Who Engages with Supernatural Entities? An Investigation of Personality and Cognitive Style Predictors

Abstract

We tested preregistered hypotheses (a) examining the structure of supernatural beliefs and perceived experiences and (b) predicting supernatural engagement from the Big Five and cognitive styles. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of self-report data in the U.S. undergraduates (Study 1: n = 1,401; Study 2: n = 1,939) showed that beliefs and perceived experiences were characterized by two factors. Positive and Negative Agents factors related strongly to religious belief salience and were defined by God, the devil, angels, demons, and ghosts/spirits, whereas Forces and Spirits factors were unrelated to religious belief salience and were defined by fate/destiny, karma, and ghosts/spirits. Extraversion, conscientiousness, experiential processing, schizotypy, and dissociative tendencies related positively to supernatural engagement. With some nuances, agreeableness, neuroticism, and need for closure were positive predictors, whereas skepticism and analytical-rational processing were negative predictors. Openness and intellectual humility did not relate positively to supernatural engagement, contradicting expectations. Because the literature on individual differences predictors of supernatural engagement is not well integrated, these results may contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of this topic.

Exploring the mechanisms that allow incompatible beliefs to coexist in the cognitive system: how doublethink relates to thinking styles and syndromes of irrational beliefs

“…relying more on intuitive, but less on rational thinking) that is typical for people who endorse irrational beliefs (e.g., Knežević et al, 2024;Lazarević et al, 2023;Pennycook et al, 2015;Svedholm & Lindeman, 2013;Yelbuz et al, 2022). Similarly, another characteristic of such a belief system might be a strong intolerance of uncertainty reflected in the need for cognitive closure -it has previously been tied to conspiratorial thinking (Marchlewska et al, 2018), pseudoscientific claims (Van Elk, 2019, and paranormal beliefs (Wilt et al, 2022).…”

Religious and spiritual struggles around the 2016 and 2020 U.S. presidential elections.

“…People with greater r/s engagement should also be more likely to make divine and demonic attributions for events (Wilt, Stauner, et al, 2021), both of which were documented in response to the 2016 election (Wong et al, 2019), and may increase the odds of r/s struggle. Granted, when making divine attributions, people may see God’s role as benevolent—perhaps providing help, guidance, or protection.…”

After-Death Communication: Issues of Nondisclosure and Implications for Treatment

“…For example, supernatural explanations may become accessible when individuals have experienced attention-grabbing or unusual events, major life stressors, or environmental cues. Supernatural explanations may be plausible for some individuals due to preexisting spiritual beliefs, a lack of satisfying natural explanations, or traits such as openness (Kamp et al 2019), experiential processing (Wilt et al 2022), schizotypy (Barnes and Gibson 2013), or prolonged grief or loneliness (Kamp et al 2020). Individuals could also be motivated to interpret events as supernatural when they have the desire to make meaning from them or if they have emotional needs, such as relational closure, that could be met with supernatural explanations.…”