title: Prosociality and religion: History and experimentation.
abstract: Norenzayan et al. are praised for choosing to deal with significant questions in the understanding of religion. They are then criticized for refusing to define religion and for relying on problematic theoretical concepts. The authors discuss Abrahamic religions as the best-known prosocial religions, but the evidence shows that the case does not fit their conceptual framework. Finally, an extension of the authors' ideas about the meaning of priming effects is proposed.
authors.affiliation: Psychology Department,University of Haifa,Haifa 3498838,Israel.benny@psy.haifa.ac.ilhttp://hevra.haifa.ac.il/psy/index.php/en/faculty?id=112.
authors.forename: Benjamin
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Beit-Hallahmi
mesh_terms: D036262:Empirical Research; D006801:Humans; D012067:Religion; D012107:Research Design; D012919:Social Behavior