宗教信仰对亲社会行为的影响

以往研究发现宗教信仰与亲社会行为之间存在显著的正相关, 据此研究者提出“信仰-亲社会假设”试图证实两者的因果关系。本文主要从研究方法、影响因素及心理机制三个方面对信仰影响亲社会行为的研究进展进行介绍和评述。在研究早期, 研究者主要考察宗教信仰的归属身份对个体亲社会行为的影响; 而近年来, 研究者则越来越关注信仰启动对亲社会行为的影响。信仰对亲社会行为的作用受到信仰程度、文化背景、信仰认知和信仰取向等多种因素的影响。未来研究需要有效控制宗教信仰身份对亲社会测量的影响, 明确宗教信仰的操作性定义并改进相关的测量指标, 关注精神性的作用机制、“信仰-亲社会假设”的跨文化效应以及信仰概念对非宗教信仰群体的影响。     

Does religious priming increase the prosocial behaviour of a Japanese sample in an anonymous economic game?

We examined the effect of religious priming on a Japanese sample in an anonymous dictator game whereas previous studies on religious priming on prosociality had mainly been conducted within Western contexts. The current study attempted to examine whether religion increases prosocial behaviour in a Japanese sample through the replication of ‘God is Watching You’ (Shariff & Norenzayan, 2007) where it was found that participants primed with religion‐related words and secular justice‐related words behaved more prosocially than participants primed with neutral words in an anonymous dictator game. The current experiment was conducted with Japanese students (n = 106) to examine whether the results of the original study could be applied to Japanese people. The results showed that among the three priming conditions (control, religion, secular justice), there was no difference in the amount of money participants allocated to anonymous strangers, although in the secular justice priming condition, theists allocated more money than atheists. The results might be due to the fact that the religious priming words used in the original study did not precisely activate the propositional network of religion that Japanese participants have. More culture‐specific studies are necessary to examine how religious priming works for non‐Westerners.     

Religiosity and Prosocial Behavior Among Churchgoers: Exploring Underlying Mechanisms

Research has shown that religious beliefs and practices are related, to some extent, to prosocial behaviors, but less is known about why it is so. In addition, participating in the traditional Christian ritual (Sunday Mass) may be particularly powerful in eliciting prosocial behavior among believers. The present study explores the aspects of the Sunday Mass that may be involved in the activation of religious prosociality. The social, emotional, and cognitive aspects of the Mass were concurrently assessed among churchgoers (n = 548) across 20 different parishes. Prosociality was measured by looking at spontaneous intention to share a hypothetical lottery prize. Results showed that a positive relation found between religion and prosociality was mediated by the social aspect of the Mass. Additional analyses revealed that this social aspect also induced the emotion of love, which in turn promoted prosociality.     

Principles of Religious Prosociality: A Review and Reformulation

Historically, religion and religious belief have often been credited as the source of human morality. But what have been the real effects of religion on prosocial behavior? A review of the psychological literature reveals a complex relation between religious belief and moral action: leading to greater prosocial behavior in some contexts but not in others, and in some cases actually increasing antisocial behavior. In addition, different forms of religious belief are associated with different styles of co-operation. This body of evidence paints a somewhat messy picture of religious prosociality; however, recent examinations of the cognitive mechanisms of belief help to resolve apparent inconsistencies. In this article, we review evidence of two separate sources of religious prosociality: a religious principle associated with the protection of the religious group, and a supernatural principle associated with the belief in God, or other supernatural agents. These two principles emphasize different prosocial goals, and so have different effects on prosocial behavior depending on the target and context. A re-examination of the literature illustrates the independent influences of religious and supernatural principles on moral action.     

Why Are Protestants More Prosocial Than Catholics? A Comparative Study Among Orthodox Dutch Believers

The present study sheds light on the contentious relation between religions and prosociality by comparing self-reported altruistic and prosocial behavior among a group of Catholic and Protestant believers. We found that denomination was strongly related to strength of religious beliefs, afterlife beliefs, free-will beliefs, and self-reported prosocial behavior. Denominational differences between Catholics and Protestants in self-reported prosociality were mediated by a stronger endorsement of religious beliefs and belief in predestination but were not related to motivational measures of self-esteem. We also found that the perceived prosociality (i.e., the extent to which others were perceived as being prosocial) was higher for one’s religious ingroup than one’s outgroup, and this effect was stronger for Catholics than Protestants. These novel findings provide an integrated perspective on how religious denominations shape prosocial attitudes and behavior.     

Does religious belief promote prosociality? A critical examination

Numerous authors have suggested that religious belief has a positive association, possibly causal, with prosocial behavior. This article critiques evidence regarding this "religious prosociality" hypothesis from several areas of the literature. The extant literature on religious prosociality is reviewed including domains of charity, volunteering, morality, personality, and well-being. The experimental and quasi-experimental literature regarding controlled prosocial interactions (e.g., sharing and generosity) is reviewed and contrasted with results from naturalistic studies. Conceptual problems in the interpretation of this literature include separating the effects of stereotypes and ingroup biases from impression formation as well as controlling for self-report biases in the measurement of religious prosociality. Many effects attributed to religious processes can be explained in terms of general nonreligious psychological effects. Methodological problems that limit the interpretation of religious prosociality studies include the use of inappropriate comparison groups and the presence of criterion contamination in measures yielding misleading conclusions. Specifically, it is common practice to compare high levels of religiosity with "low religiosity" (e.g., the absence of denominational membership, lack of church attendance, or the low importance of religion), which conflates indifferent or uncommitted believers with the completely nonreligious. Finally, aspects of religious stereotype endorsement and ingroup bias can contribute to nonprosocial effects. These factors necessitate a revision of the religious prosociality hypothesis and suggest that future research should incorporate more stringent controls in order to reach less ambiguous conclusions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

Being Watched by Anthropomorphized Objects Affects Charitable Donation in Religious People

This study assessed the effect of bottom‐up visual cues—the cues of being watched—from anthropomorphized (face‐like) everyday objects on religious people's prosocial behavior. As religious people are more likely than less‐religious people to perceive faces in everyday objects and as perception of face‐like objects promotes prosociality, it was expected that religious people would become more prosocial when they perceived face‐like objects. To test the hypothesis, the study replicated a past finding in a Japanese sample in which religious people tended to perceive a face in everyday objects. Next, results showed that the decision to donate in religious people (compared to less‐religious people) was increased when a face‐like object was displayed with charitable appeals. This effect was not observed with a non‐face‐like object. The current study indicates that interaction with the surrounding environment plays an important role in motivating prosocial behavior among religious people.     

宗教启动会使人更加道德吗?

通过启动被试的宗教信仰状态, 进而探讨宗教对个体道德的影响作用, 这是近年来宗教心理学研究的热点问题, 但是围绕此问题的研究结论并不统一。有研究发现, 宗教启动可以增强个体的道德。但也有研究表明宗教启动会使个体更不道德。宗教启动对道德的影响是通过宗教信念的中介作用而实现的, 被试的信仰类型、性别、实验启动的方式及内容、以及被试的人格倾向则会因为影响中介信念的激活而调节宗教启动与道德的关系。未来研究需要进一步创新启动实验研究方法, 探索影响宗教与道德的关系的调节变量, 结合跨文化、跨学科的研究视角, 更深入地挖掘这一问题。     

Influence of Religion on Prosociality: A Priming Study of Buddhist Concepts among Nonbelievers in China

ABSTRACT

From a theoretical perspective, there is consensus that religion is positively associated with prosocial behaviors. However, rather little is known about whether religion can increase the accessibility of prosocial concepts among nonbelievers. In the current study, we explored the influence of religion on the accessibility of such concepts among nonbelievers of Buddhism using supraliminal and subliminal priming techniques. Specifically, we employed 20 each of Buddhist and neutral words as priming stimuli, along with 20 each of prosocial and antisocial words as target stimuli. Participants were asked to determine, as quickly and as accurately as possible, if a presented word had a prosocial or antisocial meaning. In Study 1, participants were supraliminally primed (200 ms) with Buddhist words. The results showed that participants recognized prosocial words more quickly than they did antisocial words when primed with Buddhist words than with neutral words. In Study 2, we used subliminal priming (38 ms), and obtained the same results as in Study 1. Taken together, the results suggest that Buddhist concepts, whether primed explicitly or implicitly, increased the mental accessibility of prosocial concepts.     

Religious Prosociality and Aggression: It's Real

Individual religiosity relates to prosocial attitudes, behavioral intentions, and behaviors of minimal (no/low cost; limited to in‐group members) prosociality in hypothetical situations. Yet evidence on religious prosociality through other‐oriented, costly helping behavior in real life is still to be documented. Similarly, religiosity relates to cognitive, emotional, and attitudinal components of prejudice toward moral out‐groups. Evidence on real behavior of prejudice is nevertheless still needed. In two experiments using the same measure of religiosity and samples from the same population, religiosity predicted helping, in a real‐life context, of an in‐group member in need (Experiment 1) as well as overt and direct aggression by means of allocating hot sauce to a gay, but not to a neutral, target (Experiment 2). Religious prosociality and aggression are real, concern distinct kinds of targets, and are at the heart of personal religiosity.     

God is watching you: priming God concepts increases prosocial behavior in an anonymous economic game

We present two studies aimed at resolving experimentally whether religion increases prosocial behavior in the anonymous dictator game. Subjects allocated more money to anonymous strangers when God concepts were implicitly activated than when neutral or no concepts were activated. This effect was at least as large as that obtained when concepts associated with secular moral institutions were primed. A trait measure of self-reported religiosity did not seem to be associated with prosocial behavior. We discuss different possible mechanisms that may underlie this effect, focusing on the hypotheses that the religious prime had an ideomotor effect on generosity or that it activated a felt presence of supernatural watchers. We then discuss implications for theories positing religion as a facilitator of the emergence of early large-scale societies of cooperators.     

Effect of Religious Day on Prosocial Behavior: A Field Study

It has previously been suggested that prosociality is correlated with the degree of religiousness. However, experimental and meta-analytical studies cast doubt on the existence of such a relationship. Due to the controversy over the link between religiousness and prosocial behavior, and the existence of only a small number of ecological experiments focusing on this relationship, we tested the effect of a religious salient day, a previously uninvestigated effect, on prosocial behavior. Specifically, across two experiments (N = 405) and in an ecological setting in Portugal, we tested whether prosocial behavior would increase on a religious salient day compared to a non-religious regular day. We found a gender-related effect: Women, on a religious day, were more inclined to agree to a prosocial behavior than on a non-religious day, whereas men did not change their behavior. We discuss such a difference in behavior, as well as the implications of our studies.     

Is religion not prosocial at all? Comment on Galen (2012)

Galen (2012), critically reviewing recent research on religion and prosociality, concludes that the religious prosociality hypothesis is a (congruence) fallacy. The observed effects are not real: They only reflect stereotypes and ingroup favoritism, are due to secular psychological effects, are inconsistent, and confound (e.g., by ignoring curvilinear relationships) those low in religiosity with nonbelievers. In this commentary, a distinction is first made between the already known limitations on the extent, context, and quality of the religion-prosociality link and the novel, more radical argument of Galen denying the validity and the plausibility of such a link. Second, careful examination of relevant studies shows that religious prosociality is not reduced to social desirability in self-reports, is confirmed through ratings by peers who are blind with regard to the religious status of the target, and is expressed through real prosocial behavior in controlled experiments and life decisions with long-term effects. This behavior cannot be reduced to ingroup favoritism. Finally, Galen's opposition between religious versus "secular" psychological effects is criticized as psychologically problematic, and his insistence for examination of curvilinear relationships is relativized on the basis of research confirming the linear relationship. Alternative research questions for understanding prosociality of atheists are proposed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

Residential Mobility and Prosocial Development Within a Single City

Neighborhood social dynamics have been shown to impact behavioral development in residents, including levels of prosociality (i.e. positive social behavior). This study explores whether residential moves to neighborhoods with different social dynamics can influence further prosocial development. Prosociality, five domains of social support, and residential location were tracked between 2006 and 2009 in 397 adolescents across a small city in upstate New York. Analysis compared the role of the different forms of social support in prosocial development for movers versus non-movers. The effects of one's neighborhood of residence at Time 2 were also compared between movers and non-movers. Prosocial development in these two groups responded similarly to all forms of social support, including from neighbors. Movers experienced a greater increase in prosociality the more residentially stable the adolescent population of their new neighborhood of residence. Such neighborhood characteristics were not influential in the prosocial development of non-movers.     

The effect of perceived financial vulnerability on prosocial activity

Our research examines the effect of subjective financial vulnerability on prosocial activity. First, data from the European Survey of Health, Aging and Retirement (SHARE) revealed that higher assessment of one's financial vulnerability might be associated with prosocial motivation for social activities. Next, we manipulated participants' perception of their relative financial position compared to their peers and found that participants randomly assigned to the low financial position condition were more willing to volunteer than participants assigned to the high financial position condition. In Study 3, we manipulated participants' financial advantage. Participants who were disadvantaged in the experimental settings were more willing to volunteer and donate to charity compared to participants with financial advantage. In our final study, we examined willingness to donate to in‐group and out‐group help organizations and found that individuals of lower perceived financial standing may be motivated by the goal of increasing the strength of the social group, rather than by expectations of direct reciprocity. We also found that emotional distress mediates the relationship between perceived financial vulnerability and prosocial behavior. In line with earlier research illustrating that lower financial status promotes prosociality on an interpersonal level, we demonstrate that even momentary perception of relative financial disadvantage and vulnerability promotes prosociality in the broader social context.     

Reflections on religious belief and prosociality: Comment on Galen (2012)

Luke Galen (2012) offers a timely analysis of associations between religiosity and prosocial and antisocial attitudes and behaviors. After identifying 10 points of agreement, I raise 8 questions for further reflection and research: (1) Is ingroup giving and volunteerism not prosocial? (2) Are religion-related prosocial norms part of the religious factor? (3) Is social support also appropriately considered part of the religious factor? (4) Are self-report data from more and less religious people invalid? (5) How should we disentangle gender and religiosity? (6) How might we resolve "the religious engagement paradox"? (7) Does religion serve an adaptive, evolutionary function? And (8) Might research further explore religiosity, in its varieties, and prosociality? (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

When authoritarianism meets religion: Sacrificing others in the name of abstract deontology

Authoritarianism is a stable construct in terms of individual differences (social attitudes based on personality and values), but its manifestations and behavioral outcomes may depend on contextual factors. In the present experiment, we investigated whether authoritarianism is sensitive to religious influences in predicting rigid morality. Specifically, we investigated whether authoritarians, after supraliminal religious priming, would show, in hypothetical moral dilemmas, preference for impersonal societal norms even at the detriment of interpersonal, care‐based prosociality toward proximal persons and acquaintances in need. The results confirmed the expectations, with a small effect size for the religious priming × authoritarianism interaction. In addition, these results were specific to participants' authoritarianism and not to their individual religiosity. The interaction between authoritarian dispositions and religious ideas may constitute a powerful combination leading to behaviors that are detrimental for the well‐being and the life of others, even proximal people, in the name of abstract deontology. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Awe’s effects on generosity and helping

It is unclear whether positive emotionality in general, or some specific positive emotions (e.g. other-oriented ones), but not others (e.g. self-oriented and, possibly, stimulus-oriented ones), enhance prosocial thoughts, dispositions, and behavior. We focus here on awe and argue that, although being primarily stimulus-oriented and not necessarily social in its very nature, awe should enhance prosociality for several theoretical reasons. In replicating and extending previous initial research, we found in two online experiments that the induction of awe (video clip or recall), compared to the induction of amusement or a neutral condition, leads to increased prosocial behavioral intentions of generosity (spontaneous sharing of hypothetical gains) and help of a person in need – in hypothetical everyday life situations. Awe’s effect on prosociality was independent from participants’ religiosity (in both experiments) but seemed to be clearer for those in need of such affective stimulation, i.e. less agreeable participants (Experiment 2).     

基于直觉的亲社会性：来自社会启发式假设的思考

亲社会属性是人类的一个重要特征, 也是研究者一直关注的重点问题。大多数关于亲社会性的理论模型都有一个共同的假设：人类本能地自私, 亲社会行为是对自私进行反思控制的结果。亲社会性直觉模型却提出了相反的假设, 认为在许多情况下, 亲社会行为不需要主动控制自私冲动, 它本身就可以以直觉的(或冲动的)方式出现。亲社会性自动化的行为特征、奖赏寻求的神经特征, 以及儿童亲社会性的早期发展都为亲社会性直觉模型提供了支持性证据。社会启发式假设可以对个体的直觉亲社会性进行解释, 并从情境和个体两个方面对影响直觉亲社会性的因素进行了预测。这不仅为研究者重新思考亲社会行为的根源提供了一个新的视角, 也为未来研究提出了一些可供参考的方向。