Cited by 480Evolution and Science EducationScience Education and PedagogyChild and Animal Learning Development

The Human Function Compunction: Teleological explanation in adults

Kelemen, Deborah, Rosset, Evelyn·2009·Cognition

Abstract

Research has found that children possess a broad bias in favor of teleological--or purpose-based--explanations of natural phenomena. The current two experiments explored whether adults implicitly possess a similar bias. In Study 1, undergraduates judged a series of statements as "good" (i.e., correct) or "bad" (i.e., incorrect) explanations for why different phenomena occur. Judgments occurred in one of three conditions: fast speeded, moderately speeded, or unspeeded. Participants in speeded conditions judged significantly more scientifically unwarranted teleological explanations as correct (e.g., "the sun radiates heat because warmth nurtures life"), but were not more error-prone on control items (e.g., unwarranted physical explanations such as "hills form because floodwater freezes"). Study 2 extended these findings by examining the relationship between different aspects of adults' "promiscuous teleology" and other variables such as scientific knowledge, religious beliefs, and inhibitory control. Implications of these findings for scientific literacy are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.01.001

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The creative power of blind selection conflicts with our teleological intuitions about functional complexity and our intuitive design stance.

    “Moreover, the creative power of blind selection also conflicts with our teleological intuitions (in the sense of goal-directedness) about functional complexity, and our intuitive design stance (Kelemen and Rosset 2009; Reiss 2009).”

    From Natural Selection Does Care about Truth (2014) · cites this paper as Kelemen and Rosset 2009

  • Teleological thinking is a cognitive default, to which people resort if they have no alternative explanations.

    “Subsequent experiments have demonstrated that teleological thinking is a cognitive default, to which people resort if they have no alternative explanations.”

    From The Challenge of Evolution to Religion (2019) · cites this paper as Kelemen & Rosset, 2009

  • These intuitions tend to translate into religious beliefs, but they can also contribute to a quasi-religious view on nature.

    “These intuitions tend to translate in religious beliefs, but they can also contribute to a 103 quasi-religious view on nature [30,31].”

    From Fatal attraction: the intuitive appeal of GMO opposition (2015) · cites this paper as [30]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 28 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kelemen, D., & Rosset, E.
Affiliations
Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Kelemen, Deborah
Venue
Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-04
Volume
111
Issue
1
Pages
138-143
ISSN
0010-0277 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2073307787
Cited by
480
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 24
FWCI
141.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Evolution and Science Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
teleological reasoning, implicit reasoning, scientific literacy, religious beliefs, inhibitory control, scientific knowledge, explanation evaluation
MeSH terms
Humans, Reading, Religion, Intuition, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review