Cited by 367Death Anxiety and Social ExclusionReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyDeath, Funerary Practices, and Mourning

Terror management and religion: Evidence that intrinsic religiousness mitigates worldview defense following mortality salience.

Jonas, Eva, Fischer, Peter·2006·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

Terror management theory suggests that people cope with awareness of death by investing in some kind of literal or symbolic immortality. Given the centrality of death transcendence beliefs in most religions, the authors hypothesized that religious beliefs play a protective role in managing terror of death. The authors report three studies suggesting that affirming intrinsic religiousness reduces both death-thought accessibility following mortality salience and the use of terror management defenses with regard to a secular belief system. Study 1 showed that after a naturally occurring reminder of mortality, people who scored high on intrinsic religiousness did not react with worldview defense, whereas people low on intrinsic religiousness did. Study 2 specified that intrinsic religious belief mitigated worldview defense only if participants had the opportunity to affirm their religious beliefs. Study 3 illustrated that affirmation of religious belief decreased death-thought accessibility following mortality salience only for those participants who scored high on the intrinsic religiousness scale. Taken as a whole, these results suggest that only those people who are intrinsically vested in their religion derive terror management benefits from religious beliefs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.91.3.553

Cites

16 of 16 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?

  • TMT has been applied to understand human activities such as religion, cultural identity, and inter-group conflict.

    “TMT has been applied to understand human activities such as religion (e.g., belief in an afterlife grants literal immortality, alleviating mortality terror; Jonas & Fischer, 2006), cultural identity (e.g., belief in being part of a greater good that will persist after death; Greenberg et al., 1990), and inter-group conflict (Burke et al., 2010).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jonas, E., & Fischer, P.
Affiliations
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
2006
Volume
91
Issue
3
Pages
553-567
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2058291953
Cited by
367
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 21
FWCI
15.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
Keywords
terror management theory, intrinsic religiosity, mortality salience, worldview defense, death-thought accessibility, coping with death
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Attitude to Death, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Religion, Terrorism

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