ArticlePerspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science2014
Confronting, Representing, and Believing Counterintuitive Concepts: Navigating the Natural and the Supernatural.
Article in Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correspondence in parents' and children's concepts of god: Investigating the role of parental values, religious practices and executive functioning.The British journal of developmental psychology · 2022Article
- Varieties of Ignorance: Mystery and the Unknown in Science and Religion.Cognitive science · 2022Article
- Giving Up on Consciousness as the Ghost in the Machine.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- The moral barrier effect: Real and imagined barriers can reduce cheating.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020Article
- God, Germs, and Evolution: Belief in Unobservable Religious and Scientific Entities in the U.S. and China.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2019Article
- The Influence of First-Hand Testimony and Hearsay on Children's Belief in the Improbable.Child development · 2018Article
- Dimensional Structure of and Variation in Anthropomorphic Concepts of God.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
- How Children and Adults Represent God's Mind.Cognitive science · 2016Review
- Infants Understand How Testimony Works.Topoi : an international review of philosophy · 2014Article
- What do Different Beliefs Tell us? An Examination of Factual, Opinion-Based, and Religious Beliefs.Cognitive development · 2014Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent research shows that even preschoolers are skeptical; they frequently reject claims from other people when the claims conflict with their own perceptions and concepts. Yet, despite their skepticism, both children and adults come to believe in a variety of phenomena that defy their first-hand perceptions and intuitive conceptions of the world. In this review, we explore how children and adults acquire such concepts. We describe how a similar developmental process underlies mental representation of both the natural and the supernatural world, and we detail this process for two prominent supernatural counterintuitive ideas-God and the afterlife. In doing so, we highlight the fact that conceptual development does not always move in the direction of greater empirical truth, as described within naturalistic domains. We consider factors that likely help overcome skepticism and, in doing so, promote belief in counterintuitive phenomena. These factors include qualities of the learners, aspects of the context, qualities of the informants, and qualities of the information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.