Department of Psychology, Grand Valley State University, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI 49401, USA.
Psychol Bull. 2012 Sep;138(5):876-906. doi: 10.1037/a0028251.
Numerous authors have suggested that religious belief has a positive association, possibly causal, with prosocial behavior. This article critiques evidence regarding this "religious prosociality" hypothesis from several areas of the literature. The extant literature on religious prosociality is reviewed including domains of charity, volunteering, morality, personality, and well-being. The experimental and quasi-experimental literature regarding controlled prosocial interactions (e.g., sharing and generosity) is reviewed and contrasted with results from naturalistic studies. Conceptual problems in the interpretation of this literature include separating the effects of stereotypes and ingroup biases from impression formation as well as controlling for self-report biases in the measurement of religious prosociality. Many effects attributed to religious processes can be explained in terms of general nonreligious psychological effects. Methodological problems that limit the interpretation of religious prosociality studies include the use of inappropriate comparison groups and the presence of criterion contamination in measures yielding misleading conclusions. Specifically, it is common practice to compare high levels of religiosity with "low religiosity" (e.g., the absence of denominational membership, lack of church attendance, or the low importance of religion), which conflates indifferent or uncommitted believers with the completely nonreligious. Finally, aspects of religious stereotype endorsement and ingroup bias can contribute to nonprosocial effects. These factors necessitate a revision of the religious prosociality hypothesis and suggest that future research should incorporate more stringent controls in order to reach less ambiguous conclusions.
许多作者认为,宗教信仰与亲社会行为之间存在积极的关联,这种关联可能是因果关系。本文从多个文献领域批判了这种“宗教亲社会性”假说的证据。本文回顾了宗教亲社会性的现有文献,包括慈善、志愿服务、道德、人格和幸福感等领域。本文还回顾了关于受控亲社会互动(如分享和慷慨)的实验和准实验文献,并将其与自然主义研究的结果进行了对比。解释这些文献时存在概念问题,包括将刻板印象和内群体偏见的影响与印象形成区分开来,以及在衡量宗教亲社会性时控制自我报告偏见。许多归因于宗教过程的影响可以用一般的非宗教心理影响来解释。限制宗教亲社会性研究解释的方法学问题包括使用不适当的对照组和在产生误导性结论的测量中存在标准污染。具体来说,常见的做法是将高宗教水平与“低宗教水平”(例如,没有教派成员身份、不参加教堂活动或宗教不重要)进行比较,这将冷漠或不坚定的信徒与完全非宗教的信徒混为一谈。最后,宗教刻板印象认可和内群体偏见的各个方面都可能导致非亲社会的影响。这些因素需要对宗教亲社会性假说进行修订,并建议未来的研究应采用更严格的控制措施,以得出更明确的结论。