Cognitive Reflection and Religious Belief: a Test of Two Models

dc.authorscopusid 57976071400
dc.authorscopusid 57782063900
dc.authorscopusid 57211604087
dc.authorscopusid 36082461900
dc.authorscopusid 57200182087
dc.authorscopusid 36631535000
dc.authorscopusid 36631535000
dc.contributor.author Şeker, F.
dc.contributor.author Acem, E.
dc.contributor.author Bayrak, F.
dc.contributor.author Dogruyol, B.
dc.contributor.author Isler, O.
dc.contributor.author Bahçekapili, H.G.
dc.contributor.author Yilmaz, O.
dc.date.accessioned 2025-02-15T19:38:26Z
dc.date.available 2025-02-15T19:38:26Z
dc.date.issued 2025
dc.department Kadir Has University en_US
dc.department-temp Şeker F., Department of Psychology, Kadir Has University, Istanbul, Türkiye, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, United States; Acem E., Department of Psychology, Kadir Has University, Istanbul, Türkiye; Bayrak F., Department of Psychology, Baskent University, Ankara, Türkiye; Dogruyol B., Department of Psychology, Kadir Has University, Istanbul, Türkiye; Isler O., Department of Economics, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia; Bahçekapili H.G., Department of Psychology, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Türkiye; Yilmaz O., Department of Psychology, Kadir Has University, Istanbul, Türkiye en_US
dc.description.abstract Existing research suggests a negative correlation between reflective thinking and religious belief. The dual process model (DPM) posits that reflection diminishes religious belief by limiting intuitive decisions. In contrast, the expressive rationality model (ERM) argues that reflection serves an identity-protective function by bolstering rather than modifying preexisting beliefs. Although the current literature tends to favor the DPM, many studies suffer from unbalanced samples. To avoid this limitation, we recruited comparably large number of participants for both religious believers (n = 580) and non-believers (n = 594) and observed the relationship between reflection and two measures of religious belief: belief in God and disbelief in evolution. Our findings corroborate the negative associations found between higher levels of reflection and both types of belief, independent of religious affiliation. Our results align with the broader literature, supporting the DPM but not the ERM. © The Author(s), 2025. en_US
dc.description.sponsorship Templeton Religion Trust, (TRT0424) en_US
dc.description.woscitationindex Social Science Citation Index
dc.identifier.citationcount 0
dc.identifier.doi 10.1017/jdm.2024.41
dc.identifier.issn 1930-2975
dc.identifier.scopus 2-s2.0-85217467090
dc.identifier.scopusquality Q2
dc.identifier.uri https://doi.org/10.1017/jdm.2024.41
dc.identifier.volume 20 en_US
dc.identifier.wos WOS:001409863700001
dc.identifier.wosquality Q2
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Society for Judgment and Decision making en_US
dc.relation.ispartof Judgment and Decision Making en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategory Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı en_US
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess en_US
dc.scopus.citedbyCount 0
dc.subject Belief In God en_US
dc.subject Cognitive Reflection en_US
dc.subject Cognitive Style en_US
dc.subject Dual-Process Model en_US
dc.subject Intuition en_US
dc.subject Religiosity en_US
dc.subject Religious Belief en_US
dc.subject Religious Disbelief en_US
dc.title Cognitive Reflection and Religious Belief: a Test of Two Models en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.wos.citedbyCount 0
dspace.entity.type Publication

Files