Authors: Montgomery, Derek E.; Sandberg, Erika; Zimmerman, Alissa

Journal of Psychology & Christianity, Vol. 24(1), Spr 2005, pp. 3-12

Abstract:

College students were asked to judge whether two protagonists with different beliefs were equally right or whether one could be more right than the other one. The beliefs were either about religious phenomena (e.g., whether God is all-knowing) or natural phenomena (e.g., scientific claims about social and physical occurrences). In Experiment 1, the different beliefs were conflicting, but not strictly contradictory, and in Experiment 2, they were explicitly contradictory. In both studies participants generally assumed that opposing beliefs about the natural world could differ in veracity. However, significant increases in relativistic judgments (ps < .05) occurred for competing religious claims as participants maintained that conflicting or contradictory religious beliefs were equally true. Implications of these findings and directions for future research are discussed.