Literature DB >> 23933505

Paranormal believers are more prone to illusory agency detection than skeptics.

Michiel van Elk1.   

Abstract

It has been hypothesized that illusory agency detection is at the basis of belief in supernatural agents and paranormal beliefs. In the present study a biological motion perception task was used to study illusory agency detection in a group of skeptics and a group of paranormal believers. Participants were required to detect the presence or absence of a human agent in a point-light display. It was found that paranormal believers had a lower perceptual sensitivity than skeptics, which was due to a response bias to 'yes' for stimuli in which no agent was present. The relation between paranormal beliefs and illusory agency detection held only for stimuli with low to intermediate ambiguity, but for stimuli with a high number of visual distractors responses of believers and skeptics were at the same level. Furthermore, it was found that illusory agency detection was unrelated to traditional religious belief and belief in witchcraft, whereas paranormal beliefs (i.e. Psi, spiritualism, precognition, superstition) were strongly related to illusory agency detection. These findings qualify the relation between illusory pattern perception and supernatural and paranormal beliefs and suggest that paranormal beliefs are strongly related to agency detection biases.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Agency detection; Biological motion; Illusory pattern perception; Paranormal beliefs; Signal detection theory

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23933505     DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2013.07.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Conscious Cogn        ISSN: 1053-8100


  17 in total

Review 1.  How Children and Adults Represent God's Mind.

Authors:  Larisa Heiphetz; Jonathan D Lane; Adam Waytz; Liane L Young
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2015-03-23

2.  Linking Agent Detection of Invisible Presences to the Self: Relevance for Religious and Spiritual Experiences.

Authors:  Neza Vehar; Jevita Potheegadoo; Olaf Blanke
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 3.617

3.  Paranormal beliefs and cognitive function: A systematic review and assessment of study quality across four decades of research.

Authors:  Charlotte E Dean; Shazia Akhtar; Tim M Gale; Karen Irvine; Dominique Grohmann; Keith R Laws
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-05-04       Impact factor: 3.752

4.  Paranormal psychic believers and skeptics: a large-scale test of the cognitive differences hypothesis.

Authors:  Stephen J Gray; David A Gallo
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-02

5.  Apophenia and anesthesia: how we sometimes change our practice prematurely.

Authors:  Neil A Hanson; Matthew B Lavallee; Robert H Thiele
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2021-05-07       Impact factor: 6.713

Review 6.  Religion and morality.

Authors:  Ryan McKay; Harvey Whitehouse
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2014-12-22       Impact factor: 17.737

7.  Perceptual Biases in Relation to Paranormal and Conspiracy Beliefs.

Authors:  Michiel van Elk
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Linking unfounded beliefs to genetic dopamine availability.

Authors:  Katharina Schmack; Hannes Rössler; Maria Sekutowicz; Eva J Brandl; Daniel J Müller; Predrag Petrovic; Philipp Sterzer
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2015-09-30       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  Individuals Who Believe in the Paranormal Expose Themselves to Biased Information and Develop More Causal Illusions than Nonbelievers in the Laboratory.

Authors:  Fernando Blanco; Itxaso Barberia; Helena Matute
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Teaching signal detection theory with pseudoscience.

Authors:  Nicole D Anderson
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-06-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.