1. Religion, Culture, and Trust ( FA9550-15-1-0008 ) PI: Adam B. Cohen (Arizona State University; Psychology) Co-PI: Gene A. Brewer (Arizona State University; Psychology) Senior Personnel: Steven Corman (Arizona State University; Communication) Roger C. Mayer (North Carolina State University; Organizational Behavior) Matthew L. Newman (Research Now, Dallas TX) AFOSR Program Review: T rust & Influence May 11-15, 2015, USAF Academy, CO.

2. Trust is Critical in Military Contexts Cultivating trust and credibility in diverse cultural and religious contexts Assessing trustworthiness and credibility in informants in diverse cultural and religious contexts Trust in teams where people are truly vulnerable to actions of other team members Religion and culture may help solve some of these problems Ingroup-Outgroup Identities Supernatural Monitoring Costly Signaling Individualism-Collectivism Tightness-Looseness

3. Religious Ingroups and Outgroups and Trust Religion is a powerful source of in-group and out-group identities (Cohen, 2009; 2015) People probably trust outgroups less than ingroups Does being from a different religious group always reduce trust? –Might atheists even distrust other atheists?

4. Beliefs About God Supernatural punishment hypothesis (Norenzayan, Big Gods) Belief in a punishing God makes people less likely to cheat, but belief in God’s forgiveness makes them more likely (Shariff & Norenzayan, 2011)

5. Costly Signaling and Trust Religion often involves costly signals of commitment –elaborate rituals, charity, sacrifices, circumcision, dietary restrictions, etc. –Religious kibbutzim enjoy greater longevity, related to the greater costly signals (Sosis & Alcorta, 2003) Does the presence of ingroup religious signals increase trust? Does the presence of outgroup costly signals decrease trust?

6. Friending on Facebook 393 Christian undergraduates (308 Protestant, 85 Catholic) 153 male, 240 female Manipulated –religious group –beliefs about God –costly signaling

7. Trust Scale, α =.82 (in the future, multiple dimensions and measurement invariance) Do you think this person is trustworthy? Would you trust this person with a sensitive secret? Would you lend this person money and expect to get it back? Do you think this person has the ability to be trustworthy? Do you think this person is benevolent? Do you think this person has integrity?

8. Target Religion F(1,374) = 0.47, p =.50, η p 2 =.001 Trust Composite (M ± SEM) Christian undergrads rating trustworthiness of…

9. Forgiving Versus Punishing God F(1,374) =.003, p =.95, η p 2 =.00 Trust Composite (M ± SEM) Christian undergrads rating trustworthiness of…

10. Costly Signaling (Charity) F(1, 374) = 32.84, p <.001, η p 2 =.08 Trust Composite (M ± SEM) Christian undergrads rating trustworthiness of…

11. Costly Signaling x Religion Interaction F (1,374) = 0.81, p =.37, η p 2 =.002, both p’s ≤.001 Trust Composite (M ± SEM) Christian undergrads rating trustworthiness of…

12. Limitations – Future Directions Series of experiments with charity, food, more subtle measure of association between religion and trust Questionnaire based measures –Behavioral measure of trust with consequences –Physiological measures (psychophysiology, EEG) All US college students –Cross-cultural (US, Singapore, Israel) –Threat Primed threat Israeli Jews and Muslims Sri Lankan Tamils and Sinhalese 12

13. Conceptual Diagram of Trust Decision Making US (Indiv, loose), Singapore (Collec, tight), Israel (Collec, loose) Christian, atheist, Muslim, Jewish participants 13

14. Laboratory Task 14 …

15. Challenge Versus Threat Physiology 15 Emotional and physiological responses to a situation are triggered by cognitive appraisal of the event as a threat or a challenge. Challenge: efficient mobilization of cardiac resources. Blood vessel dilation results in decreased vascular resistance. Threat: inefficient mobilization of cardiac resources. Either no change or an increase in vascular resistance, resulting in increased blood pressure.

16. EEG and Trust Decision Making EEG Prediction: Oscillatory Dynamics - Mu Suppression EEG Post Effects: Event-Related Potential - Feedback Related Negativity 16

17. Timeline Year 1: –Hire staff –Procure and synchronize equipment –All hands meeting –IRB approvals –Translations –Experiment in US Year 2: Experiment in Israel. Year 3: Experiment in Singapore. 17

18. Publications, Awards, Patents, or Transitions Attributed to the Grant Publication Hall, D., Cohen, A. B., Meyer, K. K., Varley, A., & Brewer, G. A., Jr. (In press). Costly signaling increases trust, even across religious affiliations. Psychological Science. Presentations Cohen, A. B., Hall, D., & Brewer, G. A., Jr. (2015, May). Religious costly signaling increases trust. Invited address to be delivered in invited symposium at Association for Psychological Science, NY. Rayes, D., Cohen, A. B., Brewer, G. A., Jr. (2015, March). Paradox of Healing & Stigmatization: Mental Health Stigma in Arab Culture. Poster presented at the 7th annual Muslim Mental Health Conference, Dearborn, MI. Cohen, A. B. (2015, March). Religion and trust: Aim high! Address delivered to psychology alumni group, ASU. Cohen, A. B., Hall, D., & Brewer, G. A., Jr. (2015, March). Religious costly signaling increases trust. In K. Laurin, chair, Religious dimensions and morality: Perspectives on a multifaceted relationship. Symposium conducted at International Congress on Psych Science conference, Amsterdam. Cohen, A. B., Hall, D., & Brewer, G. A., Jr. (2015, February). Religious costly signaling increases trust. Invited address delivered at Justice preconference of the Society of Personality and Social Psychology conference, Long Beach. Media coverage Neil Farber’s blog in Psychology Today: “Do Christians trust Muslims? A surprising study of good faith.” [Essential Read by the Psychology Today editors, 13 May 2015] 18

19. Project Summary Research Objectives: Elucidate the cultural and religious factors that promote or hinder trustworthiness Examine the neural (EEG) and physiological correlates of trust Refine theory, measurement on factors of trustworthiness Key Findings: People can find outgroup members trustworthy Costly signaling promotes trust within and across groups, surprisingly Technical Approach: Experimental social psychology Cross-cultural and –religion research EEG techniques Cardiac physiology assessment Benefits to the wider academic or DoD community: Strategies to assess, predict, and cultivate trust in teams in various cultural-religious contexts Begins to suggest religion, often an assumed stumbling block to building trust, can build trust in volatile world environments Project Start Date: 01 Feb 2015 Project End Date: 31 Jan 2018 19