Why Religion’s Burdens Are Light: From Religiosity to Implicit Self-Regulation
Abstract
To maintain religious standards, individuals must frequently endure aversive or forsake pleasurable experiences. Yet religious individuals on average display higher levels of emotional well-being compared to nonreligious individuals. The present article seeks to resolve this paradox by suggesting that many forms of religion may facilitate a self-regulatory mode that is flexible, efficient, and largely unconscious. In this implicit mode of self-regulation, religious individuals may be able to strive for high standards and simultaneously maintain high emotional well-being. A review of the empirical literature confirmed that religious stimuli and practices foster implicit self-regulation, particularly among individuals who fully internalized their religion’s standards. The present work suggests that some seemingly irrational aspects of religion may have important psychological benefits by promoting implicit self-regulation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Koole et al. (2010) found that prayer could consistently ameliorate negative moods.
“Similarly, Koole et al. (2010) found that prayer could consistently ameliorate negative moods.”
From Repetitive Religious Chanting Modulates the Late-Stage Brain Response to Fear- and Stress-Provoking Pictures (2017) · cites this paper as Koole et al., 2010
The goal-regulatory process can also be achieved on a more implicit level.
“This goal-regulatory process can also be achieved on a more implicit level (Koole, McCullough, Kuhl, & Roelofsma, 2010).”
From The Psychology of Rituals: An Integrative Review and Process-Based Framework (2018) · cites this paper as Koole, McCullough, Kuhl, & Roelofsma, 2010
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 118 · Cited by 130
- Authors
- Koole, S. L., McCullough, M. E., Kuhl, J., & Roelofsma, P. H. M. P.
- Affiliations
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
- University of Miami (US)
- University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany
- Corresponding author
- Koole, Sander L.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-11-30
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 95-107
- ISSN
- 1088-8683 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7957
- OpenAlex
- W2398438771
- Cited by
- 130
- References
- 118
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 6.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Personality and Social Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (publishedVersion)
- Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
- Keywords
- religion, religiosity, emotional well-being, religious internalization
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Culture, Emotions, Existentialism, Fear, Humans, Internal-External Control, Object Attachment, Quality of Life, Religion and Psychology, Social Conformity, Social Identification, Unconscious, Psychology, Uncertainty
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