Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40146854›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025

Belief in belief: Even atheists in secular countries show intuitive preferences favoring religious belief.

Will M Gervais, Ryan T McKay, Jazmin L Brown-Iannuzzi, Robert M Ross, Gordon Pennycook, Jonathan Jong, Jonathan A Lanman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Intention judgments are not a reliable measure of intuitive preferences.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  3. Reply to Quillien: Intuitive preferences and interpretive humility in intentionality judgments.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    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

7 authors.

Will M GervaisDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Culture and Evolution, Psychology, Brunel University of London, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7790-1665
Ryan T McKayDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham TW20 0EX, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7781-1539
Jazmin L Brown-IannuzziDepartment of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2628.ORCID 0000-0002-2247-8385
Robert M RossSchool of Humanities, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, NSW 2113, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8711-1675
Gordon PennycookDepartment of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853.ORCID 0000-0003-1344-6143
Jonathan JongDepartment of Psychology, Coventry University, Coventry CV1 5FB, United Kingdom.
Jonathan A LanmanDepartment of Psychology, School of History, Anthropology, Philosophy and Politics, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast BT7 1NN, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4691-5922

Funding

John Templeton Foundation (JTF) 60624John Templeton Foundation (JTF) 61928John Templeton Foundation (JTF) 62631Leverhulme Trust naNOMIS Stiftung (NOMIS Foundation) na
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We find evidence of

Indexed as

CultureIntuitionReligionReligion and PsychologySecularismAdultCross-Cultural ComparisonFemaleHumansJapanMaleMiddle AgedUnited Kingdomatheismculture evolutiondual inheritance theoryintuitionsreligion

Identifiers

PMID40146854
PMCPMC12002237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.