4.3 Article

Effects of Extreme Ritual Practices on Psychophysiological Well-Being

Journal

CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 60, Issue 5, Pages 699-707

Publisher

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/705665

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Interacting Minds Centre at Aarhus University, Denmark
  2. LEVYNA Laboratory for the Experimental Research of Religion at Masaryk University, Czech Republic
  3. Medical School of the University of Exeter, United Kingdom
  4. University of Connecticut Humanities Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Extreme ritual practices involving pain and suffering pose significant risks such as injury, trauma, or infection. Nonetheless, they are performed by millions of people around the world and are often culturally prescribed remedies for a variety of maladies, and especially those related to mental health. What is the actual impact of these practices on health? Combining ethnographic observations and psychophysiological monitoring, we investigated outcomes of participation in one of the world's most extreme rituals, involving bodily mutilation and prolonged suffering. Performance of this physically demanding ordeal had no detrimental effects on physiological health and was associated with subjective health improvements, and these improvements were greater for those who engaged in more intense forms of participation. Moreover, individuals who experienced health problems and/or were of low socioeconomic status sought more painful levels of engagement. We suggest two potential mechanisms for these effects: a bottom-up process triggered by neurological responses to pain and a top-down process related to increased social support and self-enhancement. These mechanisms may buffer stress-induced pressures and positively affect quality of life. Our results stress the importance of traditional cultural practices for coping with adversity, especially in contexts where psychiatric or other medical interventions are not widely available.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available