Boy Praying in Church

Study Says Religious Kids Are Easier to Fool

Research suggests that children raised in religious households have trouble distinguishing fact from fiction

From the parting of oceans to transubstantiation, when it comes to storytelling the Bible is a riveting page-turner. But while adults can choose what tales to accept as myth, parable or literal truth, it appears that kids exposed to religious teachings often take them at face value—and it’s making it harder for them to distinguish fact from fiction across the board.

Professors from Boston University conducted two studies comparing the reasoning abilities of churchgoing children and secular kids and found that those who had been exposed to religious stories were more likely to believe that fantastical characters in fictional books are real people.

A scene from the hit documentary Jesus Camp, which chronicled the indoctrination of young children into evangelical Christianity. 

Jesus Camp

In the first study, published in the journal Cognitive Science, researchers gathered 66 5- and 6-year-olds and read them a series of stories characterized as realistic, religious and fantastical. They were then tasked with determining which of the characters were real and which were make-believe. When asked about stories featuring realistic figures, religious children answered correctly at a nearly the same rate as the secular group (in fact, they scored 85 percent, and the nonreligious got 83). But the responses were dramatically different when it came to the other two categories. With religious stories, the children who attended church or parochial school believed the protagonist to be real 79 percent of the time, while only 6 percent of the nonreligious children concurred. The same pattern held true for stories featuring characters with magical powers: The religious children were more likely to give them the benefit of the doubt at 41 percent, compared with just 13 percent of the secular subjects. The results of the second study reinforced the findings of the first.

Study author Kathleen Corriveau explains that the phenomenon occurs because religious stories often include miracles that require faith, rather than logic, to accept as real. This suspension of disbelief may then be applied when children encounter fantastical events outside of the context of religion. Though she stresses that this needn’t be seen as strictly negative.

“In no way should the findings of this study point to any sort of deficit in one group or the other,” she says. “Indeed, in some instances, the ability to suspend disbelief could be viewed as a benefit. For example, when exposed to counterintuitive phenomena—such as modern physics—a suspension of disbelief might assist in learning.”

Respond Now
  • Lib commie God haters at Vocativ with another horseshiiit hatchet job

  • From the abstract: “In two studies, 5 and 6-year-old children were questioned about the status of the protagonist embedded in three different types of stories.””Children who went to church or were enrolled in a parochial school, or both, judged the protagonist in religious stories to be a real person, whereas secular children with no such exposure to religion judged the protagonist in religious stories to be fictional.”How shocking! Five and six year old children believed stories about the supernatural, when presented by an authority figure.This means virtually nothing, except that religious kindergartners are brought up hearing about the supernatural more frequently than secularists children.

    1 Reply - Reply Now
  • Your article contains a factual error in the first sentence.  Transubstantiation is not in the Bible.

  • study says…..heheh. 

  • Well of coarse. The first rule of any relegion is to not question anything.

    3 Replies - Reply Now
    • Just like Global Warming, HAHAHAHAHAHA…Snort!

      1 Reply - Reply Now
      • Not alike at all. One relies on faith while the other relies on empirical evidence and the scientific method. The latter basically means asking every question under the sun about an issue and thousands of scientists ask questions about global warming on a daily basis. However, the basic premise holds true according to empirical evidence. At this point, with even a fraction of the amount of evidence for any other threat, we would have advanced the debate to policy implications.

        1 Reply - Reply Now
      • Whereas global warming is a logical explanation of the empirical data, I would suggest that it does not imply that it is the ‘truth’.  The balance of probabilites based on the data would suggest that using global warming as a basis of research would be more fruitful than suggestions based on faith or belief.  What you believe in or have faith in is your own concern.  Just don’t think that it will lead to constructive knowledge.  

    • *tips fedora* Yeah, that’s not actually a rule in any religion. Nice demagoguery though.

    • +
    • thats not 100% true. i was brought up to question my own religion

GUNS

Model Sets Off Firestorm With Gun Tweet, But Data Proves She's Right

M.L. Nestel
CELEBRITY

Remember Chunk from "The Goonies"? He's a Lawyer

Molly Fitzpatrick
US POLITICS

VOTR App: "Tinder for Politics"

Rebecca Steinberg
SOCIETY

8 Toys 'R' Us Products More Disturbing Than the "Breaking Bad" Dolls

Molly Fitzpatrick
BUSINESS

The Booming Black Market for Chocolate Milk

Gabriel Bell
SPORT

Every Major League Baseball Team's Victory Song, Ranked

Molly Fitzpatrick
NAT SEC

Why the U.S. Drone War Could Last Forever

John Knefel
SOCIETY

Sorry I Ran You Over. Now Please Pay Me $2,000

M.L. Nestel
Join the Fray
The Fast & The Furious: Atheists Fake Ramadan Hunger to Avoid Jail