Religious children are meaner than their secular counterparts, study finds

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Almost 1,200 children, aged between five and 12, in the US, Canada, China, Jordan, Turkey and South Africa participated in the study. Almost 24% were Christian, 43% Muslim, and 27.6% non-religious. The numbers of Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, agnostic and other children were too small to be statistically valid.

They were asked to choose stickers and then told there were not enough to go round for all children in their school, to see if they would share. They were also shown film of children pushing and bumping one another to gauge their responses.

The findings “robustly demonstrate that children from households identifying as either of the two major world religions (Christianity and Islam) were less altruistic than children from non-religious households”.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/06/religious-children-less-altruistic-secular-kids-study

I am not surprised by this result.

 

[crazyfingers]

I read that too. Nor was I a bit surprised.

 

[couch_sloth]

Children who grow up in an environment which tends to be more judgemental and punitive are likely to end up that way themselves.

 

[masterpeastheater]

Interesting.....I used to think that one reason for evangelical assholery(among the adults) was the creepy, neurotic fixation with sexual purity
sucking up cerebral resources in tending to other ethical and moral matters. Young children who haven't yet gotten those old lady sex lectures
being involved in this study points to other things being involved. My own experience with my sunday school friends, though, was that they were no different
as a group than secular peeps from my public school. Certainly no better, but no worse either....I mean NO different...precisely the same.

 

[Guyt]

My own experience with my sunday school friends, though, was that they were no different
as a group than secular peeps from my public school. Certainly no better, but no worse either....I mean NO different...precisely the same.

And that is why we need large samples and proper controls!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Keith&Co.]

My own experience with my sunday school friends, though, was that they were no different
as a group than secular peeps from my public school. Certainly no better, but no worse either....I mean NO different...precisely the same.

And that is why we need large samples and proper controls!

I teased a coworker on Ash Wednesday. I spoke in a slightly French accent, very softly as if recording a documentary near the animal under observation, saying that 'ze dot on ze forehead allows za zoologist to track ze movements and record ze interactionz in ze natural habitat.'

 

[ronburgundy]

My own experience with my sunday school friends, though, was that they were no different
as a group than secular peeps from my public school. Certainly no better, but no worse either....I mean NO different...precisely the same.

And that is why we need large samples and proper controls!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

These comments are more for masterpeastheatre than you.

Even more important than large samples and control for confounding variables is simply systematic observation and actual empirical measurement, which such anecdotes lack. We don't notice non-asshole behavior, so it doesn't get counted in the observations. The only instances we notice and later remember are those that really stand out, such as kids being extreme dicks. That means we are not actually noticing the variance in behavior, so of course there will be "no difference" in that behavior between groups and no possibility of observing a correlation with other variables. Then there is the complete subjectivity and lack of consistency in the measurement tool, namely a vague feeling of "gee, that was a dick move" that is heavily influenced by countless random factors that vary from instance to instance, such as all the things that impact the observers own mood that day.

The OP study systematically recorded instances of all possible types of reactions to the situation from highly generous to extremely selfish and everything in between. IOW, the recorded variability in Y, which is necessary for seeing if it covaries with X. We almost never do that in everyday experience.

I say "more important" because without systematic observation, large samples are just as meaningless as big samples, but with systematic observation and objective measurement small samples will at least tend to show similar results to large ones, just not as reliably.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Almost 1,200 children, aged between five and 12, in the US, Canada, China, Jordan, Turkey and South Africa participated in the study. Almost 24% were Christian, 43% Muslim, and 27.6% non-religious. The numbers of Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, agnostic and other children were too small to be statistically valid.

They were asked to choose stickers and then told there were not enough to go round for all children in their school, to see if they would share. They were also shown film of children pushing and bumping one another to gauge their responses.

The findings “robustly demonstrate that children from households identifying as either of the two major world religions (Christianity and Islam) were less altruistic than children from non-religious households”.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/06/religious-children-less-altruistic-secular-kids-study

I am not surprised by this result.

Neither was I. I was discussing the study yesterday at church as a matter of fact. One of my friends was surprised at the study's conclusions and I simply said, you can't teach a religion built on infinite punishment for finite sin and turn out a majority of nice people. It can't be done. You turnout lovers of Judgement Day, the ultimate revenge fantasy.

 

[crazyfingers]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/06/religious-children-less-altruistic-secular-kids-study

I am not surprised by this result.

Neither was I. I was discussing the study yesterday at church as a matter of fact. One of my friends was surprised at the study's conclusions and I simply said, you can't teach a religion built on infinite punishment for finite sin and turn out a majority of nice people. It can't be done. You turnout lovers of Judgement Day, the ultimate revenge fantasy.

No kidding. Their imaginary god may hate the sin but love the sinner but my observation is that followers of this imaginary god don't separate things too well. And add to that the volume of "sins" for which there is no rational reason for them to actually be morally wrong, you get a lot of judgmentalism over things that simply are not wrong to do.

Hell, you tell kids that not believing in Jesus is grounds for eternal punishment and you shouldn't be surprised that the kids become judgmental against the infidels.

 

[Guyt]

Their imaginary god may hate the sin but love the sinner but my observation is that followers of this imaginary god don't separate things too well. And add to that the volume of "sins" for which there is no rational reason for them to actually be morally wrong, you get a lot of judgmentalism over things that simply are not wrong to do.

Also, in this case, 'love' is used in such a loose sense as to be meaningless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GenesisNemesis]

There's no real incentive to share stickers if they're just stickers and the lack of having them wouldn't cause any harm, is there? I'd think that would be a more likely reason for not sharing the stickers. I don't think you can make an extrapolation that they wouldn't share other things just because they wouldn't share stickers.

Almost 1,200 children, aged between five and 12, in the US, Canada, China, Jordan, Turkey and South Africa participated in the study. Almost 24% were Christian, 43% Muslim, and 27.6% non-religious.

Nitpick, they weren't religious, because they're children.

 

[ronburgundy]

There's no real incentive to share stickers if they're just stickers and the lack of having them wouldn't cause any harm, is there? I'd think that would be a more likely reason for not sharing the stickers. I don't think you can make an extrapolation that they wouldn't share other things just because they wouldn't share stickers.

Stickers have high subjective value to kids and they well aware that other kids would want some, just like they themselves do. Thus, there is reason to think that the results extrapolate to others things that have subjective value and are desired by others.

 

[crazyfingers]

My kids love stickers. Yes they are highly valued by kids.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

My kids love stickers. Yes they are highly valued by kids.

I forgot about that aspect of childhood.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

There's no real incentive to share stickers if they're just stickers and the lack of having them wouldn't cause any harm, is there? I'd think that would be a more likely reason for not sharing the stickers. I don't think you can make an extrapolation that they wouldn't share other things just because they wouldn't share stickers.

Almost 1,200 children, aged between five and 12, in the US, Canada, China, Jordan, Turkey and South Africa participated in the study. Almost 24% were Christian, 43% Muslim, and 27.6% non-religious.

Nitpick, they weren't religious, because they're children.

They're just reflecting the values of their parents and community.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Almost 1,200 children, aged between five and 12, in the US, Canada, China, Jordan, Turkey and South Africa participated in the study. Almost 24% were Christian, 43% Muslim, and 27.6% non-religious. The numbers of Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, agnostic and other children were too small to be statistically valid.

They were asked to choose stickers and then told there were not enough to go round for all children in their school, to see if they would share. They were also shown film of children pushing and bumping one another to gauge their responses.

The findings “robustly demonstrate that children from households identifying as either of the two major world religions (Christianity and Islam) were less altruistic than children from non-religious households”.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/06/religious-children-less-altruistic-secular-kids-study

I am not surprised by this result.

I doubt that anyone who has waited tables on Sunday brunch would surprised by this result.

 

[ronburgundy]

There's no real incentive to share stickers if they're just stickers and the lack of having them wouldn't cause any harm, is there? I'd think that would be a more likely reason for not sharing the stickers. I don't think you can make an extrapolation that they wouldn't share other things just because they wouldn't share stickers.



Nitpick, they weren't religious, because they're children.

They're just reflecting the values of their parents and community.

Essentially, that is all religious adults are doing too. They are the people who never thought for themselves about the beliefs they were conditioned to hold as kids. Differences between religious groups, like those in the OP are not primarily about the "type of people" who choose different religious beliefs, they are more about the impact that those beliefs systems have on people and communities.

 

[ronburgundy]

My kids love stickers. Yes they are highly valued by kids.

I forgot about that aspect of childhood.

Yeah, stickers are almost a mindless cult among children. It almost seems innate and universal.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Maybe religious kids are more selfish because they are taught about an eternal reward. They focus on this to the exclusion or being proactive about making the world a better place. They're also taught that some people will be punished and will burn in a hell forever. Seems like greed and fear are the two pillars of religion so it's not surprising religious kids behave as they do.

There's not a lot of empathizing in religious indoctrination either. You don't want to dump the worlds problems in the lap of a five year old but neither do you want to make that child selfish, which is what religion does. It's all about making a god happy so you can go to heaven. Else the god has the last word and you get screwed out of your proper inheritance. Got to get that inheritance.

Stickers? Not exactly the same but my wife, formerly a teacher, would use smiley face / frowney face stamps at the bank when she'd evaluate employee progress. Frowney faces elicited the most responses.