Search

Supernatural fears, although common, are not as well-understood as natural fears and phobias (e.g., social, blood, and animal phobias) which are prepared by evolution, such that they are easily acquired through direct experience and relatively immune to cognitive mediation. In contrast, supernatural fears do not involve direct experience but seem to be related to sensory or cognitive biases in the interpretation of stimuli as well as culturally driven cognitions and beliefs. In this multidisciplinary synthesis and collaborative review, we claim that supernatural beliefs are “super natural.” That is, they occur spontaneously and are easy to acquire, possibly because such beliefs rest on intuitive concepts such as mind-body dualism and animism, and may inspire fear in believers as well as non-believers. As suggested by psychological and neuroscientific evidence, they tap into an evolutionarily prepared fear of potential impending dangers or unknown objects and have their roots in “prepared fears” as well as “cognitively prepared beliefs,” making fear of supernatural agents a fruitful research avenue for social, anthropological, and psychological inquires.

In most religious traditions, there exists the conception that human beings can lose their freedom of will to an invading consciousness. We argue that possession myths emerge from evolved mental architecture and reflect a constellation of deep-seated beliefs about cognition, consciousness, and mind−body dualism. We also consider why possession is almost always considered frightening and aversive, thus explaining why the horror genre, and audiovisual horror in particular, has embraced the trope of possession. We analyze how possession works in 2 examples: The Exorcist (Blatty & Friedkin, 1973) and Supernatural (Kripke et al., 2005–2020). Finally, we conclude by briefly discussing the possibility that possession mythology represents an interesting test case for examining the origins of culture in general. Culture, as others have also suggested, exists first as an outgrowth of human psychological faculties but can then come to exert top-down causal influence on those same faculties.

The present thought-provoking conversation engages two accomplished scholars of horror, Darryl Jones and Mathias Clasen, on the multimedia history of horror through their disciplinary viewpoints, respectively, literary studies and the cognitive sciences. Following the publication of their most recent books on the topic (Jones 2018; Clasen 2017), the main theme discussed herein is the possibility of creating an interdisciplinary bridge, and, possibly, developing a cross-disciplinary integration between different scholarly strategies. Other themes considered include: consilience and coexistence between humanistic and scientific approaches; potential intradisciplinary issues around the establishment of an interdisciplinary dialogue; the differential heuristic gains of qualitative analyses through different disciplinary toolboxes; the existence of a bewildering historical array of theories explaining the appeal of horror as a genre and a collection of tropes; the thematic interconnection between horror and religion. The conversation also includes a series of artistic and scholarly suggestions to further explore the topics debated. The present thought-provoking conversation engages two accomplished scholars of horror, Darryl Jones and Mathias Clasen, on the multimedia history of horror through their disciplinary viewpoints, respectively, literary studies and the cognitive sciences. Following the publication of their most recent books on the topic (Jones 2018; Clasen 2017), the main theme discussed herein is the possibility of creating an interdisciplinary bridge, and, possibly, developing a cross-disciplinary integration between different scholarly strategies. Other themes considered include: consilience and coexistence between humanistic and scientific approaches; potential intradisciplinary issues around the establishment of an interdisciplinary dialogue; the differential heuristic gains of qualitative analyses through different disciplinary toolboxes; the existence of a bewildering historical array of theories explaining the appeal of horror as a genre and a collection of tropes; the thematic interconnection between horror and religion. The conversation also includes a series of artistic and scholarly suggestions to further explore the topics debated.

Darryl Jones, Sleeping with the Lights On: The Unsettling Story of Horror (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), xii + 181 pp. £10.99/$16.95. ISBN 978-0-19882-648-4.

Films about chainsaw killers, demonic possession, and ghostly intruders. Screaming audiences with sleepless nights or sweat-drenched nightmares in their immediate future. What’s going on here? Presumably, almost everybody has experience with horror films. Almost everybody has sat through a terrifying motion picture and suffered the aftereffects, such as hypervigilance and sleep disturbances. Some people would even characterize themselves as horror fans. But what about the others—the ones who are curious about horror films, but also very, very nervous about them? This book delves into the science of horror cinema in an attempt to address common concerns about the genre. Why is the jump scare so effective and so dreaded? What are the effects of horror films on mental and physical health? Why do horror films so often cause nightmares? Aren’t horror films immoral . . . and stupid, too? Are horror films bad for children and adolescents? What does the current profusion of horror films say about our society? Should we be concerned? Or can horror films be a force for good—do horror films have health benefits, can they be aesthetically and morally valuable, and might they even have therapeutic psychological and cultural effects? The book addresses these questions in short, readable chapters, peppered with vivid anecdotes and examples and supported by scientific findings. It notes that while horror films can have negative effects, they can also help people confront and manage fear.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused widespread social disruption and lockdowns, with negative consequences for psychological wellbeing worldwide. We argue that mental simulation, through the cognitive capacity of imagination and its instigator fiction, may have substantial positive contributions to psychological wellbeing during the pandemic. We review relevant research on the evolutionary functions of simulation through imagination and fiction, and propose that simulation is a tool to support (i) planning and future thought, (ii) coping and emotion regulation, (iii) bonding and social needs, and (iv) identity and worldviews. We suggest that these functions can contribute to coping during the pandemic. We also address the dark side of simulation, whereby excessive simulation may have negative effects such as rumination. In light of previous research and the negative psychological effects of COVID-19 disruptions and lockdowns, we suggest that there is much scope for future research on this topic, including whether simulations offered by imaginative activity could be useful and inexpensive mental health tools.

Evolutionary or biocultural theorizing about horror films has been slow to gain traction in film studies, but the field has seen two recent book publications, Mastering Fear by Rikke Schubart and Primal Roots of Horror Cinema by Carrol L. Fry. Unfortunately, neither book is poised to make a substantial impact on evolutionary horror film theory. Mastering Fear ultimately undermines its own engagement with evolutionary social science, and Primal Roots of Horror Cinema stops short of contributing substantially to the field beyond its compelling argument for the relevance of evolutionary social science to film studies. Plenty of work remains to be done at the fertile junction between evolutionary psychology and horror film.

Why are people attracted to scary entertainment, to stories and leisure activities designed to evoke negative emotion? How does such entertainment work, and why does it work? Why do we respond with genuine fear to flickering light on a screen? Why do our stories brim with danger and horror and monsters, sometimes far-fetched and utterly implausible monsters? The culmination of that research, so far, is my 2017 monograph Why Horror Seduces. In this article, I will introduce that work, which is the first book-length study of horror from an evolutionary perspective. After a brief introduction to the subject matter, I explain the main theoretical assumptions of the book. I then give a few examples of evolutionary horror theory in analytical and interpretative practice and offer some considerations on the adaptive function of horror. Finally, I reflect on the challenges and benefits of interdisciplinary work and point the way toward future studies.

This article introduces student readers to the realm of the interdisciplinary, with a primary focus on the humanities. We first introduce interdisciplinarity and other related terms as concepts. We then present eight specific examples, on which we illustrate interdisciplinary research. Finally, we address the question of when one should be interdisciplinary.

We investigate approaches to horror entertainment from two common consumer stances: ‘the thrill-seeking stance’ in which adrenaline junkies seek maximal fear arousal and ‘the fear-avoidance stance’ in which so-called white-knucklers seek minimal fear arousal. Visitors of a haunted house attraction (n = 280) were invited to focus on either maximizing or minimizing their fear. Open-ended participant interviews and questionnaire data were used to map how adrenaline junkies and white-knucklers regulate fear, and also how reported fear experience and consumer satisfaction compare across the two groups. A host of antecedent and response-focused strategies, including cognitive, behavioral, and social strategies, were used to up- and down-regulate fear arousal. Notably, the results reveal hitherto uncharted strategies employed by adrenaline junkies to support and maximize their fear experience. Although adrenaline junkies report stronger fear experiences than white-knucklers, consumer satisfaction remains relatively similar across the two groups, indicating that both stances can lead to satisfying consumer experiences. The study thus helps explain the paradoxical appeal of frightening entertainment by illuminating how consumers deliberately up- and down-regulate fear arousal in pursuit of the optimal experience. We investigate approaches to horror entertainment from two common consumer stances: ‘the thrill-seeking stance’ in which adrenaline junkies seek maximal fear arousal and ‘the fear-avoidance stance’ in which so-called white-knucklers seek minimal fear arousal. Visitors of a haunted house attraction (n = 280) were invited to focus on either maximizing or minimizing their fear. Open-ended participant interviews and questionnaire data were used to map how adrenaline junkies and white-knucklers regulate fear, and also how reported fear experience and consumer satisfaction compare across the two groups. A host of antecedent and response-focused strategies, including cognitive, behavioral, and social strategies, were used to up- and down-regulate fear arousal. Notably, the results reveal hitherto uncharted strategies employed by adrenaline junkies to support and maximize their fear experience. Although adrenaline junkies report stronger fear experiences than white-knucklers, consumer satisfaction remains relatively similar across the two groups, indicating that both stances can lead to satisfying consumer experiences. The study thus helps explain the paradoxical appeal of frightening entertainment by illuminating how consumers deliberately up- and down-regulate fear arousal in pursuit of the optimal experience.

The audience for horror films is more diverse than many people seem to assume. The genre appeals to women and men, young and old, thrill seekers and neurotics alike. The horror genre is also more popular than many might assume, with hundreds of horror movies being produced in the United States each year, and an increase in horror movie production in recent decades. When people seek out horror movies, they desire emotional stimulation, and the fear elicited by a horror movie is a main attraction, not an unfortunate byproduct. The threat simulation theory of horror argues that people have safe, vicarious experiences with dangerous scenarios through scary fiction. This adaptive function of horror explains the paradoxical appeal of the genre.

Some people are nervous about the psychological effects of horror films, and researchers have demonstrated both short- and long-term negative psychological effects of such films, including mild behavioral disturbances and sleep disturbances such as nightmares. However, most documented cases of cinematic neurosis involve individuals with preexisting mental problems. The mild fright reactions produced by horror movies are not only widespread, but predictable and generally harmless. Both troubling images and disturbing ideas can produce such reactions. However, horror film–induced fear is crucial to the pleasure many people derive from horror, and there may even be positive psychological and social effects of horror movie watching, such as mood improvement, bonding with co-viewers, and improved coping skills.

Media psychologists have documented negative psychological effects of premature exposure to horror films in children, and many have expressed concerns over children’s viewing of scary films. However, while childhood is a time of fears fantastical and realistic, children are naturally curious about monsters and scary stories, and they are better at distinguishing between fantasy and reality than has been assumed. Moreover, the subgenre of children’s horror films provides appropriate fare for children, and may have positive effects such as teaching children coping strategies and media literacy. In addition, mildly scary media may have an inoculating effect on children, helping them to master their own fear.

The effects of horror movies on physical health have received little scientific attention, but there are anecdotal reports of people getting hurt and even dying as a result of horror exposure. Such cases, however, are extremely rare and usually poorly documented. While it is possible to die from fright, the odds of dying from fright induced by a horror movie are not worth worrying about. A little research has investigated potential health benefits of horror exposure. Some research suggests that horror movies may have metabolic benefits, and researchers have found that watching horror movies can increase white blood cell production and blood coagulant, but more research is needed. Indirect evidence does suggest that watching horror movies may increase self-perceived physical health or well-being.

Some people may be concerned that the explosion in horror movie production is a symptom of a sick society, but that is not the case. Not only is movie production in general increasing, but horror movies specifically fulfill an important function of addressing widespread, topical anxieties. Horror movies work on two levels: a literal and a metaphorical level. On the literal level, the horror movie induces fear and anxiety through primitive cues that might frighten a monkey, but on the metaphorical level, it can address more abstract worries such as concerns over conformity or racism or other aspects of cultural context. Moreover, horror movies seem to thrive in periods of cultural and social unrest. Horror films are not just symptoms of cultural unrest, however, but may also be a cure for pervasive sociocultural anxieties—a means for people to cope with a scary world.

If a nervous person wants to watch a horror movie, there are several pieces of science-based advice that may help make the experience as pleasant as possible, such as watching with others, watching at home, and keeping the sound at a reasonable level. Moreover, certain coping strategies can help to adjust psychological distance, thus decreasing immersion and fright response. At the same time, increasing psychological distance allows for an aesthetic form of engagement with horror, which comes with its own peculiar pleasure. The trick is to find a horror movie that hits the viewer’s sweet spot in terms of scariness, and to maximize the odds of having a fun and constructive experience.

The horror genre has historically been the focus of several moral panics, most recently revolving around films in the “torture porn” subgenre, and before that around “video nasties,” rape-revenge films, and splatter movies. However, there is no research to support a concern that horror fans are immoral or that horror films make people unempathetic or sadistic. Horror films are more morally complex than many critics have assumed, and the relationship between horror films and moral psychology is also more complex than critics have assumed. Studies have also shown that horror films may actually be associated with a decrease in real-world violence. Moreover, horror films (with their roots in cautionary tales) are often moralizing, but their effects on viewers’ moral compasses may be limited.

The horror genre has traditionally struggled with an image problem, with horror films being seen as unintelligent, aesthetically uninteresting, and perhaps even morally problematic. This genre stigma has historically been extended to horror fans, who may worry about a lack of cultural capital. Horror movies rarely receive prestigious critical accolades, and the academic study of horror only emerged toward the end of the twentieth century. In recent years, an emergence of ambitious and genre convention-challenging horror movies has prompted some critics to talk about a horror renaissance or even the birth of “post-horror” or “elevated horror.” However, horror films have always had the capacity for engaging with serious themes in an artistic way, and there is often a discrepancy between critics’ evaluations of horror films and audiences’ evaluations. The genre stigma seems to be abating, but some horror fans may still worry about looking stupid—especially if they startle easily.

Why do people seek out frightening leisure activities such as horror films and haunted attractions, and does the experience benefit them in any way? In this article, we address these questions through two separate studies. In Study 1, we asked American horror fans (n = 256) why they like horror and identified three overall types of horror fans which we term “Adrenaline Junkies,” “White Knucklers,” and “Dark Copers.” In Study 2, we collected data from Danish visitors at a haunted house attraction (n = 258) and replicated the findings from Study 1 by finding the same three types of horror fans. Furthermore, we show that these three types of horror fans report distinct benefits from horror experiences. Adrenaline Junkies reported immediate enjoyment, White Knucklers reported personal growth, and Dark Copers reported both. These results suggest that frightening leisure activities are not only an outlet for sensation- seeking, and that the allure of horror may have as much to do with learning and personal growth as it has with high-arousal fun. Why do people seek out frightening leisure activities such as horror films and haunted attractions, and does the experience benefit them in any way? In this article, we address these questions through two separate studies. In Study 1, we asked American horror fans (n = 256) why they like horror and identified three overall types of horror fans, which we term Adrenaline Junkies, White Knucklers, and Dark Copers. In Study 2, we collected data from Danish visitors at a haunted house attraction (n = 258) and replicated the findings from Study 1 by finding the same three types of horror fans. Furthermore, we show that these three types of horror fans report distinct benefits from horror experiences. Adrenaline Junkies reported immediate enjoyment, White Knucklers reported personal growth, and Dark Copers reported both. These results suggest that frightening leisure activities are not only an outlet for sensation-seeking, and that the allure of horror may have as much to do with learning and personal growth as it has with high-arousal fun.

Haunted attractions are illustrative examples of recreational fear in which people voluntarily seek out frightening experiences in pursuit of enjoyment. We present findings from a field study at a haunted-house attraction where visitors between the ages of 12 and 57 years ( N = 110) were equipped with heart rate monitors, video-recorded at peak scare points during the attraction, and asked to report on their experience. Our results show that enjoyment has an inverted-U-shaped relationship with fear across repeated self-reported measures. Moreover, results from physiological data demonstrate that the experience of being frightened is a linear function of large-scale heart rate fluctuations, whereas there is an inverted-U-shaped relationship between participant enjoyment and small-scale heart rate fluctuations. These results suggest that enjoyment is related to forms of arousal dynamics that are “just right.” These findings shed light on how fear and enjoyment can coexist in recreational horror.

Horror entertainment is a thriving and paradoxical industry. Who are the consumers of horror, and why do they seek out frightening media? We provide support for the threat simulation theory of horror, according to which horror media provides a form of benign masochism that offers negative emotional stimulation through simulation of threat scenarios. Through an online survey of genre use and preference as well as personality traits and paranormal beliefs (n=1070), we find that sensation seeking and the fifth of the Big-Five factors, intellect/imagination, predict liking of horror and frequency of use. Gender, educational level, and age are also correlated with horror liking and frequency of use (males show higher liking and more frequent use, whereas liking and use frequency are negatively correlated with educational level and age). People with stronger beliefs in the paranormal tend to seek out horror media with supernatural content, whereas those with weaker beliefs in the paranormal gravitate toward horror media with natural content, suggesting that people seek out horror media with threatening stimuli that they perceive to be plausible. While frightening media may be initially aversive, people high in sensation seeking and intellect/imagination, in particular, like intellectual stimulation and challenge and expect not just negative but also positive emotions from horror consumption. They brave the initially aversive response to simulate threats and so enter a positive feedback loop by which they attain adaptive mastery through coping with virtual simulated danger.

One explanation for why people engage in frightening fictional experiences is that these experiences can act as simulations of actual experiences from which individuals can gather information and model possible worlds. Conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study (n = 310) tested whether past and current engagement with thematically relevant media fictions, including horror and pandemic films, was associated with greater preparedness for and psychological resilience toward the pandemic. Since morbid curiosity has previously been associated with horror media use during the COVID-19 pandemic, we also tested whether trait morbid curiosity was associated with pandemic preparedness and psychological resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that fans of horror films exhibited greater resilience during the pandemic and that fans of “prepper” genres (alien-invasion, apocalyptic, and zombie films) exhibited both greater resilience and preparedness. We also found that trait morbid curiosity was associated with positive resilience and interest in pandemic films during the pandemic. Taken together, these results are consistent with the hypothesis that exposure to frightening fictions allow audiences to practice effective coping strategies that can be beneficial in real-world situations., Highlights • Fans of horror films exhibit less psychological distress during COVID-19. • Fans of “prepper” films reported being more prepared for the pandemic. • Morbidly curious people exhibit greater positive resilience during COVID-19. • Morbidly curious people are more interested in pandemic films during the pandemic.

How far has the Darwinian revolution come? To what extent have evolutionary ideas penetrated into the social sciences and humanities? Are the “science wars” over? Or do whole blocs of disciplines face off over an unbridgeable epistemic gap? To answer questions like these, contributors to top journals in 22 disciplines were surveyed on their beliefs about human nature, culture, and science. More than 600 respondents completed the survey. Scoring patterns divided into two main sets of disciplines. Genetic influences were emphasized in the evolutionary social sciences, evolutionary humanities, psychology, empirical study of the arts, philosophy, economics, and political science. Environmental influences were emphasized in most of the humanities disciplines and in anthropology, sociology, education, and women’s or gender studies. Confidence in scientific explanation correlated positively with emphasizing genetic influences on behavior, and negatively with emphasizing environmental influences. Knowing the current actual landscape of belief should help scholars avoid sterile debates and ease the way toward fruitful collaborations with neighboring disciplines. Keywords: human nature, culture, science, science wars, cultural construction, evolutionary social science, social science, humanities, biocultural theory

The bestselling author Stephen King is famous for his scary stories. He has terrified and delighted millions of readers with his horror fiction, but he continues to face indifference or even hostility from parts of the critical establishment, predominantly because of the stigma associated with the horror genre. However, I argue from the perspective of evolutionary literary theory that the horror genre fulfills an important psychological function as threat simulation. King is temperamentally drawn to dark subject matter, and he uses this subject matter to investigate the complexities of human nature and the social world. Through interpretive analysis of two of King’s most famous novels, Pet Sematary (1983) and It (1986), I argue that King uses the elements of horror not just to provide threat simulations for his readers, but also to give readers psychological, social, and moral insight through imaginative simulation.

Why would anyone want to play a game designed to scare them? We argue that an alliance between evolutionary theory and game studies can shed light on the forms and psychological functions of horror video games. Horror games invite players to simulate prototypical fear scenarios of uncertainty and danger. These scenarios challenge players to adaptively assess and negotiate their dangers. While horror games thereby instil negative emotion, they also entice players with stimulating challenges of fearful coping. Players who brave these challenges expand their emotional and behavioural repertoire and experience a sense of mastery, explaining the genre’s paradoxical appeal. We end by illustrating our evolutionary approach through an in-depth analysis of Playdead’s puzzle-horror game Limbo.

The slasher film, which depicts teenagers stalked by homicidal maniacs, has been experiencing waves of intense popularity since the late 1970s. In explaining the paradoxical appeal of such films, we argue that an integrative analytical framework is required. Such a framework pays attention to the evolved psychological dispositions brought into play by slasher films, to the sociocultural context that such films may reflect, and to the film-industrial factors that make such films particularly attractive from a production point of view. We discuss the entire history of modern slasher films but take John Carpenter’s famous slasher Halloween (1978) as out analytical focus. Our claim is that a multi-level analytical framework guided by biocultural theory is necessary to making sense of the slasher film.

Post-apocalyptic fiction taps into the deepest springs of ancient and evolved emotions, but it found in modernity a particularly hospitable cultural ecology and a particularly receptive audience. Focusing on post-apocalyptic English language science fiction and horror literature of the Cold War era, I argue that a biocultural analytical framework is indispensable to making sense of this type of fiction. Post-apocalyptic stories function as a mental testing-ground where readers can cognitively and emotionally model the experience of living through the worst, and the genre prompts readers to reflect on the meaning of an existence that is always subject to radical change.

Paradoxically, villainous characters in film, literature, and video games can be very popular. Previous research in the traditions of cognitive media theory and affective disposition theory has assumed that villainous characters can inspire positive engagement only when audiences discount the villains’ immorality by focusing on positive traits or mitigating circumstances. Challenging this assumption, we argue that audiences with a conventionally immoral personality profile may come to engage positively with villainous characters because they share the villains’ immoral outlook to some significant degree. We find robust support for this hypothesis in a North American sample (N = 1805) by comparing respondents’ survey scores on the Dark Triad of personality traits (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) with their professed degrees of villain sympathy, identification, fascination, empathy, and enjoyment. We reject a competing hypothesis that such positive forms of engagement with villainous characters will be best predicted by respondents’ agentic values, such as autonomy and competence. Our results support a need to consider personality as a basic determinant of character preferences.

Biocultural theory is an integrative research program designed to investigate the causal interactions between biological adaptations and cultural constructions. From the biocultural perspective, cultural processes are rooted in the biological necessities of the human life cycle: specifically human forms of birth, growth, survival, mating, parenting, and sociality. Conversely, from the biocultural perspective, human biological processes are constrained, organized, and developed by culture, which includes technology, culturally specific socioeconomic and political structures, religious and ideological beliefs, and artistic practices such as music, dance, painting, and storytelling. Establishing biocultural theory as a program that self-consciously encompasses the different particular forms of human evolutionary research could help scholars and scientists envision their own specialized areas of research as contributions to a coherent, collective research program. This article argues that a mature biocultural paradigm needs to be informed by at least 7 major research clusters: (a) gene-culture coevolution; (b) human life history theory; (c) evolutionary social psychology; (d) anthropological research on contemporary hunter-gatherers; (e) biocultural socioeconomic and political history; (f) evolutionary aesthetics; and (g) biocultural research in the humanities (religions, ideologies, the history of ideas, and the arts). This article explains the way these research clusters are integrated in biocultural theory, evaluates the level of development in each cluster, and locates current biocultural theory within the historical trajectory of the social sciences and the humanities. Biocultural theory is an integrative research program designed to investigate the causal interactions between biological adaptations and cultural constructions. From the biocultural perspective, cultural processes are rooted in the biological necessities of the human life cycle: specifically human forms of birth, growth, survival, mating, parenting, and sociality. Conversely, from the biocultural perspective, human biological processes are constrained, organized, and developed by culture, which includes technology, culturally specific socioeconomic and political structures, religious and ideological beliefs, and artistic practices such as music, dance, painting, and storytelling. Establishing biocultural theory as a program that self-consciously encompasses the different particular forms of human evolutionary research could help scholars and scientists envision their own specialized areas of research as contributions to a coherent, collective research program. This article argues that a mature biocultural paradigm needs to be informed by at least 7 major research clusters: (a) gene-culture coevolution; (b) human life history theory; (c) evolutionary social psychology; (d) anthropological research on contemporary hunter-gatherers; (e) biocultural socioeconomic and political history; (f) evolutionary aesthetics; and (g) biocultural research in the humanities (religions, ideologies, the history of ideas, and the arts). This article explains the way these research clusters are integrated in biocultural theory, evaluates the level of development in each cluster, and locates current biocultural theory within the historical trajectory of the social sciences and the humanities.

Tror danskerne pa spogelser? Tror de at kon er en social konstruktion? Tror de pa UFO’er og horoskoper? Mener de at videnskaben kan forklare vores oplevelse af skonhed? Er kvinder mere overtroiske end maend? Tror de mere pa intuition? Og er danskerne mere eller mindre overtroiske end folk i andre lande? Denne rapport er lavet pa baggrund af en stor sporgeskemaundersogelse som er gennemfort i 2017-2018. Vi satte os for at kortlaegge danskernes tro og overbevisning fordi der mangler viden pa dette felt. Empirisk viden om befolkningens tro og overbevisning er vaesentlig i et demokratisk samfund, ikke mindst i en tid hvor fake news og udsagn om det ’post-faktuelle’ og fakta-resistente samfund spiller en vaesentlig rolle i den offentlige debat. Kritisk taenkning og videnskabelig oplysning er nodvendige midler i kampen mod misinformation og konspirationsteorier. Eksempelvis spillede diskussionen om voldsomme bivirkninger af HPV-vaccinen mod livmoderhalskraeft en vaesentlig rolle i den offentlige debat i 2015 og fremefter. Diskussionen blev isaer affodt af en dokumentarudsendelse, ’De vaccinerede piger’, som blev sendt pa TV2 i marts 2015 og som modte betragtelig videnskabelig kritik for manglende evidens. Selvom der stadig ikke foreligger videnskabelig evidens for bivirkninger af den slags der er blevet fremfort af HPV- skeptikere, er resultatet af denne diskussion et markant fald i udbredelsen af vaccinen blandt danske piger. Blandt piger fodt i 2003 har 26% modtaget HPV-vaccine i Danmark. Til sammenligning er tallet i Sverige 73% og i Norge 84%. Den offentlige diskussion om HPV-vaccine og eventuelle bivirkninger illustrerer nodvendigheden af videnskabelig dannelse og oplysning i et demokratisk samfund hvor borgerne skal vaere i stand til at traeffe beslutninger pa baggrund af solid evidens og ikke bare anekdoter og mavefornemmelser. For at kortlaegge danskernes overbevisninger inden for en raekke udvalgte omrader, fra overtro til videnskabelig overbevisning, konstruerede vi et sporgeskema som blev distribueret via sociale medier. Flere end 2.200 personer besvarede undersogelsen. I det folgende praesenterer og diskuterer vi de vaesentligste resultater.

Recent advances in the sciences of human nature, such as evolutionarypsychology, the cognitive science of religion, and cognitive and affectiveneuroscience, corroborate key aspects of Lovecraft’s poetics of horror asdelineated in Supernatural Horror in Literature, including his claim about anatural basis for the appeal of horror stories and his claim that people arebiologically susceptible to superstitious fear. Horror and weird stories depend onancient, evolved mechanisms in human nature, as Lovecraft claimed, andbecause of recent scientific advances, we are now in a position to chart thesemechanisms and explain their evolutionary history as well as their relevance tothe academic study of horror and weird fiction.

Evolutionary horror study is an emerging research field that uses as its theoretical foundation the sciences of human nature. Evolutionary horror scholars claim that we can understand horror fiction as a cultural technology that works by tapping into ancient, defensive psychological mechanisms to satisfy an adaptive appetite for vicarious experience with threat scenarios. The genre elicits negative emotions ranging from disgust to terror, usually via the representation of fictional monsters that engage the evolved fear system by mimicking cues of threat. Immersion in a fictional world of horror is rewarding because it serves the adaptive functions of emotional, moral, and cognitive calibration. Although evolutionary horror study is growing in visibility and productivity, it is an emerging enterprise in need of much theoretical and interpretative work.