Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
Research Article

Believers' estimates of God's beliefs are more egocentric than estimates of other people's beliefs

Nicholas Epley, Benjamin A. Converse, Alexa Delbosc, George A. Monteleone, and John T. Cacioppo
  1. aBooth School of Business, 5807 South Woodlawn Avenue, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, 60637;
  2. bInstitute of Transport Studies, Monash University, Melbourne 3800, Australia; and
  3. cDepartment of Psychology, 5848 South University Avenue, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637

See allHide authors and affiliations

PNAS first published December 2, 2009; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0908374106
Nicholas Epley
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: epley@chicagobooth.edu
Benjamin A. Converse
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alexa Delbosc
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
George A. Monteleone
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John T. Cacioppo
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  1. Edited by Edward E. Smith, Columbia University, New York, NY, and approved October 21, 2009 (received for review July 27, 2009)

  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

People often reason egocentrically about others' beliefs, using their own beliefs as an inductive guide. Correlational, experimental, and neuroimaging evidence suggests that people may be even more egocentric when reasoning about a religious agent's beliefs (e.g., God). In both nationally representative and more local samples, people's own beliefs on important social and ethical issues were consistently correlated more strongly with estimates of God's beliefs than with estimates of other people's beliefs (Studies 1–4). Manipulating people's beliefs similarly influenced estimates of God's beliefs but did not as consistently influence estimates of other people's beliefs (Studies 5 and 6). A final neuroimaging study demonstrated a clear convergence in neural activity when reasoning about one's own beliefs and God's beliefs, but clear divergences when reasoning about another person's beliefs (Study 7). In particular, reasoning about God's beliefs activated areas associated with self-referential thinking more so than did reasoning about another person's beliefs. Believers commonly use inferences about God's beliefs as a moral compass, but that compass appears especially dependent on one's own existing beliefs.

  • decision making
  • judgment
  • religion
  • social cognition
  • social neuroscience

Footnotes

  • 1To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: epley{at}chicagobooth.edu
  • Author contributions: N.E., B.A.C., and J.T.C. designed research; B.A.C. and A.D. performed research; B.A.C., A.D., G.A.M., and J.T.C. analyzed data; and N.E. and B.A.C. wrote the paper.

  • The authors declare no conflict of interest.

  • This article is a PNAS Direct Submission.

Next
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Believers' estimates of God's beliefs are more egocentric than estimates of other people's beliefs
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Believers' estimates of God's beliefs are more egocentric than estimates of other people's beliefs
Nicholas Epley, Benjamin A. Converse, Alexa Delbosc, George A. Monteleone, John T. Cacioppo
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Dec 2009, pnas.0908374106; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0908374106

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Believers' estimates of God's beliefs are more egocentric than estimates of other people's beliefs
Nicholas Epley, Benjamin A. Converse, Alexa Delbosc, George A. Monteleone, John T. Cacioppo
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Dec 2009, pnas.0908374106; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0908374106
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 118 (28)
Current Issue

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Three anemone fish at home, Raja Ampat, Indonesia.
Global warming and marine biodiversity
A study reports a dip in marine biodiversity at the equator and suggests ocean warming has created conditions inhospitable for some species.
Image credit: Mark J. Costello.
Human hand as an infrared light source, with each finger emitting infrared light independently.
Human hands as infrared emitters
The human hand can act as a powerless infrared radiation source in encryption, decryption, and signal generation.
Image credit: Shun An.
Rationales for diversity may have far-reaching implications.
Higher-education diversity rationales
A prevailing rationale for diversity in higher education is associated with better educational outcomes for White than Black students.
Image credit: Pixabay/naassomz1.
Scientists take samples on the side of a scorched hill.
Inner Workings: Big wildfires mobilize mercury. What are the risks?
Researchers are far from understanding all the downstream effects on surface water, not to mention human and ecological health.
Image credit: US Geological Survey/Jonathan Stock.
Plastic trash on a beach.
Journal Club: Degradable plastic polymer breaks down in sunlight and air
The environmentally degradable plastic breaks down in about a week.
Image credit: Shutterstock/Larina Marina.

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Youtube
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Special Feature Articles – Most Recent
  • List of Issues

PNAS Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science
  • Teaching Resources

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Subscribers
  • Librarians
  • Press
  • Cozzarelli Prize
  • Site Map
  • PNAS Updates
  • FAQs
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Rights & Permissions
  • About
  • Contact

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490. PNAS is a partner of CHORUS, COPE, CrossRef, ORCID, and Research4Life.