Situation beats stated religiosity in predicting selfishness

Evidence

In virtually all of these priming studies, reported religious involvement was unrelated to prosocial tendenies, while religious priming made a substantial difference. In addition, religious involvement was unrelated to helping rates in the Good Samaritan study and similar ones conducted in the United States, Canada, and Europe. Yet several other studies conducted outside North America and Europe, including a fifteen-society comparative investigation, have indeed found a clear link between religious involvement and prosociality. How can we explain this apparent puzzle? — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 186 (#qualifies, via linked claim)

The entire argument in this book can be summarized in eight interrelated principles. … 2. Religion is more in the situation than in the person. … 5. Religious actions speak louder than words. … 8. Religious groups cooperate in order to compete. — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 19 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Personal religiosity does not predict generosity in experiments.; Religious behavior depends on situational context, observable action, and intergroup competition — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 19; Self-reported religiosity predicts prosociality only outside secular Western societies — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 186 (+3 more)

Related

• Religiosity predicts helping only when one can be seen doing it (similarity 0.92)
• Self-reported religiosity predicts prosociality only outside secular Western societies (similarity 0.90)
• Personal religiosity does not predict generosity in experiments. (similarity 0.90)
• Religious identity alone does not make people more charitable (similarity 0.89)
• Religious behavior depends on situational context, observable action, and intergroup competition (similarity 0.88)
• Audible religious calls trigger generosity in non-Western settings (similarity 0.88)
• Religious situations boost prosociality more than personal devotion does (similarity 0.85)
• Religious priming boosts prosocial behavior only for believers, not non-believers. (similarity 0.84)
• Situational religious reminders, not personal religiosity, drive prosocial behavior (similarity 0.83)
• Religious participation, not belief, drives support for intergroup conflict (similarity 0.83)
• Secular authority primes increase stranger generosity as much as religious primes do. (similarity 0.83)
• Prosocial religious groups outcompeted rivals through internal cooperation. (similarity 0.82)
• Secular moral authority primes generosity as much as God does. (similarity 0.82)
• The null effects of religiosity on prosocial behavior reflect biased sampling of university students (similarity 0.82)
• Witnessing an intense ritual boosts prosociality as much as participating in it (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Religiosity predicts helping only when one can be seen doing it #exemplifies (0.90)
• Self-reported religiosity predicts prosociality only outside secular Western societies #qualifies (0.85) — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 186
• Religious behavior depends on situational context, observable action, and intergroup competition #expands (0.82) — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 19
• Supernatural punishment explains religion’s prosocial effects better than ideomotor priming #complicates (0.72)