{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01727574750830565, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003986710963455149, 'mean_word_length': 5.51948051948052, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
An Analytic Cognitive Style Negatively Predicts a More Literal but Not a More Symbolic Religiosity Type

ABSTRACT The idea that a more analytic cognitive style is associated with lower religiosity is a theoretical prediction that has been challenged by some empirical findings. We conducted three studies with Argentine participants (N = 719) to clarify this issue. In Study 1, we replicated the negative correlation between analytic cognitive style, measured with the Cognitive Reflection Test, and Belief in Supernatural Agents, Intrinsic, and Intuitive Religiosity. In Studies 2 and 3, participants responded to the Post-Critical Beliefs Scale which measures both the presence of a transcendent dimension in beliefs and the extent to which literal-vs.-symbolic beliefs are endorsed, and we also tested for individual differences in Need for Cognitive Closure. Results showed that a more analytic cognitive style negatively predicted both inclusion of transcendence and a literal interpretation of religious ideas. Moreoever, an analytic cognitive style was negatively associated with a literal but not with a symbolic inclusion of transcendence in beliefs. In turn, higher scores of closed-mindedness were positively associated with a more literal interpretation of religion. We conclude that present data support the hypothesis that religiosity may be negatively associated with an analytic cognitive style, but individuals who experience religion more symbolically do not accommodate to that pattern.