Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T05:45:07.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Loss of control is not necessary to induce behavioral consequences of deprivation: The case of religious fasting during Ramadan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2017

Mostafa Salari Rad  and
Jeremy Ginges
Mostafa Salari Rad
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, New School for Social Research, New York, NY 10011. [email protected]@newschool.edu
Jeremy Ginges
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, New School for Social Research, New York, NY 10011. [email protected]@newschool.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Pepper & Nettle argue that the more present-oriented behavior associated with a low socioeconomic status is an adaptive response to having relatively little control over the future. However, a study of fasters during Ramadan shows that self-imposed deprivation, which carries no implications regarding the ability to realize deferred rewards, is associated with loss and risk aversion.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e338
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Atran, S. & Ginges, J. (2012) Religious and sacred imperatives in human conflict. Science 336(6083):855–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bari, A. & Robbins, T. W. (2013) Inhibition and impulsivity: Behavioral and neural basis of response control. Progress in Neurobiology 108:44–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Callan, M. J., Shead, N. W. & Olson, J. M. (2011) Personal relative deprivation, delay discounting, and gambling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 101(5):955–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, E. C. & McCullough, M. E. (2010) Waiting, tolerating, and cooperating. Did religion evolve to prop up human's self-control abilities. Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theories, and applications, 2nd edn., ed. Vohs, K. D. & Baumeister, R. F., pp. 422–37. Guilford.Google Scholar
Gaechter, S., Johnson, E. J. & Herrmann, A. (2007) Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1010597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginges, J., Hansen, I. & Norenzayan, A. (2009) Religion and support for suicide attacks. Psychological Science 20(2):224–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guiso, L., Sapienza, P. & Zingales, L. (2013) Time varying risk aversion. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper no. 19284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haushofer, J. & Fehr, E. (2014) On the psychology of poverty. Science 344(6186):862–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henrich, J., Ensminger, J., McElreath, R., Barr, A., Barrett, C., Bolyanatz, A., Cardenas, J. C., Gurven, M., Gwako, E., Henrich, N., Lesorogol, C., Marlowe, F., Tracer, D. & Ziker, J. (2010) Markets, religion, community size, and the evolution of fairness and punishment. Science 327(5972):1480–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mani, A., Mullainathan, S., Shafir, E. & Zhao, J. (2013) Poverty impedes cognitive function. Science 341(6149):976–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norenzayan, A., Shariff, A. F. & Gervais, W. M. (2009) The evolution of religious misbelief. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32(6):531–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salari Rad, M. & Ginges, J. (2017) Risk behavior in fasting Muslims during Ramadan: A study of self-induced scarcity. Preprint available at: https://osf.io/3ffgx.Google Scholar
Shah, A. K., Mullainathan, S. & Shafir, E. (2012) Some consequences of having too little. Science 338(6107):682–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yesuf, M. & Bluffstone, R. A. (2009) Poverty, risk aversion, and path dependence in low-income countries: Experimental evidence from Ethiopia. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 91(4):1022–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar