Cargando…

Dimensional Structure of and Variation in Anthropomorphic Concepts of God

When considering other persons, the human mind draws from folk theories of biology, physics, and psychology. Studies have examined the extent to which people utilize these folk theories in inferring whether or not God has human-like biological, physical, and psychological constraints. However, few s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shaman, Nicholas J., Saide, Anondah R., Richert, Rebekah A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6095990/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30147668
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01425
_version_ 1783348026498088960
author Shaman, Nicholas J.
Saide, Anondah R.
Richert, Rebekah A.
author_facet Shaman, Nicholas J.
Saide, Anondah R.
Richert, Rebekah A.
author_sort Shaman, Nicholas J.
collection PubMed
description When considering other persons, the human mind draws from folk theories of biology, physics, and psychology. Studies have examined the extent to which people utilize these folk theories in inferring whether or not God has human-like biological, physical, and psychological constraints. However, few studies have examined the way in which these folk attributions relate to each other, the extent to which attributions within a domain are consistent, or whether cultural factors influence human-like attributions within and across domains. The present study assessed 341 individuals’ attributions of anthropomorphic properties to God in three domains (psychological, biological, and physical), their religious beliefs, and their engagement in religious practices. Three Confirmatory Factor Analyses tested hypothetical models of the underlying structure of an anthropomorphic concept of God. The best fitting model was the “Hierarchical Dimensions Concept,” the analyses indicated one overall dimension of anthropomorphism with three sub-domains. Additionally, participants’ religiosity was negatively related to attributing human-like psychological properties to God, suggesting that the more people engage with their religion, the less they think about God as having a ‘human-like’ mind. Religiosity was positively related to individual consistency scores in the biological domain. In other words, greater religiosity was related to less consistent answers about God’s biological properties. As a result, the findings of the current study also suggest that individuals do not just vary between each other in how much they anthropomorphize God, but additionally, variation exists in the type of anthropomorphic reasoning used within an individual person’s concept of God.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6095990
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60959902018-08-24 Dimensional Structure of and Variation in Anthropomorphic Concepts of God Shaman, Nicholas J. Saide, Anondah R. Richert, Rebekah A. Front Psychol Psychology When considering other persons, the human mind draws from folk theories of biology, physics, and psychology. Studies have examined the extent to which people utilize these folk theories in inferring whether or not God has human-like biological, physical, and psychological constraints. However, few studies have examined the way in which these folk attributions relate to each other, the extent to which attributions within a domain are consistent, or whether cultural factors influence human-like attributions within and across domains. The present study assessed 341 individuals’ attributions of anthropomorphic properties to God in three domains (psychological, biological, and physical), their religious beliefs, and their engagement in religious practices. Three Confirmatory Factor Analyses tested hypothetical models of the underlying structure of an anthropomorphic concept of God. The best fitting model was the “Hierarchical Dimensions Concept,” the analyses indicated one overall dimension of anthropomorphism with three sub-domains. Additionally, participants’ religiosity was negatively related to attributing human-like psychological properties to God, suggesting that the more people engage with their religion, the less they think about God as having a ‘human-like’ mind. Religiosity was positively related to individual consistency scores in the biological domain. In other words, greater religiosity was related to less consistent answers about God’s biological properties. As a result, the findings of the current study also suggest that individuals do not just vary between each other in how much they anthropomorphize God, but additionally, variation exists in the type of anthropomorphic reasoning used within an individual person’s concept of God. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-08-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6095990/ /pubmed/30147668 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01425 Text en Copyright © 2018 Shaman, Saide and Richert. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Shaman, Nicholas J.
Saide, Anondah R.
Richert, Rebekah A.
Dimensional Structure of and Variation in Anthropomorphic Concepts of God
title Dimensional Structure of and Variation in Anthropomorphic Concepts of God
title_full Dimensional Structure of and Variation in Anthropomorphic Concepts of God
title_fullStr Dimensional Structure of and Variation in Anthropomorphic Concepts of God
title_full_unstemmed Dimensional Structure of and Variation in Anthropomorphic Concepts of God
title_short Dimensional Structure of and Variation in Anthropomorphic Concepts of God
title_sort dimensional structure of and variation in anthropomorphic concepts of god
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6095990/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30147668
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01425
work_keys_str_mv AT shamannicholasj dimensionalstructureofandvariationinanthropomorphicconceptsofgod
AT saideanondahr dimensionalstructureofandvariationinanthropomorphicconceptsofgod
AT richertrebekaha dimensionalstructureofandvariationinanthropomorphicconceptsofgod