The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise
People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that desi...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Souza, André L. [verfasserIn] Legare, Cristine H. [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2011 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Religion, brain & behavior - London [u.a.] : Routledge, 2011, 1(2011), 2, Seite 146-153 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:1 ; year:2011 ; number:2 ; pages:146-153 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
1837939241 |
---|
LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | 1837939241 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230302114452.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230302s2011 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)1837939241 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1837939241 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
084 | |a 0 |2 ssgn | ||
100 | 1 | |a Souza, André L. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 4 | |a The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise |
264 | 1 | |c 2011 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that designate and legitimate religious experts, many are associated with loosely organized religious traditions that involve a variety of supernatural healing practices and remedies. How is expertise evaluated in these contexts? One possibility is that consensus information may be important; higher levels of agreement about the efficacy of an expert may be more convincing than lower levels of agreement. Another possibility is that the expertise of the informant may influence efficacy judgments. In cases in which the skeptic or supporter is another religious expert, does the expertise of the informant override consensus information? In the current study, we investigated the effect of consensus information and the expertise of informants on perceived efficacy evaluation of religious healers in Brazil, a cultural context in which religious healers are consulted to solve a great variety of everyday problems. Results indicate that although both consensus information and expertise independently influence the perceived efficacy of a religious healer, the opinion of another expert overrides consensus information when the two are in conflict. | ||
650 | 4 | |a consensus | |
650 | 4 | |a expertise | |
650 | 4 | |a religious cognition | |
650 | 4 | |a supernatural reasoning | |
650 | 4 | |a testimony | |
650 | 4 | |a traditional healing | |
700 | 1 | |a Legare, Cristine H. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Religion, brain & behavior |d London [u.a.] : Routledge, 2011 |g 1(2011), 2, Seite 146-153 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)666852502 |w (DE-600)2624106-7 |w (DE-576)457642572 |x 2153-5981 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:1 |g year:2011 |g number:2 |g pages:146-153 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2019 | ||
912 | |a ISIL_DE-Tue135 | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_1 | ||
912 | |a GBV_KXP | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2007 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2026 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4246 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 1 |j 2011 |e 2 |h 146-153 | ||
980 | |2 2019 |1 01 |x DE-Tü135 |b 4282515163 |c 00 |f --%%-- |d --%%-- |e --%%-- |j n |y l01 |z 02-03-23 |
author_variant |
a l s al als c h l ch chl |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:21535981:2011----::hrlotsioynheautoorl |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2011 |
publishDate |
2011 |
allfields |
10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 doi (DE-627)1837939241 (DE-599)KXP1837939241 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 0 ssgn Souza, André L. verfasserin aut The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise 2011 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that designate and legitimate religious experts, many are associated with loosely organized religious traditions that involve a variety of supernatural healing practices and remedies. How is expertise evaluated in these contexts? One possibility is that consensus information may be important; higher levels of agreement about the efficacy of an expert may be more convincing than lower levels of agreement. Another possibility is that the expertise of the informant may influence efficacy judgments. In cases in which the skeptic or supporter is another religious expert, does the expertise of the informant override consensus information? In the current study, we investigated the effect of consensus information and the expertise of informants on perceived efficacy evaluation of religious healers in Brazil, a cultural context in which religious healers are consulted to solve a great variety of everyday problems. Results indicate that although both consensus information and expertise independently influence the perceived efficacy of a religious healer, the opinion of another expert overrides consensus information when the two are in conflict. consensus expertise religious cognition supernatural reasoning testimony traditional healing Legare, Cristine H. verfasserin aut Enthalten in Religion, brain & behavior London [u.a.] : Routledge, 2011 1(2011), 2, Seite 146-153 Online-Ressource (DE-627)666852502 (DE-600)2624106-7 (DE-576)457642572 2153-5981 nnns volume:1 year:2011 number:2 pages:146-153 https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 Resolving-System lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ILN_2019 ISIL_DE-Tue135 SYSFLAG_1 GBV_KXP GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2011 2 146-153 2019 01 DE-Tü135 4282515163 00 --%%-- --%%-- --%%-- n l01 02-03-23 |
spelling |
10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 doi (DE-627)1837939241 (DE-599)KXP1837939241 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 0 ssgn Souza, André L. verfasserin aut The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise 2011 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that designate and legitimate religious experts, many are associated with loosely organized religious traditions that involve a variety of supernatural healing practices and remedies. How is expertise evaluated in these contexts? One possibility is that consensus information may be important; higher levels of agreement about the efficacy of an expert may be more convincing than lower levels of agreement. Another possibility is that the expertise of the informant may influence efficacy judgments. In cases in which the skeptic or supporter is another religious expert, does the expertise of the informant override consensus information? In the current study, we investigated the effect of consensus information and the expertise of informants on perceived efficacy evaluation of religious healers in Brazil, a cultural context in which religious healers are consulted to solve a great variety of everyday problems. Results indicate that although both consensus information and expertise independently influence the perceived efficacy of a religious healer, the opinion of another expert overrides consensus information when the two are in conflict. consensus expertise religious cognition supernatural reasoning testimony traditional healing Legare, Cristine H. verfasserin aut Enthalten in Religion, brain & behavior London [u.a.] : Routledge, 2011 1(2011), 2, Seite 146-153 Online-Ressource (DE-627)666852502 (DE-600)2624106-7 (DE-576)457642572 2153-5981 nnns volume:1 year:2011 number:2 pages:146-153 https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 Resolving-System lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ILN_2019 ISIL_DE-Tue135 SYSFLAG_1 GBV_KXP GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2011 2 146-153 2019 01 DE-Tü135 4282515163 00 --%%-- --%%-- --%%-- n l01 02-03-23 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 doi (DE-627)1837939241 (DE-599)KXP1837939241 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 0 ssgn Souza, André L. verfasserin aut The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise 2011 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that designate and legitimate religious experts, many are associated with loosely organized religious traditions that involve a variety of supernatural healing practices and remedies. How is expertise evaluated in these contexts? One possibility is that consensus information may be important; higher levels of agreement about the efficacy of an expert may be more convincing than lower levels of agreement. Another possibility is that the expertise of the informant may influence efficacy judgments. In cases in which the skeptic or supporter is another religious expert, does the expertise of the informant override consensus information? In the current study, we investigated the effect of consensus information and the expertise of informants on perceived efficacy evaluation of religious healers in Brazil, a cultural context in which religious healers are consulted to solve a great variety of everyday problems. Results indicate that although both consensus information and expertise independently influence the perceived efficacy of a religious healer, the opinion of another expert overrides consensus information when the two are in conflict. consensus expertise religious cognition supernatural reasoning testimony traditional healing Legare, Cristine H. verfasserin aut Enthalten in Religion, brain & behavior London [u.a.] : Routledge, 2011 1(2011), 2, Seite 146-153 Online-Ressource (DE-627)666852502 (DE-600)2624106-7 (DE-576)457642572 2153-5981 nnns volume:1 year:2011 number:2 pages:146-153 https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 Resolving-System lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ILN_2019 ISIL_DE-Tue135 SYSFLAG_1 GBV_KXP GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2011 2 146-153 2019 01 DE-Tü135 4282515163 00 --%%-- --%%-- --%%-- n l01 02-03-23 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 doi (DE-627)1837939241 (DE-599)KXP1837939241 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 0 ssgn Souza, André L. verfasserin aut The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise 2011 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that designate and legitimate religious experts, many are associated with loosely organized religious traditions that involve a variety of supernatural healing practices and remedies. How is expertise evaluated in these contexts? One possibility is that consensus information may be important; higher levels of agreement about the efficacy of an expert may be more convincing than lower levels of agreement. Another possibility is that the expertise of the informant may influence efficacy judgments. In cases in which the skeptic or supporter is another religious expert, does the expertise of the informant override consensus information? In the current study, we investigated the effect of consensus information and the expertise of informants on perceived efficacy evaluation of religious healers in Brazil, a cultural context in which religious healers are consulted to solve a great variety of everyday problems. Results indicate that although both consensus information and expertise independently influence the perceived efficacy of a religious healer, the opinion of another expert overrides consensus information when the two are in conflict. consensus expertise religious cognition supernatural reasoning testimony traditional healing Legare, Cristine H. verfasserin aut Enthalten in Religion, brain & behavior London [u.a.] : Routledge, 2011 1(2011), 2, Seite 146-153 Online-Ressource (DE-627)666852502 (DE-600)2624106-7 (DE-576)457642572 2153-5981 nnns volume:1 year:2011 number:2 pages:146-153 https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 Resolving-System lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ILN_2019 ISIL_DE-Tue135 SYSFLAG_1 GBV_KXP GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2011 2 146-153 2019 01 DE-Tü135 4282515163 00 --%%-- --%%-- --%%-- n l01 02-03-23 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 doi (DE-627)1837939241 (DE-599)KXP1837939241 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 0 ssgn Souza, André L. verfasserin aut The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise 2011 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that designate and legitimate religious experts, many are associated with loosely organized religious traditions that involve a variety of supernatural healing practices and remedies. How is expertise evaluated in these contexts? One possibility is that consensus information may be important; higher levels of agreement about the efficacy of an expert may be more convincing than lower levels of agreement. Another possibility is that the expertise of the informant may influence efficacy judgments. In cases in which the skeptic or supporter is another religious expert, does the expertise of the informant override consensus information? In the current study, we investigated the effect of consensus information and the expertise of informants on perceived efficacy evaluation of religious healers in Brazil, a cultural context in which religious healers are consulted to solve a great variety of everyday problems. Results indicate that although both consensus information and expertise independently influence the perceived efficacy of a religious healer, the opinion of another expert overrides consensus information when the two are in conflict. consensus expertise religious cognition supernatural reasoning testimony traditional healing Legare, Cristine H. verfasserin aut Enthalten in Religion, brain & behavior London [u.a.] : Routledge, 2011 1(2011), 2, Seite 146-153 Online-Ressource (DE-627)666852502 (DE-600)2624106-7 (DE-576)457642572 2153-5981 nnns volume:1 year:2011 number:2 pages:146-153 https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 Resolving-System lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ILN_2019 ISIL_DE-Tue135 SYSFLAG_1 GBV_KXP GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2011 2 146-153 2019 01 DE-Tü135 4282515163 00 --%%-- --%%-- --%%-- n l01 02-03-23 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in Religion, brain & behavior 1(2011), 2, Seite 146-153 volume:1 year:2011 number:2 pages:146-153 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in Religion, brain & behavior 1(2011), 2, Seite 146-153 volume:1 year:2011 number:2 pages:146-153 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
building |
2019:0 |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
selectbib_iln_str_mv |
2019@01 |
topic_facet |
consensus expertise religious cognition supernatural reasoning testimony traditional healing |
isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
container_title |
Religion, brain & behavior |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Souza, André L. @@aut@@ Legare, Cristine H. @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2011-01-01T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
666852502 |
id |
1837939241 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">1837939241</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230302114452.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230302s2011 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)1837939241</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)KXP1837939241</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">0</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Souza, André L.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that designate and legitimate religious experts, many are associated with loosely organized religious traditions that involve a variety of supernatural healing practices and remedies. How is expertise evaluated in these contexts? One possibility is that consensus information may be important; higher levels of agreement about the efficacy of an expert may be more convincing than lower levels of agreement. Another possibility is that the expertise of the informant may influence efficacy judgments. In cases in which the skeptic or supporter is another religious expert, does the expertise of the informant override consensus information? In the current study, we investigated the effect of consensus information and the expertise of informants on perceived efficacy evaluation of religious healers in Brazil, a cultural context in which religious healers are consulted to solve a great variety of everyday problems. Results indicate that although both consensus information and expertise independently influence the perceived efficacy of a religious healer, the opinion of another expert overrides consensus information when the two are in conflict.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">consensus</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">expertise</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">religious cognition</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">supernatural reasoning</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">testimony</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">traditional healing</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Legare, Cristine H.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Religion, brain & behavior</subfield><subfield code="d">London [u.a.] : Routledge, 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">1(2011), 2, Seite 146-153</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)666852502</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2624106-7</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)457642572</subfield><subfield code="x">2153-5981</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:1</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2011</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:146-153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320</subfield><subfield code="x">Resolving-System</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ISIL_DE-Tue135</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_KXP</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">1</subfield><subfield code="j">2011</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="h">146-153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">2019</subfield><subfield code="1">01</subfield><subfield code="x">DE-Tü135</subfield><subfield code="b">4282515163</subfield><subfield code="c">00</subfield><subfield code="f">--%%--</subfield><subfield code="d">--%%--</subfield><subfield code="e">--%%--</subfield><subfield code="j">n</subfield><subfield code="y">l01</subfield><subfield code="z">02-03-23</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
standort_str_mv |
--%%-- |
standort_iln_str_mv |
2019:--%%-- DE-Tü135:--%%-- |
author |
Souza, André L. |
spellingShingle |
Souza, André L. ssgn 0 misc consensus misc expertise misc religious cognition misc supernatural reasoning misc testimony misc traditional healing The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise |
authorStr |
Souza, André L. |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)666852502 |
format |
electronic Article |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut |
collection |
KXP SWB GVK |
remote_str |
true |
last_changed_iln_str_mv |
2019@02-03-23 |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
2153-5981 |
topic_title |
0 ssgn The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise consensus expertise religious cognition supernatural reasoning testimony traditional healing |
topic |
ssgn 0 misc consensus misc expertise misc religious cognition misc supernatural reasoning misc testimony misc traditional healing |
topic_unstemmed |
ssgn 0 misc consensus misc expertise misc religious cognition misc supernatural reasoning misc testimony misc traditional healing |
topic_browse |
ssgn 0 misc consensus misc expertise misc religious cognition misc supernatural reasoning misc testimony misc traditional healing |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
standort_txtP_mv |
--%%-- |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Religion, brain & behavior |
hierarchy_parent_id |
666852502 |
signature |
--%%-- |
signature_str_mv |
--%%-- |
hierarchy_top_title |
Religion, brain & behavior |
isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)666852502 (DE-600)2624106-7 (DE-576)457642572 |
title |
The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)1837939241 (DE-599)KXP1837939241 |
title_full |
The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise |
author_sort |
Souza, André L. |
journal |
Religion, brain & behavior |
journalStr |
Religion, brain & behavior |
callnumber-first-code |
- |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
false |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2011 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
container_start_page |
146 |
author_browse |
Souza, André L. Legare, Cristine H. |
selectkey |
2019:l |
container_volume |
1 |
class |
0 ssgn |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Souza, André L. |
doi_str_mv |
10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise |
title_auth |
The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise |
abstract |
People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that designate and legitimate religious experts, many are associated with loosely organized religious traditions that involve a variety of supernatural healing practices and remedies. How is expertise evaluated in these contexts? One possibility is that consensus information may be important; higher levels of agreement about the efficacy of an expert may be more convincing than lower levels of agreement. Another possibility is that the expertise of the informant may influence efficacy judgments. In cases in which the skeptic or supporter is another religious expert, does the expertise of the informant override consensus information? In the current study, we investigated the effect of consensus information and the expertise of informants on perceived efficacy evaluation of religious healers in Brazil, a cultural context in which religious healers are consulted to solve a great variety of everyday problems. Results indicate that although both consensus information and expertise independently influence the perceived efficacy of a religious healer, the opinion of another expert overrides consensus information when the two are in conflict. |
abstractGer |
People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that designate and legitimate religious experts, many are associated with loosely organized religious traditions that involve a variety of supernatural healing practices and remedies. How is expertise evaluated in these contexts? One possibility is that consensus information may be important; higher levels of agreement about the efficacy of an expert may be more convincing than lower levels of agreement. Another possibility is that the expertise of the informant may influence efficacy judgments. In cases in which the skeptic or supporter is another religious expert, does the expertise of the informant override consensus information? In the current study, we investigated the effect of consensus information and the expertise of informants on perceived efficacy evaluation of religious healers in Brazil, a cultural context in which religious healers are consulted to solve a great variety of everyday problems. Results indicate that although both consensus information and expertise independently influence the perceived efficacy of a religious healer, the opinion of another expert overrides consensus information when the two are in conflict. |
abstract_unstemmed |
People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that designate and legitimate religious experts, many are associated with loosely organized religious traditions that involve a variety of supernatural healing practices and remedies. How is expertise evaluated in these contexts? One possibility is that consensus information may be important; higher levels of agreement about the efficacy of an expert may be more convincing than lower levels of agreement. Another possibility is that the expertise of the informant may influence efficacy judgments. In cases in which the skeptic or supporter is another religious expert, does the expertise of the informant override consensus information? In the current study, we investigated the effect of consensus information and the expertise of informants on perceived efficacy evaluation of religious healers in Brazil, a cultural context in which religious healers are consulted to solve a great variety of everyday problems. Results indicate that although both consensus information and expertise independently influence the perceived efficacy of a religious healer, the opinion of another expert overrides consensus information when the two are in conflict. |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ILN_2019 ISIL_DE-Tue135 SYSFLAG_1 GBV_KXP GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
2 |
title_short |
The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 |
ausleihindikator_str_mv |
2019:- |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Legare, Cristine H. |
author2Str |
Legare, Cristine H. |
ppnlink |
666852502 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
false |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320 |
callnumber-a |
--%%-- |
up_date |
2024-07-04T18:00:25.396Z |
_version_ |
1803672381447733248 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">1837939241</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230302114452.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230302s2011 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)1837939241</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)KXP1837939241</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">0</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Souza, André L.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">People learn about the efficacy and validity of cultural practices through the testimony and expertise of others. Although some religious practices are highly accessible and require no specialized expertise to engage in them, and others are part of highly controlled religious organizations that designate and legitimate religious experts, many are associated with loosely organized religious traditions that involve a variety of supernatural healing practices and remedies. How is expertise evaluated in these contexts? One possibility is that consensus information may be important; higher levels of agreement about the efficacy of an expert may be more convincing than lower levels of agreement. Another possibility is that the expertise of the informant may influence efficacy judgments. In cases in which the skeptic or supporter is another religious expert, does the expertise of the informant override consensus information? In the current study, we investigated the effect of consensus information and the expertise of informants on perceived efficacy evaluation of religious healers in Brazil, a cultural context in which religious healers are consulted to solve a great variety of everyday problems. Results indicate that although both consensus information and expertise independently influence the perceived efficacy of a religious healer, the opinion of another expert overrides consensus information when the two are in conflict.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">consensus</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">expertise</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">religious cognition</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">supernatural reasoning</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">testimony</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">traditional healing</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Legare, Cristine H.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Religion, brain & behavior</subfield><subfield code="d">London [u.a.] : Routledge, 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">1(2011), 2, Seite 146-153</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)666852502</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2624106-7</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)457642572</subfield><subfield code="x">2153-5981</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:1</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2011</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:146-153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320</subfield><subfield code="x">Resolving-System</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ISIL_DE-Tue135</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_KXP</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">1</subfield><subfield code="j">2011</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="h">146-153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">2019</subfield><subfield code="1">01</subfield><subfield code="x">DE-Tü135</subfield><subfield code="b">4282515163</subfield><subfield code="c">00</subfield><subfield code="f">--%%--</subfield><subfield code="d">--%%--</subfield><subfield code="e">--%%--</subfield><subfield code="j">n</subfield><subfield code="y">l01</subfield><subfield code="z">02-03-23</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.3992968 |