Acts of God? Religiosity and Natural Disasters Across Subnational World Districts
Jeanet Sinding Bentzen. The Economic Journal, uez008, May 16 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/uez008
Abstract: Religious beliefs potentially influence individual behavior. But why are some societies more religious than others? One possible answer is religious coping: Individuals turn to religion to deal with unbearable and unpredictable life events. To investigate whether coping can explain global differences in religiosity, I combine a global dataset on individual-level religiosity with spatial data on natural disasters. Individuals become more religious if an earthquake recently hit close by. Even though the effect decreases after a while, data on children of immigrants reveal a persistent effect across generations. The results point to religious coping as the main mediating channel, but alternative explanations such as mutual insurance or migration cannot be ruled out entirely. The findings may help explain why religiosity has not vanished as some scholars once predicted.
Bipartisan Alliance, a Society for the Study of the US Constitution, and of Human Nature, where Republicans and Democrats meet.
Monday, July 8, 2019
How Children Come to Care About Reputation: The tendency to assume that others could evaluate one’s behavior and the default preference to elicit positive instead of negative evaluations
Evaluative Audience Perception (EAP): How Children Come to Care About Reputation. Sara Valencia Botto, Philippe Rochat. Child Development Perspectives, July 7 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12335
Abstract: Despite the fact that reputational concerns are central to human psychology, we know little about when and how children come to care about the evaluation of others. In this article, we review recent studies on reputational concerns in early childhood, and propose that evaluative audience perception (EAP) is necessary to understand the developmental origins of reputation. Specifically, we argue that EAP’s two defining components—the tendency to assume that others could evaluate one’s behavior and the default preference to elicit positive instead of negative evaluations—lay the foundation for the development of reputational concerns. We provide evidence suggesting that EAP would emerge by 24 months and conclude by suggesting possible developmental models of EAP.
Abstract: Despite the fact that reputational concerns are central to human psychology, we know little about when and how children come to care about the evaluation of others. In this article, we review recent studies on reputational concerns in early childhood, and propose that evaluative audience perception (EAP) is necessary to understand the developmental origins of reputation. Specifically, we argue that EAP’s two defining components—the tendency to assume that others could evaluate one’s behavior and the default preference to elicit positive instead of negative evaluations—lay the foundation for the development of reputational concerns. We provide evidence suggesting that EAP would emerge by 24 months and conclude by suggesting possible developmental models of EAP.
Is Empathy the Default Response to Suffering? A Meta-analytic Evaluation of Perspective-taking’s Effect on Empathic Concern
McAuliffe, William H., Evan C. Carter, Juliana Berhane, Alexander Snihur, and Michael E. McCullough. 2019. “Is Empathy the Default Response to Suffering? A Meta-analytic Evaluation of Perspective-taking’s Effect on Empathic Concern.” PsyArXiv. March 5. doi:10.31234/osf.io/bwxm9
Abstract: We conducted a series of meta-analytic tests on experiments in which participants read perspective-taking instructions—i.e., written instructions to imagine a distressed persons’ point of view (“imagine-self” and “imagine-other” instructions), or to inhibit such actions (“remain-objective” instructions)—and afterwards reported how much empathic concern they experienced after learning about the distressed person. If people spontaneously empathize with others, then participants who receive remain-objective instructions should report less empathic concern than do participants who do not receive instructions; if people can deliberately increase how much empathic concern they experience, then imagine-self and imagine-other instructions should increase empathic concern relative to not receiving any instructions. Random-effects models revealed that medium-sized differences between imagine and remain-objective instructions were driven by remain-objective instructions. The results were robust to most corrections for bias. Our conclusions were not qualified by the study characteristics we examined, but most theoretically relevant moderators have not yet been thoroughly studied.
Abstract: We conducted a series of meta-analytic tests on experiments in which participants read perspective-taking instructions—i.e., written instructions to imagine a distressed persons’ point of view (“imagine-self” and “imagine-other” instructions), or to inhibit such actions (“remain-objective” instructions)—and afterwards reported how much empathic concern they experienced after learning about the distressed person. If people spontaneously empathize with others, then participants who receive remain-objective instructions should report less empathic concern than do participants who do not receive instructions; if people can deliberately increase how much empathic concern they experience, then imagine-self and imagine-other instructions should increase empathic concern relative to not receiving any instructions. Random-effects models revealed that medium-sized differences between imagine and remain-objective instructions were driven by remain-objective instructions. The results were robust to most corrections for bias. Our conclusions were not qualified by the study characteristics we examined, but most theoretically relevant moderators have not yet been thoroughly studied.