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

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Souza, André L. [verfasserIn] Legare, Cristine H. [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2011

Schlagwörter:	consensus expertise religious cognition supernatural reasoning testimony traditional healing

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:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1080/2153599X.2011.598320

Katalog-ID:	1837939241

Internformat


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

Indexfelder

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

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

The role of testimony in the evaluation of religious expertise

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?