Mapping the minds of spectators during an extreme ritual: a network perspective

Figures & data

Figure 1. Spectators reactions during extreme ritual. While past research has examined ritualistic effects on high ordeal performers & their closest kin (center panel) (e.g., Konvalinka et al., 2011; Xygalatas, Mitkidis, et al., 2013), little is known about the cognitive and emotional reactions of observing participants in response to the ritual (left and right panel).

Figure 2. Network structure of psychological reactions during an extreme ritual. Overall network structure based on Extended Bayesian Information Criterion Gaussian Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (EBICglasso; Foygel & Drton, 2010) network analysis and bootstrapped Exploratory Graph Analysis (EGA) (Epskamp & Fried, 2018) using a walktrap algorithm (Yang et al., 2016) with 1,000 bootstrap samples. Node colors indicate community membership according to EGA (see the right-hand legend). Node size indicates the expected influence (2-step, including indirect influence) on communities outside the node’s community, while node shape indicates direction of expected influence (circle – positive, square – negative). Green lines indicate positive edges between individual nodes, and red edges indicate negative edges between individual nodes. MDS stress = .13. For interpretation purposes, the axes are rotated 15° anticlockwise. Full statistical information is provided in the supplement (see Tables S3–S7).

Table 1. Main findings and implications of the network findings in spectators for ritual theory.

Main findings	Theoretical implications
Five network communities were identified	Cognitions during a ritual appear clustered around core psychological functions: 1) belief/positive emotions/awe: clustering of emotional and belief cognitions implying some joint activation of meaning systems and positive emotional responses, highlighting the importance of positive emotional responses and its connection to meaning systems; clustering of awe with beliefs supports the importance of awe for ritual performances (Keltner & Haidt, 2003; Shiota et al., 2007; Valdesolo & Graham, 2014); 2) negative emotions & pain: confirms negative valence of pain displays; 3) Social connection: identity fusion with the shrine & high ordeal performers, social identification with kin & other beliefs at the festival and elsewhere show a single cluster, implying that fusion and social connection are closely linked (Bortolini et al., 2018); family ties connect to broader social cognitions (superordinate identity) during ritual (Konvalinka et al., 2011; Singh et al., 2020); 4) Need for closure/ambiguity cognitions (supporting the centrality of uncertainty dynamics); 5) Behavioral clusters: behavioral nodes indicating support for spirit mediums & shrine merged with behaviors focusing on controlling uncertainty.
Two major dimensions underlie the network: a) valence & b) uncertainty beliefs vs management	Valence: a clear distinction of positive vs negatively valenced cognitions is evident, highlighting the emotional complexity of extreme rituals, greater attention to positive valence in particular is needed (Xygalatas, 2014); Uncertainty: Uncertainty is a core organizing principle of cognitions during ritual, separating ambiguity and negative emotional dynamics associated with pain and fear at one end from active behavioral acts that are geared towards controlling uncertainty (asking for advice, blessings & divination) at the opposite end, supports uncertainty mechanisms for ritual (Henrich et al., 2019; Hogg et al., 2010; Snodgrass et al., 2017).
Identification of bridging nodes between cluster communities (strongest nodes per community): a) Belief that spirit mediums protect (care); feeling happy, feeling strong, feeling awe; b) Donating to shrine, walking with spirit mediums; c) Feeling connected to spirit mediums; feeling connected to family; feeling strong because of mediums (identity fusion); d) Like to know what other people are thinking; e) Feeling sad, feeling fear (negative links).	Bridging nodes offer insights into how activation of cognitions rituals during ritual spreads and therefore may induce greater efficiency of ritual functions: a) Belief nodes that focus on benefits and focus on empowering positive emotions show greater connectivity across communities – supports the importance of transmission of belief systems via credibility enhancing displays & empowerment via social emotions (Henrich, 2009; Kok et al., 2013; Singh & Henrich, 2020), links of awe to negative emotions & social connection supports the complexity of awe experiences & the importance of awe for ritual functioning (Bortolini et al., 2021; Keltner & Haidt, 2003; Shiota et al., 2007; Valdesolo & Graham, 2014); b) Behavioral nodes that signal commitment to the religious system show stronger links throughout the cognitive network, supporting the importance of signals of commitment to the group & belief system (Power, 2017; Sosis, 2003) and providing support for costly signaling theories that emphasize cooperative intent (Brusse et al., 2022; Singh & Henrich, 2020); c) Social connection to both high performers and kin (family) are centrally connected to other cognitions, highlighting the importance of social connection during collective ritual; d) Epistemic uncertainty, especially concerns about the minds of others are important cognitions that activate & spread to other cognitions during extreme rituals; e) Experiencing fear appears to be an important emotional response to extreme displays & distinguish believers from non-believers; unexpectedly, feeling sad shows some connection to other nodes (may indicate lack of social connection; see also the non-redundancy of sadness in supplementary material).

Konvalinka, I., Xygalatas, D., Bulbulia, J., Schjodt, U., Jegindo, E.-M., Wallot, S., Van Orden, G., & Roepstorff, A. (2011). Synchronized arousal between performers and related spectators in a fire-walking ritual. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(20), 8514–8519. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1016955108

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Xygalatas, D., Mitkidis, P., Fischer, R., Reddish, P., Skewes, J., Geertz, A. W., Roepstorff, A., & Bulbulia, J. (2013). Extreme rituals promote prosociality. Psychological Science, 24(8), 1602–1605. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612472910

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Foygel, R., & Drton, M. (2010). Extended Bayesian information criteria for Gaussian graphical models. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems - Volume 1, 604–612. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1011.6640

 Google Scholar

Epskamp, S., & Fried, E. I. (2018). A tutorial on regularized partial correlation networks. Psychological Methods, 23(4), 617–634. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000167

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Yang, Z., Algesheimer, R., & Tessone, C. J. (2016). A comparative analysis of community detection algorithms on artificial networks. Scientific Reports, 6(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep30750

 Google Scholar

Keltner, D., & Haidt, J. (2003). Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion. Cognition & Emotion, 17(2), 297–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930302297

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., & Mossman, A. (2007). The nature of awe: Elicitors, appraisals, and effects on self-concept. Cognition and Emotion, 21(5), 944–963. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930600923668

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Valdesolo, P., & Graham, J. (2014). Awe, uncertainty, and agency detection. Psychological Science, 25(1), 170–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613501884

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bortolini, T., Newson, M., Natividade, J. C., Vázquez, A., & Gómez, Á. (2018). Identity fusion predicts endorsement of pro-group behaviours targeting nationality, religion, or football in Brazilian samples. British Journal of Social Psychology, 57(2), 346–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12235

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Singh, P., Tewari, S., Kesberg, R., Karl, J. A., Bulbulia, J., & Fischer, R. (2020). Time investments in rituals are associated with social bonding, affect and subjective health: A longitudinal study of diwali in two Indian communities. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375(1805), 20190430. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0430

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Xygalatas, D. (2014). Ritual and cohesion. What is the place of euphoric arousal? Commentary on H. Whitehouse & J. A. Lanman, “The ties that bind us: Ritual, fusion, and identification.”. Current Anthropology, 55(6), 689–690.

 Google Scholar

Henrich, J., Bauer, M., Cassar, A., Chytilova, J., & Purzycki, B. G. (2019). War increases religiosity. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(Issue 2), 129–135. NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0512-3

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hogg, M. A., Adelman, J. R., & Blagg, R. D. (2010). Religion in the face of uncertainty: An uncertainty-identity theory account of religiousness. Personality and Social Psychology Review: An Official Journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc, 14(1), 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309349692

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Snodgrass, J. G., Most, D. E., & Upadhyay, C. (2017). Religious ritual is good medicine for indigenous Indian conservation refugees implications for global mental health. In Current Anthropology (Vol. 58, Issue 2, pp. 257–284). UNIV CHICAGO PRESS. https://doi.org/10.1086/691212

 Google Scholar

Henrich, J. (2009). The evolution of costly displays, cooperation and religion: Credibility enhancing displays and their implications for cultural evolution. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30(Issue 4), 244–260. ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.03.005

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kok, B. E., Coffey, K. A., Cohn, M. A., Catalino, L. I., Vacharkulksemsuk, T., Algoe, S. B., Brantley, M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2013). How positive emotions build physical health: Perceived positive social connections account for the upward spiral between positive emotions and vagal tone. Psychological Science, 24(7), 1123–1132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612470827

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Singh, M., & Henrich, J. (2020). Why do religious leaders observe costly prohibitions? Examining taboos on mentawai shamans. Evolutionary Human Sciences, 2, e32. https://doi.org/10.1017/ehs.2020.32

 Google Scholar

Bortolini, T., Melo, B., Basilio, R., Fischer, R., Zahn, R., de Oliveira-Souza, R., Knutson, B., & Moll, J. (2021). Striatal and septo-hypothalamic responses to anticipation and outcome of affiliative rewards. NeuroImage, 243, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118474

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Power, E. A. (2017). Discerning devotion: Testing the signaling theory of religion. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38(1), 82–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.07.003

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sosis, R. (2003). Why arent we all hutterities? Costly signaling theory and religious behavior. Human Nature-An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective, 14(Issue 2), 91–127. ALDINE DE GRUYTER DIVISION WALTER DE GRUYTER INC. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-003-1000-6

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Brusse, C., Handfield, T., & Zollman, K. J. S. (2022). Explaining costly religious practices: Credibility enhancing displays and signaling theories. Synthese, 200(3), 249, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-022-03742-7

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar