J 2016

Religious Cognition and Behaviour in Autism: The Role of Mentalizing

REDDISH, Paul, Penny TOK SIEW LING a Radek KUNDT

Základní údaje

Originální název

Religious Cognition and Behaviour in Autism: The Role of Mentalizing

Autoři

REDDISH, Paul (554 Nový Zéland, domácí), Penny TOK SIEW LING (702 Singapur, domácí) a Radek KUNDT (826 Velká Británie a Severní Irsko, garant, domácí)

Vydání

The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, Roma, Taylor & Francis Group, 2016, 1050-8619

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Článek v odborném periodiku

Obor

60300 6.3 Philosophy, Ethics and Religion

Stát vydavatele

Spojené státy

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Impakt faktor

Impact factor: 0.897

Kód RIV

RIV/00216224:14210/16:00089155

Organizační jednotka

Filozofická fakulta

DOI

UT WoS

000372701800001

Klíčová slova anglicky

agency; anthropomorphism; asperger syndrome; autism spectrum disorders; behaviour; belief; cognitive science; mentalizing; prayer; religion; ritual; theory of mind

Štítky

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno
Změněno: 27. 3. 2017 11:52, Mgr. Vendula Hromádková

Anotace

V originále

Mentalizing, or theory of mind, has been argued to be critical for supporting religious beliefs and practices involving supernatural agents. As individuals with autism spectrum conditions have been found to have deficits in mentalizing, this raises the question as to how they may conceive of gods and behave in relation to gods. To examine this, we compared high functioning individuals with autism (HFA) to typically developing individuals across seven key aspects of religious cognition and behaviour: (1) strength of belief; (2) anthropomorphism of god concepts; (3) felt closeness towards the god; (4) prayer habits; (5) attraction to prayer; (6) efficacy of prayer; and (7) a sense of agency whilst praying. A battery of mentalizing tasks was administered to measure mentalizing ability, along with the Autism-Spectrum Quotient. As expected, typically developing subjects performed better than HFA subjects in the advanced mentalizing task. However, no statistically significant differences were found with first order and second order false belief tasks. In contrast to our predictions and previous research on the religiosity of HFA, we found very little differences between the groups in their religious cognition and behaviour. Moreover, the relationship between mentalizing ability and most of our measures of religious cognition and behaviour was weak and negative. Our data suggest that HFA's deficits in mentalizing appear to have only minimal impact on the way they interact and think about gods. We end the paper by re-evaluating the role mentalizing may have in religious cognition and behaviour.

Návaznosti

EE2.3.20.0048, projekt VaV
Název: Laboratoř pro experimentální výzkum náboženství