Examining the relationship between metacognitive trust in thinking styles and supernatural beliefs.
Valerie van Mulukom, Adam Baimel, Everton Maraldi, Miguel Farias
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology September 25, 2023 DOI: 10.1111/sjop.12961 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Experimental study (two studies) Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 415 |
| Population | Study 1: 415 participants; Study 2: 802 participants from the United States, Canada, and Brazil |
| Measures | Ambiguous Decisions task, Belief in Psychic Ability scale |
| Keywords | Humans Trust Intuition Parapsychology Metacognition Meta-cognition Dual-processing Paranormal belief Religious belief Thinking styles |
| Key findings | Participants reported greater trust in analytical than intuitive thinking, and trust differed between conditions that framed one thinking style as beneficial. Intuitive thinking correlated more strongly with psychic ability and paranormal beliefs than with religious beliefs, but a mixed-effects regression found little variation in how thinking-style measures related to types of supernatural belief. Study 2 replicated these patterns, with Brazilian participants showing reduced emphasis on analytical thinking. |
Abstract
Conflicting findings have emerged from research on the relationship between thinking styles and supernatural beliefs. In two studies, we examined this relationship through meta-cognitive trust and developed a new: (1) experimental manipulation, a short scientific article describing the benefits of thinking styles: (2) trust in thinking styles measure, the Ambiguous Decisions task; and (3) supernatural belief measure, the Belief in Psychic Ability scale. In Study 1 (N = 415) we found differences in metacognitive trust in thinking styles between the analytical and intuitive condition, and overall greater trust in analytical thinking. We also found stronger correlations between thinking style measures (in particular intuitive thinking) and psychic ability and paranormal beliefs than with religious beliefs, but a mixed-effect linear regression showed little to no variation in how measures of thinking style related to types of supernatural beliefs. In Study 2, we replicated Study 1 with participants from the United States, Canada, and Brazil (N = 802), and found similar results, with the Brazilian participants showing a reduced emphasis on analytical thinking. We conclude that our new design, task, and scale may be particularly useful for dual-processing research on supernatural belief.