MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993399171 · doi:10.1080/10508619.2014.916590

Make Believe Unmakes Belief?: Childhood Play Style and Adult Personality as Predictors of Religious Identity Change

2014· article· en· W1993399171 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher T. Burris, Keri Raif

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for the Psychology of Religion · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsSt. Jerome's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFaithPsychologyIdentity (music)PersonalityIdeologySocial psychologyStyle (visual arts)Developmental psychologyTheologyPoliticsAestheticsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Links between current religious status and both childhood play style and adult personality (Five-Factor Model) were explored in a Canadian undergraduate sample. The lifelong religious reported being less open to experience, but more agreeable and conscientious, relative to apostates (who left their childhood faith for no faith), switchers (who migrated to a different faith), converts (who adopted faith since childhood), and the lifelong nonreligious. Relative to the two lifelong groups, apostates and switchers—and, to a lesser extent, converts—reported stronger interest and engrossment in pretend play involving props, peer collaborators, and/or imaginary characters, as well as less interest in organized sports. A childhood predilection for pretend play may function as a marker of greater ability and willingness to consider the implications of experiencing the self in different roles in an “as if” world. In turn, this predisposition may eventuate in a significant ideological shift in response to unmet cognitive and/or emotional needs, consistent with current understandings of religious change.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for the Psychology of ReligionSame topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207