Implicit pattern learning predicts individual differences in belief in God in the United States and Afghanistan


  • 1.

    Barrett, J. L. Exploring the natural foundations of religion. Trends Cogn. Sci. 4, 29–34 (2000).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 2.

    Baumard, N. & Boyer, P. Religious beliefs as reflective elaborations on intuitions: a modified dual-process model. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 22, 295–300 (2013).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 3.

    Degelman, D. & Lynn, D. The development and preliminary validation of the belief in divine intervention scale. J. Psychol. Theol. 23, 37–44 (1995).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 4.

    Norenzayan, A. et al. The cultural evolution of prosocial religions. Behav. Brain Sci. 39, e1 (2016).

  • 5.

    Jones, S. R. & McEwen, M. K. A conceptual model of multiple dimensions of identity. J. Coll. Stud. Dev. 41, 405–414 (2000).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 6.

    Ysseldyk, R., Matheson, K. & Anisman, H. Religiosity as identity: toward an understanding of religion from a social identity perspective. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 14, 60–71 (2010).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 7.

    Grim, B. J. & Finke, R. International Religion Indexes: government regulation, government favoritism, and social regulation of religion. Interdiscip. J. Res. Relig. 2, 1–49 (2006).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 8.

    Fox, J. Religion as an overlooked element of international relations. Int. Stud. Rev. 3, 53–73 (2001).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 9.

    Norenzayan, A. & Gervais, W. M. The origins of religious disbelief. Trends Cogn. Sci. 17, 20–25 (2013).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 10.

    Boyer, P. Religious thought and behaviour as by-products of brain function. Trends Cogn. Sci. 7, 119–124 (2003).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 11.

    Willard, A. K. & Norenzayan, A. Cognitive biases explain religious belief, paranormal belief, and belief in life’s purpose. Cognition 129, 379–391 (2013).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 12.

    Gervais, W. M., Willard, A. K., Norenzayan, A. & Henrich, J. THE CULTURAL TRANSMISSION OF FAITH Why innate intuitions are necessary, but insufficient, to explain religious belief. Religion 41, 389–410 (2011).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 13.

    Barrett, J. L. & Lanman, J. A. The science of religious beliefs. Religion 38, 109–124 (2008).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 14.

    Barrett, J. L. Why would anyone believe in God? (AltaMira Press, 2004).

  • 15.

    Pyysiäinen, I. & Hauser, M. The origins of religion: evolved adaptation or by-product? Trends Cogn. Sci. 14, 104–109 (2010).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 16.

    Boyer, P. Religion: bound to believe? Nature 455, 1038–1039 (2008).

    ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 17.

    Kahneman, D. A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. Am. Psychol. 58, 697–720 (2003).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 18.

    Stanovich, K. E. & West, R. F. Individual differences in reasoning: implications for the rationality debate? Behav. Brain Sci. 23, 645–665 (2000).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 19.

    Evans, J. St. B. T. Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 59, 255–278 (2008).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 20.

    Reber, A. S. The cognitive unconscious: an evolutionary perspective. Conscious. Cogn. 1, 93–133 (1992).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 21.

    Reber, A. S. Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 118, 219 (1989).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 22.

    Lieberman, M. D. Intuition: a social cognitive neuroscience approach. Psychol. Bull. 126, 109–137 (2000).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 23.

    Epstein, S. Demystifying intuition: what it is, what it does, and how it does it. Psychol. Inq. 21, 295–312 (2010).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 24.

    Pacini, R. & Epstein, S. The relation of rational and experiential information processing styles to personality, basic beliefs, and the ratio-bias phenomenon. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 76, 972–987 (1999).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 25.

    Epstein, S., Pacini, R., Denes-Raj, V. & Heier, H. Individual differences in intuitive–experiential and analytical–rational thinking styles. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 71, 390 (1996).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 26.

    Greenwald, A. G. et al. A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychol. Rev. 109, 3 (2002).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 27.

    Seger, C. A. Implicit learning. Psychol. Bull. 115, 163 (1994).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 28.

    Liljenquist, K., Zhong, C.-B. & Galinsky, A. D. The smell of virtue: clean scents promote reciprocity and charity. Psychol. Sci. 21, 381–383 (2010).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 29.

    Olivola, C. Y. & Todorov, A. Fooled by first impressions? Reexamining the diagnostic value of appearance-based inferences. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 46, 315–324 (2010).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 30.

    Cogsdill, E. J., Todorov, A. T., Spelke, E. S. & Banaji, M. R. Inferring character from faces: a developmental study. Psychol. Sci. 25, 1132–1139 (2014).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 31.

    Ballew, C. C. & Todorov, A. Predicting political elections from rapid and unreflective face judgments. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 17948–17953 (2007).

    ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 32.

    Boyer, P. The Naturalness of Religious Ideas: A Cognitive Theory of Religion (University of California Press, 1994).

  • 33.

    Baumard, N. & Chevallier, C. What goes around comes around: the evolutionary roots of the belief in immanent justice. J. Cogn. Cult. 12, 67–80 (2012).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 34.

    Boyer, P. & Liénard, P. Why ritualized behavior? Precaution systems and action parsing in developmental, pathological and cultural rituals. Behav. Brain Sci. 29, 595–613 (2006).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 35.

    Waytz, A., Epley, N. & Cacioppo, J. T. Social cognition unbound: insights into anthropomorphism and dehumanization. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 19, 58–62 (2010).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 36.

    Waytz, A., Cacioppo, J. & Epley, N. Who sees human? The stability and importance of individual differences in anthropomorphism. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 5, 219–232 (2010).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 37.

    Epley, N., Waytz, A. & Cacioppo, J. T. On seeing human: a three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychol. Rev. 114, 864 (2007).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 38.

    Maij, D. L. R., Schie, H. Tvan & Elk, Mvan The boundary conditions of the hypersensitive agency detection device: an empirical investigation of agency detection in threatening situations. Relig. Brain Behav. 9, 23–51 (2019).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 39.

    van Elk, M. Paranormal believers are more prone to illusory agency detection than skeptics. Conscious. Cogn. 22, 1041–1046 (2013).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 40.

    van Elk, M., Rutjens, B. T., van der Pligt, J. & Van Harreveld, F. Priming of supernatural agent concepts and agency detection. Relig. Brain Behav. 6, 4–33 (2016).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 41.

    Shenhav, A., Rand, D. G. & Greene, J. D. Divine intuition: cognitive style influences belief in God: (519702015-023). https://doi.org/10.1037/e519702015-023 (2011).

  • 42.

    Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Seli, P., Koehler, D. J. & Fugelsang, J. A. Analytic cognitive style predicts religious and paranormal belief. Cognition 123, 335–346 (2012).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 43.

    Gervais, W. M. & Norenzayan, A. Analytic thinking promotes religious disbelief. Science 336, 493–496 (2012).

    ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 44.

    Camerer, C. F. et al. Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2, 637–644 (2018).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 45.

    Sanchez, C., Sundermeier, B., Gray, K. & Calin-Jageman, R. J. Direct replication of Gervais & Norenzayan (2012): No evidence that analytic thinking decreases religious belief. PLoS ONE 12, e0172636 (2017).

  • 46.

    Kay, A. C., Gaucher, D., McGregor, I. & Nash, K. Religious belief as compensatory. Control. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 14, 37–48 (2010).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 47.

    Banerjee, K. & Bloom, P. Why did this happen to me? Religious believers’ and non-believers’ teleological reasoning about life events. Cognition 133, 277–303 (2014).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 48.

    White, C. J., Norenzayan, A. & Schaller, M. The content and correlates of belief in Karma across cultures. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 45, 1184–1201 (2019).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 49.

    Heywood, B. T. & Bering, J. M. “Meant to be”: How religious beliefs and cultural religiosity affect the implicit bias to think teleologically. Relig. Brain Behav. 4, 183–201 (2014).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 50.

    Buffone, A., Gabriel, S. & Poulin, M. There but for the grace of God: counterfactuals influence religious belief and images of the divine. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 7, 256–263 (2016).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 51.

    Evans, E. M. Cognitive and contextual factors in the emergence of diverse belief systems: Creation versus evolution. Cogn. Psychol. 42, 217–266 (2001).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 52.

    Järnefelt, E., Canfield, C. F. & Kelemen, D. The divided mind of a disbeliever: Intuitive beliefs about nature as purposefully created among different groups of non-religious adults. Cognition 140, 72–88 (2015).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 53.

    Bender, C. How does God answer back? Poetics 36, 476–492 (2008).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 54.

    Hodgkinson, G. P., Langan-Fox, J. & Sadler-Smith, E. Intuition: a fundamental bridging construct in the behavioural sciences. Br. J. Psychol. 99, 1–27 (2008).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 55.

    Granena, G. Cognitive aptitudes for implicit and explicit learning and information-processing styles: an individual differences study. Appl. Psycholinguist. 37, 577–600 (2016).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 56.

    Woolhouse, L. S. & Bayne, R. Personality and the use of intuition: individual differences in strategy and performance on an implicit learning task. Eur. J. Personal. 14, 157–169 (2000).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 57.

    Kaufman, S. B. et al. Implicit learning as an ability. Cognition 116, 321–340 (2010).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 58.

    Sobkow, A., Traczyk, J., Kaufman, S. B. & Nosal, C. The structure of intuitive abilities and their relationships with intelligence and openness to experience. Intelligence 67, 1–10 (2018).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 59.

    Little, A. C., Jones, B. C. & DeBruine, L. M. The Many Faces of Research on Face Perception (The Royal Society, 2011).

  • 60.

    Aslin, R. N. & Newport, E. L. Statistical learning: from acquiring specific items to forming general rules. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 21, 170–176 (2012).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 61.

    Howard, D. V. & Howard, J. H. When it does hurt to try: adult age differences in the effects of instructions on implicit pattern learning. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 8, 798–805 (2001).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 62.

    Finn, A. S. et al. Developmental dissociation between the maturation of procedural memory and declarative memory. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 142, 212–220 (2016).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 63.

    Smalle, E. H. M., Page, M. P. A., Duyck, W., Edwards, M. & Szmalec, A. Children retain implicitly learned phonological sequences better than adults: a longitudinal study. Dev. Sci. 21, e12634 (2018).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 64.

    Meulemans, T., Van der Linden, M. & Perruchet, P. Implicit sequence learning in children. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 69, 199–221 (1998).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 65.

    Kalra, P. B., Gabrieli, J. D. & Finn, A. S. Evidence of stable individual differences in implicit learning. Cognition 190, 199–211 (2019).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 66.

    Lum, J., Kidd, E., Davis, S. & Conti-Ramsden, G. Longitudinal study of declarative and procedural memory in primary school-aged children. Aust. J. Psychol. 62, 139–148 (2010).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 67.

    Simon, J. R. et al. Dopamine transporter genotype predicts implicit sequence learning. Behav. Brain Res. 216, 452–457 (2011).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 68.

    Baetu, I., Burns, N. R., Urry, K., Barbante, G. G. & Pitcher, J. B. Commonly-occurring polymorphisms in the COMT, DRD1 and DRD2 genes influence different aspects of motor sequence learning in humans. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 125, 176–188 (2015).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 69.

    Reber, P. J. The neural basis of implicit learning and memory: a review of neuropsychological and neuroimaging research. Neuropsychologia 51, 2026–2042 (2013).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 70.

    Batterink, L. J., Paller, K. A. & Reber, P. J. Understanding the neural bases of implicit and statistical learning. Top. Cogn. Sci. 11, 482–503 (2019).

  • 71.

    Henrich, J., Heine, S. J. & Norenzayan, A. The weirdest people in the world? Behav. Brain Sci. 33, 61–83 (2010).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 72.

    Medora, N. P., Larson, J. H., Hortacsu, N. & Dave, P. Perceived attitudes towards romanticism; a cross-cultural study of American, Asian-Indian, and Turkish young adults. J. Comp. Fam. Stud. 33, 155–178 (2002).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 73.

    Cukur, C. S., De Guzman, M. R. T. & Carlo, G. Religiosity, values, and horizontal and vertical individualism—Collectivism: a study of Turkey, the United States, and the Philippines. J. Soc. Psychol. 144, 613–634 (2004).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 74.

    Verkuyten, M. & Yildiz, A. A. National (dis) identification and ethnic and religious identity: a study among Turkish-Dutch Muslims. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 33, 1448–1462 (2007).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 75.

    Arnett, J. J. The neglected 95%: why American psychology needs to become less American. Am. Psychol. 63, 602–614 (2008).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 76.

    Nielsen, M., Haun, D., Kärtner, J. & Legare, C. H. The persistent sampling bias in developmental psychology: a call to action. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 162, 31–38 (2017).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 77.

    Robertson, E. M. The serial reaction time task: implicit motor skill learning? J. Neurosci. 27, 10073–10075 (2007).

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 78.

    Nissen, M. J. & Bullemer, P. Attentional requirements of learning: evidence from performance measures. Cogn. Psychol. 19, 1–32 (1987).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 79.

    Fletcher, P. C. et al. On the benefits of not trying: brain activity and connectivity reflecting the interactions of explicit and implicit sequence learning. Cereb. Cortex 15, 1002–1015 (2005).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 80.

    Soref, A., Liberman, N., Abramovitch, A. & Dar, R. Explicit instructions facilitate performance of OCD participants but impair performance of non-OCD participants on a serial reaction time task. J. Anxiety Disord. 55, 56–62 (2018).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 81.

    Destrebecqz, A. & Cleeremans, A. Can sequence learning be implicit? New evidence with the process dissociation procedure. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 8, 343–350 (2001).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 82.

    Song, S., Howard, J. H. & Howard, D. V. Perceptual sequence learning in a serial reaction time task. Exp. Brain Res. 189, 145–158 (2008).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 83.

    Hodges, S. D., Sharp, C. A., Gibson, N. J. S. & Tipsord, J. M. Nearer my God to thee: self–God overlap and believers’ relationships with God. Self Identity 12, 337–356 (2013).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 84.

    Barnes, K. & Gibson, N. J. S. Supernatural agency: individual difference predictors and situational correlates. Int. J. Psychol. Relig. 23, 42–62 (2013).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 85.

    Myers, S. M. An interactive model of religiosity inheritance: the importance of family context. Am. Sociol. Rev. 61, 858–866 (1996).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 86.

    Brugger, P. et al. ‘Meaningful’ patterns in visual noise: effects of lateral stimulation and the observer’s belief in ESP. Psychopathology 26, 261–265 (1993).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 87.

    Reed, P. et al. Seeing non-existent events: effects of environmental conditions, schizotypal symptoms, and sub-clinical characteristics. J. Behav. Ther. Exp. Psychiatry 39, 276–291 (2008).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 88.

    Ingersoll-Dayton, B., Krause, N. & Morgan, D. Religious trajectories and transitions over the life course. Int. J. Aging Hum. Dev. 55, 51–70 (2002).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 89.

    Dane, E. & Pratt, M. G. Conceptualizing and measuring intuition: a review of recent trends. Int. Rev. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 24, 1–40 (2009).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 90.

    Frederick, S. Cognitive reflection and decision making. J. Econ. Perspect. 19, 25–42 (2005).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 91.

    Gervais, W. M. & Norenzayan, A. Analytic atheism revisited. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2, 609–609 (2018).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 92.

    Pennycook, G., Ross, R. M., Koehler, D. J. & Fugelsang, J. A. Atheists and agnostics are more reflective than religious believers: four empirical studies and a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 11, e0153039 (2016).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 93.

    Saribay, S. A. & Yilmaz, O. Analytic cognitive style and cognitive ability differentially predict religiosity and social conservatism. Personal. Individ. Differ. 114, 24–29 (2017).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 94.

    Farias, M., Newheiser, A.-K., Kahane, G. & de Toledo, Z. Scientific faith: belief in science increases in the face of stress and existential anxiety. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49, 1210–1213 (2013).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 95.

    Pew Research Center. Global rEligious Diversity: Half of the Most Religiously Diverse Countries Are in Asia-pacific Region (Pew Research Center Washington, DC, 2014).

  • 96.

    Pew Research Center. Global Uptick in Government Restrictions on Religion in 2016. Pew Research Center’s Religion & Public Life Project http://www.pewforum.org/2018/06/21/global-uptick-in-government-restrictions-on-religion-in-2016/ (2018).

  • 97.

    United States Department of State. Afghanistan 2017 International Religious Freedom Report. Hum. Rights 19 (2017).

  • 98.

    Keren, G. & Schul, Y. Two is not always better than one: a critical evaluation of two-system theories. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 4, 533–550 (2009).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 99.

    Proulx, T. & Heine, S. J. Connections from Kafka: exposure to meaning threats improves implicit learning of an artificial grammar. Psychol. Sci. 20, 1125–1131 (2009).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 100.

    Green, D. P., Ha, S. E. & Bullock, J. G. Enough already about “black box” experiments: Studying mediation is more difficult than most scholars suppose. Ann. Am. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci. 628, 200–208 (2010).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 101.

    Imai, K., Keele, L. & Tingley, D. A general approach to causal mediation analysis. Psychol. Methods 15, 309 (2010).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 102.

    Rucker, D. D., Preacher, K. J., Tormala, Z. L. & Petty, R. E. Mediation analysis in social psychology: current practices and new recommendations. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 5, 359–371 (2011).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 103.

    Ashcraft, M. H. Math anxiety: personal, educational, and cognitive consequences. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 11, 181–185 (2002).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 104.

    Suárez-Pellicioni, M., Núñez-Peña, M. I. & Colomé, À. Math anxiety: a review of its cognitive consequences, psychophysiological correlates, and brain bases. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 16, 3–22 (2016).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 105.

    Choe, K. W., Jenifer, J. B., Rozek, C. S., Berman, M. G. & Beilock, S. L. Calculated avoidance: Math anxiety predicts math avoidance in effort-based decision-making. Sci. Adv. 5, eaay1062 (2019).

    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 106.

    Blanco, F., Barberia, I. & Matute, H. Individuals who believe in the paranormal expose themselves to biased information and develop more causal illusions than nonbelievers in the laboratory. PLoS ONE 10, e0131378 (2015).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 107.

    Griffiths, O., Shehabi, N., Murphy, R. A. & Pelley, M. E. L. Superstition predicts perception of illusory control. Br. J. Psychol. 110, 499–518 (2019).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 108.

    Warren, Z. et al. Afghanistan in 2014: A Survey of the Afghan People (Asia Foundation, 2014).

  • 109.

    Claridge, G. & Broks, P. Schizotypy and hemisphere function—I: Theoretical considerations and the measurement of schizotypy. Personal. Individ. Differ. 5, 633–648 (1984).


    Google Scholar
     



  • Source link

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *