Cited by 145

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluating ritual efficacy: Evidence from the supernatural

Legare, Cristine H., Souza, André L.·2012·Cognition

Abstract

Rituals pose a cognitive paradox: although widely used to treat problems, rituals are causally opaque (i.e., they lack a causal explanation for their effects). How is the efficacy of ritual action evaluated in the absence of causal information? To examine this question using ecologically valid content, three studies (N=162) were conducted in Brazil, a cultural context in which rituals called simpatias are used to treat a great variety of problems ranging from asthma to infidelity. Using content from existing simpatias, experimental simpatias were designed to manipulate the kinds of information that influences perceptions of efficacy. A fourth study (N=68) with identical stimuli was conducted with a US sample to assess the generalizability of the findings across two different cultural contexts. The results provide evidence that information reflecting intuitive causal principles (i.e., repetition of procedures, number of procedural steps) and transcendental influence (i.e., presence of religious icons) affects how people evaluate ritual efficacy.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.03.004

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. Atran, 2004, Religion’s evolutionary landscape: Counterintuition, commitment, compassion, communion, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 713, 10.1017/S0140525X04000172 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Barrett, 2002, Smart gods, dumb gods, and the role of social cognition in structuring ritual intuitions, Journal of Cognition and Culture, 2, 183, 10.1163/15685370260225080 · DOI
  3. Barrett, 2001, Ritual intuitions: Cognitive contributions to judgments of ritual efficacy, Journal of Cognition and Culture, 1, 183, 10.1163/156853701316931407 · DOI
  4. Barrett, 2007, A cognitive typology of religious actions, Journal of Cognition and Culture, 7, 201, 10.1163/156853707X208486 · DOI
  5. Bloch, 2004, Bringing ritual to mind: Psychological foundations of cultural forms, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 10, 202
  6. Boyer, 2006, Why ritualized behavior? Precaution systems and action-parsing in developmental, pathological and cultural rituals, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29, 1
  7. Cohen, 2008, When minds migrate: Conceptualizing spirit possession, Journal of Cognition and Culture, 8, 23, 10.1163/156770908X289198 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Hume, D. (1740). A treatise of human nature (1967 ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  9. Keil, 2011, Science starts early, Science, 331, 1023, 10.1126/science.1195221 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Legare, 2008, Bewitchment, biology, or both: The co-existence of natural and supernatural explanatory frameworks across development, Cognitive Science, 32, 607, 10.1080/03640210802066766 · DOI
  11. Markman, 2010, The optimal level of fuzz: Case studies in a methodology for psychological research, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 21, 197, 10.1080/09528130903065380 · DOI
  12. Norenzayan, 2009, Mortality salience and religion: Divergent effects on the defense of cultural values for the religious and the non-religious, European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 101, 10.1002/ejsp.482 · DOI
  13. Norenzayan, 2006, Belief in supernatural agents in the face of death, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 174, 10.1177/0146167205280251 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Oppenheimer, 2008, The secret life of fluency, Trends in Cognitive Science, 12, 237, 10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.014 · DOI
  15. Sax, 2004, Healing rituals: A critical performative approach, Anthropology and Medicine, II, 293, 10.1080/1364847042000296572 · DOI
  16. Scott, 2008, The conscious, the unconscious, and familiarity, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 35, 1264
  17. Shultz, 1982, Rules of causal attribution, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 47, 1, 10.2307/1165893 · DOI
  18. Sørensen, 2006, Agent and instrument in evaluations of ritual efficacy, Journal of Cognition and Culture, 6, 463, 10.1163/156853706778554977 · DOI
  19. Souza, 2011, The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise, Religion, Brain & Behavior, 2, 1
  20. Tambiah, 1979, A performative approach to ritual, Proceedings of the British Academy, 45, 113
  21. Whitehouse, 2001, Transmissive frequency, ritual, and exegesis, Journal of Cognition and Culture, 1, 167, 10.1163/156853701316931399 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 145

Metadata

Authors
Legare, C. H., & Souza, A. L.
Venue
Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-07
Volume
124
Issue
1
Pages
1-15
ISSN
0010-0277
Cited by
145
References
4
Language
en

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluating ritual efficacy: Evidence from the supernatural. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.03.004
The paper
Legare, C. H., & Souza, A. L. (2012). Evaluating ritual efficacy: Evidence from the supernatural. Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.03.004