↓ Skip to main content

How Do Rituals Affect Cooperation?

Overview of attention for article published in Human Nature, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
139 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
186 Mendeley
Title
How Do Rituals Affect Cooperation?
Published in
Human Nature, May 2013
DOI 10.1007/s12110-013-9167-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ronald Fischer, Rohan Callander, Paul Reddish, Joseph Bulbulia

Abstract

Collective rituals have long puzzled anthropologists, yet little is known about how rituals affect participants. Our study investigated the effects of nine naturally occurring rituals on prosociality. We operationalized prosociality as (1) attitudes about fellow ritual participants and (2) decisions in a public goods game. The nine rituals varied in levels of synchrony and levels of sacred attribution. We found that rituals with synchronous body movements were more likely to enhance prosocial attitudes. We also found that rituals judged to be sacred were associated with the largest contributions in the public goods game. Path analysis favored a model in which sacred values mediate the effects of synchronous movements on prosocial behaviors. Our analysis offers the first quantitative evidence for the long-standing anthropological conjecture that rituals orchestrate body motions and sacred values to support prosociality. Our analysis, moreover, adds precision to this old conjecture with evidence of a specific mechanism: ritual synchrony increases perceptions of oneness with others, which increases sacred values to intensify prosocial behaviors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 186 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
United States 2 1%
Israel 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Philippines 1 <1%
Unknown 175 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 25%
Student > Bachelor 29 16%
Researcher 27 15%
Student > Master 22 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 5%
Other 34 18%
Unknown 18 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 73 39%
Social Sciences 33 18%
Arts and Humanities 14 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 3%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 26 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 April 2017.
All research outputs
#3,588,836
of 22,710,079 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#232
of 509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,004
of 193,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,710,079 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 509 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 193,695 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.