ReviewPsychological bulletin2015
Religion and morality.
Review in Psychological bulletin, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Belief in belief: Even atheists in secular countries show intuitive preferences favoring religious belief.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Article
- Digital religion and Generation Z: an empirical study in the context of China.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Relationship between religious coping and post-traumatic stress disorder and professional quality of life of nurses working at COVID-19 wards: a descriptive correlational study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- The Long Road from Religious and Ethical Traditions to Welfare of Invertebrates.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Ethical and moral principles for oncology healthcare workers: A brief report from a Bioethics consortium emphasizing on need for education.Journal of education and health promotion · 2024Review
- Light Personality Style and Moral Injury Among Chinese Health Professionals.Journal of religion and health · 2023Article
- Thinking about God increases acceptance of artificial intelligence in decision-making.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Gods are watching and so what? Moralistic supernatural punishment across 15 cultures.Evolutionary human sciences · 2023Article
- The Role of Religion and Religiosity in Health-Promoting Care for the Body During the Lockdowns caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic in Egypt, Poland and Romania.Journal of religion and health · 2022Article
- "Speak of the Devil… and he Shall Appear": Religiosity, Unconsciousness, and the Effects of Explicit Priming in the Misperception of Immorality.Psychological research · 2022Article
- Religious Coping During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Gender, Occupational and Socio-economic Perspectives Among Malaysian Frontline Healthcare Workers.Alpha psychiatry · 2021Article
- The sex premium in religiously motivated moral judgment.Journal of personality and social psychology · 2021Article
- Posterior medial frontal cortex and threat-enhanced religious belief: a replication and extension.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2020Article
- The cultural evolutionary trade-off of ritualistic synchrony.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020Review
- The relationship between individual differences in gray matter volume and religiosity and mystical experiences: A preregistered voxel-based morphometry study.The European journal of neuroscience · 2020Article
- Article
- Not All Skepticism Is Equal: Exploring the Ideological Antecedents of Science Acceptance and Rejection.Personality & social psychology bulletin · 2018Article
- Article
- Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of Self-Transcendence Scale: Adolescent Version.International journal of community based nursing and midwifery · 2016Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The relationship between religion and morality has long been hotly debated. Does religion make us more moral? Is it necessary for morality? Do moral inclinations emerge independently of religious intuitions? These debates, which nowadays rumble on in scientific journals as well as in public life, have frequently been marred by a series of conceptual confusions and limitations. Many scientific investigations have failed to decompose "religion" and "morality" into theoretically grounded elements; have adopted parochial conceptions of key concepts-in particular, sanitized conceptions of "prosocial" behavior; and have neglected to consider the complex interplay between cognition and culture. We argue that to make progress, the categories "religion" and "morality" must be fractionated into a set of biologically and psychologically cogent traits, revealing the cognitive foundations that shape and constrain relevant cultural variants. We adopt this fractionating strategy, setting out an encompassing evolutionary framework within which to situate and evaluate relevant evidence. Our goals are twofold: to produce a detailed picture of the current state of the field, and to provide a road map for future research on the relationship between religion and morality.
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.