Cited by 112Psychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationViolence, Religion, and Philosophy

Outsourcing punishment to God: beliefs in divine control reduce earthly punishment.

Open access
Laurin, Kristin, Shariff, Azim F., Henrich, Joseph, Kay, Aaron C.·2012·Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

The sanctioning of norm-transgressors is a necessary—though often costly—task for maintaining a well-functioning society. Prior to effective and reliable secular institutions for punishment, large-scale societies depended on individuals engaging in ‘altruistic punishment’—bearing the costs of punishment individually, for the benefit of society. Evolutionary approaches to religion suggest that beliefs in powerful, moralizing Gods, who can distribute rewards and punishments, emerged as a way to augment earthly punishment in large societies that could not effectively monitor norm violations. In five studies, we investigate whether such beliefs in God can replace people's motivation to engage in altruistic punishment, and their support for state-sponsored punishment. Results show that, although religiosity generally predicts higher levels of punishment, the specific belief in powerful, intervening Gods reduces altruistic punishment and support for state-sponsored punishment. Moreover, these effects are specifically owing to differences in people's perceptions that humans are responsible for punishing wrongdoers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspb.2012.0615

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Beliefs that emphasize submission, sacrifice, or divine testing may lead individuals to remain in harmful relationships, delaying intervention and increasing risk.

    “For example, beliefs that emphasize submission, sacrifice, or divine testing may lead individuals to remain in harmful relationships, delaying intervention and increasing risk (Laurin et al., 2012; Martel et al., 2021).”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 56 · Cited by 112

Authors
Laurin, K., Shariff, A. F., Henrich, J., & Kay, A. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
  • University of Oregon (US)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Laurin, Kristin
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2012-05-23
Volume
279
Issue
1741
Pages
3272-3281
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 0962-8452
  • 1471-2954
OpenAlex
W2117894654
Cited by
112
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 1
FWCI
4.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (ES/I005455/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Violence, Religion, and Philosophy
Keywords
altruistic punishment, divine punishment, moralizing gods, religiosity, social sanctions, norm violation, evolutionary theory of religion, large-scale cooperation
MeSH terms
Altruism, Cooperative Behavior, Cultural Evolution, Culture, Humans, Punishment, Religion

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