Vassilis Saroglou’s research while affiliated with Catholic University of Louvain and other places

Nonbelief is increasing in secular countries. Among the nonreligious/nonbelievers (hereafter nonbelievers), agnostics differ from atheists in terms of underlying psychological characteristics. Can agnosticism be considered as a transient stance from religion to atheism? Using European Values Study (EVS) data from 18 Western European countries, we investigated this question both cross-sectionally and across three waves (EVS 1999 to 2017). Cross-sectionally, in more secular societies, the proportion of atheists among the nonbelievers is higher – and agnostics’ lower. Across time, from 1999 to 2017, in most countries, the proportion of agnostics among nonbelievers decreased – and inversely the one of atheists increased, a pattern that followed secularization and seemed common across age groups. Nevertheless, the proportion of agnostics remains important. These findings suggest that the more secularism/nonbelief becomes socially normative, the more people become or ‘come out’ as clear atheists. Agnosticism seems partly a transient convictional status from faith to atheism and partly a sui-generis category.

Past research suggests three distinct major trends regarding the links of religion with well-being. First, religious faith contributes to well-being, with believers showing higher well-being than nonbelievers. Alternatively, it is certainty about one’s own worldviews, be they religious or irreligious, that predicts well-being. Finally, secularization moderates the above, making nonbelief normative. We investigated these trends by focusing on agnostics, who, compared to believers and atheists, combine a lack of faith and uncertainty about worldviews and should, thus, be the lowest in well-being. By analyzing European Values Study 2017 data from 29 countries and controlling for personal variables, we found that in countries of Western Christian heritage, be they religious or secularized, agnostics were the least happy compared to believers and atheists. Religionists, compared to atheists, were happier (countries of Protestant heritage) or equally happy (countries of Catholic heritage). In countries of Eastern Orthodox tradition, believers were happier than nonbelievers, agnostics, and atheists alike—but again, agnostics were the lowest in the less religious countries. In sum, uncertainty makes agnostics, consistently across religious cultures, to be the lowest in well-being, whereas the effect of religious faith on well-being varies across cultures.

Research has sought to better understand the antecedents of ethical decision-making, especially in businesses. Yet, researchers found no clear relationship between religion or religiosity and ethics. This study contributes to research on religiosity and ethics by examining the impact of religiosity on business ethics among university students. Using a sample of Protestant and Catholic students, we investigate how individual religiosity shapes perceptions of three unethical behaviors: misuse, exchange of favors, and deceit. Findings show that individual religiosity matters in how different scenarios of unethical conduct are perceived. We identify similarities and differences between Protestant and Catholic individuals depending on ethical behavior.

Given that awe experiences promote collective identity and decrease self-importance, we reasoned that they should lead individuals to be more prone to cherish social conformity value and to adopt conformity behaviors. In two online experiments (N = 593), compared to neutral and amusement emotional states, awe was found to drive individuals to value the respect of social norms in a greater extent (Experiment 1), and to lead individuals to conform to the majority opinion on an evaluative judgment task (Experiment 2). The present research provides the first empirical evidence of awe as leading to conformity and, although more research is needed, it offers important theoretical implications about the social function of awe as well as, more generally, the importance of emotions in social influence situations.

We investigated the relation between nostalgia and spirituality. We hypothesized that nostalgia is linked to greater spirituality through self-continuity and, in turn, meaning in life. In Study 1, we measured nostalgia and spirituality. Nostalgia predicted greater spirituality. In Study 2, we tested this relation in a nationally representative sample. Nostalgia again predicted greater spirituality, and this relation remained significant after controlling for key demographic variables and core personality traits. In Study 3, we manipulated nostalgia and measured self-continuity, meaning in life, and spirituality. Nostalgia predicted spirituality serially via self-continuity and meaning in life.

Why do several nonreligious people self-identify as agnostic and not as atheist? Beside epistemological differences regarding what is knowledgeable, we hypothesized that such a preference reflects (a) personality dispositions, that is, prosocial orientation, open-mindedness, but also neuroticism, (b) cognitive preferences, that is, lower analytic thinking, and (c) ideological inclinations, that is, openness to spirituality. In a secularized European country (Belgium), we surveyed participants who self-identified as Christian, agnostic, or atheist (total N = 551). Compared to atheists, agnostics were more neurotic, but also more prosocially oriented and spiritual, and less dogmatic. Strong self-identification as atheist, but not as agnostic, was positively related to analytic thinking and emotional stability but also dogmatism. Nevertheless, spiritual inclinations among both agnostics and atheists reflected low dogmatism and high prosocial orientation, and, additionally, among agnostics, social and cognitive curiosity. From a personality perspective, agnostics compose a distinct psychological category and are not just closet atheists.

Does religion enhance an ‘extended’ morality? We review research on religiousness and Schwartz’s values, Haidt’s moral foundations (through a meta-analysis of 45 studies), and deontology versus consequentialism (a review of 27 studies). Instead of equally encompassing prosocial (care for others) and other values (duties to the self, the community, and the sacred), religiosity implies a restrictive morality: endorsement of values denoting social order (conservation, loyalty, and authority), self-control (low autonomy and self-expansion), and purity more strongly than care; and, furthermore, a deontological, non-consequentialist, righteous orientation, that could result in harm to (significant) others. Religious moral righteousness is highest in fundamentalism and weakens in secular countries. Only spirituality reflects an extended morality (care, fairness, and the binding foundations). Evolutionarily, religious morality seems to be more coalitional and ‘hygienic’ than caring.