| Summary: | The dual-process model
of the mind predicts that religious belief will be stronger for intuitive
decisions, whereas reflective thinking will lead to religious disbelief (i.e.,
the Intuitive Religious Belief Hypothesis). While early research found
intuition to promote and reflection to weaken belief in God, more recent
attempts found no evidence for the intuitive religious belief hypothesis. Many
of the previous studies are underpowered to detect small effects, and it is not
clear whether the cognitive process manipulations used in these failed attempts
worked as intended. We investigated the influence of intuitive and reflective
thought on belief in God in two large-scale preregistered experiments (N =
1,602), using well-established cognitive manipulations (i.e., time-pressure
with incentives for compliance) and alternative elicitation methods (between
and within-subject designs). Against our initial hypothesis based on the
literature, the experiments provide first suggestive then confirmatory evidence
for the Reflective Religious Belief Hypothesis. Exploratory examination of the
data suggests that reflection increases doubts about beliefs held regarding
God’s existence. Reflective doubt exists primarily among non-believers,
resulting in an overall increase in belief in God when deciding reflectively.
|
|---|