Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34252167›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

What shall we call God? An exploration of metaphors coded from descriptions of God from a large U.S. undergraduate sample.

Adam K Fetterman, Nicholas D Evans, Julie J Exline, Brian P Meier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Adam K FettermanDepartment of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5957-7670
Nicholas D EvansDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4799-7218
Julie J ExlineDepartment of Psychology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3544-2469
Brian P MeierDepartment of Psychology, Gettysburg College, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People use numerous metaphors to describe God. God is seen as a bearded man, light, and love. Based on metaphor theories, the metaphors people use to refer to God reflect how people think about God and could, in turn, reflect their worldview. However, little work has explored the common metaphors for God. This was the purpose of the current investigation. Four trained raters coded open-ended responses from predominantly Christian U.S. undergraduates (N = 2,923) describing God for the presence or absence of numerous metaphoric categories. We then assessed the frequency of each of the metaphor categories. We identified 16 metaphor categories that were present in more than 1% of the responses. The top categories were "GOD IS POWER," "GOD IS HUMAN," and "GOD IS MALE." These findings were similar across religious affiliations. We attempted to support our coding analysis using top-down and bottom-up automated language analysis. Results from these analyses provided added confidence to our conclusions. We discuss the implications of our findings and the potential for future studies investigating important psychological and behavioral outcomes of using different metaphors for God.

Indexed as

LanguageMetaphorHumansMaleReligion and PsychologyStudents

Identifiers

PMID34252167
PMCPMC8274864

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.