How Thinking About God Transforms Self Recognition and AI Preferences Among Christians and Shintoists in Japan

How Thinking About God Transforms Self Recognition and AI Preferences Among Christians and Shintoists in Japan | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article How Thinking About God Transforms Self Recognition and AI Preferences Among Christians and Shintoists in Japan Jimpei Hitsuwari, Takechika Hayashi, Meiyi Du, Michio Nomura This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5826471/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study investigated how God saliency affects self-recognition and AI preferences across different Japanese religions, via two studies: a three-religion comparison (N=168) and a focused examination of Christians and Shintoists (N=120). Participants wrote about God or daily activities and completed measures of the small self, human imperfection, human imperfection acceptance, divine love, evaluation of AI-generated art, and investment decisions. Results showed that God salience consistently increased the small self across both studies; however, unlike previous Western findings, it did not affect perceptions of human imperfections or AI preferences. Notably, animistic tendencies emerged as significant predictors of the small self (Study 1) and imperfection acceptance (Study 2), suggesting that viewing the divine as more intimate and equal, rather than absolute, shapes these relationships in the Japanese context. These findings highlight how cultural and religious backgrounds influence the relationship between religious thought and AI preferences, demonstrating the need for culturally diverse perspectives. Psychology Religious Studies Religion Animism Shintoism Cultural differences Human-AI interaction Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Introduction Thinking about God Research on the psychology of religion faces constant challenges. First, the definitions of religiosity and spirituality are not uniquely determined, and there exists a wide variety of religions, sects, and cultural backgrounds (e.g., Paloutzian & Park, 2021). While such conceptual debates continue, empirical research in the field of the psychology of religion has attempted to study the topic through behavior-based experimental manipulations, such as the behavior of praying (vs. thinking; Bremner et al., 2011), priming of religious words (Haggard et al., 2019), imagining a posture of praying (Van Cappellen et al., 2024), experiments in religious places and contexts (Takano & Taoka, 2024), and worship music (vs. secular music; Walter, & Altorfer, 2022). These studies have analyzed the subsequent questionnaire and behavioral data (for a large-scale meta-analysis of the effects of priming on prejudice for various religions, see Snell et al., 2024). In particular, Karataş & Cutright (2023) recently conducted a large-scale experiment with Christian and Muslim participants using various manipulations to increase the salience of God (e.g., describing God in detail), where participants were asked to describe their relationship with God, which increased their awareness of their own small selves and human imperfection, and as a result, they were more likely to adopt the AI’s recommendations in various decision-making tasks. It should be noted that there is also a rebuttal against this work of Karataş & Cutright (2023) (Moore et al., 2024), and it is necessary to continue to reproduce and expand on whether the god saliency affects AI preferences (Karataş & Cutright, 2024). In this study, we focused on Japanese samples and religions common in Japan. Variety of religion and culture As mentioned above, empirical research in the field of the psychology of religion is gradually accumulating, but the focus is still on religions, samples, and researches from Europe and North America. A recent study that examined articles from the past 60 years in three journals specializing in the psychology of religion found that of the 1503 articles, 930 were from North America (61.63%), indicating a significant bias in terms of the region of research (Davis et al., 2024). This bias in research areas is related to the bias in religion and sects, and it has been criticized that majority participants are Christians, and that the psychology of religion is the psychology of Christianity (Abu-Raiya, 2017). In addition to Christian participants, as in previous studies, our study also focused on Shinto and indigenous Japanese religions (Tenrikyo 1 ). It is noteworthy, that in Japan, the “ Japanese Journal for the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality ,” a peer-reviewed academic journal, was first published in 2023; until then, there had been almost no research on the psychology of religion (Fujii, 2023). Shinto is a polytheistic religion unique to Japan that has also been influenced by Buddhism and Taoism. It is a complex system of beliefs that venerates nature, ancestors, and various gods (Teeuwen, 2002), and is deeply rooted in the spiritual culture and daily lives of the Japanese people, as they put their religious values into practice in harmony with nature and traditional rituals. There are also experimental studies that deal with Shinto beliefs. Takano and Nomura (2024) conducted an experiment that reminded participants of their experiences of feeling the spirits or souls of their ancestors (Ancestor Condition) or of feeling a spiritual existence greater than themselves when they see the vastness of nature (Nature Condition). The experience of ancestral worship was positively correlated with authoritarianism, while the experience of nature worship was negatively correlated with traditionalism (Takano & Nomura, 2024). It would be interesting to compare religions that worship nature and have polytheistic characteristics to monotheistic religions from the perspective of God saliency. Additionally, although we collected data from Japanese Christians, their traits may differ from those of Western Christians. For example, in the 16th century, when Christian missionaries came to a country where traditional religions such as Buddhism were already well established, they gradually began to engage in dialogue, and many Japanese people found both religions attractive and attempted to harmonize them (Thelle et al., 1996). Mechanism for AI preference In previous research (Karataş & Cutright, 2023), the reason why AI recommendations were adopted in the high God saliency condition was that God saliency made people feel small and imperfect (the mediating effect of imperfection was more significant) and increased their preference for AI over humans. However, this is thought to reflect the religious views of Christianity and Islam, which regard the one absolute God as the only God. In religions that are either polytheistic or monotheistic but also value harmony with other religions (in this study, this includes Tenrikyo followers in Study 1), there is a possibility that thinking about God will not necessarily lead to a sense of a small self or imperfection. Such differences between religions and between Christians in Japan and Europe may be partly explained by their tendencies toward animism. Recent research has shown that animistic tendencies positively influence moral attitudes toward robots in Japan, while showing different patterns in Western cultures (Ikari et al., 2023). Animism is a belief and worldview that holds that all beings in the natural world (plants and animals, mountains and rivers, natural phenomena such as wind and thunder) are inhabited by spirits and souls, and that humans and these spiritual beings interact with each other (Ikeuchi, 2010). In recent years, it has received renewed attention in the context of AI (Hitsuwari et al., 2023), in addition to climate change and environmental issues (Conty, 2022). In an animistic world, gods and spirits are thought to be more equal to and closer to humans than omnipotent gods. Therefore, when a person with animistic values strongly feels the existence of gods and spirits, they feel a sense of oneness with nature and the universe. Even if they feel small in comparison, it does not necessarily lead to the recognition of human imperfection. The animist spirit is not only deeply connected to Shinto, but even those who believe in monotheistic religions such as Christianity may have this tendency as part of their values similar to the Japanese people (although it is probably lower than that of Shinto believers). Furthermore, in previous research (Karataş & Cutright, 2023), participants were asked to make choices that required logical judgment, such as selecting financial products (also implemented in Study 2 of this research) or supplements. In in this research, we have also attempt to expand the scope to include more aesthetic judgments by having participants evaluate AI art. It is assumed that attitudes toward AI in logical and aesthetic judgment situations differ significantly. In fact, in research on AI interactions, AI recommendations are preferred in situations requiring logical judgments, such as in finance (e.g., Germann & Merkle, 2023), whereas human-made works are preferred in situations requiring aesthetic judgment, such as in the evaluation of paintings (e.g., Demmer et al., 2023; Hitsuwari et al., 2024). Study Aims Based on the above, this study examined how God saliency affects the small self, sense of human imperfection, and preference for AI among followers of multiple religions in Japan to replicate the previous study, overcome the limited kinds of religions and cultures found in previous research, and propose a generalization of theory. The main hypotheses were: Hypothesis 1. When Christians think about God, the small self, human imperfections, and preference for AI art increase, unlike among Shinto (Studies 1 and 2) or Tenrikyo believers (Study 1). Hypothesis 2. When Christians write about God, this leads to a preference for AI art, mediated by small self and human imperfection (according to previous research, the mediating effect of imperfection is greater). Hypothesis 3. Those with higher animistic tendencies have a smaller effect of manipulating writing about God on the small self, human imperfection, and preference for AI art (AI suggested investment decision-making only in Study 2). [1] Tenrikyo is a new religion that was founded in Japan in the 19th century with Nakayama Miki as its founder, and it is one of the largest new religions in Japan (Shimada, 2016). It believes in a single god called “Tenri-O-no-Mikoto,” and is also influenced by traditional Japanese religions such as Shinto and Buddhism. Study 1 Method Ethical Considerations This study was approved by the Ethics Committee (anonymous for peer review). Study 1 (hypotheses and design) was preregistered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/q9unr/?view_only=8708071352f64438ba3ee3aa4cc76b7e). The sample size, research design, hypotheses, and planned analyses were preregistered prior to data collection. All data and analysis scripts are available at (https://osf.io/uvw7y/?view_only=7f4dcf946e7e4e65962c5a79a0c41c55). Participants The participants were recruited using CrowdWorks, a Japanese crowdsourcing service ( https://crowdworks.jp ). The main analyses were ANOVAs with a 3 (religion) × 2 (God saliency) between-subjects factorial design in which the small self and human imperfection scales served as dependent variables. Sample size was determined using Gpower (3.1.9.7; Faul et al., 2007), assuming a medium effect size ( f = .25), with power = .80 and α = .05, which yielded N = 158. A total of 168 participants were included in the analysis after excluding duplicate IDs and participants who failed the attention check based on preregistered criteria. The sample consisted of 58 Christians (27 men and 31 women; M age = 42.10, SD = 11.25), 59 Shintoists (37 men and 22 women; M age = 43.90, SD = 11.47), and 51 followers of Tenrikyo (30 men and 21 women; M age = 40.08, SD = 9.17). The participants provided informed consent by checking each item in a detailed consent form outlining the study’s purpose, procedures, data use, and anonymity safeguards. They were explicitly informed that participation was voluntary, that they could withdraw at any time without penalty, and that their data would be used solely for research purposes. Measures 2 Small Self Participants answered four items (Piff et al., 2015): “Right now, I feel small,” “I feel the presence of something greater than me,” “I feel like I am in the presence of something grand,” and “I feel part of some greater entity,” on a 7-point scale, where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree. Human Imperfection To assess participants’ beliefs about human imperfection, four items from the Human Imperfection Scale were used (Karataş & Cutright, 2023): “We are all imperfect in many ways,” “All people have flaws,” “There is no perfect person,” and “We all make mistakes,” rated on a 7-point scale, where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree. AI Artworks We used 20 AI haikus (Hitsuwari et al., 2023) and 20 AI paintings (Hitsuwari et al., 2024) that have been used in previous studies. All the artworks were AI-generated, but we randomly labeled them as human-made or AI-generated. Their beauty was rated in advance in those previous studies, and the two works of equal beauty were compared. Responses were rated on a 7-point scale, where 1 = strongly prefer AI-generated and 7 = strongly prefer human-made. Spirituality The Japanese Youth Spirituality Rating Scale (JYS; Nigorikawa et al., 2016) was used to assess spirituality. This scale includes 27 items and 5 distinct factors: harmony with nature, ikigai (meaning in life), awe regarding invisible existence, connection with ancestors/roots, and independence. Responses are rated on a 7-point scale, where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree. Animism Tendency The 11-item Animism Scale for Adults (Ikeuchi, 2020) developed in Japan was used to assess the participants’ tendency toward animistic beliefs, which consisted of three factors: the apotheosis of natural products (e.g., "I believe that gods dwell in massive rocks and ancient trees found in nature."), the parts of possessors ("I feel as though the maker's spirit resides in handmade objects."), and the anthropomorphication of possessions ("At times, I feel a sense of attachment to the things around me, similar to how I feel toward people."). Responses were rated on a 5-point scale, where 1 = does not apply at all and 7 = applies very well. Religious Background and Commitment Religious background was assessed using two measures: a single item asking participants' religious affiliation (“Please indicate the religion you believe in”) and an open-ended question about their religious involvement (“How are you involved with your religion? (or, how have you been involved with your religion?)”). Religious commitment was measured using a 5-item scale, 1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree. The scale included items such as “Religion is essential for me” and “I believe in God.” Procedure This study consisted of four parts: 1) writing task on a specific theme, 2) questions about the participants’ current psychological state, 3) evaluation of AI haikus and paintings, and 4) questions on participants’ personalities and characteristics. In the first part, participants were randomly assigned to God (high-God saliency) or daily life (low-God saliency) conditions. Those in the God condition were instructed (in Japanese) to write about the role or impact of God in their lives, with specific examples (e.g., situation, time, place, and feelings). In the daily life condition, participants were instructed (in Japanese) to describe their daily activities in detail (e.g., waking up, brushing teeth, going to work). Participants wrote for at least three minutes before proceeding. In the second part, participants completed questionnaires about small self and human imperfection (Karataş & Cutright, 2023). In the third part, participants compared two AI works of equal beauty, labeled as human-made or AI-generated, and rated their preference on a 7-point scale. The fourth part included questionnaires on spirituality, animism, time perception, art experiences, religious attitudes (e.g., clergy or layperson), and demographic information. Data Analysis All analyses were performed using the R (ver. 4.2.3; R Core Team, 2022). Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVAs) was performed using the anovakun package (ver. 4.8.6.; Iseki, 2021) to test the effects of religion and God saliency on the small self and human imperfection. For AI art preferences (AI paintings and haiku), linear mixed models were conducted using the lme4 package (Bates et al., 2015), with religion and God saliency as fixed effects and participant ID 2 as a random effect. For H3, regression analyses were performed using the lm function to examine the interaction between God saliency and animistic tendencies. Results and Discussion The means and standard deviations for each religion and God saliency are shown in Table 1. The correlations between the main variables are shown in Figure 1 (the correlation table for all variables is shown in Supplementary Table 1). Table 1. Descriptive statistics for religion and God saliency (Study 1) Christianity Shinto Tenrikyo God (N = 28) Daily (N = 30) God (N = 26) Daily (N = 33) God (N = 24) Daily (N = 27) Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Small self 5.48 1.15 4.88 1.13 5.41 .79 4.48 1.22 4.93 1.38 4.51 1.17 Imperfection 6.42 .65 5.97 1.45 6.59 .48 6.11 1.08 5.79 1.16 6.02 1.22 AI art Painting 4.26 .54 4.31 .63 4.45 .68 4.32 .68 4.32 .51 4.25 .55 Haiku 4.45 .65 4.66 .73 4.92 .63 4.79 .86 4.48 .59 4.29 .59 Spirituality 4.99 .83 4.87 .70 5.12 .59 4.91 .78 4.93 .82 4.89 .54 Harmonizing with nature 5.53 1.06 5.53 1.03 5.92 .77 5.78 .65 5.39 .95 5.74 .76 Ikigai 4.82 1.48 4.61 1.21 4.51 1.42 4.30 1.51 4.62 1.12 4.41 1.32 Awe (invisible existence) 5.58 1.07 5.51 .85 5.71 .87 5.39 .88 5.48 1.05 5.39 .86 Connecting with ancestors 4.35 1.40 4.57 1.32 5.21 1.02 5.11 1.17 5.04 1.30 5.21 1.06 Self-determination 4.68 1.26 4.12 1.20 4.25 1.38 3.97 1.55 4.10 .96 3.70 1.46 Time perception 3.43 .88 3.31 1.03 3.89 .64 3.85 .55 3.68 .74 3.84 .50 Animism 3.12 .95 2.94 .82 2.87 1.00 3.01 .89 3.45 .79 3.17 1.14 Apotheosis of natural products 3.35 1.06 3.22 1.23 4.15 .69 3.98 .65 3.79 .83 3.95 .63 Parts of possessors 3.49 .99 3.49 1.09 4.00 .80 3.97 .81 3.71 .93 4.01 .49 Anthropomorphication of possessions 3.46 .86 3.22 .91 3.52 .77 3.59 .59 3.54 .77 3.57 .72 Commitment 3.95 .60 3.93 .63 3.67 .78 3.51 .54 3.73 .83 3.63 .64 To test Hypothesis 1, a two-way ANOVA was first conducted with religion and God saliency as independent variables for the two dependent variables of small self and human imperfection. The results showed that the main effect of God saliency ( F (1, 162) = 13.26, p < .001, η 2 = .07) was significant for small self, but the main effect of religion ( F (2, 162) = 2.20, p = .11, η 2 = .02) and the interaction (( F (2, 162) = .71, p = .49, η 2 = .01) were not significant. Small self was higher when God saliency was higher than when it was low. For human imperfection, the main effects of religion ( F (2, 162) = 2.39, p = .09, η 2 = .03) and of God saliency ( F (2, 162) = 1.97, p = .16, η 2 = .01), and the interaction ( F (2, 162) = 1.85, p = .16, η 2 = .02) were not significant. We then examined linear mixed models with religion and God saliency as independent variables and participants as random effects for preferences for AI paintings and AI haikus. There were no significant main effects or interactions for religion and God saliency for either the AI paintings or the AI haikus. Since Hypothesis 1 was not completely supported, it was not possible to verify the mediating effect; however, we explored the relationship between small self/human imperfection and preference for AI art, to test Hypothesis 2. We examined linear mixed models with small self and human imperfection as independent variables and participants as random effects for preferences for AI paintings and AI haikus. As a result, neither the small self nor human imperfection explained the preference for AI paintings and AI haikus. To test Hypothesis 3, we conducted a multiple regression analysis (linear mixed models for AI paintings and AI haikus) with preference for the small self, human imperfection, AI paintings, and AI haikus as dependent variables and God saliency and animism, as well as their interaction, as independent variables. The results showed that the effect of animism was significant only when the small self was used as the dependent variable; the higher the animism, the smaller the self-felt ( b = .52, SE = .17, t = 3.12, p = .002). Interestingly, when animism and God saliency were entered simultaneously, the main effect of God saliency on the small self observed in the analysis of Hypothesis 1 became non-significant ( b = .48, SE = .85, t = .57, p = .57). As described above, Study 1 showed the main effects of religion and God saliency for human imperfection on the small self; while it partially reproduced the findings of previous studies and supported some of the hypothesis (a part of Hypothesis 1), it did not support other hypotheses, such as the interaction, preference for AI art, and the relationship with animism. This may be due to the complex grouping of the three religious samples and problems with the scales used; for example, the ceiling effect seen for Human Imperfection Scale. Study 2 aimed to overcome these limitations. [2] Time perception was included to explore its potential for future research, and its results have not been discussed in the current study. [3] Although we initially planned to include painting ID and haiku ID as random effects in the preregistration, these were excluded from the final analyses due to singular fit issues. Study 2 In Study 2, the following modifications were made to Study 1: first, only participants who believed in Christianity or Shintoism were included. Tenrikyo was excluded to simplify the comparison and focus on the two groups, Christianity and Shintoism, which represent a major Western religion and a representative Japanese religion, respectively. Tenrikyo, being a unique monotheistic religion that respects other religions and is influenced by Shintoism and Buddhism, was considered less suitable for the purpose of this study. Second, the expected mechanism was expanded. Contrary to expectations, the manipulation of God saliency did not significantly affect preferences for AI art in Study 1. Recognition and acceptance of imperfections may have had no effect on preferences. Therefore, in addition to human imperfection, a scale measuring the degree of acceptance of imperfections was added, as it was thought that rather than the acceptance of imperfections, recognition of God’s acceptance (such as love) could indirectly lead to a preference for AI (i.e., a high evaluation of art created by humans made by God). To measure the subjective feeling of being loved by God, we added some measures (discussed in the Methods section). We also added an investment selection task based on AI recommendations, which has also been used in previous research (Karataş & Cutright, 2023), as it was thought that there may be differences in the mechanisms of logical judgment based on numerical values, such as investment, and aesthetic evaluation, such as art. Method Study 2 was conducted in the same manner as Study1, with some changes. Participants Study 2 considered only Christians and Shintoists as participants. A total of 120 participants 4 were analyzed, consisting of 58 Christians (31 men, 27 women; M age = 41.50, SD = 10.16) and 62 Shintoists (37 men, 25 women; M age = 42.26, SD = 11.57) after excluding duplicate IDs and participants who failed the attention check. All participants in Study 2 were different from those in Study 1. Measures 5 Human Imperfection Scale (Revised Version) Items on the Human Imperfection Scale (Karataş & Cutright, 2023) used in Study 1 were modified from assertive statements to questions asking about extent (e.g., “We are all imperfect in many ways” was revised to “To what extent do you think humans are imperfect?”). This was done to allow a more state-like change to be observed, as a ceiling effect was observed in Study 1 (the mean value exceeded 6 in the 7-point method for all experimental conditions and sample combinations). The item responses ranged from 1 = imperfect to 7= perfect. Acceptance of Own Imperfection It is possible that recognizing and accepting one's own imperfections may influence participants’ evaluations of AI and human-created art. To test this, we incorporated an 8-item measure adapted from Zhan et al. (2019), assessing the extent to which participants accept their imperfections (e.g., “I accept myself even with this imperfection.”), rated on a 7-point scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. Loved As-Is It is possible that an awareness of the divine love, rather than the acceptance of human imperfection, may indirectly lead participants to prefer human-created art artworks crafted by humans, who themselves are the creations of God. To test this, we incorporated a measure of the participants’ subjective sense of being loved by God via the 4-items (e.g., “I feel loved for who I am.”) from Grewal et al. (2023), rated on a 7-point scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. Investment Decision-Making Task Participants were presented with a graph showing the one-year cumulative return rates of the two mutual fund options, one recommended by an AI advisor providing investment advice based solely on algorithmic processing without human input, and the other recommended by a human investment expert, and were asked to choose between them. The two options had nearly identical cumulative return trends, with the same most recent cumulative return rates. This setup allowed participants to focus solely on deciding whether they found the AI or human recommendations to be more trustworthy. Religious Commitment The Religious Commitment Inventory-10 (RCI-10; Worthington et al., 2003) measures participants’ commitment to their religion (i.e., Christianity or Shintoism), and is based on Worthington’s (1988) theory of religious values. The 10-items scale (e.g., “I often read books and magazines about my faith”) is rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Data analysis Analyses were conducted in the same manner as in Study 1. For the investment decision-making task, we performed logistic regression analysis using the glm function (binomial family) to test the effects of religion, God saliency, and their interaction. Results and Discussion The means and standard deviations for each religion and God saliency are shown in Table 2. The correlations between the main variables are shown in Figure 2 (the correlation table for all variables is shown in Supplementary Table 2). Table 2 . Descriptive statistics for religion and God saliency (Study 2) Christianity Shinto God (N = 31) Daily (N = 27) God (N = 27) Daily (N = 35) Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Small self 5.40 .85 4.94 1.07 5.06 1.18 4.46 1.24 Imperfection 2.09 1.40 2.15 1.34 2.43 1.29 2.41 1.14 Love 4.85 1.45 4.31 1.71 4.61 1.28 4.30 1.21 Acceptance 5.29 .96 4.80 .90 4.98 .93 4.61 .97 AI art Painting 4.27 .61 4.26 .77 4.24 .61 4.26 .46 Haiku 4.47 .98 4.44 1.07 4.75 .74 4.71 .54 Invest .58 .50 .59 .50 .67 .48 .60 .50 Spirituality 4.79 .70 4.58 .88 4.84 .65 4.72 .65 Harmonizing with nature 5.47 .91 5.14 1.16 5.42 1.08 5.44 .63 Ikigai 4.48 1.36 3.98 1.40 4.50 1.20 4.22 1.35 Awe (invisible existence) 5.56 .76 5.05 1.06 5.08 .89 5.15 .74 Connecting with ancestors 4.68 1.10 4.40 1.41 5.05 1.00 4.82 1.19 Self-determination 3.77 1.11 4.35 1.33 4.17 1.22 3.99 1.35 Time perception 2.97 1.09 2.79 .74 3.09 1.10 2.81 .83 Animism 3.73 .92 3.33 .90 3.77 .58 3.67 .59 Apotheosis of natural products 3.67 1.16 3.22 1.11 3.94 .59 3.82 .77 Parts of possessors 3.76 1.02 3.59 .96 3.77 .68 3.65 .86 Anthropomorphication of possessions 3.76 .87 3.18 .85 3.60 .73 3.54 .66 Attitude toward ambiguity Discomfort with ambiguity 4.79 .90 4.53 .71 4.47 .98 4.64 .89 Absolutism 3.69 .80 3.74 1.08 3.60 1.26 3.33 .92 Need for complexity and novelty 3.97 .88 4.19 1.23 4.21 1.28 3.97 .87 Commitment 3.38 .83 3.09 .88 3.01 .70 2.69 .70 To test Hypothesis 1, a two-way ANOVA was conducted with religion and God saliency as independent variables and the four dependent variables of small self, imperfection, acceptance, and love. The results showed that the main effects of religion ( F (1, 116) = 4.02, p = .047, η 2 = .03) and God saliency ( F (1, 116) = 6.76, p = .01, η 2 = .05) were significant for small self. Christians had a higher small self than Shintoists, and high God saliency was higher than low God saliency. The main effect of God saliency ( F (1, 116) = 6.30, p = .01, η 2 = .05) was significant for acceptance. High-God saliency had a higher acceptance than low-God saliency. However, the interactions and main effects of imperfection and love were not significant. Next, we examined the effects of religion and God saliency on AI art preferences using linear mixed models. Religion ( p = .83), God saliency ( p = .96), and their interaction ( p = .90) had no significant effect on the preference for AI paintings, religion ( p = .21), and God saliency ( p = .89), and their interaction ( p = .97) had no significant effect on the preference for AI haikus. Additionally, we examined the impact of religion and God saliency on investment decisions for AI suggestions using a logistic regression analysis. Neither religion ( p = .50) nor God saliency ( p = .93), or their interaction ( p = .66) had a significant effect on investment decisions. Regarding Hypothesis 2, since Hypothesis 1 was not completely supported, it was not possible to verify the mediating effect; however, we explored the impact of small self, human imperfection, acceptance, and love on the preference for AI art and the selection of AI suggestions for investment decisions using a linear mixed model. None of the variables had an impact on the preference for AI art or the selection of AI suggestions for investment decisions. To test Hypothesis 3, we conducted a multiple regression analysis (linear mixed models for AI art and logistic regression for investment decisions) with God saliency and animism as independent variables, and small self, human imperfection, acceptance, love, preference for AI art, and investment decisions as dependent variables. The results showed that the effect of animism was significant only when acceptance was used as the dependent variable; the higher the animism, the more the acceptance ( b = .32, SE = .15, t = 2.11, p = .04). Interestingly, when animism and God saliency were entered simultaneously, the main effect of God saliency on acceptance observed in the analysis of Hypothesis 1 was not significant ( b = -.71, SE = .81, t = -.88, p = .38). [4] We conducted two rounds of recruitment to reach this number of participants. As a result of randomly allocating the experimental manipulation, we were short of four participants in the high God saliency group of Christian believers and 10 participants in the low God saliency group of Shinto believers. Based on the sample size estimation conducted in Study 1, we needed 27 participants of each religion and God saliency groups. [5] Time perception and attitude toward ambiguity were included to explore its potential for future research, and its results have not been discussed in the current study. General Discussion In this study, we examined the impact of God saliency on self-awareness and attitudes toward AI using participants from multiple religions in Japan. In Study 1, we conducted an experiment with Christian, Shintoist, and Tenrikyo followers. In Study 2, we conducted an experiment with Christian and Shintoist followers. In both studies, we consistently observed a positive effect of God saliency on the small self, but we did not observe the effect on human imperfection or the effect on preference for AI that was observed in previous research (Karataş & Cutright, 2023). Religious Differences in Self-Recognition The first hypothesis, “When Christians write about God, small self, human imperfection, and preference for AI art increase, unlike in Shinto (Study 1 & 2) and Tenrikyo (Study 1) believers,” was only partially supported. In Study 1, there was no main effect of religion, which may be because the study included Tenrikyo, a monotheistic religion that is strongly influenced by Japanese culture. Contrarily, Study 2 showed that Christians had a higher small self than Shintoists. This may reflect the differences between monotheism and polytheism. In other words, while Christianity, which is based on the premise of an absolute being in the form of an omniscient and omnipotent God, has a high sense of small self (cf. Preston & Shin, 2017), Shintoism, which emphasizes relationships with beings closer to humans, such as nature and ancestors, is considered to have relatively less of this phenomenon. However, the effect of human imperfection was not observed in either of these studies. Rather, in Study 2, the effect of God saliency was observed in the acceptance of imperfection rather than in the recognition of the imperfection itself. This may reflect the tendency of many Japanese religions to view human imperfection not as something negative but as something natural and sometimes even positive (Saito, 1997). Two implications were obtained regarding the AI preference. First, when the work was an artform, there was no effect on its preference. This aligns with previous studies, suggesting that humans may prefer human-made works in aesthetic judgments (e.g., Demmer et al., 2023; Hitsuwari et al., 2024). Second, the fact that no effect was observed in the investment decision task suggests the importance of cultural context, given that in Western samples, God saliency promoted the adoption of AI recommendations (Karataş & Cutright, 2023). This lack of effect may be because reflecting on God did not increase perceptions of imperfection, or, alternatively, imperfection was not interpreted negatively in this cultural context. Pathways to AI Preference The second hypothesis, “When Christians write about God, it leads to a preference for AI art, mediated by small self and human imperfection,” was not supported. The mediating effect shown in previous research (Karataş & Cutright, 2023) was not confirmed as small self and human imperfection did not predict preference for AI. This result suggests that the mechanism from God saliency to preference for AI may differ depending on the culture and type of judgment. Notably, the variables of acceptance and love, which were added in Study 2, also had no effect. This finding has two possible explanations. First, in the Japanese religious context, God saliency may not necessarily follow the simple cognitive pathway of “preference for AI over human imperfection.” For example, in Japanese values, which tend to accept imperfection (Saito, 1997), recognition of imperfection may not necessarily lead to a preference for “perfect” entities such as AI. Second, the influence of cognitive mediating factors may be limited to aesthetic judgments, such as art evaluations. Cultural values and aesthetic sensibilities may have a stronger influence on the evaluation of AI art than technical perfection or logical decision-making criteria (e.g., Demmer et al., 2023). At the same time, the fact that the investment decision task added in Study 2 also had no effect is consistent with the findings of Moore et al. (2024), prompting us to reconsider the impact of God saliency on AI preferences. The construction of more sophisticated models that consider the cultural background and nature of the decision-making task will be a topic for future research. Animism and God Saliency The third hypothesis, “Those with higher animistic tendencies will have a smaller effect of manipulation writing about God on small self, human imperfection, and preference for AI art (AI suggested investment decision making only in Study 2),” showed the importance of animism in a different way than expected. Specifically, in Study 1, the main effect of animism was observed for small self, whereas in Study 2, it was observed for acceptance. In addition, when animism was included, the effect of God saliency disappeared. This pattern indicates three aspects. First, the effect of God saliency can be explained by animism, which is a more primitive religious sensibility. This finding aligns with recent cross-cultural research showing that animistic tendencies differently influence moral attitudes toward robots in Japan and the United States (Ikari et al., 2023). For people with an animistic worldview, the relationship between gods and spirits is equal and intimate (Ikeuchi, 2010), and such a relationship may enhance the sense of acceptance. However, the effect of animism on the small self was unexpected, and it is possible that animistic sensibilities bring about a different form of humility by positioning the self as part of nature and the universe. Second, there is the possibility that animistic worldviews have universal influence that transcends religious categories. In this study, animistic tendencies were observed even among Christian believers, explaining the effect of God saliency. Interestingly, animistic tendencies were observed even among Christian believers of a monotheistic religion, which shows the importance of conducting research in different countries and cultures, even within the same religion. Third, animism is the tendency to perceive spirituality in things. This perspective provides important suggestions for considering the relationship between AI and humans in the future (Hitsuwari et al., 2023). Evaluating AI art or making investment decisions the possibility of viewing AI as a unique existence rather than just a tool may be considered. Limitations This study has several limitations. First, there were measurement issues. In particular, a ceiling effect was observed in the Human Imperfection Scale. Despite using the revised version in Study 2, a ceiling effect was still observed; hence, it is necessary to develop more precise measurement methods. Second, because only one type of decision-making task was used for the AI investment decisions, the generalizability of the results is limited. In future, it will be necessary to examine a wider variety of decision-making tasks. Third is the issue of power. In this study, the sample size was set assuming a medium effect size; however, as the large-scale replication study by Moore et al. (2024) showed that the relationship between God saliency and AI preference may have a smaller effect size, our study may have lacked sufficient power. Conclusion This study provides new insights into the impact of God saliency on the self and attitudes toward AI in the Japanese religious context. Specifically, we showed that the model from God saliency to AI preference indicated in previous research (Karataş & Cutright, 2023) was not completely replicated in the Japanese sample. This is consistent with the replication issue shown by Moore et al. (2024). Additionally, this study showed that animistic worldviews may be an important factor in explaining the effects of God saliency, which is a novel finding. These findings demonstrate the importance of cultural diversity in the psychology of religion and suggest the need to consider culturally specific religious views and animistic worldviews when considering the relationship between AI and humans. Future research involving participants from diverse cultural and religious backgrounds and the development of experimental manipulations suited to each culture will be required. References Abu-Raiya, H. (2017). A critique from within: Some important research issues that psychologists of religion and spirituality should further work on. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 20 (6), 544–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2017.1377945 Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., & Allen, K. B. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: the Kentucky inventory of mindfulness skills. Assessment , 11 (3), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191104268029 Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67 (1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 Bremner, R. H., Koole, S. L., & Bushman, B. J. (2011). “Pray for Those Who Mistreat You”: Effects of Prayer on Anger and Aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37 (6), 830–837. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211402215 Conty, A. (2022). Animism in the Anthropocene. Theory, Culture & Society, 39 (5), 127–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/02632764211039283 Davis, E. B., Lacey, E. K., Heydt, E. J., LaBouff, J. P., Barker, S. B., Van Elk, M., & Ladd, K. L. (2024). Sixty years of studying the sacred: Auditing and advancing the psychology of religion and spirituality. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 16 (1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000485 Demmer, T. R., Kühnapfel, C., Fingerhut, J., & Pelowski, M. (2023). Does an emotional connection to art really require a human artist? Emotion and intentionality responses to AI-versus human-created art and impact on aesthetic experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 148 , 107875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107875 Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39 (2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146 Fujii, S. (2023). The Psychology of Religion: Its Current State, Subject Matter, and Challenges. Japanese Journal for the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 1 (1), 18–32. (in Japanese with English abstract) https://doi.org/10.60238/jjprs.1.1_18 Germann, M., & Merkle, C. (2023). Algorithm aversion in delegated investing. Journal of Business Economics, 93 (9), 1691–1727. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-022-01121-9 Grewal, L., Wu, E. C., & Cutright, K. M. (2021). Loved As-Is: How God Salience Lowers Interest in Self-Improvement Products. Journal of Consumer Research , 49 (1), 154–174. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucab055 Haggard, M. C., Kaelen, R., Saroglou, V., Klein, O., & Rowatt, W. C. (2019). Religion’s role in the illusion of gender equality: Supraliminal and subliminal religious priming increases benevolent sexism. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 11 (4), 392–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000196 Hitsuwari, J., Ikeda, H., Yun, W., & Ueda, Y. (2024). Aesthetic experience of AI-generated and human-made abstract paintings: Turing test and multidimensional evaluations, Research Square . Hitsuwari, J., & Nomura, M. (2021). Developing and Validating a Japanese Version of the Multidimensional Attitude toward Ambiguity Scale (MAAS). Psychology, 12(04), 477–497. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2021.124030 Hitsuwari, J., Ueda, Y., Yun, W., & Nomura, M. (2023). Does human–AI collaboration lead to more creative art? Aesthetic evaluation of human-made and AI-generated haiku poetry. Computers in Human Behavior, 139 , 107502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107502 Ikari, S., Sato, K., Burdett, E., Ishiguro, H., Jong, J., & Nakawake, Y. (2023). Religion-Related Values Differently Influence Moral Attitude for Robots in the United States and Japan. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 54 (6–7), 742–759. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221231193369 Ikeuchi, H. (2010). Animistic thinking in adults: The memorial service for dolls as a voluntary loss [Seijin no animizumu-teki shiko: Jihatsuteki soshitsu toshite no mono kuyo no shinri]. Japanese journal of social psychology, 25 (3), 167–177. https://doi.org/10.14966/jssp.KJ00006203282 (in Japanese with English abstract) Iseki, R. (2021). Anovakun (version 4.8.6.) . https://riseki.cloudfree.jp/ Karataş, M., & Cutright, K. M. (2023). Thinking about God increases acceptance of artificial intelligence in decision-making. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120 (33), e2218961120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2218961120 Karataş, M., & Cutright, K. M. (2024). Reply to Moore et al.: Manipulation adherence and baseline AI attitudes as moderators of the effect of God salience on algorithm aversion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121 (31), e2407917121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2407917121 Looft, W. R., & Bartz, W. H. (1969). Animism revived. Psychological Bulletin, 71 (1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0026856 Moore, D. A., Schroeder, J., Bailey, E. R., Gershon, R., Moore, J. E., & Simmons, J. P. (2024). Does thinking about God increase acceptance of artificial intelligence in decision-making? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121 (31), e2402315121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2402315121 Nigorikawa, T., Mitsuishi, H., Endo, S., Hirono, M., & Kanou, H. (2016). Development of a spirituality rating scale for Japanese Youth. Japanese Journal of Transpersonal Psychology/Psychiatry , 15 (1), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.32218/transpersonal.15.1_87 Paloutzian, R. F., & Park, C. L. (2021). The psychology of religion and spirituality: How big the tent? Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 13 (1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000218 Piff, P. K., Dietze, P., Feinberg, M., Stancato, D. M., & Keltner, D. (2015). Awe, the small self, and prosocial behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology , 108 (6), 883–899. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000018 Preston, J. L., & Shin, F. (2017). Spiritual experiences evoke awe through the small self in both religious and non-religious individuals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70 , 212–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.11.006 R Core Team (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved 4 November, 2024 from https://www.R-project.org/ Rudd, M., Vohs, K. D., & Aaker, J. (2012). Awe expands people’s perception of time, alters decision making, and enhances Well-Being. Psychological Science , 23 (10), 1130–1136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612438731 Saito, Y. (1997). The Japanese aesthetics of imperfection and insufficiency. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 55 (4), 377–385. https://doi.org/10.2307/430925 Shimada, H. (2016). An Introduction to Japanese Deities: Deciphering the History of Shinto [Nihonjin no Kami Nyumon: Shinto no Rekishi wo Yomitoku] . Kodansha. Snell, A., Zuckerman, M., & Le, B. M. (2024). Does Religious Priming Induce Greater Prejudice? A Meta-Analytic Review. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 50 (3), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672221135956 Takano, R., & Nomura, M. (2024). Relationships between right-wing authoritarianism and spirituality in Japan. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 16 (1), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000462 Takano, R., & Taoka, D. (2024). Relationships Between Meaning in Life and Positive and Negative Spirituality in a Field Setting in Japan. Journal of religion and health, 63 (1), 224–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-023-01891-8 Teeuwen, M. (2002). From Jindō to Shinto: A Concept Takes Shape. Japanese Journal of Religious Studies, 29 (3/4), 233–263. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30233723 Thelle, N. R. (1996). Christianity encounters Buddhism in Japan: A historical perspective . In J. Breen, & M. Williams (Eds.), Japan and Christianity (pp. 94–106). Palgrave Macmillan. Van Cappellen, P., Edwards, M. E., Kamble, S. V., Yildiz, M., & Ladd, K. L. (2024). Kneel, stand, prostrate: The psychology of prayer postures in three world religions. Plos one, 19 (8), e0306924. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306924 Walter, Y., & Altorfer, A. (2022). The psychological role of music and attentional control for religious experiences in worship. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75 (12), 2272–2286. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218221075330 Worthington, E. L. (1988). Understanding the values of religious clients: A model and its application to counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35 (2), 166–174. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.35.2.166 Worthington, E. L., Wade, N. G., Hight, T. L., Ripley, J. S., McCullough, M. E., Berry, J. W., Schmitt, M. M., Berry, J. T., Bursley, K. H., & O’Connor, L. (2003). The Religious Commitment Inventory–10: Development, refinement, and validation of a brief scale for research and counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology , 50 (1), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.50.1.84 Zhang, J. W., Chen, S., & Shakur, T. K. T. (2019). From Me to You: Self-Compassion predicts acceptance of own and others’ imperfections. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 46 (2), 228–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219853846 Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Supplementary Files GODAIJPsupplementarytables.xlsx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-5826471","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":401968871,"identity":"e825343d-acc3-4dde-8b23-e2b006d5c33d","order_by":0,"name":"Jimpei Hitsuwari","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0061-5318","institution":"Helmut Schmidt University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jimpei","middleName":"","lastName":"Hitsuwari","suffix":""},{"id":401968872,"identity":"aee4898f-8e8e-4cd8-985a-9b1cbd574f7c","order_by":1,"name":"Takechika Hayashi","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0003-4092-745X","institution":"Kyoto University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Takechika","middleName":"","lastName":"Hayashi","suffix":""},{"id":401969302,"identity":"4efa3d11-9d87-4f5d-8985-2f46d26db3a8","order_by":2,"name":"Meiyi Du","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0002-4758-3947","institution":"Kyoto University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Meiyi","middleName":"","lastName":"Du","suffix":""},{"id":401969303,"identity":"347ac4e0-e1ab-4246-9bb2-cf7a323e2bb7","order_by":3,"name":"Michio Nomura","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1043-2811","institution":"Kyoto University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Michio","middleName":"","lastName":"Nomura","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-01-14 10:55:31","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5826471/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5826471/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":74073191,"identity":"b618b540-a708-45d7-bd1f-4997661bcab3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-01-17 13:16:09","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":600819,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCorrelation plot of main variables\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote\u003c/em\u003e. * indicates \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5826471/v1/10387589362b3c82a5351ee3.png"},{"id":74074323,"identity":"362ed1bd-62cd-4075-9eeb-9c6b1ade4c7c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-01-17 13:24:09","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":789734,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCorrelation plot of main variables\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote\u003c/em\u003e. * indicates \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5826471/v1/1f1f4124e9133001d278cfdc.png"},{"id":74075056,"identity":"706408a0-fd7a-4e5b-a5cd-14363d388e3b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-01-17 13:32:10","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1990299,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5826471/v1/ad9ad6cc-8788-43b4-8175-630d71cf8c0f.pdf"},{"id":74073188,"identity":"38f4b72d-6c81-47af-a378-ca8de1e45844","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-01-17 13:16:09","extension":"xlsx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":29858,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"GODAIJPsupplementarytables.xlsx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5826471/v1/a41632945e51657f6bd417dd.xlsx"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHow Thinking About God Transforms Self Recognition and AI Preferences Among Christians and Shintoists in Japan\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThinking about God\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResearch on the psychology of religion faces constant challenges. First, the definitions of religiosity and spirituality are not uniquely determined, and there exists a wide variety of religions, sects, and cultural backgrounds (e.g., Paloutzian \u0026amp; Park, 2021). While such conceptual debates continue, empirical research in the field of the psychology of religion has attempted to study the topic through behavior-based experimental manipulations, such as the behavior of praying (vs. thinking; Bremner et al., 2011), priming of religious words (Haggard et al., 2019), imagining a posture of praying (Van Cappellen et al., 2024), experiments in religious places and contexts (Takano \u0026amp; Taoka, 2024), and worship music (vs. secular music; Walter, \u0026amp; Altorfer, 2022). These studies have analyzed the subsequent questionnaire and behavioral data (for a large-scale meta-analysis of the effects of priming on prejudice for various religions, see Snell et al., 2024). In particular, Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright (2023) recently conducted a large-scale experiment with Christian and Muslim participants using various manipulations to increase the salience of God (e.g., describing God in detail), where participants were asked to describe their relationship with God, which increased their awareness of their own small selves and human imperfection, and as a result, they were more likely to adopt the AI\u0026rsquo;s recommendations in various decision-making tasks. It should be noted that there is also a rebuttal against this work of Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright (2023) (Moore et al., 2024), and it is necessary to continue to reproduce and expand on whether the god saliency affects AI preferences (Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright, 2024). In this study, we focused on Japanese samples and religions common in Japan.\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariety of religion and culture\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs mentioned above, empirical research in the field of the psychology of religion is gradually accumulating, but the focus is still on religions, samples, and researches from Europe and North America. A recent study that examined articles from the past 60 years in three journals specializing in the psychology of religion found that of the 1503 articles, 930 were from North America (61.63%), indicating a significant bias in terms of the region of research (Davis et al., 2024). This bias in research areas is related to the bias in religion and sects, and it has been criticized that majority participants are Christians, and that the psychology of religion is the psychology of Christianity (Abu-Raiya, 2017).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to Christian participants, as in previous studies, our study also focused on Shinto and indigenous Japanese religions (Tenrikyo\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e). It is noteworthy, that in Japan, the \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eJapanese Journal for the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality\u003c/em\u003e,\u0026rdquo; a peer-reviewed academic journal, was first published in 2023; until then, there had been almost no research on the psychology of religion (Fujii, 2023). Shinto is a polytheistic religion unique to Japan that has also been influenced by Buddhism and Taoism. It is a complex system of beliefs that venerates nature, ancestors, and various gods (Teeuwen, 2002), and is deeply rooted in the spiritual culture and daily lives of the Japanese people, as they put their religious values into practice in harmony with nature and traditional rituals. There are also experimental studies that deal with Shinto beliefs. Takano and Nomura (2024) conducted an experiment that reminded participants of their experiences of feeling the spirits or souls of their ancestors (Ancestor Condition) or of feeling a spiritual existence greater than themselves when they see the vastness of nature (Nature Condition). The experience of ancestral worship was positively correlated with authoritarianism, while the experience of nature worship was negatively correlated with traditionalism (Takano \u0026amp; Nomura, 2024). It would be interesting to compare religions that worship nature and have polytheistic characteristics to monotheistic religions from the perspective of God saliency. Additionally, although we collected data from Japanese Christians, their traits may differ from those of Western Christians. For example, in the 16th century, when Christian missionaries came to a country where traditional religions such as Buddhism were already well established, they gradually began to engage in dialogue, and many Japanese people found both religions attractive and attempted to harmonize them (Thelle et al., 1996).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMechanism for AI preference\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn previous research (Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright, 2023), the reason why AI recommendations were adopted in the high God saliency condition was that God saliency made people feel small and imperfect (the mediating effect of imperfection was more significant) and increased their preference for AI over humans. However, this is thought to reflect the religious views of Christianity and Islam, which regard the one absolute God as the only God. In religions that are either polytheistic or monotheistic but also value harmony with other religions (in this study, this includes Tenrikyo followers in Study 1), there is a possibility that thinking about God will not necessarily lead to a sense of a small self or imperfection.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSuch differences between religions and between Christians in Japan and Europe may be partly explained by their tendencies toward animism. Recent research has shown that animistic tendencies positively influence moral attitudes toward robots in Japan, while showing different patterns in Western cultures (Ikari et al., 2023). Animism is a belief and worldview that holds that all beings in the natural world (plants and animals, mountains and rivers, natural phenomena such as wind and thunder) are inhabited by spirits and souls, and that humans and these spiritual beings interact with each other (Ikeuchi, 2010). In recent years, it has received renewed attention in the context of AI (Hitsuwari et al., 2023), in addition to climate change and environmental issues (Conty, 2022). In an animistic world, gods and spirits are thought to be more equal to and closer to humans than omnipotent gods. Therefore, when a person with animistic values strongly feels the existence of gods and spirits, they feel a sense of oneness with nature and the universe. Even if they feel small in comparison, it does not necessarily lead to the recognition of human imperfection. The animist spirit is not only deeply connected to Shinto, but even those who believe in monotheistic religions such as Christianity may have this tendency as part of their values similar to the Japanese people (although it is probably lower than that of Shinto believers).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, in previous research (Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright, 2023), participants were asked to make choices that required logical judgment, such as selecting financial products (also implemented in Study 2 of this research) or supplements. In in this research, we have also attempt to expand the scope to include more aesthetic judgments by having participants evaluate AI art. It is assumed that attitudes toward AI in logical and aesthetic judgment situations differ significantly. In fact, in research on AI interactions, AI recommendations are preferred in situations requiring logical judgments, such as in finance (e.g., Germann \u0026amp; Merkle, 2023), whereas human-made works are preferred in situations requiring aesthetic judgment, such as in the evaluation of paintings (e.g., Demmer et al., 2023; Hitsuwari et al., 2024).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy Aims\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the above, this study examined how God saliency affects the small self, sense of human imperfection, and preference for AI among followers of multiple religions in Japan to replicate the previous study, overcome the limited kinds of religions and cultures found in previous research, and propose a generalization of theory. The main hypotheses were:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHypothesis 1. When Christians think about God, the small self, human imperfections, and preference for AI art increase, unlike among Shinto (Studies 1 and 2) or Tenrikyo believers (Study 1).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHypothesis 2. When Christians write about God, this leads to a preference for AI art, mediated by small self and human imperfection (according to previous research, the mediating effect of imperfection is greater).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHypothesis 3. Those with higher animistic tendencies have a smaller effect of manipulating writing about God on the small self, human imperfection, and preference for AI art (AI suggested investment decision-making only in Study 2).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[1] Tenrikyo is a new religion that was founded in Japan in the 19th century with Nakayama Miki as its founder, and it is one of the largest new religions in Japan (Shimada, 2016). It believes in a single god called \u0026ldquo;Tenri-O-no-Mikoto,\u0026rdquo; and is also influenced by traditional Japanese religions such as Shinto and Buddhism.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Study 1","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethod\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical Considerations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was approved by the Ethics Committee (anonymous for peer review). Study 1 (hypotheses and design) was preregistered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/q9unr/?view_only=8708071352f64438ba3ee3aa4cc76b7e). The sample size, research design, hypotheses, and planned analyses were preregistered prior to data collection. All data and analysis scripts are available at (https://osf.io/uvw7y/?view_only=7f4dcf946e7e4e65962c5a79a0c41c55).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParticipants\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe participants were recruited using CrowdWorks, a Japanese crowdsourcing service (\u003cu\u003ehttps://crowdworks.jp\u003c/u\u003e). The main analyses were ANOVAs with a 3 (religion) \u0026times; 2 (God saliency) between-subjects factorial design in which the small self and human imperfection scales served as dependent variables. Sample size was determined using Gpower (3.1.9.7; Faul et al., 2007), assuming a medium effect size (\u003cem\u003ef\u003c/em\u003e = .25), with power = .80 and \u0026alpha; = .05, which yielded N = 158. A total of 168 participants were included in the analysis after excluding duplicate IDs and participants who failed the attention check based on preregistered criteria. The sample consisted of 58 Christians (27 men and 31 women; \u003cem\u003eM\u003csub\u003eage\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = 42.10, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e = 11.25), 59 Shintoists (37 men and 22 women; \u003cem\u003eM\u003csub\u003eage\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = 43.90, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e = 11.47), and 51 followers of Tenrikyo (30 men and 21 women; \u003cem\u003eM\u003csub\u003eage\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = 40.08, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e = 9.17). The participants provided informed consent by checking each item in a detailed consent form outlining the study\u0026rsquo;s purpose, procedures, data use, and anonymity safeguards. They were explicitly informed that participation was voluntary, that they could withdraw at any time without penalty, and that their data would be used solely for research purposes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasures\u003c/strong\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSmall Self\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants answered four items (Piff et al., 2015): \u0026ldquo;Right now, I feel small,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;I feel the presence of something greater than me,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;I feel like I am in the presence of something grand,\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I feel part of some greater entity,\u0026rdquo; on a 7-point scale, where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eHuman Imperfection\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;To assess participants\u0026rsquo; beliefs about human imperfection, four items from the Human Imperfection Scale were used (Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright, 2023): \u0026ldquo;We are all imperfect in many ways,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;All people have flaws,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;There is no perfect person,\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;We all make mistakes,\u0026rdquo; rated on a 7-point scale, where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAI Artworks\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe used 20 AI haikus (Hitsuwari et al., 2023) and 20 AI paintings (Hitsuwari et al., 2024) that have been used in previous studies. All the artworks were AI-generated, but we randomly labeled them as human-made or AI-generated. Their beauty was rated in advance in those previous studies, and the two works of equal beauty were compared.\u0026nbsp;Responses were rated on a 7-point scale, where 1 = strongly prefer AI-generated and 7 = strongly prefer human-made.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSpirituality\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Japanese Youth Spirituality Rating Scale (JYS; Nigorikawa et al., 2016) was used to assess spirituality. This scale includes 27 items and 5 distinct factors: harmony with nature, ikigai (meaning in life), awe regarding invisible existence, connection with ancestors/roots, and independence. Responses are rated on a 7-point scale, where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAnimism Tendency\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe 11-item Animism Scale for Adults (Ikeuchi, 2020) developed in Japan was used to assess the participants\u0026rsquo; tendency toward animistic beliefs, which consisted of three factors: the apotheosis of natural products (e.g., \u0026quot;I believe that gods dwell in massive rocks and ancient trees found in nature.\u0026quot;), the parts of possessors (\u0026quot;I feel as though the maker\u0026apos;s spirit resides in handmade objects.\u0026quot;), and the anthropomorphication of possessions (\u0026quot;At times, I feel a sense of attachment to the things around me, similar to how I feel toward people.\u0026quot;). Responses were rated on a 5-point scale, where 1 = does not apply at all and 7 = applies very well.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eReligious Background and Commitment\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eReligious background was assessed using two measures: a single item asking participants\u0026apos; religious affiliation (\u0026ldquo;Please indicate the religion you believe in\u0026rdquo;) and an open-ended question about their religious involvement (\u0026ldquo;How are you involved with your religion? (or, how have you been involved with your religion?)\u0026rdquo;). Religious commitment was measured using a 5-item scale, 1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree. The scale included items such as \u0026ldquo;Religion is essential for me\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I believe in God.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProcedure\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study consisted of four parts: 1) writing task on a specific theme, 2) questions about the participants\u0026rsquo; current psychological state, 3) evaluation of AI haikus and paintings, and 4) questions on participants\u0026rsquo; personalities and characteristics. In the first part, participants were randomly assigned to God (high-God saliency) or daily life (low-God saliency) conditions. Those in the God condition were instructed (in Japanese) to write about the role or impact of God in their lives, with specific examples (e.g., situation, time, place, and feelings). In the daily life condition, participants were instructed (in Japanese) to describe their daily activities in detail (e.g., waking up, brushing teeth, going to work). Participants wrote for at least three minutes before proceeding. In the second part, participants completed questionnaires about small self and human imperfection (Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright, 2023). In the third part, participants compared two AI works of equal beauty, labeled as human-made or AI-generated, and rated their preference on a 7-point scale. The fourth part included questionnaires on spirituality, animism, time perception, art experiences, religious attitudes (e.g., clergy or layperson), and demographic information.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll analyses were performed using the R (ver. 4.2.3; R Core Team, 2022). Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVAs) was performed using the \u003cem\u003eanovakun\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003epackage (ver. 4.8.6.; Iseki, 2021) to test the effects of religion and God saliency on the small self and human imperfection. For AI art preferences (AI paintings and haiku), linear mixed models were conducted using the \u003cem\u003elme4\u003c/em\u003e package (Bates et al., 2015), with religion and God saliency as fixed effects and participant ID\u003ca title=\"\" href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e as a random effect. For H3, regression analyses were performed using the \u003cem\u003elm\u003c/em\u003e function to examine the interaction between God saliency and animistic tendencies.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults and Discussion\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe means and standard deviations for each religion and God saliency are shown in Table 1. The correlations between the main variables are shown in Figure 1 (the correlation table for all variables is shown in Supplementary Table 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescriptive statistics for religion and God saliency (Study 1)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" width=\"713\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19.4404%;\" colspan=\"4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChristianity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19.9116%;\" colspan=\"4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eShinto\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.1029%;\" colspan=\"4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTenrikyo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9.7791%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGod (N = 28)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9.7791%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDaily (N = 30)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9.7791%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGod (N = 26)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10.1325%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDaily (N = 33)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9.4256%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGod (N = 24)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9.7791%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDaily (N = 27)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21.3255%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSmall self\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.48\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.15\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.88\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.13\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.41\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.79\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.48\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.22\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.93\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.38\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.51\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.17\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21.3255%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eImperfection\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.42\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.65\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.97\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.45\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.59\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.48\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.11\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.08\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.79\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.16\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.02\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.22\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21.3255%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAI art\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePainting\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.26\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.54\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.31\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.63\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.45\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.68\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.32\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.68\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.32\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.51\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.25\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.55\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHaiku\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.45\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.65\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.66\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.73\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.92\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.63\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.79\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.86\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.48\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.59\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.29\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.59\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21.3255%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpirituality\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.99\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.83\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.87\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.70\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.12\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.59\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.91\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.78\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.93\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.82\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.89\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.54\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHarmonizing with nature\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.53\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.06\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.53\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.03\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.92\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.77\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.78\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.65\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.39\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.95\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.74\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.76\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIkigai\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.82\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.48\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.61\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.21\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.51\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.42\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.30\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.51\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.62\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.12\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.41\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.32\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAwe (invisible existence)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.58\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.07\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.51\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.85\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.71\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.87\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.39\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.88\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.48\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.05\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.39\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.86\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConnecting with ancestors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.35\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.40\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.57\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.32\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.21\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.02\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.11\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.17\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.04\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.30\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.21\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.06\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSelf-determination\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.68\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.26\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.12\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.20\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.25\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.38\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.97\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.55\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.10\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.96\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.70\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.46\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21.3255%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTime perception\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.43\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.88\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.31\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.03\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.89\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.64\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.85\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.55\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.68\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.74\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.84\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.50\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21.3255%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnimism\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.12\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.95\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.94\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.82\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.87\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.01\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.89\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.45\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.79\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.17\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.14\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eApotheosis of natural products\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.35\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.06\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.22\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.23\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.15\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.69\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.98\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.65\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.79\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.83\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.95\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.63\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eParts of possessors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.49\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.99\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.49\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.09\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.00\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.80\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.97\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.81\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.71\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.93\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.01\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.49\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 0.8247%;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20.5007%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnthropomorphication of possessions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.46\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.86\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.22\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.91\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.52\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.77\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.59\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.59\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.54\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.77\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.57\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.72\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21.3255%;\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCommitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.95\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.60\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.93\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.63\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.67\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.78\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.6554%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.51\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.4772%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.54\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.73\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.2415%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.83\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.1841%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.63\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 4.595%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.64\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo test Hypothesis 1, a two-way ANOVA was first conducted with religion and God saliency as independent variables for the two dependent variables of small self and human imperfection. The results showed that the main effect of God saliency (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 162) = 13.26, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001, \u003cem\u003e\u0026eta;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = .07) was significant for small self, but the main effect of religion (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(2, 162) = 2.20, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .11, \u003cem\u003e\u0026eta;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = .02) and the interaction ((\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(2, 162) = .71, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .49, \u003cem\u003e\u0026eta;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = .01) were not significant. Small self was higher when God saliency was higher than when it was low. For human imperfection, the main effects of religion (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(2, 162) = 2.39, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .09, \u003cem\u003e\u0026eta;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = .03) and of God saliency (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(2, 162) = 1.97, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .16, \u003cem\u003e\u0026eta;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = .01), and the interaction (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(2, 162) = 1.85, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .16, \u003cem\u003e\u0026eta;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = .02) were not significant. We then examined linear mixed models with religion and God saliency as independent variables and participants as random effects for preferences for AI paintings and AI haikus. There were no significant main effects or interactions for religion and God saliency for either the AI paintings or the AI haikus.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSince Hypothesis 1 was not completely supported, it was not possible to verify the mediating effect; however, we explored the relationship between small self/human imperfection and preference for AI art, to test Hypothesis 2. We examined linear mixed models with small self and human imperfection as independent variables and participants as random effects for preferences for AI paintings and AI haikus. As a result, neither the small self nor human imperfection explained the preference for AI paintings and AI haikus.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo test Hypothesis 3, we conducted a multiple regression analysis (linear mixed models for AI paintings and AI haikus) with preference for the small self, human imperfection, AI paintings, and AI haikus as dependent variables and God saliency and animism, as well as their interaction, as independent variables. The results showed that the effect of animism was significant only when the small self was used as the dependent variable; the higher the animism, the smaller the self-felt (\u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e = .52, \u003cem\u003eSE\u003c/em\u003e = .17, \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e = 3.12, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .002). Interestingly, when animism and God saliency were entered simultaneously, the main effect of God saliency on the small self observed in the analysis of Hypothesis 1 became non-significant (\u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e = .48, \u003cem\u003eSE\u003c/em\u003e = .85, \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e = .57, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .57).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs described above, Study 1 showed the main effects of religion and God saliency for human imperfection on the small self; while it partially reproduced the findings of previous studies and supported some of the hypothesis (a part of Hypothesis 1), it did not support other hypotheses, such as the interaction, preference for AI art, and the relationship with animism. This may be due to the complex grouping of the three religious samples and problems with the scales used; for example, the ceiling effect seen for Human Imperfection Scale. Study 2 aimed to overcome these limitations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[2] Time perception was included to explore its potential for future research, and its results have not been discussed in the current study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003ca title=\"\" href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e[3] Although we initially planned to include painting ID and haiku ID as random effects in the preregistration, these were excluded from the final analyses due to singular fit issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec35\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec36\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Study 2","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn Study 2, the following modifications were made to Study 1: first, only participants who believed in Christianity or Shintoism were included. Tenrikyo was excluded to simplify the comparison and focus on the two groups, Christianity and Shintoism, which represent a major Western religion and a representative Japanese religion, respectively. Tenrikyo, being a unique monotheistic religion that respects other religions and is influenced by Shintoism and Buddhism, was considered less suitable for the purpose of this study. Second, the expected mechanism was expanded. Contrary to expectations, the manipulation of God saliency did not significantly affect preferences for AI art in Study 1. Recognition and acceptance of imperfections may have had no effect on preferences. Therefore, in addition to human imperfection, a scale measuring the degree of acceptance of imperfections was added, as it was thought that rather than the acceptance of imperfections, recognition of God\u0026rsquo;s acceptance (such as love) could indirectly lead to a preference for AI (i.e., a high evaluation of art created by humans made by God). To measure the subjective feeling of being loved by God, we added some measures (discussed in the Methods section). We also added an investment selection task based on AI recommendations, which has also been used in previous research (Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright, 2023), as it was thought that there may be differences in the mechanisms of logical judgment based on numerical values, such as investment, and aesthetic evaluation, such as art.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethod\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudy 2 was conducted in the same manner as Study1, with some changes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParticipants\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudy 2 considered only Christians and Shintoists as participants. A total of 120 participants\u003ca href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e were analyzed, consisting of 58 Christians (31 men, 27 women; \u003cem\u003eM\u003csub\u003eage\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003e= 41.50, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e = 10.16) and 62 Shintoists (37 men, 25 women; \u003cem\u003eM\u003csub\u003eage\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = 42.26, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e = 11.57) after excluding duplicate IDs and participants who failed the attention check. All participants in Study 2 were different from those in Study 1.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasures\u003c/strong\u003e\u003ca href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eHuman Imperfection Scale (Revised Version)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eItems on the Human Imperfection Scale (Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright, 2023) used in Study 1 were modified from assertive statements to questions asking about extent (e.g., \u0026ldquo;We are all imperfect in many ways\u0026rdquo; was revised to \u0026ldquo;To what extent do you think humans are imperfect?\u0026rdquo;). This was done to allow a more state-like change to be observed, as a ceiling effect was observed in Study 1 (the mean value exceeded 6 in the 7-point method for all experimental conditions and sample combinations). The item responses ranged from 1 = imperfect to 7= perfect.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAcceptance of Own Imperfection\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt is possible that recognizing and accepting one\u0026apos;s own imperfections may influence participants\u0026rsquo; evaluations of AI and human-created art. To test this, we incorporated an 8-item measure adapted from Zhan et al. (2019), assessing the extent to which participants accept their imperfections (e.g., \u0026ldquo;I accept myself even with this imperfection.\u0026rdquo;), rated on a 7-point scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLoved As-Is\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt is possible that an awareness of the divine love, rather than the acceptance of human imperfection, may indirectly lead participants to prefer human-created art artworks crafted by humans, who themselves are the creations of God. To test this, we incorporated a measure of the participants\u0026rsquo; subjective sense of being loved by God via the 4-items (e.g., \u0026ldquo;I feel loved for who I am.\u0026rdquo;) from Grewal et al. (2023), rated on a 7-point scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eInvestment Decision-Making Task\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants were presented with a graph showing the one-year cumulative return rates of the two mutual fund options, one recommended by an AI advisor providing investment advice based solely on algorithmic processing without human input, and the other recommended by a human investment expert, and were asked to choose between them. The two options had nearly identical cumulative return trends, with the same most recent cumulative return rates. This setup allowed participants to focus solely on deciding whether they found the AI or human recommendations to be more trustworthy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eReligious Commitment\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Religious Commitment Inventory-10 (RCI-10; Worthington et al., 2003) measures participants\u0026rsquo; commitment to their religion (i.e., Christianity or Shintoism), and is based on Worthington\u0026rsquo;s (1988) theory of religious values. The 10-items scale (e.g., \u0026ldquo;I often read books and magazines about my faith\u0026rdquo;) is rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAnalyses were conducted in the same manner as in Study 1. For the investment decision-making task, we performed logistic regression analysis using the \u003cem\u003eglm\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003efunction (binomial family) to test the effects of religion, God saliency, and their interaction.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults and Discussion\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe means and standard deviations for each religion and God saliency are shown in Table 2. The correlations between the main variables are shown in Figure 2 (the correlation table for all variables is shown in Supplementary Table 2).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2\u003c/strong\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescriptive statistics for religion and God saliency (Study 2)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"723\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" style=\"width: 24.5361%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChristianity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" style=\"width: 11.3174%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eShinto\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 12.3251%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGod (N = 31)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 12.3251%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDaily (N = 27)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 13.9228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGod (N = 27)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 12.3251%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDaily (N = 35)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 29.2151%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSmall self\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.40\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.85\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.94\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.07\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.06\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.18\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.46\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.24\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 29.2151%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eImperfection\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.09\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.40\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.15\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.34\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.43\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.29\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.41\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.14\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 29.2151%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLove\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.85\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.45\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.31\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.71\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.61\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.28\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.30\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.21\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 29.2151%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAcceptance\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.29\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.96\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.80\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.90\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.98\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.93\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.61\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.97\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 29.2151%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAI art\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePainting\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.27\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.61\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.26\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.77\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.24\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.61\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.26\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.46\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHaiku\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.47\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.98\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.44\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.07\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.75\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.74\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.71\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.54\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 29.2151%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInvest\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.58\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.50\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.59\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.50\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.67\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.48\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.60\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.50\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 29.2151%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpirituality\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.79\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.70\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.58\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.88\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.84\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.65\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.72\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.65\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHarmonizing with nature\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.47\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.91\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.14\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.16\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.42\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.08\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.44\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.63\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIkigai\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.48\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.36\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.98\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.40\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.50\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.20\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.22\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.35\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAwe (invisible existence)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.56\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.76\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.05\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.06\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.08\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.89\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.15\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.74\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConnecting with ancestors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.68\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.10\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.40\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.41\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.05\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.82\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.19\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSelf-determination\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.77\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.11\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.35\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.33\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.17\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.22\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.99\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.35\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 29.2151%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTime perception\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.97\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.09\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.79\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.74\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.09\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.10\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.81\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.83\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 29.2151%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnimism\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.73\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.92\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.33\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.90\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.77\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.58\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.67\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.59\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eApotheosis of natural products\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.67\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.16\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.22\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.11\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.94\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.59\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.82\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.77\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eParts of possessors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.76\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.02\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.59\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.96\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.77\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.68\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.65\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.86\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnthropomorphication of possessions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.76\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.87\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.18\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.85\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.60\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.73\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.54\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.66\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 29.2151%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAttitude toward ambiguity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDiscomfort with ambiguity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.79\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.90\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.53\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.71\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.47\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.98\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.64\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.89\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAbsolutism\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.69\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.80\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.74\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.08\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.60\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.26\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.33\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.92\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 2.853%;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 26.3621%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNeed for complexity and novelty\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.97\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.88\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.19\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.23\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.21\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.28\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.97\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.87\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 29.2151%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCommitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.38\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.83\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.09\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.88\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8.5591%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.01\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.70\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 6.8473%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.69\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 5.4778%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.70\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo test Hypothesis 1, a two-way ANOVA was conducted with religion and God saliency as independent variables and the four dependent variables of small self, imperfection, acceptance, and love. The results showed that the main effects of religion (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 116) = 4.02, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .047, \u003cem\u003e\u0026eta;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = .03) and God saliency (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 116) = 6.76, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .01, \u003cem\u003e\u0026eta;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = .05) were significant for small self. Christians had a higher small self than Shintoists, and high God saliency was higher than low God saliency. The main effect of God saliency (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 116) = 6.30, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .01, \u003cem\u003e\u0026eta;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = .05) was significant for acceptance. High-God saliency had a higher acceptance than low-God saliency. However, the interactions and main effects of imperfection and love were not significant. Next, we examined the effects of religion and God saliency on AI art preferences using linear mixed models. Religion (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .83), God saliency (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .96), and their interaction (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .90) had no significant effect on the preference for AI paintings, religion (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .21), and God saliency (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .89), and their interaction (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .97) had no significant effect on the preference for AI haikus. Additionally, we examined the impact of religion and God saliency on investment decisions for AI suggestions using a logistic regression analysis. Neither religion (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .50) nor God saliency (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .93), or their interaction (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .66) had a significant effect on investment decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegarding Hypothesis 2, since Hypothesis 1 was not completely supported, it was not possible to verify the mediating effect; however, we explored the impact of small self, human imperfection, acceptance, and love on the preference for AI art and the selection of AI suggestions for investment decisions using a linear mixed model. None of the variables had an impact on the preference for AI art or the selection of AI suggestions for investment decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo test Hypothesis 3, we conducted a multiple regression analysis (linear mixed models for AI art and logistic regression for investment decisions) with God saliency and animism as independent variables, and small self, human imperfection, acceptance, love, preference for AI art, and investment decisions as dependent variables. The results showed that the effect of animism was significant only when acceptance was used as the dependent variable; the higher the animism, the more the acceptance (\u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e = .32, \u003cem\u003eSE\u003c/em\u003e = .15, \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e = 2.11, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .04). Interestingly, when animism and God saliency were entered simultaneously, the main effect of God saliency on acceptance observed in the analysis of Hypothesis 1 was not significant (\u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e = -.71, \u003cem\u003eSE\u003c/em\u003e = .81, \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e = -.88, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .38).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003ca href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e[4] We conducted two rounds of recruitment to reach this number of participants. As a result of randomly allocating the experimental manipulation, we were short of four participants in the high God saliency group of Christian believers and 10 participants in the low God saliency group of Shinto believers. Based on the sample size estimation conducted in Study 1, we needed 27 participants of each religion and God saliency groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[5] Time perception and attitude toward ambiguity were included to explore its potential for future research, and its results have not been discussed in the current study.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"General Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn this study, we examined the impact of God saliency on self-awareness and attitudes toward AI using participants from multiple religions in Japan. In Study 1, we conducted an experiment with Christian, Shintoist, and Tenrikyo followers. In Study 2, we conducted an experiment with Christian and Shintoist followers. In both studies, we consistently observed a positive effect of God saliency on the small self, but we did not observe the effect on human imperfection or the effect on preference for AI that was observed in previous research (Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright, 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReligious Differences in Self-Recognition\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe first hypothesis, \u0026ldquo;When Christians write about God, small self, human imperfection, and preference for AI art increase, unlike in Shinto (Study 1 \u0026amp; 2) and Tenrikyo (Study 1) believers,\u0026rdquo; was only partially supported. In Study 1, there was no main effect of religion, which may be because the study included Tenrikyo, a monotheistic religion that is strongly influenced by Japanese culture. Contrarily, Study 2 showed that Christians had a higher small self than Shintoists. This may reflect the differences between monotheism and polytheism. In other words, while Christianity, which is based on the premise of an absolute being in the form of an omniscient and omnipotent God, has a high sense of small self (cf. Preston \u0026amp; Shin, 2017), Shintoism, which emphasizes relationships with beings closer to humans, such as nature and ancestors, is considered to have relatively less of this phenomenon. However, the effect of human imperfection was not observed in either of these studies. Rather, in Study 2, the effect of God saliency was observed in the acceptance of imperfection rather than in the recognition of the imperfection itself. This may reflect the tendency of many Japanese religions to view human imperfection not as something negative but as something natural and sometimes even positive (Saito, 1997).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTwo implications were obtained regarding the AI preference. First, when the work was an artform, there was no effect on its preference.\u0026nbsp;This aligns with previous studies, suggesting that humans may prefer human-made works in aesthetic judgments (e.g., Demmer et al., 2023; Hitsuwari et al., 2024). Second, the fact that no effect was observed in the investment decision task suggests the importance of cultural context, given that in Western samples, God saliency promoted the adoption of AI recommendations (Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright, 2023). This lack of effect may be because reflecting on God did not increase perceptions of imperfection, or, alternatively, imperfection was not interpreted negatively in this cultural context.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePathways to AI Preference\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe second hypothesis, \u0026ldquo;When Christians write about God, it leads to a preference for AI art, mediated by small self and human imperfection,\u0026rdquo; was not supported. The mediating effect shown in previous research (Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright, 2023) was not confirmed as small self and human imperfection did not predict preference for AI. This result suggests that the mechanism from God saliency to preference for AI may differ depending on the culture and type of judgment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNotably, the variables of acceptance and love, which were added in Study 2, also had no effect. This finding has two possible explanations. First, in the Japanese religious context, God saliency may not necessarily follow the simple cognitive pathway of \u0026ldquo;preference for AI over human imperfection.\u0026rdquo; For example, in Japanese values, which tend to accept imperfection (Saito, 1997), recognition of imperfection may not necessarily lead to a preference for \u0026ldquo;perfect\u0026rdquo; entities such as AI. Second, the influence of cognitive mediating factors may be limited to aesthetic judgments, such as art evaluations. Cultural values and aesthetic sensibilities may have a stronger influence on the evaluation of AI art than technical perfection or logical decision-making criteria (e.g., Demmer et al., 2023). At the same time, the fact that the investment decision task added in Study 2 also had no effect is consistent with the findings of Moore et al. (2024), prompting us to reconsider the impact of God saliency on AI preferences. The construction of more sophisticated models that consider the cultural background and nature of the decision-making task will be a topic for future research.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAnimism and God Saliency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe third hypothesis, \u0026ldquo;Those with higher animistic tendencies will have a smaller effect of manipulation writing about God on small self, human imperfection, and preference for AI art (AI suggested investment decision making only in Study 2),\u0026rdquo; showed the importance of animism in a different way than expected. Specifically, in Study 1, the main effect of animism was observed for small self, whereas in Study 2, it was observed for acceptance. In addition, when animism was included, the effect of God saliency disappeared.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis pattern indicates three aspects. First, the effect of God saliency can be explained by animism, which is a more primitive religious sensibility. This finding aligns with recent cross-cultural research showing that animistic tendencies differently influence moral attitudes toward robots in Japan and the United States (Ikari et al., 2023). For people with an animistic worldview, the relationship between gods and spirits is equal and intimate (Ikeuchi, 2010), and such a relationship may enhance the sense of acceptance. However, the effect of animism on the small self was unexpected, and it is possible that animistic sensibilities bring about a different form of humility by positioning the self as part of nature and the universe. Second, there is the possibility that animistic worldviews have universal influence that transcends religious categories. In this study, animistic tendencies were observed even among Christian believers, explaining the effect of God saliency. Interestingly, animistic tendencies were observed even among Christian believers of a monotheistic religion, which shows the importance of conducting research in different countries and cultures, even within the same religion. Third, animism is the tendency to perceive spirituality in things. This perspective provides important suggestions for considering the relationship between AI and humans in the future (Hitsuwari et al., 2023). Evaluating AI art or making investment decisions the possibility of viewing AI as a unique existence rather than just a tool may be considered.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLimitations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study has several limitations. First, there were measurement issues. In particular, a ceiling effect was observed in the Human Imperfection Scale. Despite using the revised version in Study 2, a ceiling effect was still observed; hence, it is necessary to develop more precise measurement methods. Second, because only one type of decision-making task was used for the AI investment decisions, the generalizability of the results is limited. In future, it will be necessary to examine a wider variety of decision-making tasks. Third is the issue of power. In this study, the sample size was set assuming a medium effect size; however, as the large-scale replication study by Moore et al. (2024) showed that the relationship between God saliency and AI preference may have a smaller effect size, our study may have lacked sufficient power.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study provides new insights into the impact of God saliency on the self and attitudes toward AI in the Japanese religious context. Specifically, we showed that the model from God saliency to AI preference indicated in previous research (Karataş \u0026amp; Cutright, 2023) was not completely replicated in the Japanese sample. This is consistent with the replication issue shown by Moore et al. (2024). Additionally, this study showed that animistic worldviews may be an important factor in explaining the effects of God saliency, which is a novel finding. These findings demonstrate the importance of cultural diversity in the psychology of religion and suggest the need to consider culturally specific religious views and animistic worldviews when considering the relationship between AI and humans. Future research involving participants from diverse cultural and religious backgrounds and the development of experimental manipulations suited to each culture will be required.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbu-Raiya, H. (2017). A critique from within: Some important research issues that psychologists of religion and spirituality should further work on. \u003cem\u003eMental Health, Religion \u0026amp; Culture, 20\u003c/em\u003e(6), 544\u0026ndash;551. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2017.1377945\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBaer, R. A., Smith, G. T., \u0026amp; Allen, K. B. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: the Kentucky inventory of mindfulness skills. \u003cem\u003eAssessment\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(3), 191\u0026ndash;206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191104268029\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBates, D., M\u0026auml;chler, M., Bolker, B., \u0026amp; Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Statistical Software, 67\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;48. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01\u003c/span\u003e \u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBremner, R. H., Koole, S. L., \u0026amp; Bushman, B. J. (2011). \u0026ldquo;Pray for Those Who Mistreat You\u0026rdquo;: Effects of Prayer on Anger and Aggression. \u003cem\u003ePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37\u003c/em\u003e(6), 830\u0026ndash;837. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211402215\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConty, A. (2022). Animism in the Anthropocene. \u003cem\u003eTheory, Culture \u0026amp; Society, 39\u003c/em\u003e(5), 127\u0026ndash;153. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/02632764211039283\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDavis, E. B., Lacey, E. K., Heydt, E. J., LaBouff, J. P., Barker, S. B., Van Elk, M., \u0026amp; Ladd, K. L. (2024). Sixty years of studying the sacred: Auditing and advancing the psychology of religion and spirituality. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Religion and Spirituality, 16\u003c/em\u003e(1), 7\u0026ndash;19. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000485\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDemmer, T. R., K\u0026uuml;hnapfel, C., Fingerhut, J., \u0026amp; Pelowski, M. (2023). Does an emotional connection to art really require a human artist? Emotion and intentionality responses to AI-versus human-created art and impact on aesthetic experience. \u003cem\u003eComputers in Human Behavior, 148\u003c/em\u003e, 107875. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107875\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFaul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., \u0026amp; Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. \u003cem\u003eBehavior Research Methods, 39\u003c/em\u003e(2), 175\u0026ndash;191. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFujii, S. (2023). The Psychology of Religion: Its Current State, Subject Matter, and Challenges. \u003cem\u003eJapanese Journal for the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 1\u003c/em\u003e(1), 18\u0026ndash;32. (in Japanese with English abstract) \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.60238/jjprs.1.1_18\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGermann, M., \u0026amp; Merkle, C. (2023). Algorithm aversion in delegated investing. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Business Economics, 93\u003c/em\u003e(9), 1691\u0026ndash;1727. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-022-01121-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGrewal, L., Wu, E. C., \u0026amp; Cutright, K. M. (2021). Loved As-Is: How God Salience Lowers Interest in Self-Improvement Products. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consumer Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e49\u003c/em\u003e(1), 154\u0026ndash;174. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucab055\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHaggard, M. C., Kaelen, R., Saroglou, V., Klein, O., \u0026amp; Rowatt, W. C. (2019). Religion\u0026rsquo;s role in the illusion of gender equality: Supraliminal and subliminal religious priming increases benevolent sexism. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Religion and Spirituality, 11\u003c/em\u003e(4), 392\u0026ndash;398. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000196\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHitsuwari, J., Ikeda, H., Yun, W., \u0026amp; Ueda, Y. (2024). Aesthetic experience of AI-generated and human-made abstract paintings: Turing test and multidimensional evaluations, \u003cem\u003eResearch Square\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHitsuwari, J., \u0026amp; Nomura, M. (2021). Developing and Validating a Japanese Version of the Multidimensional Attitude toward Ambiguity Scale (MAAS). Psychology, 12(04), 477\u0026ndash;497. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2021.124030\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHitsuwari, J., Ueda, Y., Yun, W., \u0026amp; Nomura, M. (2023). Does human\u0026ndash;AI collaboration lead to more creative art? Aesthetic evaluation of human-made and AI-generated haiku poetry. \u003cem\u003eComputers in Human Behavior, 139\u003c/em\u003e, 107502. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107502\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIkari, S., Sato, K., Burdett, E., Ishiguro, H., Jong, J., \u0026amp; Nakawake, Y. (2023). Religion-Related Values Differently Influence Moral Attitude for Robots in the United States and Japan. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 54\u003c/em\u003e(6\u0026ndash;7), 742\u0026ndash;759. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221231193369\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIkeuchi, H. (2010). Animistic thinking in adults: The memorial service for dolls as a voluntary loss [Seijin no animizumu-teki shiko: Jihatsuteki soshitsu toshite no mono kuyo no shinri]. \u003cem\u003eJapanese journal of social psychology, 25\u003c/em\u003e(3), 167\u0026ndash;177. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.14966/jssp.KJ00006203282\u003c/span\u003e (in Japanese with English abstract)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIseki, R. (2021). \u003cem\u003eAnovakun (version 4.8.6.)\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://riseki.cloudfree.jp/\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKarataş, M., \u0026amp; Cutright, K. M. (2023). Thinking about God increases acceptance of artificial intelligence in decision-making. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120\u003c/em\u003e(33), e2218961120. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2218961120\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKarataş, M., \u0026amp; Cutright, K. M. (2024). Reply to Moore et al.: Manipulation adherence and baseline AI attitudes as moderators of the effect of God salience on algorithm aversion. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121\u003c/em\u003e(31), e2407917121. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2407917121\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLooft, W. R., \u0026amp; Bartz, W. H. (1969). Animism revived. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Bulletin, 71\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;19. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/h0026856\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoore, D. A., Schroeder, J., Bailey, E. R., Gershon, R., Moore, J. E., \u0026amp; Simmons, J. P. (2024). Does thinking about God increase acceptance of artificial intelligence in decision-making? \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121\u003c/em\u003e(31), e2402315121. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2402315121\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNigorikawa, T., Mitsuishi, H., Endo, S., Hirono, M., \u0026amp; Kanou, H. (2016). Development of a spirituality rating scale for Japanese Youth. \u003cem\u003eJapanese Journal of Transpersonal Psychology/Psychiatry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(1), 87\u0026ndash;104. https://doi.org/10.32218/transpersonal.15.1_87\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaloutzian, R. F., \u0026amp; Park, C. L. (2021). The psychology of religion and spirituality: How big the tent? \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Religion and Spirituality, 13\u003c/em\u003e(1), 3\u0026ndash;13. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000218\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePiff, P. K., Dietze, P., Feinberg, M., Stancato, D. M., \u0026amp; Keltner, D. (2015). Awe, the small self, and prosocial behavior. \u003cem\u003eJournal of personality and social psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e108\u003c/em\u003e(6), 883\u0026ndash;899. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000018\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePreston, J. L., \u0026amp; Shin, F. (2017). Spiritual experiences evoke awe through the small self in both religious and non-religious individuals. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70\u003c/em\u003e, 212\u0026ndash;221. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.11.006\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eR Core Team (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved 4 November, 2024 from \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://www.R-project.org/\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRudd, M., Vohs, K. D., \u0026amp; Aaker, J. (2012). Awe expands people\u0026rsquo;s perception of time, alters decision making, and enhances Well-Being. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e(10), 1130\u0026ndash;1136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612438731\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSaito, Y. (1997). The Japanese aesthetics of imperfection and insufficiency. \u003cem\u003eThe Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 55\u003c/em\u003e(4), 377\u0026ndash;385. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2307/430925\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShimada, H. (2016). \u003cem\u003eAn Introduction to Japanese Deities: Deciphering the History of Shinto [Nihonjin no Kami Nyumon: Shinto no Rekishi wo Yomitoku]\u003c/em\u003e. Kodansha.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSnell, A., Zuckerman, M., \u0026amp; Le, B. M. (2024). Does Religious Priming Induce Greater Prejudice? A Meta-Analytic Review. \u003cem\u003ePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 50\u003c/em\u003e(3), 423\u0026ndash;435. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/01461672221135956\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTakano, R., \u0026amp; Nomura, M. (2024). Relationships between right-wing authoritarianism and spirituality in Japan. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Religion and Spirituality, 16\u003c/em\u003e(1), 34\u0026ndash;42. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000462\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTakano, R., \u0026amp; Taoka, D. (2024). Relationships Between Meaning in Life and Positive and Negative Spirituality in a Field Setting in Japan. \u003cem\u003eJournal of religion and health, 63\u003c/em\u003e(1), 224\u0026ndash;237. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-023-01891-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTeeuwen, M. (2002). From Jindō to Shinto: A Concept Takes Shape. \u003cem\u003eJapanese Journal of Religious Studies, 29\u003c/em\u003e(3/4), 233\u0026ndash;263. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://www.jstor.org/stable/30233723\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eThelle, N. R. (1996). \u003cem\u003eChristianity encounters Buddhism in Japan: A historical perspective\u003c/em\u003e. In J. Breen, \u0026amp; M. Williams (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eJapan and Christianity\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 94\u0026ndash;106). Palgrave Macmillan.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVan Cappellen, P., Edwards, M. E., Kamble, S. V., Yildiz, M., \u0026amp; Ladd, K. L. (2024). Kneel, stand, prostrate: The psychology of prayer postures in three world religions. \u003cem\u003ePlos one, 19\u003c/em\u003e(8), e0306924. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306924\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWalter, Y., \u0026amp; Altorfer, A. (2022). The psychological role of music and attentional control for religious experiences in worship. \u003cem\u003eQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75\u003c/em\u003e(12), 2272\u0026ndash;2286. \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/17470218221075330\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWorthington, E. L. (1988). Understanding the values of religious clients: A model and its application to counseling. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Counseling Psychology, 35\u003c/em\u003e(2), 166\u0026ndash;174. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.35.2.166\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWorthington, E. L., Wade, N. G., Hight, T. L., Ripley, J. S., McCullough, M. E., Berry, J. W., Schmitt, M. M., Berry, J. T., Bursley, K. H., \u0026amp; O\u0026rsquo;Connor, L. (2003). The Religious Commitment Inventory\u0026ndash;10: Development, refinement, and validation of a brief scale for research and counseling. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Counseling Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e50\u003c/em\u003e(1), 84\u0026ndash;96. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.50.1.84\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang, J. W., Chen, S., \u0026amp; Shakur, T. K. T. (2019). From Me to You: Self-Compassion predicts acceptance of own and others\u0026rsquo; imperfections. \u003cem\u003ePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e46\u003c/em\u003e(2), 228\u0026ndash;242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219853846\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"Kyoto University","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Religion, Animism, Shintoism, Cultural differences, Human-AI interaction","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5826471/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5826471/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study investigated how God saliency affects self-recognition and AI preferences across different Japanese religions, via two studies: a three-religion comparison (N=168) and a focused examination of Christians and Shintoists (N=120). Participants wrote about God or daily activities and completed measures of the small self, human imperfection, human imperfection acceptance, divine love, evaluation of AI-generated art, and investment decisions. Results showed that God salience consistently increased the small self across both studies; however, unlike previous Western findings, it did not affect perceptions of human imperfections or AI preferences. Notably, animistic tendencies emerged as significant predictors of the small self (Study 1) and imperfection acceptance (Study 2), suggesting that viewing the divine as more intimate and equal, rather than absolute, shapes these relationships in the Japanese context. These findings highlight how cultural and religious backgrounds influence the relationship between religious thought and AI preferences, demonstrating the need for culturally diverse perspectives.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"How Thinking About God Transforms Self Recognition and AI Preferences Among Christians and Shintoists in Japan","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-01-17 13:16:04","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5826471/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"849de03f-b31b-452c-8df1-d9575fb16dbd","owner":[],"postedDate":"January 17th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":42841535,"name":"Psychology"},{"id":42841536,"name":"Religious Studies"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-01-17T13:16:04+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-01-17 13:16:04","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-5826471","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-5826471","identity":"rs-5826471","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}