How Education and Metacognitive Training May Ameliorate Religious Prejudices: A Randomized Controlled Trial

IF 1.7 2区 哲学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
S. Moritz, Kaser Ahmed, N. Krott, Isgard Ohls, K. Reininger
{"title":"How Education and Metacognitive Training May Ameliorate Religious Prejudices: A Randomized Controlled Trial","authors":"S. Moritz, Kaser Ahmed, N. Krott, Isgard Ohls, K. Reininger","doi":"10.1080/10508619.2020.1815994","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Religious tensions in Western countries are growing and pose a challenge to societal peace. For the present study, we examined the attitudes of Christians, Muslims, and people with no religious affiliation toward the three major monotheistic religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. In the framework of a randomized controlled trial, we explored the extent to which five conditions (three metacognitive, one educational, and one control) changed participants’ attitudes toward their own faith and other faiths. In the educational condition, information was conveyed in a simple narrative form, whereas in the metacognitive conditions participants were asked seemingly simple questions that frequently elicit incorrect responses followed by the correct responses along with corrective information (either immediately or after a delay). Christian and Muslim participants appraised their own religion as tolerant. The metacognitive interventions were significantly more successful than the control condition in reducing prejudice overall. Christians improved their attitudes toward Judaism and Islam in the metacognitive conditions. Muslims, however, showed more positive appraisals of Judaism and their own religion but not of Christianity (which showed a slight but nonsignificant decline) following the intervention. We discuss the possible contribution of particular questionnaire items to the latter unexpected result. Participants evaluated the information provided by the educational intervention as less interesting relative to the metacognitive approach.","PeriodicalId":47234,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for the Psychology of Religion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10508619.2020.1815994","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for the Psychology of Religion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2020.1815994","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT Religious tensions in Western countries are growing and pose a challenge to societal peace. For the present study, we examined the attitudes of Christians, Muslims, and people with no religious affiliation toward the three major monotheistic religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. In the framework of a randomized controlled trial, we explored the extent to which five conditions (three metacognitive, one educational, and one control) changed participants’ attitudes toward their own faith and other faiths. In the educational condition, information was conveyed in a simple narrative form, whereas in the metacognitive conditions participants were asked seemingly simple questions that frequently elicit incorrect responses followed by the correct responses along with corrective information (either immediately or after a delay). Christian and Muslim participants appraised their own religion as tolerant. The metacognitive interventions were significantly more successful than the control condition in reducing prejudice overall. Christians improved their attitudes toward Judaism and Islam in the metacognitive conditions. Muslims, however, showed more positive appraisals of Judaism and their own religion but not of Christianity (which showed a slight but nonsignificant decline) following the intervention. We discuss the possible contribution of particular questionnaire items to the latter unexpected result. Participants evaluated the information provided by the educational intervention as less interesting relative to the metacognitive approach.
教育和元认知训练如何改善宗教偏见:一项随机对照试验
西方国家的宗教紧张局势日益加剧,对社会和平构成挑战。在目前的研究中,我们调查了基督徒、穆斯林和无宗教信仰的人对三大一神论宗教的态度:犹太教、基督教和伊斯兰教。在随机对照试验的框架下,我们探索了五种条件(三种元认知条件,一种教育条件和一种对照条件)在多大程度上改变了参与者对自己信仰和其他信仰的态度。在教育条件下,信息以简单的叙述形式传达,而在元认知条件下,参与者被问及看似简单的问题,这些问题经常引起错误的回答,然后是正确的回答和纠正信息(要么立即回答,要么延迟回答)。基督徒和穆斯林参与者评价他们自己的宗教是宽容的。元认知干预在总体上减少偏见方面比对照组更成功。在元认知条件下,基督徒对犹太教和伊斯兰教的态度有所改善。然而,在干预之后,穆斯林对犹太教和他们自己的宗教表现出更积极的评价,而对基督教则没有(基督教表现出轻微但不显著的下降)。我们讨论了特定问卷项目对后者意外结果的可能贡献。参与者评价教育干预提供的信息相对于元认知方法不那么有趣。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
4.50%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion (IJPR) is devoted to psychological studies of religious processes and phenomena in all religious traditions. This journal provides a means for sustained discussion of psychologically relevant issues that can be examined empirically and concern religion in the most general sense. It presents articles covering a variety of important topics, such as the social psychology of religion, religious development, conversion, religious experience, religion and social attitudes and behavior, religion and mental health, and psychoanalytic and other theoretical interpretations of religion. The journal publishes research reports, brief research reports, commentaries on relevant topical issues, book reviews, and statements addressing articles published in previous issues. The journal may also include a major essay and commentaries, perspective papers of the theory, and articles on the psychology of religion in a specific country.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信