results suggest that the SOWS
may be a promising measure for assessing strength of belief in both theist and nontheist
populations.
onreligious
worldview scale that has language inclusive for nontheistic populations. An exploratory
factor analysis was conducted using 207 participants from a major public southwestern
university and a public midwestern university in the United States. It was determined
that the Strength of Worldview Scale (SOWS) is a single-factor measure, which also
demonstrated high test-retest reliability. It was hypothesized that scores on the SOWS
would be negatively correlated with the Depression, Stress, and Anxiety Scale (DASS),
positively correlated with the Purpose in Life Subscale, and not correlated with the
Extraversion Subscale of the Big Five Inventory (BFI). Only a modest statistically
significant correlation between the SOWS and Purpose in life was found. A regression
analysis was also conducted with theistic/atheistic belief as a predictor of scores on the
SOWS. A curvilinear relationship was found, indicating that strong theists and atheists
score more highly in the SOWS than those who are unsure of their beliefs on the
existence of a God, Gods, or Higher Power. Preliminary results suggest that the SOWS
may be a promising measure for assessing strength of belief in both theist and nontheist
populations.
ContributorsRobele, Joseph (Author) / Kinnier, Richard (Thesis advisor) / Kemer, Gulsah (Committee member) / Santos, Carlos (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
Loss aversion manifests as a decision bias in which avoiding losses is preferred over acquiring rewards and can drastically alter an individual’s decision-making by overweighting potential losses relative to gains of equal magnitude. Consequently, individuals may require greater positive compensation to offset potential losses, exhibit contradictory choice preferences, or even avoid the decision entirely; and this behavior may be ascribed to an over-reliance on automatic, unconscious (intuitive) judgments rather than initiating analytic reasoning more capable of objectively evaluating outcomes.
Religion (specifically Christianity) is the topic of focus, as preliminary evidence suggests an individual’s intuitive inclinations positively correlate with and predict religious beliefs. Moreover, self-reported religious beliefs significantly differed as a function of inducing either intuitive or reflective mindsets. Therefore, the purpose of this experiment was to test the hypothesis that religious participants will display significantly greater levels of loss aversion than nonreligious participants.
This hypothesis extends from a previous study relating large-scale cultural and religious differences with loss aversion. While their results revealed religious orthodoxy strongly influenced loss aversion, the parameters elicited may be less stable as only two lottery questions were asked and religion was determined by cultural demographics. This study used the same design, but with a total of ten lotteries and a more detailed investigation into individual religious factors.
While loss aversion coefficients replicated the overall behavioral effect (Median θ = 2.6), independent sample, Mann-Whitney U tests did not yield any significant differences between Christian and Nonreligious participants (p > 0.05); nor did any of the religious factors examined account for a significant amount of variability.
This study attempted to add to current knowledge by further conflating the relationship between religiosity and adaptive decision strategies susceptible to errant and inconsistent behavior. While the hypotheses were unsupported, a null finding is still important, and future research re-testing this association or introducing causational designs may prove more fruitful in understanding these complex relationships.
Religion (specifically Christianity) is the topic of focus, as preliminary evidence suggests an individual’s intuitive inclinations positively correlate with and predict religious beliefs. Moreover, self-reported religious beliefs significantly differed as a function of inducing either intuitive or reflective mindsets. Therefore, the purpose of this experiment was to test the hypothesis that religious participants will display significantly greater levels of loss aversion than nonreligious participants.
This hypothesis extends from a previous study relating large-scale cultural and religious differences with loss aversion. While their results revealed religious orthodoxy strongly influenced loss aversion, the parameters elicited may be less stable as only two lottery questions were asked and religion was determined by cultural demographics. This study used the same design, but with a total of ten lotteries and a more detailed investigation into individual religious factors.
While loss aversion coefficients replicated the overall behavioral effect (Median θ = 2.6), independent sample, Mann-Whitney U tests did not yield any significant differences between Christian and Nonreligious participants (p > 0.05); nor did any of the religious factors examined account for a significant amount of variability.
This study attempted to add to current knowledge by further conflating the relationship between religiosity and adaptive decision strategies susceptible to errant and inconsistent behavior. While the hypotheses were unsupported, a null finding is still important, and future research re-testing this association or introducing causational designs may prove more fruitful in understanding these complex relationships.
ContributorsHowatt, Brian (Author) / Robles-Sotelo, Elias (Thesis advisor) / Vargas, Perla (Committee member) / Neal, Tess (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017