Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Religion vs. the Welfare State-The Importance of Cultural Context for Religious Schematicity and Priming
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, Personality, Social and Developmental Psychology.
Show others and affiliations
Number of Authors: 52018 (English)In: Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, ISSN 1941-1022, E-ISSN 1943-1562, Vol. 10, no 3, p. 276-287Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Prior research, using correlational and self-report methodologies, suggests that religion and public welfare function as alternate security/insurance systems. Consequently, in countries with more expansive public welfare systems people report less religiosity. The present studies expand this field by utilizing experimental methodology and by replicating and extending two previous experiments in both a secular/welfare state context (Sweden) and a religious/nonwelfare state context (the United States). In the first set of experiments, we tested if cognitive access to religious and welfare-related mental schemas differ depending on context. We also tested whether previous findings indicating that people cognitively turn to religion when exposed to threat replicate and extend to the welfare system. In the second set of experiments, we tested whether religious and welfare reminders lead to increased risk taking in these contexts. Our findings show that participants in the secular/welfare state context had lower cognitive access to religious schemas and were less willing to take risks after religious reminders. However, our findings did not replicate those from previous studies: our participants did not have increased cognitive access to religion, nor public welfare, after threat primes. Similarly, our participants were generally not more prone to risk taking after reminders of religion (or public welfare), although such an effect was obtained specifically on high-religious participants. We conclude that cultural context is important to consider when studying psychological functions of religion, and we suggest that the failed replications may be due to cultural, contextual factors. Finally, religious reminders may have contradictory influences on risk taking.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018. Vol. 10, no 3, p. 276-287
Keywords [en]
religion, public welfare, secularity, attachment, cross-cultural
National Category
Psychology Philosophy, Ethics and Religion
Research subject
Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-159012DOI: 10.1037/rel0000200ISI: 000440009400008OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-159012DiVA, id: diva2:1246717
Available from: 2018-09-10 Created: 2018-09-10 Last updated: 2019-01-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Gruneau Brulin, JoelGranqvist, Pehr
By organisation
Personality, Social and Developmental Psychology
In the same journal
Psychology of Religion and Spirituality
PsychologyPhilosophy, Ethics and Religion

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 48 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf