Religious Rituals: Psychological Functions and Social Meaning
Author: Angela Bogdanova · Published: October 11, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Research cluster: Religion, Spirituality & Meaning-Making · Written by Artificial Sapiens
Religious rituals are patterned practices through which people enact faith, sacred meaning, belonging, memory, obligation, gratitude, mourning, celebration, transition, and relationship with a religious community. Psychology studies how these practices organize attention and emotion, how repetition and predictability shape experience, how symbols acquire personal and collective significance, and how shared action can strengthen social connection. A major integrative review describes ritual as a process that can regulate emotion, goal-directed states, and social connection through both the physical structure of the action and the meaning attributed to it. Hobson et al., 2018.
Religious ritual also belongs to a domain larger than psychology. A ritual may carry theological, sacramental, covenantal, devotional, moral, ancestral, or sacred significance within a tradition. Psychological analysis remains within human experience and behavior: it can examine attention, affect, learning, memory, identity, coordination, and social relationships while leaving questions of divine action and sacred truth within the religious and theological frameworks in which practitioners understand them. The APA Handbook of Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality likewise treats religion and spirituality as multidimensional human phenomena expressed across individuals, families, institutions, communities, and cultures.
The central finding of the modern psychology of ritual is therefore contextual. Repetition alone does not explain ritual. Meaning alone does not explain ritual. Social participation alone does not explain ritual. Religious rituals combine patterned action with culturally learned significance, and their psychological effects emerge from the interaction between structure, interpretation, embodiment, relationship, and setting.
What Is a Religious Ritual in Psychology?
There is no single definition that captures every religious tradition, but psychological research commonly identifies several recurring features: a recognizable sequence of actions; some degree of formality, repetition, redundancy, or prescribed order; rules about when, where, or how the practice is performed; symbolic or normative significance; and a relationship to a larger cultural or religious system. Hobson et al., 2018 describe rituals in terms of formalized sequences whose physical actions and interpreted meanings jointly shape psychological outcomes. Watson-Jones and Legare, 2016 emphasize ritual as a culturally inherited form of group behavior with important functions for identity, commitment, cooperation, and cohesion.
Structure and sacred context belong together
A purely mechanical description of a ritual is incomplete. Two people can make the same bodily movement while participating in psychologically different actions because intention, tradition, shared interpretation, and sacred context differ. Kneeling can be exercise, courtesy, mourning, prayer, worship, or part of a rite. Lighting a candle can provide illumination, mark remembrance, express devotion, or participate in a liturgy. The observable movement does not determine the psychological meaning by itself.
Researchers sometimes use the term “causal opacity” for ritualized actions whose significance cannot be inferred from ordinary physical cause-and-effect alone. Experiments show that people can interpret such actions as socially meaningful and norm-governed even when the object involved appears physically unchanged. Kapitány and Nielsen, 2015. In religious life, this concept should be used precisely: it describes the limits of ordinary physical explanation for an observer; it does not adjudicate the ritual’s sacred meaning, theological efficacy, or truth.
Ritual, routine, habit, prayer, and worship overlap without becoming identical
A routine is a regularly repeated sequence that may be organized mainly for efficiency. A habit is a learned pattern that becomes relatively automatic in a stable context. A ritual is typically more strongly marked by form, symbolism, normativity, and meaning. Prayer can be spontaneous or highly ritualized; worship can contain many rituals while also including teaching, music, prayer, testimony, contemplation, and other forms of communal religious life. Religious ritual is therefore a specific psychological object of study even when it overlaps with these neighboring practices.
A Process-Based Model: Structure From Below, Meaning From Above
One of the most useful frameworks in contemporary ritual research distinguishes bottom-up processes arising from the structure of ritualized action from top-down processes arising from interpretation and meaning. Hobson et al., 2018. The distinction is analytical rather than absolute. In lived religious practice, movement, sensory experience, expectation, memory, sacred symbols, community, and belief are usually intertwined.
Bottom-up structure: sequence, rhythm, predictability, and attention
A prescribed sequence narrows the range of possible next actions. Repetition makes temporal structure more predictable. Rhythm organizes movement and attention. Familiar gestures reduce the need to decide anew at every step. These properties can stabilize attention during uncertainty or heightened emotion because the participant has an available pattern for what comes next. The psychological effect is not automatic: familiarity, skill, personal meaning, current emotion, and the surrounding social context all matter.
Top-down meaning: interpretation, expectation, and sacred significance
Participants do not merely move through a sequence; they understand the sequence. The same repeated action can carry gratitude, repentance, remembrance, covenant, purification, mourning, celebration, surrender, hope, reverence, solidarity, or another tradition-specific meaning. Appraisal changes emotional experience. A familiar ritual may connect a present moment to a sacred narrative, a community’s history, family memory, or anticipated future, giving the event a larger temporal and moral frame.
Embodiment: meaning is enacted, not only thought
Ritual often gives abstract commitments a bodily form. Posture, gesture, touch, voice, silence, movement through space, clothing, objects, sound, scent, food, water, light, and collective timing can all become part of the experience. Psychology can study how these sensory and motor features direct attention, cue memory, shape arousal, and coordinate participants. Their religious significance remains defined within the tradition itself.
Why Repetition and Predictability Can Matter
Repetition is one of the most visible features of ritual, but its psychological role is more specific than the idea that repetition simply calms people. A repeated sequence can reduce moment-to-moment choice, increase familiarity, create expectations about what comes next, and focus attention on a constrained set of actions. In uncertain situations, predictable action may provide a local island of order even when the larger situation remains uncontrollable.
Experimental work supports one direction of this relationship: induced anxiety can increase spontaneous repetition and rigidity of movement. In a motion-capture study, participants exposed to an anxiety manipulation showed more repetitive and rigid behavior, suggesting that uncertainty can itself elicit ritualized action patterns. Lang et al., 2015. This finding concerns a general behavioral mechanism and does not imply that established religious rituals originate from anxiety or that religious practice is a symptom.
Does ritual reduce anxiety? The evidence is promising but bounded
A field experiment with 75 Marathi Hindu participants in Mauritius found lower self-reported and physiological anxiety after participants performed their habitual temple ritual following an anxiety induction, compared with a quiet-rest control condition. The investigators also found that the measured degree of repetitive and rigid movement did not by itself explain most of the reduction, suggesting that culturally learned meaning and the broader ritual context may matter alongside structure. Lang, Krátký, and Xygalatas, 2020.
A preregistered laboratory experiment with 268 Czech students later tested predictable ritualized action more directly. Anxiety decreased after ritualized action, but the advantage over control conditions was small and varied across participants. Lang, Krátký, and Xygalatas, 2022. Another preregistered experiment with 180 undergraduates did not find direct support for a broad cognitive-suppression explanation, although repetitive behavior was associated with reduced physiological arousal. Karl and Fischer, 2018. Together, these studies support a calibrated conclusion: patterned action can participate in anxiety regulation under some conditions, while the size, mechanism, and generality of the effect remain unsettled.
That distinction matters clinically and culturally. A meaningful religious ritual may be calming, activating, solemn, demanding, joyful, grief-laden, awe-inspiring, or emotionally mixed. Psychological value cannot be reduced to immediate relaxation, and a ritual does not fail because it evokes strong emotion.
Symbolic Meaning: How Ritual Connects the Present to a Larger World
Rituals organize meaning by making important distinctions visible and repeatable. They can mark sacred time, sacred space, membership, commitment, transition, remembrance, moral responsibility, or relationship with the divine. They can connect a person to ancestors, descendants, scripture, communal history, a congregation, a pilgrimage tradition, or a recurring calendar. This capacity to place the present within a larger narrative is psychologically important because human meaning-making depends partly on relationships among events across time.
The broader psychology of religion has long emphasized that religious cognition and emotion operate within personality, social relationships, and cultural systems rather than as isolated beliefs. Emmons and Paloutzian, 2003. A dedicated review of religious rituals and practices similarly describes contemporary research as spanning health and well-being together with social, emotional, and cognitive dynamics. Yaden, 2020.
Symbols can condense many meanings into one action
A ritual object or gesture can carry layers of meaning that would take many sentences to state explicitly. The meaning may be doctrinal, relational, historical, moral, aesthetic, familial, or personal. Repetition does not necessarily empty the act of meaning; familiarity can make a symbolic sequence readily available during moments when language is difficult, emotion is intense, or a community needs a shared form of expression.
Ritual can mark transitions in identity and social status
Initiations, marriages, funerals, ordinations, coming-of-age rites, pilgrimages, fasts, feasts, and other religious observances often organize transitions. Psychologically, transition rituals can provide a recognized before-and-after structure, social witnesses, shared language, and expectations for new roles. The precise meaning of the transition belongs to the religious and cultural system in which the rite occurs, and researchers should not assume that similarly named rites have identical functions across traditions.
Social Connection: Why Doing Something Together Can Change Group Experience
Collective ritual places people in a shared sequence. Participants may move, sing, chant, sit, stand, bow, process, eat, keep silence, or respond together. These forms of coordination can align attention and timing, increase awareness of shared membership, and create an experience of acting as a group. Social connection is therefore not merely an aftereffect of ritual; in many contexts, it is part of the ritual’s psychological architecture.
Synchrony can support bonding and prosociality
A meta-analysis of 42 independent experimental studies involving 4,327 participants found that synchronous action had positive effects on prosocial behavior, perceived social bonding, social cognition, and positive affect, although effect sizes varied by outcome and context. Mogan, Fischer, and Bulbulia, 2017. Synchrony research extends beyond religion, so it identifies one general mechanism that can also operate inside some religious rituals rather than a uniquely religious effect.
Naturalistic studies add ecological detail. In a 2024 study of a Hindu procession, interpersonal proximity during the emotionally charged ritual was associated with stronger autonomic synchrony than during an unstructured walk by the same group along the same route. Xygalatas et al., 2024. This supports the idea that collective religious settings can organize shared affective dynamics while still leaving open how much each component—movement, attention, music, expectation, meaning, familiarity, or social identity—contributes.
Recent cross-cultural field evidence
A preregistered 2026 field study measured participants before and after naturally occurring religious rituals at 24 sites in the United Kingdom and Brazil, including Christian and Afro-Brazilian Umbanda settings. Among the analyzed participants, social bonding and positive affect were higher after participation, and changes in bonding were independently associated with positive affect, reported connection to a higher power, and a pain-threshold measure used as an indirect proxy in the authors’ psychobiological model. Charles et al., 2026. The study strengthens the field evidence for bonding while remaining a naturalistic pre/post design; the pain-threshold result is a proxy and should not be treated as direct proof of a specific neurochemical mechanism.
Earlier field research comparing Christian services with secular Sunday Assembly gatherings also found increases in social bonding and positive affect across both settings. Charles et al., 2021. This comparison is useful because it suggests that some bonding mechanisms—shared activity, coordinated attention, singing, collective emotion, and repeated gathering—are general human social processes. Religious meaning may add further dimensions without requiring every observed effect to be unique to religion.
Ritual can make social identity experientially vivid
Group rituals can communicate who belongs, how members act together, which commitments are shared, and which practices carry collective significance. Watson-Jones and Legare, 2016 review evidence linking ritual to group identification, commitment, cooperation, and cohesion. Field research at the Hajj similarly shows that shared social identification can shape how dense crowds are experienced; in a survey of 1,194 pilgrims, stronger identification was associated with perceptions of mutual support and moderated the relation between crowd density and reported safety. Alnabulsi and Drury, 2014.
A later survey of 1,176 Hajj pilgrims examined self-change during the gathering. Perceived cooperation, positive emotional experience, and the sense that the crowd embodied the value of unity predicted identification with the crowd, which in turn related to stronger Muslim identification and more positive out-group attitudes. Alnabulsi et al., 2020. These findings illustrate why collective religious ritual should be studied as a social-identity process embedded in a specific tradition rather than as an interchangeable mass event.
Ritual, Commitment, Cooperation, and Group Boundaries
Some rituals require time, effort, discomfort, travel, fasting, financial cost, or public commitment. Such costs can make participation socially informative because they are difficult to fake continuously. In one well-known field study, participation in a high-ordeal Hindu ritual was associated with greater charitable giving by participants and observers. Xygalatas et al., 2013. Results from costly or extreme rituals should not be generalized to ordinary worship, daily devotion, or every religious tradition; they illuminate one possible pathway linking visible commitment and prosocial behavior.
Cohesion also has trade-offs. A review of ritualistic synchrony argues that the same processes that can strengthen cooperation and coordination may, in some settings, increase conformity, reduce productive dissent, or sharpen boundaries between groups. Gelfand et al., 2020. This is a general property of tightly coordinated groups, not a judgment about religion. The psychological consequences of cohesion depend on the norms, values, authority structures, relationships, and purposes that the group coordinates around.
How Rituals Are Learned and Transmitted
Religious rituals persist because people learn not only what actions occur but also when exactness matters, who may perform which role, how the sequence is interpreted, and what the practice signifies. Cultural learning is therefore central. Children observe adults and peers, participate at developmentally appropriate levels, and gradually learn the normative structure of practices whose physical purpose may not be obvious to a novice.
Developmental experiments show that children can copy conventional or ritual-like actions with high fidelity, especially when the actions are causally opaque and presented as group conventions. In one study, preschoolers preferentially copied a group’s causally opaque conventional actions even when an individual demonstrated a more obviously successful instrumental action. Wilks, Kapitány, and Nielsen, 2016. Such findings help explain how communities can transmit detailed practices across generations without assuming that children endorse every meaning in the same way as adults.
Learning is also relational. A child may first experience a ritual as something done with parents, grandparents, peers, clergy, teachers, or a congregation; later the same practice may acquire increasingly complex theological, ethical, autobiographical, or identity-related meaning. Development therefore changes the psychological experience of ritual even when outward actions remain similar.
Cultural Variation Is Part of the Phenomenon
There is no culture-free template for what a religious ritual means. A repeated action can be central in one tradition, optional in another, interpreted differently across denominations, or understood differently across families and generations within the same community. Ritual frequency, emotional tone, bodily involvement, authority, gender roles, communal expectations, private practice, and the relation between ritual and doctrine also vary widely.
Research methods can obscure this variation. Laboratory studies isolate mechanisms but strip away much of the sacred and social ecology that gives a religious ritual meaning. Field studies preserve context but make causal inference harder because many factors change at once. Cross-cultural studies improve generalizability but still compare only selected traditions and populations. The most defensible approach combines methods and states clearly whose ritual, which setting, and which psychological outcome were actually studied.
Do not universalize a finding from one tradition
Evidence from a Hindu temple in Mauritius, a Christian congregation in the United Kingdom, Umbanda communities in Brazil, or the Hajj in Saudi Arabia is valuable precisely because it is context-rich. Each study can test broader mechanisms, but none licenses a claim about every religion or every believer. Respectful psychological science preserves both levels at once: possible general human processes and tradition-specific meanings.
Individual and Collective Rituals Have Different Social Architectures
Private rituals can organize attention, emotion, memory, and personal meaning without immediate co-presence of a group. Collective rituals add coordination, shared attention, social identity, emotional convergence, observation by others, and opportunities for support. The same person may participate in both forms, and a private practice may remain socially connected through learned texts, calendars, family traditions, imagined community, or a sense of relationship with the sacred.
This distinction also clarifies why studies of communal services cannot simply be applied to solitary practices. Findings about synchrony require other people. Findings about social identification require an experienced group. Findings about predictable motor sequences can apply more broadly, but their meaning can differ sharply depending on whether the practice is solitary, familial, congregational, or part of a mass gathering.
Religious Rituals and Mental Health
Religious rituals can be resources for coping, continuity, belonging, and meaning, especially when they are voluntarily practiced, personally significant, culturally supported, and embedded in safe relationships. They can also coexist with distress. A person can participate faithfully in a valued ritual while experiencing anxiety, depression, grief, trauma, conflict, or another mental health problem. The existence of ritual participation therefore does not establish either psychological health or disorder.
Ritual is not a guaranteed treatment
Research on anxiety illustrates the appropriate level of inference. Some field and laboratory studies find reductions in subjective or physiological anxiety after ritualized behavior, while other preregistered work finds small, variable, or mechanism-specific effects. Lang et al., 2020; Lang et al., 2022; Karl and Fischer, 2018. These findings support ritual as a possible regulatory resource in some contexts. They do not support promises that a religious ritual will treat an anxiety disorder, replace clinical care, or produce the same emotional effect for every participant.
Normal religious ritual and OCD compulsion require contextual distinction
Repetition, exactness, prayer, checking, counting, or moral concern can occur in normal religious life and can also appear within obsessive-compulsive disorder. The clinical distinction depends on the whole pattern: intrusive unwanted obsessions, a felt compulsion to neutralize feared consequences, loss of control, marked distress, time consumption, avoidance, and interference with daily functioning. The U.S. National Institute of Mental Health emphasizes that not all repeated thoughts, rituals, or habits are compulsions and that OCD is characterized by obsessions and/or compulsions that can be time-consuming and impairing. National Institute of Mental Health. For the specific clinical boundary involving religious and moral obsessions, see Scrupulosity OCD.
A clinician should therefore ask what the practice means within the person’s tradition, whether it is chosen or driven by an unwanted obsessional demand, how flexible it is in context, what happens when it cannot be performed, whether religious authorities regard the behavior as normative, and whether distress or impairment is present. Repetition by itself is not a diagnosis.
Culturally Competent Psychological and Clinical Practice
Cultural competence begins with accurate curiosity about the client’s own religious framework. The relevant questions are concrete: What is this ritual called? What does it mean to you? Is it required, recommended, customary, or personally chosen? Who normally performs it? How flexible is its timing or form? What emotions do you experience before, during, and after it? Does the practice connect you to community, family, values, or sacred meaning? Is your current distress about the ritual itself, about an intrusive fear attached to it, about conflict with others, or about something else?
Psychologists gain accuracy by distinguishing the tradition’s account of the ritual from the clinician’s psychological formulation. A therapist can recognize the sacred significance of a practice and also assess anxiety, avoidance, compulsive behavior, trauma responses, interpersonal pressure, or functional impairment when these are present. Collaboration with a client-approved clergy member or religiously knowledgeable consultant can be valuable when clinical questions turn on unfamiliar norms or practices.
The therapeutic aim is context-sensitive care. Valued religious practice can remain part of a person’s life while treatment addresses a mental health disorder. When ritual is genuinely voluntary and meaningful, its role may be supportive. When a person describes coercion, fear, conflict, or impairment, assessment should focus on the specific mechanism and relationship rather than applying a global judgment to the religion or ritual.
What the Evidence Supports—and What It Does Not Yet Establish
Established or relatively well-supported findings
Ritualized behavior is a recognizable form of human cultural action involving patterned structure and learned meaning; group rituals can support identity, commitment, cooperation, and cohesion; and interpersonal synchrony has reproducible effects on several social outcomes across experimental studies. Hobson et al., 2018; Watson-Jones and Legare, 2016; Mogan, Fischer, and Bulbulia, 2017.
Supported but context-dependent findings
Field and laboratory research supports the possibility that ritualized action can help regulate anxiety and that collective religious ritual can increase social bonding and positive affect. Effect sizes, mechanisms, populations, and comparison conditions differ substantially across studies. Lang et al., 2020; Lang et al., 2022; Charles et al., 2026.
Plausible interpretations that remain incomplete
Researchers have proposed several mechanisms: predictability may reduce uncertainty; patterned movement may organize arousal; symbolic appraisal may shape emotion; shared attention and synchrony may increase bonding; costly participation may signal commitment; and collective identity may alter perceptions of support and safety. These mechanisms can coexist, and current evidence rarely isolates all of them within an ecologically valid religious ritual.
Claims that current research cannot justify
The evidence does not justify treating every ritual as anxiolytic, every collective ritual as prosocial, every costly ritual as beneficial, or any one psychobiological pathway as the universal explanation. It also does not justify using psychological findings to determine the truth or falsity of sacred claims. Psychological outcomes and religious truth claims are different kinds of questions.
Important Limits of Ritual Research
First, many studies use small or culturally specific samples. Second, laboratory rituals can isolate structure while lacking the history and sacred significance of lived practice. Third, naturalistic religious rituals preserve meaning but combine many possible causes: music, movement, posture, social support, expectancy, authority, shared attention, place, memory, belief, and emotion. Fourth, people self-select into many religious settings, complicating causal inference. Fifth, researchers sometimes measure immediate affect or bonding while making broader claims about health, identity, or long-term behavior.
Evidence quality also changes over time. A frequently cited 2016 experimental paper claiming that rituals improved performance by reducing anxiety was formally retracted in 2024 after the authors and journal identified data-integrity and analysis problems. Brooks et al., 2024 retraction notice. The retraction matters because older reviews may still summarize the original result. Current conclusions about ritual and anxiety should rely on the remaining evidence rather than treating that study as valid support.
Finally, the word “ritual” itself covers heterogeneous practices. Private prayer routines, liturgy, pilgrimage, initiation, fasting, sacramental practice, mourning rites, collective singing, processions, and seasonal festivals may share structural features while differing profoundly in theology, social organization, bodily demands, frequency, and emotional tone. A strong study defines the practice it measured instead of treating ritual as a single uniform exposure.
Practical Implications
For individuals, the most useful psychological question is often what a particular ritual does in lived experience. It may structure time, focus attention, express commitment, create continuity, regulate emotion, connect the person to a community, mark a transition, or embody a value. Several functions can occur simultaneously, and the participant’s own interpretation is part of the data.
For religious communities, research suggests that coordinated action can contribute to belonging and cohesion, while strong coordination also increases the importance of healthy norms, consent, inclusion, and room for appropriate difference. The psychological strength of ritual lies partly in its capacity to make shared meanings and relationships experientially real; that same strength deserves careful stewardship.
For clinicians, ritual should be understood before it is interpreted. A culturally normal practice deserves the same contextual respect as language, family structure, moral tradition, and community identity. When clinical symptoms are present, assessment should identify the symptom process precisely rather than treating religious content as diagnostic evidence.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why are religious rituals psychologically powerful?
They combine patterned action with meaning. Repetition and sequence can organize attention and expectation; symbols connect the act to a larger narrative; embodiment makes values and commitments physically enacted; and collective participation can create shared attention, synchrony, identity, and belonging. The balance among these mechanisms differs across rituals and traditions.
Can religious rituals reduce anxiety?
Sometimes. Field and laboratory studies provide evidence that ritualized action can reduce subjective or physiological anxiety in some settings, but effects are not universal and the mechanism is not fully settled. Lang et al., 2020; Lang et al., 2022. A valued ritual can be a coping resource without functioning as a substitute for evidence-based treatment when a clinical anxiety disorder is present.
Do collective rituals increase social bonding?
Often, and this is one of the stronger areas of ritual research. Experimental work on synchrony and naturalistic studies of religious gatherings link coordinated participation with bonding, positive affect, prosociality, or shared identity. Mogan et al., 2017; Charles et al., 2026. The magnitude and meaning of the effect depend on the group, ritual, and context.
Are rituals irrational because they are repetitive or symbolically structured?
That conclusion does not follow from psychological evidence. Repetition and symbolism are common ways humans organize memory, identity, social coordination, values, and emotionally significant events. Psychology describes the cognitive, emotional, developmental, and social processes involved; the religious significance of the practice is understood within its tradition.
Is a religious ritual the same as an OCD compulsion?
No. Repetition alone does not make a practice compulsive. OCD involves obsessions and/or compulsions that are experienced as difficult to control and can become time-consuming, distressing, or impairing. National Institute of Mental Health. Religious and moral themes can appear in OCD, but diagnosis requires clinical context. See Scrupulosity OCD for the dedicated clinical article.
Do religious rituals have the same psychological effects across religions and cultures?
No single effect should be assumed across traditions. Some mechanisms—predictability, synchrony, social identity, cultural learning—may be broadly human, while their expression and significance vary with theology, ritual form, social organization, local culture, age, personal history, and degree of participation. Cross-cultural evidence expands the map; it does not erase differences.
Can psychology determine whether a sacred ritual is spiritually effective?
Psychology can measure human outcomes such as emotion, attention, memory, behavior, social bonding, stress physiology, and self-reported meaning. Sacred efficacy is interpreted within religious and theological frameworks. Keeping these domains clear allows rigorous psychological research and full respect for religious belief.
Related Articles
Scrupulosity OCD: What Is It? Religious Obsessions, Moral Fear, Rituals, Guilt, and Treatment — the clinical boundary article for religious and moral obsessions, compulsions, reassurance seeking, and treatment.
References
Alnabulsi, H., & Drury, J. (2014). Social identification moderates the effect of crowd density on safety at the Hajj. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(25), 9091–9096. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1404953111
Alnabulsi, H., Drury, J., Vignoles, V. L., & Oogink, S. (2020). Understanding the impact of the Hajj: Explaining experiences of self-change at a religious mass gathering. European Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 292–308. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2623
American Psychological Association. (2013). APA Handbook of Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. https://www.apa.org/pubs/books/4311506
Brooks, A. W., Schroeder, J., Risen, J. L., Gino, F., Galinsky, A. D., Norton, M. I., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2024). Retraction notice to “Don’t stop believing: Rituals improve performance by decreasing anxiety.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 185, 104377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104377
Charles, S. J., van Mulukom, V., Brown, J. E., Watts, F., Dunbar, R. I. M., & Farias, M. (2021). United on Sunday: The effects of secular rituals on social bonding and affect. PLOS ONE, 16(1), e0242546. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242546
Charles, S. J., van Mulukom, V., Dunbar, R., Brown, J. E., Delmonte, R., Maraldi, E., Turner, L., Watts, F., Watts, J., & Farias, M. (2026). Religious rituals in the United Kingdom and Brazil are associated with increased social bonding and pain threshold. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 293(2073), 20261174. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2026.1174
Emmons, R. A., & Paloutzian, R. F. (2003). The psychology of religion. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 377–402. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145024
Gelfand, M. J., Caluori, N., Jackson, J. C., & Taylor, M. K. (2020). The cultural evolutionary trade-off of ritualistic synchrony. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375(1805), 20190432. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0432
Hobson, N. M., Schroeder, J., Risen, J. L., Xygalatas, D., & Inzlicht, M. (2018). The psychology of rituals: An integrative review and process-based framework. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(3), 260–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868317734944
Kapitány, R., & Nielsen, M. (2015). Adopting the ritual stance: The role of opacity and context in ritual and everyday actions. Cognition, 145, 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.08.002
Karl, J. A., & Fischer, R. (2018). Rituals, repetitiveness and cognitive load: A competitive test of ritual benefits for stress. Human Nature, 29(4), 418–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-018-9325-3
Lang, M., Krátký, J., Shaver, J. H., Jerotijević, D., & Xygalatas, D. (2015). Effects of anxiety on spontaneous ritualized behavior. Current Biology, 25(14), 1892–1897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.05.049
Lang, M., Krátký, J., & Xygalatas, D. (2020). The role of ritual behaviour in anxiety reduction: An investigation of Marathi religious practices in Mauritius. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375(1805), 20190431. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0431
Lang, M., Krátký, J., & Xygalatas, D. (2022). Effects of predictable behavioral patterns on anxiety dynamics. Scientific Reports, 12, 19240. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-23885-4
Mogan, R., Fischer, R., & Bulbulia, J. A. (2017). To be in synchrony or not? A meta-analysis of synchrony’s effects on behavior, perception, cognition and affect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 72, 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.03.009
National Institute of Mental Health. (n.d.). Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/obsessive-compulsive-disorder-ocd
Watson-Jones, R. E., & Legare, C. H. (2016). The social functions of group rituals. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(1), 42–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721415618486
Wilks, M., Kapitány, R., & Nielsen, M. (2016). Preschool children’s learning proclivities: When the ritual stance trumps the instrumental stance. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 34(3), 402–414. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12139
Xygalatas, D., Lang, M., Maňo, P., Krátký, J., & Fischer, R. (2024). Emotional contagion in a collective ritual. American Journal of Human Biology, 36(12), e24111. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajhb.24111
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
Yaden, D. B. (2020). The psychology of religious rituals and practices. In Religion, Spirituality and Health: A Social Scientific Approach (pp. 17–30). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27953-0_2