The Relationship Between Religiosity and Implicit vs. Explicit Death Anxiety

RELIGION AND IMPLICIT VS. EXPLICIT DEATH ANXIETY While there is ample reason to expect a relationship between religiosity and death anxiety, conflicting results across studies indicate a need to separately measure the unconscious and conscious aspects of death anxiety in order to further the research and refine theory. The current study tests the hypothesis that those who are more religious will demonstrate greater implicit death anxiety (IDA) and lower explicit death anxiety (EDA) than those who are lower in religiosity. Due to a lack of adequate measures for IDA, a self-report measure was created for the purpose of this study in order to assess death anxiety below consciousness. In Study 1, participants responded to self-report questionnaires targeting IDA, EDA, religiosity, and control variables of attachment style and self-esteem. I found that there was no association between EDA and religiosity, but those who were more religious exhibited more IDA. In Study 2, controlling for “pro-life” ideology reversed the results, such that those who were more religious had somewhat lower IDA than those who were not. While the results are not in line with the original hypothesis, this study provides useful directions for future research as well as a potential measure of IDA to use going forward. The Relationship Between Religiosity and Implicit vs. Explicit Death Anxiety RELIGION AND IMPLICIT VS. EXPLICIT DEATH ANXIETY Religion has been pervasive across cultures and throughout the history of human existence. Connecting humans to supernatural beings is a fundamental tendency that all societies, with few exceptions, have adopted in various ways (Jong & Halberstadt, 2016). With an estimated 84 percent of the world’s population reporting some religious identification, it seems unlikely that such a ubiquitous phenomenon could be functionless; thus, a number of theories have been devised to explain why religion is such a staple to humanity (Jong & Halberstadt, 2016). One psychological perspective on religion that was advanced by, among others, Ernest Becker (e.g., 1973), posits that religion, at its core, functions to defend against existential anxiety by providing a literal handbook for living life in a meaningful way and achieving immortality. While there is existing evidence supporting this perspective, validating it is challenging due to its somewhat tautological nature. The notion that religion buffers death anxiety could suggest that those who are religious have lower death anxiety because religion is regulating it, but it could also indicate that those who are religious have greater death anxiety, which is why there is a need for religion as a defense. The present research examines this question by measuring death anxiety at both the conscious and unconscious level and relating them to religion independently. Religion: Functional Theories Even before the evolution of the modern human, there is archaeological evidence that the hunters and gatherers of the Upper Paleolithic era, otherwise known as the Old Stone Age, showed signs of religious affiliation over 200,000 years ago (Jong & Halberstadt, 2016). Although religion has been established in all groups that show signs of societal structure, the various interpretations of religion are widespread and it can be difficult to encompass all religions with a single definition. The most comprehensive explanation of religion is that it is any RELIGION AND IMPLICIT VS. EXPLICIT DEATH ANXIETY belief system involving one or more supernatural agent (Jong & Halberstadt, 2016). A supernatural agent is characterized as any human or nonhuman being whose abilities surpass the assumptions of the natural object (e.g., humans walking through walls or trees speaking) and are often elusive in their existence. Additionally, adherence to these supernatural agents tends to involve often unsafe, inconvenient rituals such as fasting (i.e. abstinence from sex or food; Jong & Halberstadt, 2016). It seems peculiar that a human-made institution such as religion would involve seemingly maladaptive components, so it seems likely there is a deeper adaptive function of religion. Many adaptive theories of religion are based on the notion that religion is a means of social solidarity. These theories posit that religion facilitates group membership and social cohesion, necessary facets of prosocial behavior that increase chances of survival and reproduction. The costly rituals associated with religion can be explained from this perspective as evidence to society that an individual is truly committed to group membership (Gould, 1991). Other theories propose that religion is a necessary adaptation in order to deal with the unwelcome consequences of human consciousness. Freud proposed that the executive functions unique to the human brain exist for reasons other than consciousness, but that consciousness is a burdensome byproduct that requires taming and religion was created in order to cope with the concept of mortality (Gould, 1991). These adaptive theories of religion attempt to explain why religion exists, whereas additional theories target the ways in which the supernatural agents that define religion are created in order to achieve its adaptive purpose. Anthropomorphic theories of religion posit that the various manifestations of these figures are a personification of society based on humans projecting their own attributes onto the natural world. These natural personifications are given RELIGION AND IMPLICIT VS. EXPLICIT DEATH ANXIETY human-like qualities but also maintain a degree of immortality, connecting the mortal existence of humans to something ethereal (Jong & Halberstadt, 2016). The functionalist theories of religion then attempt to explain how this personification occurs by binding the soul, which connects the mind to the body, to these supernatural agents in order to extend human existence beyond the death of the human body. Combined, these perspectives illuminate religion as an attempt at gaining control over the one inevitability of life: death (Jong & Halberstadt, 2016). Terror Management Theory (TMT), developed by Greenberg, Pyszczynski, and Solomon (1986), proposes that religion is a worldview defense that buffers the fear of death by maintaining a sense of personal security and immortality. Humans’ existential self-awareness has the capacity to be a nagging anxiety at the forefront of thought, but TMT asserts that religion provides assurances about the immortality of the soul, an achievement that many are desperate for in order to feel that life is meaningful and enduring. Terror Management Theory The terror management perspective (Greenberg et al., 1986), largely based on the work of Ernest Becker (1973), posits that human’s awareness of the inevitability of death arouses overwhelming anxiety that must be managed by adherence to a particular cultural worldview (i.e., an individual’s values and conception of the world). Worldviews buffer death anxiety directly, by conveying a sense of an orderly, meaningful, enduring, benevolent universe, but also by giving the individual a sense of personal self-esteem that comes from adhering to the values of the worldview. When the worldview is validated, it leads to a sense of security rooted in the assurance that one’s existence is ultimately significant and permanent. Conversely, if this worldview is compromised, an individual’s self-esteem and security may be negatively impacted due to the resulting uncertainty. RELIGION AND IMPLICIT VS. EXPLICIT DEATH ANXIETY In sum, TMT, suggests that awareness of mortality leads to the adoption and adherence of securityand self-esteem-bolstering worldviews. However, the specific ways that people cope with death awareness depends on how salient mortality is at any given time. The dual process model of terror management theory proposes two different routes of defense against death anxiety, depending on whether death concerns are implicit (i.e. unconscious) or explicit (i.e. conscious; Greenberg, Pyszczynski & Solomon, 1999). Implicit death anxiety (IDA) refers to death anxiety that is suppressed and exists below the level of consciousness. Due to the unconscious nature of IDA, distal defenses, such as rejecting groups whose worldviews differ from one’s own, buffer IDA by using symbolic ideas about oneself and the world to cope with suppressed death anxiety by channeling anxious energy into the need for control over aspects of life that are seemingly unrelated to death. Distal defenses rely on maintaining a sense of predictability and ultimate meaning in one’s life that allows death anxiety to remain below consciousness by maintaining a sense of security within the world. For instance, there is evidence that when mortality is made salient, participants put greater effort into planning future events (Landau, Greenberg & Sullivan, 2009). Defenses such as meticulously planning ahead creates a sense of symbolic immortality because these types of behaviors instill a feeling of control over one’s own life. This control functions as a symbol of immortality by allowing people to feel as if life is predictable and that they have a secure place within the world, without actually acknowledging that the death anxiety they hold unconsciously. Explicit death anxiety (EDA), on the other hand, is defended in ways directly related to death and its outcomes. When conscious death anxiety is experienced, proximal (i.e. literal) defenses directly buffer EDA by removing death thoughts from the focus of one’s attention by recognizing it as a problem for future consideration or using rationalization tactics to deny RELIGION AND IMPLICIT VS. EXPLICIT DEATH ANXIETY vulnerability. Common proximal defenses include putting off contracting a will by rationalizing it as being a consideration to deal with in the future or using logic to justify that one will not have an early death due to family history. These types of proximal defenses use l