ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025
Reflective thinking predicts disbelief in God across 19 countries.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the present study, we tested three hypotheses about relationships between reflective thinking, intuitive thinking (both measured using the Cognitive Reflection Test; CRT), and belief in God or gods (BiG) in university students across 19 culturally and geographically diverse countries (n = 7,771). In support of our first hypothesis, we found a negative relationship between reflective thinking and BiG; and in support of our second hypothesis, we found a positive relationship between intuitive thinking and BiG. Contrary to our third hypothesis, we found no evidence that measuring CRT prior to measuring BiG decreased BiG. Given that this is the first large cross-cultural test of these hypotheses to have a preregistered analysis plan, the first to hold education constant across countries, and the first to use both Bayesian and frequentist methods, these results considerably bolster the evidence in support of the first two hypotheses and against the third hypothesis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.