超自然的操作规则:人们如何想象和体验上帝、魔鬼、鬼魂/精灵、命运/宿命、业力和运气。

IF 2.2 1区 哲学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Julie J. Exline, J. Wilt, Nick Stauner, William A. Schutt, K. Pargament, F. Fincham, R. May
{"title":"超自然的操作规则:人们如何想象和体验上帝、魔鬼、鬼魂/精灵、命运/宿命、业力和运气。","authors":"Julie J. Exline, J. Wilt, Nick Stauner, William A. Schutt, K. Pargament, F. Fincham, R. May","doi":"10.1037/rel0000444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How do people decide whether a supernatural entity (God, the devil, ghosts/spirits, fate/destiny, karma, or luck) has intervened in their lives? Their decisions may depend partly on how well the event fits with beliefs about the entity’s supernatural operating rules, such as the entity’s power, scope of communication, and intent. We examined these ideas among undergraduates from three U.S. universities (N = 3840). To assess beliefs about power, we asked questions like these: Do you believe that God has the power to violate natural laws and to work indirectly through nature? Can the devil affect many parts of people’s lives, such as thoughts, relationships, and health? To assess beliefs about scope of communication, we asked about frequency (How often do ghosts/spirits try to communicate with people?), breadth (Does God try to communicate with many people, or just a few?), and modes (Does the devil communicate in multiple ways?). To assess intent, we asked about positive, negative, and justice-maintaining intentions ascribed to the entities. God was clearly seen as most powerful and intentional, with the broadest scope of communication. In most ways, ghosts/spirits were rated least influential. Impersonal forces and the devil were rated between God and ghosts/spirits in terms of influence. Correlations and regressions confirmed that beliefs about power, scope of communication, and intent all predicted more perceived experiences with entities. These findings, coupled with other research on supernatural beliefs and attributions, help to explain why some people perceive high levels of supernatural activity and communication while others do not. (250 words)","PeriodicalId":47450,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Supernatural operating rules: How people envision and experience God, the devil, ghosts/spirits, fate/destiny, karma, and luck.\",\"authors\":\"Julie J. Exline, J. Wilt, Nick Stauner, William A. Schutt, K. Pargament, F. Fincham, R. May\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/rel0000444\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"How do people decide whether a supernatural entity (God, the devil, ghosts/spirits, fate/destiny, karma, or luck) has intervened in their lives? Their decisions may depend partly on how well the event fits with beliefs about the entity’s supernatural operating rules, such as the entity’s power, scope of communication, and intent. We examined these ideas among undergraduates from three U.S. universities (N = 3840). To assess beliefs about power, we asked questions like these: Do you believe that God has the power to violate natural laws and to work indirectly through nature? Can the devil affect many parts of people’s lives, such as thoughts, relationships, and health? To assess beliefs about scope of communication, we asked about frequency (How often do ghosts/spirits try to communicate with people?), breadth (Does God try to communicate with many people, or just a few?), and modes (Does the devil communicate in multiple ways?). To assess intent, we asked about positive, negative, and justice-maintaining intentions ascribed to the entities. God was clearly seen as most powerful and intentional, with the broadest scope of communication. In most ways, ghosts/spirits were rated least influential. Impersonal forces and the devil were rated between God and ghosts/spirits in terms of influence. Correlations and regressions confirmed that beliefs about power, scope of communication, and intent all predicted more perceived experiences with entities. These findings, coupled with other research on supernatural beliefs and attributions, help to explain why some people perceive high levels of supernatural activity and communication while others do not. (250 words)\",\"PeriodicalId\":47450,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000444\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Religion and Spirituality","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000444","RegionNum":1,"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: 9

摘要

人们如何判断一个超自然的实体(上帝、魔鬼、鬼/灵、命运/宿命、因果报应或运气)是否干预了他们的生活?他们的决定可能部分取决于事件是否符合人们对实体超自然运作规则的信念,比如实体的力量、交流范围和意图。我们在三所美国大学的本科生(N = 3840)中检验了这些观点。为了评估人们对权力的看法,我们问了这样的问题:你相信上帝有能力违反自然法则,并通过自然间接地发挥作用吗?魔鬼能影响人们生活的方方面面吗,比如思想、人际关系和健康?为了评估人们对交流范围的看法,我们询问了频率(鬼魂/灵魂多久与人交流一次?)、广度(上帝是试图与很多人交流,还是只与几个人交流?)和模式(魔鬼是否以多种方式交流?)。为了评估意图,我们询问了归因于实体的积极、消极和维护正义的意图。上帝显然被认为是最强大、最有意图的,拥有最广泛的交流范围。在大多数情况下,鬼魂/精灵的影响力最小。在影响力方面,非人格化的力量和魔鬼被评为介于上帝和鬼魂之间。相关性和回归证实,关于权力、交流范围和意图的信念都预示着更多的实体感知体验。这些发现,再加上其他关于超自然信仰和归因的研究,有助于解释为什么有些人能感受到高度的超自然活动和交流,而另一些人却不能。(250字)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Supernatural operating rules: How people envision and experience God, the devil, ghosts/spirits, fate/destiny, karma, and luck.
How do people decide whether a supernatural entity (God, the devil, ghosts/spirits, fate/destiny, karma, or luck) has intervened in their lives? Their decisions may depend partly on how well the event fits with beliefs about the entity’s supernatural operating rules, such as the entity’s power, scope of communication, and intent. We examined these ideas among undergraduates from three U.S. universities (N = 3840). To assess beliefs about power, we asked questions like these: Do you believe that God has the power to violate natural laws and to work indirectly through nature? Can the devil affect many parts of people’s lives, such as thoughts, relationships, and health? To assess beliefs about scope of communication, we asked about frequency (How often do ghosts/spirits try to communicate with people?), breadth (Does God try to communicate with many people, or just a few?), and modes (Does the devil communicate in multiple ways?). To assess intent, we asked about positive, negative, and justice-maintaining intentions ascribed to the entities. God was clearly seen as most powerful and intentional, with the broadest scope of communication. In most ways, ghosts/spirits were rated least influential. Impersonal forces and the devil were rated between God and ghosts/spirits in terms of influence. Correlations and regressions confirmed that beliefs about power, scope of communication, and intent all predicted more perceived experiences with entities. These findings, coupled with other research on supernatural beliefs and attributions, help to explain why some people perceive high levels of supernatural activity and communication while others do not. (250 words)
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
74
期刊介绍: Psychology of Religion and Spirituality ® publishes peer-reviewed, original articles related to the psychological aspects of religion and spirituality. The journal publishes articles employing experimental and correlational methods, qualitative analyses, and critical reviews of the literature. Papers evaluating clinically relevant issues surrounding training, professional development, and practice are also considered. Full length research reports, literature reviews, and brief reports are all published.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信