Examining Belief in a Just World,Religious Worldviews,and Self-Esteem Within the Framework of Terror Management Theory: Mortality Salient and Nonmortality Salient Organizations

Abstract

To sustain their lives has always been the main motivation of all the creatures, especially human beings. Just as there is always beginning of life, there is also an end of it for all living species. Human being is the only species that is aware of their mortality. According to terror management theory (TMT), this awareness causes some sort of anxiety. Human being, by their nature, do not want to be worried and want to cope with the anxiety in different ways. This study aims to test belief in a just world, religious worldviews, and self-esteem within the framework of TMT hypotheses in both mortality salient (n = 104) and nonmortality salient (n = 102) organizations. In each organization, half of the participants were reminded about death (experimental condition) and the other half about toothache (control condition). The required data for this study were collected by utilizing Life Satisfaction Scale, The Multidimensional Mortality Awareness Measure, Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, Belief in a Just World Scale, Self-Esteem Scale, Religious Worldviews Scale, and personal information form. Results indicated that there are no significant differences for self-esteem and religious worldviews between mortality salient and nonmortality salient samples, whereas there are significant mean differences for personal/general belief in a just world. The findings of this study are discussed within the framework of TMT literature.

Keywords

just world self-esteem religion terror management mortality

Everything in life makes sense by its contrast: black with white, night with day, bad with good, and so on. The same is also valid for life and death. As everything has its contrast, living and dying must be present simultaneously (Bulut, 2020). Regardless of their sociodemographic features, all human beings have the beginning and end of their lives. Among all living beings, only human beings are aware of the end of their lives, in other words, their mortality. Life is very attractive to people. That is why they do not want to die. When people think about death, they get worried and they do not want to leave their relatives, families, and loved ones; to lose their properties and careers; and to suffer psychologically and physiologically.

There are different practices about death and dying process in various countries and cultures. Depending on religious beliefs and worldviews, some people accept death as salvation and the others as an end or an anxious situation. In Turkey, some people believe that death is the end of life, while others believe that there exists another life after death which is the real and just/fair life. In addition to different beliefs about after death life, there are also different practices for the dead body. In some countries, it is buried; in others, it is burned, and in some, it is mummified. In Turkey, the common practice is burying. What happens after dying in Turkey can be described as follows: It was announced from the mosque to his or her relatives, friends, and so on, that the individual is dead; the dead body is washed; it is enshrouded in a white cotton or linen cloth; funeral prayer is made in front of mosques; the body is removed from coffin and buried with shroud; the face of the dead is positioned in the grave facing the Qibla (i.e., between south and south-east).

It is clearly stated in the Qur’an that death has an important place in the lives of Muslims and it can occur anywhere and anytime. There are many verses related to death in the Quran. For instance, “After that, at length ye will die” (The Believers/15); “We granted not to any man before thee permanent life (here): if then thou shouldst die, would they live permanently?” “Every soul shall have a taste of death: and We test you by evil and by good by way of trial. To Us must ye return” (The Prophets/34,35); “And Allah sends down rain from the skies, and gives therewith life to the earth after its death: verily in this is a Sign for those who listen.”
It is Allah Who creates you and takes your souls at death; and of you there are some who are sent back to a feeble age, so that they know nothing after having known (much): for Allah is All-Knowing, All-Powerful. (The Bee/65,70)
“Truly thou wilt die (one day), and truly they (too) will die (one day)” (The Companies/30).
Of no effect is the repentance of those who continue to do evil, until death faces one of them, and he says, “Now have I repented indeed;” nor of those who die rejecting Faith: for them have We prepared a punishment most grievous.
“Wherever ye are, death will find you out, even if ye are in towers built up strong and high!” If some good befalls them, they say, “This is from Allah”; but if evil, they say, “This is from thee” (O Prophet). Say: “All things are from Allah.” But what hath come to these people, that they fail to understand a single fact? (Women/18,78).
Verily the knowledge of the Hour is with Allah (alone). It is He Who sends down rain, and He Who knows what is in the wombs. Nor does any one know what it is that he will earn on the morrow: nor does any one know in what land he is to die. Verily with Allah is full knowledge and He is acquainted (with all things). (Luqman/34)
Human beings, by their nature, do not want to be worried and want to buffer anxiety in different ways which is examined by terror management theory (TMT) developed by Greenberg, Pyszczynski, and Solomon in 1980s. The authors benefited from Becker’s ideas in developing this theory (Greenberg, et al., 1986). According to Becker (1973), unlike other living beings, people’s cognitive abilities cause them to become aware of their death.

People have the cognitive ability to imagine the painful and tragic events they may experience in the future and this is the source of possible anxiety. When the individual knows that death can occur any time in future, he or she feels the need of protecting himself/herself from this situation. If the individual does not have a guarantee that he or she will be able to get rid of death, he or she is likely to experience terror (Solomon et al., 1991).

TMT shows that fear, anxiety, or terror experienced by people is related to the accessibility or salience of death-related thoughts rather than directly emotional experiences. As mortality salience increases, the need for symbolic protection provided by the belief in cultural worldviews and self-esteem also increase. It is obvious that death anxiety has a broad impact on human behavior as a result of these processes (Pyszczynski et al., 1999).

This theory is based on two main hypotheses. According to the anxiety buffer hypothesis, if a psychological structure provides protection against anxiety, there will be less tendency of the individual to worry about the threat if this structure is strengthened. Mortality salience hypothesis suggests that if a psychological structure provides protection against anxiety, reminding people of the source of this anxiety will increase the need for this structure. This will result in a positive response to those who support it and negative reactions to those who threaten it (Pyszczynski et al., 1997).

From the 1980s onward, TMT has been the subject of many scientific studies and has evolved over time. As it is clear from the literature, different variables were examined within the framework of this theory. Some of these can be listed as follows: commitment/attachment (Cox et al., 2008; Dalda, 2011; Florian et al., 2002), system justification (Doğulu, 2012), subjective well-being (Şimşek, 2005), consumer behavior (Uğurlar, 2011), creative activity (Arndt et al., 1999), political attitudes/ideology (Burke et al., 2013), charitable behavior (Jonas et al., 2013), meaning of life (Simon et al., 1998; Taubman-Ben-Ari, 2011), stereotypes (Renkema et al., 2008), and aggression (Aksüt-Çiçek, 2008; McGregor et al., 1998).

The results of the studies listed earlier showed inconsistent findings, and thus TMT hypothesis is supported in some of them (Aksüt-Çiçek, 2008; Arndt et al., 1999; Burke et al., 2013; Cox et al., 2008; Dalda, 2011; Florian et al., 2002; Jonas et al., 2013; McGregor et al., 1998; Renkema et al., 2008; Simon et al., 1998; Taubman-Ben-Ari, 2011; Uğurlar, 2011) while it is not supported in others (Doğulu, 2012; Şimşek, 2005).

Some of the other variables are belief in a just world (Bassett & Cate, 2014), self-esteem (Aslıtürk, 2001; Harmon-Jones et al., 1997; Leary, 2004; Schmeichel et al., 2009), and religiosity (Aksüt-Çiçek, 2008; Jonas & Fischer, 2006; Koca-Atabey & Öner-Özkan, 2011; Vess et al., 2009).

In a just world, people get what they deserve. Although people can have a just world belief in different intensity and at different levels, it can be said that a just world belief is natural and inevitable for all the people. In the Western culture, there is a common belief that this world is fair/just. As this world is a fair place, people who are in distress are now being punished for what they have done in the past, for example, violations of laws, rules, and norms (Lerner, 1980).

To feel secure, to have trust, confidence, and hope in the future, people want to believe that the world they live in is a just/fair place (Lerner, 1980; Lerner & Simmons, 1966) which leads to adaptive human functioning (Dalbert, 2001). In other words, it is possible to mention that the just world belief functions as a buffer against external risks. People with belief in a just world think that their good deeds will be rewarded at a specific time in the future (Dalbert & Donat, 2015). A study testing TMT and belief in a just world shows that belief in a just world increases after mortality salience (Bassett & Cate, 2014).

In contrast to Western belief in just a world, most Muslims believe that the world is not a fair place and therefore the judgments are taken by individuals or groups who have some deficiencies. They believe that the just world is in a place after death where the judgments will be taken by the impartial creator, God. The previous studies in the literature show that people in Turkey have a low/medium score in just world beliefs (e.g., Kıral, 2011; Kurtay-Doğan, 2018; Öcel & Aydın, 2010; Sapancı & Bahtiyar, 2018).

It is possible to mention that many religions (i.e., Christianity) support the belief in a just world. The good will be rewarded and the bad will be punished. In this context, many previous studies showed that belief in a just world is positively related to religiosity (e.g., Furnham & Reilly, 1991; Kaplan, 2012; Pargament & Hahn, 1986).

According to TMT, both cultural worldviews and self-esteem play an important role in buffering the anxiety that occurs as a result of the individual being’s awareness of his or her mortality. The cultural worldview of the individual is a series of concepts to understand the world and the place of the individual within the world; a set of standards in which an individual can gain a sense of personal value; and the promise of immortality to those who meet those standards. Religion can also be taken as a cultural worldview. Many theorists believe that one of the most fundamental functions of religion is to help people to overcome their aspirations for the meaning and purpose of life (Cox & Arrowood, 2018; Galek et al., 2015). By interpreting reality and making life meaningful, religion serves as an important series of beliefs about the world (Silberman, 2005). Religion connects people with similar beliefs to each other (Graham & Haidt, 2010). It can be said that the religious worldview influences individual’s behaviors and decisions. In general, religion can be seen as a culturally provided worldview so that many previous studies showed the significant effect of religion after mortality salience (e.g., Cox & Arrowood, 2018; Henrie & Patrick, 2014; Jonas & Fischer, 2006). Cox and Arrowood (2018) argued that religion serves an anxiety buffering function in the situations of death awareness. Also, religion offers people immortality, and it is clear that religion manages the terror of death (Arrowood et al., 2018).

Self-esteem or sense of personal value is the acquisition of faith in living in accordance with the standard of values that are parts of the cultural worldviews (Pyszczynski et al., 1997). Self-esteem is highly personal; it tells us something about who we are and how we live (Mruk, 2006); can be defined as the positive state of evaluating oneself; is based on the self-knowledge of the individual (Baumeister, 1998); is individual’s attitude toward himself/herself; includes personal beliefs related to skills, abilities, social relationships, and future events (Heatherton & Wyland, 2003); is the evaluative component of the self-knowledge; and means how much people value themselves (Baumeister et al., 2003). As mentioned earlier, self-esteem plays an important role in buffering the anxiety that occurs as a result of the individual being’s awareness of his or her mortality (Pyszczynski et al., 1997). In many studies, it is clear that self-esteem reduces mortality salience effects (e.g., Arndt et al., 1997; Harmon-Jones et al., 1997; Schmeichel et al., 2009).

Present Study

The researcher wonders whether the mortality salience effect can be replicated among Turkish employees or not. Turkish employees may not be sensitive to mortality salience effects as their opinions and beliefs about death and life, experience and exposure to death are different. This study investigates the effects of mortality salience in a sample of employees from mortality salient and nonmortality salient organizations. In some organizational settings, employees may constantly face death incidents, while in other settings, this is not the case. The mortality salient organization is defined as workplace settings where employees face death events frequently. In this study, intensive care units of hospitals are considered as mortality salient organizations. The nonmortality salient organization is characterized as organizations where employees face death events never or very rarely. In this sense, the banks are considered as nonmortality salient organizations.

Florian and Snowden (1989) showed that individuals with various religious orientations differ in fear of personal death. For most Turkish people, death is not an annihilation but a transition to real life. In both Western societies and Turkey, people are constantly exposed to death (e.g., there are cemeteries; the death announcement is given in religious communities in a way that everyone can hear; there is a high probability of occurrence of death every day in newspaper and television news). In contrast to Western society, in Turkey, like in India, death is much more present in daily life of individuals (Fernandez et al., 2010). For example, there are rituals for Muslims which necessitate that they visit cemeteries on some special days and cemeteries tend to be smaller and on every street. In Western societies, death often occurs in hospitals or other care facilities so the act of dying is often kept out of the public eye (Muramatsu et al., 2008). In other words, while death is prevalent in both cultures, caring for the dead and dying by families and visitation of cemeteries for religious rituals is not as prevalent in Western cultures as in Turkey.

Fernandez et al. (2010)) come up with two hypotheses for psychological consequences of daily exposure to death: Immunization Hypothesis (IH) and Chronic Defense Hypothesis. According to IH, high exposure to death may immune individuals against the effects of death reminders as continuous exposure to death can cause an individual to get accustomed to it; as a result, it no more results in a response. Or, the threat in the nature of the stimulus may lead the individual to accept the inevitability of death. According to Chronic Defense Hypothesis, continuous exposure to death leads to the use of cultural worldviews to cope with the existential anxiety. This is similar to TMT hypothesis that human beings do not want to accept the inevitability of death, and they require some psychological defense mechanisms to deal with this anxiety. In other words, it is possible to state that constant exposure to death may lead individuals to line up with their cultural worldviews to maintain permanence, meaning, and control in their lives.

In the studies listed earlier, it can be seen that there are significant differences in belief in a just world, religious worldviews, and self-esteem after mortality salience. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to check the validity of TMT among mortality salient and nonmortality salient organizations.

Unlike the Western understanding, many Muslims do not believe that this world is fair. In contrast, they have an afterlife belief which can be defined as a fair world where the judgments will be taken by the impartial creator. Based on two main hypotheses of TMT, after mortality salience, it is expected that individuals increase their cultural worldviews (religious worldviews) and self-esteems (Pyszczynski et al., 1999) so that these can protect individuals against anxiety (Pyszczynski et al., 1997). In addition, IH states that high exposure to death may immune individuals against the effects of death reminders which do not cause any response (Fernandez et al., 2010). The following hypotheses are tested in this study:

There is a significant difference in belief in a just world, religious worldviews, and self-esteem scores after mortality salience of nonmortality salient organization employees.

After mortality salience, there becomes a significant difference in belief in a just world, religious worldviews, and self-esteem scores between mortality salient and nonmortality salient organizations.

Materials and Methods

Participants

A sample of 104 employees of mortality salient and 102 employees of nonmortality salient organizations participated voluntarily in this study (n = 206; see Figure 1). As mortality salient organization, the employees of hospitals (services with high mortality rates as intensive cares) as nonmortality salient organization bank clerks are involved in the study. Participants were selected with convenience sampling technique. The research took part in Central Turkey (Central Anatolia). Of 206 employees, 97 were women and 101 were men, 8 participants did not indicate their gender. The participants ranged in age from 18 to 55 years (M = 29.06, standard deviation [SD] = 8.30). As for their marital status, 95 of the participants were single, 100 married, and 10 participants did not indicate their marital status. Nearly the half of the participants (41.83%) had bachelor’s degree and above; the rest (58.17%) had high school degree and below, and 13 participants did not indicate their educational status. The mean tenure in present organization was 5.03 years, the SD was 8.31, and the range was 0.08 to 35 years. The mean total tenure was 6.85 years, the SD was 6.05, and the range was 0.08 to 35 years.

Figure 1.
The Participants of This Study.

Measures

In this study, six scales and one demographic information form were used to collect the data.

Life Satisfaction Scale

This scale was developed by Diener et al. (1985) and adapted to Turkish language by Dağlı and Baysal (2016). It consists of five items (e.g., “In most ways my life is close to my ideal”) and one factor. A 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) was used in this study. In Dağlı and Baysal’s study, internal consistency coefficient was .88 and test–retest reliability coefficient was .97. In this study, Cronbach’s α internal consistency coefficient was .82. This scale was not evaluated statistically.

The Multidimensional Mortality Awareness Measure

This scale was developed by Levasseur, McDermott, and Lafreniere (2015) and adapted to Turkish language by Bulut et al. (2017). It consists of 30 items and five factors. One of the factors of this scale, namely, mortality fearfulness (e.g., “When I think about death I feel nervous”) was used in this study. A 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) was used. In the study by Bulut et al., internal consistency coefficient was .79. In this study, Cronbach’s α internal consistency coefficient was .91. This scale was not evaluated statistically.

Positive and Negative Affect Schedule

This schedule was developed by Watson et al. (1988) and adapted to Turkish language by Gençöz (2000). It consists of 20 items; 10 positive affect (PA; e.g., “interested”) and 10 negative affect (NA; e.g., “irritable”) items. A 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (very little) to 5 (too much) was used in this study. In Gençöz’s study, internal consistency coefficient for PA was .86 and for NA was .83. In this study, Cronbach’s α internal consistency coefficient for PA was .83 and for NA was .82.

General and Personal Belief in a Just World Scale

This scale was developed by Dalbert (1999) and adapted to Turkish language by Göregenli (2003). It consists of 13 items (e.g., “I think basically the world is a just place”) and two factors, namely, general belief in a just world (6 items) and personal belief in a just world (7 items). A 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (very little) to 5 (too much) was used in this study. In Göregenli’s (2003) study, internal consistency coefficient for general belief in a just world was .69 and personal belief in a just world was .85. In this study, Cronbach’s α internal consistency coefficient for personal belief in a just world was .86 and for general belief in a just world was .77.

Self-Esteem Scale

This scale was developed by Rosenberg (1965) and adapted to Turkish language by Çuhadaroğlu (1986). It consists of 63 items and 12 subtests. In this study, the first 10 items (e.g., “On the whole, I am satisfied with myself”) related to self-esteem were used. A 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (very little) to 5 (too much) was used in this study. In Çuhadaroğlu’s (1986) study, validity coefficient was .71. In this study, the Cronbach’s α internal consistency coefficient was .78.

Religious Worldviews Scale

This scale was developed by Goplen and Plant (2015) and adapted to Turkish language by Kuşat and Bulut (2016). It consists of 19 items (e.g., “I try hard to live my life the way my religion tells me to live it”) and two factors. A 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (very little) to 5 (too much) was used in this study. In Kuşat and Bulut’s study, internal consistency coefficient was .93. In this study, the Cronbach’s α internal consistency coefficient was .90.

Demographic Information Form

This is developed by the researcher to get information about age, gender, marital status, education level, and tenure of the participants.

Procedure

Before data collection, necessary permissions were obtained from university after ethical scrutiny. In this study, experimental procedure of TMT was conducted. Both in the mortality salient and nonmortality salient organizations, half of the participants were randomly assigned to the control condition and the other half to the experimental condition. The data were collected via the paper-and-pencil method. The participants were informed about the nature of the study, and participation in the study was voluntary. The participants were asked to respond to the questionnaires with their first responses, and they were assured that the data will be used anonymously only within the scope of this research.

The scales and the form specified in the aforementioned measures were made into a booklet and applied to the participants in their workplaces. Participants were asked to fill the scales in the order they were given and not to return to former scales. To conceal the real purpose of the study, first, the Life Satisfaction Scale was applied to the participants in both the control and experimental conditions. Later, to remind the death, the mortality fearfulness scale applied to the participants in the experimental condition, and the participants in the control condition received the same scale by only replacing the word “death” with the word “toothache.” TMT shows that anxiety experienced by people is related to the accessibility of death related thoughts rather than direct emotional experiences (Pyszczynski et al., 1999).

Following mortality salience or control questionnaire, Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) was applied to examine whether there are changes in current moods of participants in both the control and experimental conditions. Participants were then asked to solve the word search puzzle in order to work out the death manipulation and to draw the attention of the participants in another direction. According to TMT literature, a distraction task is required for the mortality salience to have an effect (Greenberg et al., 1994). Finally, participants both in mortality salience and control conditions completed several dependent variables, that is, the belief in a Just World Scale, Self-Esteem Scale, and Religious Worldview Scale. Finally, the participants filled out the demographic information form (see Table 1).

Table 1.
The Procedure of the Research.

Condition Life Satisfaction Scale Condition PANAS Puzzle Belief in a Just World Scale Self-Esteem Scale Religious Worldviews Scale

Control + Death Fearfulness Scale (the word “death” replaced with “toothache”) + + + + +

Experimental + Death Fearfulness Scale + + + + +

Note. PANAS = Positive and Negative Affect Schedule.

In the analysis process, quantitative analysis techniques were used. For analyzing means and SDs, descriptive statistical techniques were used, and for mean differences, inferential statistical techniques were used. The data were analyzed utilizing SPSS 25.0.

Results

First, the mean differences in PA and NA scales (PANAS) were tested. The independent samples t test results showed that while there is no significant mean difference in mortality salient organization for PA (t = 0.93, p = .36) and NA (t = 0.55, p = .59), nonmortality salient organization for NA (t = 0.39, p = .70) between experimental and control conditions; there is well significant mean difference in nonmortality salient organization for PA (t = 2.21, p = .03) where control condition (M = 3.42, SD = .76) has higher mean score than experimental condition (M = 3.09, SD = .72). Commonly, no significant difference is expected between PA and NA scores as many studies reported (e.g., Greenberg et al., 1994, 1997). The descriptive statistical values were given in Table 2.

Table 2.
Means and SDs of the Variables of the Study.

Organization type Condition type
Personal Belief in a Just World
General Belief in a Just World
Self-Esteem
Religious Worldviews

M SD N M SD n M SD n M SD n

Mortality salient organization Control condition 2.90* 0.82 50 3.02° 0.75 50 3.79° 0.65 50 3.72° 0.79 48

Experimental condition 2.54° 0.95 54 2.80° 0.93 54 3.73° 0.67 54 3.55° 0.74 51

Nonmortality salient organization Control condition 3.14° 0.68 49 3.26* 0.78 49 3.79° 0.57 49 3.52° 0.53 48

Experimental condition 2.88° 0.74 52 2.87° 0.67 52 3.63° 0.69 52 3.65° 0.58 50

Note. Means in the same column with different signs differ at p < .05. SD = standard deviation.

Table 2 shows that participants have a higher mean score in personal/general belief in a just world and self-esteem both at mortality salient and nonmortality salient organization’s control condition than the experimental condition. Whereas the participants have a higher mean score for religious worldviews at mortality salient organization’s control condition than experimental condition, the participants have a higher mean score at nonmortality salient organization’s experimental condition than the control condition.

To check the significance of these mean differences, analysis of variance was conducted. Analyses of variance using condition (experimental vs. control) and death exposure (mortality salient vs. nonmortality salient) as independent variables were analyzed separately for the dependent variables of this study. The results showed that personal belief in a just world and general belief in a just world differ significantly among four conditions (mortality salient control and experimental; nonmortality salient control and experimental), whereas self-esteem and religious worldviews do not differ significantly contrary to expectations.

With regard to personal belief in a just world, there are significant findings for death exposure (mortality salient/nonmortality salient organization) F(1, 205) = 6.45, p < .05, η² = .03, such that employees of mortality salient organizations have lower mean scores (M = 2.72) than nonmortality salient organizations (M = 3.01), for condition (control/experimental condition) F(1, 205) = 7.38, p < .05, η² = .04, employees in mortality salience condition (M = 2.71) have lower mean scores than in control condition (M = 3.02) and no significant interaction effect (p > .05).

Also, with regard to general belief in a just world, only the effect of the condition was significant F(1, 205) = 7.63, p < .05, η² = .04, such that employees in experimental condition (M = 2.83) have lower mean scores than in control condition (M = 3.14) and no significant death exposure and interaction effect (p > .05).

Furthermore, in respect to self-esteem and religious worldviews, neither the main effects nor interaction effects were significant (p > .05).

Discussion

On the TMT, from the date of its inception, many studies have been carried out in different cultures. It is important to note here that most of the research is carried out on Western cultures. However, it is undeniable that this theory is also started to be studied in other cultures. While some of these studies supported the TMT hypotheses, some partially supported, and the others did not support it. In Turkey, it is possible to remark that TMT is a relatively new research area where there are inconsistent findings (see Bulut, 2015, 2020).

In this study, it is examined whether there is a difference after mortality salience between working at a mortality salient or nonmortality salient organization. The findings showed that after mortality salience, participants have a lower mean score in personal belief in a just world which is consistent to the expectations. This can be explained with the religious beliefs of the participants. It is possible that the participants of this study believe that this world is not a fair/just place and the judgments are taken by the people who have deficiencies and just world is the world after death where the judgments are taken by God who is believed to be perfect. In other words, the belief in an afterlife can be the reason for the low scores. It is possible that bad people can be rich and can live in wealth; therefore, people could think that this world is not a just place.

Another explanation for this finding maybe the cultural orientation of the participants. So far, many researchers and psychologists have performed studies on the culture of individual which can affect his or her behaviors. Among these researchers, Hofstede stands out with his study from 1980s on cultural orientations of individuals. According to Hofstede, five dimensions of cultures can be listed as individualism/collectivism, masculinity/femininity, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and long-/short-term orientation. Individualism/collectivism is related to the integration of individuals into primary groups; uncertainty avoidance is related to the level of stress in a society in the face of an unknown future (Hofstede, 2011). Turkey has a low individualism, high collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance score. With collectivistic cultural orientation, it is not enough that the individual is good and just; it is also necessary that the group or society is good and just. With high uncertainty avoidance score, it is expected that the participants have a low just world belief score which is the case in this study, and the other studies tested just world belief in Turkey have also reached the consistent findings (e.g., Kıral, 2011; Kurtay-Doğan, 2018; Öcel & Aydın, 2010; Sapancı & Bahtiyar, 2018). Also, because of these scores, they do not believe that just world belief provides stability and order to their lives.

Other explanation for these findings could come from the study of Bulut and Yıldız (2018). According to these researchers, secured attachment to God and anxious attachment to God are related positively in Turkish sample. It is an unexpected result that most of the studies from Western cultures have shown that there is a negative correlation between secure and anxious attachment to God (e.g., Kirkpatrick & Shaver, 1992). In the attachment to God process, the attachment figure, God, is abstract in Muslims. The individual cannot know whether any wishes will be met by God or not. This is the reason that the just world belief of the participants in this study gets lower after mortality salience.

It is possible to note that just world belief provides individuals psychological buffer against problems/negativities of the world. Belief in a just world is a vigorous personal coping source that helps individuals to cope with stressful life events and it is related to uncertainty feelings, psychological distress, depression and anxiety in a negative way, and future orientation in a positive way (Carifio & Nasser, 2012; Otto et al., 2006; Xie et al., 2011). In addition, a study testing TMT and belief in a just world shows that belief in a just world increases after mortality salience (Bassett & Cate, 2014). Contrary to the above-listed findings, in this study, the results showed that belief in a just world does not function as a buffer against anxiety. For most people, death can have a meaning as passing from an unjust world to a just world.

According to TMT, the individual must gain self-esteem and have cultural worldviews to avoid anxiety (Rosenblatt et al., 1989). Based on this information, surprisingly, there were no significant differences in self-esteem and religious worldviews scores. This can be explained by the fact that in Turkey religion is taught people as negative/punitive from childhood till adulthood. In daily life, people often use the following statements: “If you do it, God will make a stone/rock of you,” “If you do that, God will burn you in his Hell,” “If you do that, you will go to the Hell,” and so on. According to the Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977), men learn things from their families, relatives, or others via observation and imitation. Also, because people learn religion primarily as punitive, they teach it to their children as negative. This is a vicious circle and can be the reason why it does not function as a buffer against anxiety after mortality salience.

As is well known, in many religions, when people commit sin, they can confess their sin by going places of worship such as churches. In other words, for these people religion functions as a protector against anxiety. This is not valid for Muslims because even if they live according to the rules of religion, they are not sure that their deeds are acceptable. Even religiously acceptable individuals may face negative life events in this world and this is evaluated by Muslims as an “exam.” It is clearly seen in this study that belief in a just world and religious worldviews do not function as a buffer against anxiety. There is an uncertain future or situation perception, and this probably creates anxiety.

Unlike Eastern religions, in most Western religions, life is seen as a “one-time” phenomenon. Moreover, death is considered as the end of existence. This fundamental difference between these religious philosophies may have opposed the assumption that mortality, which is the mainstay of the theory, will cause terrorism (Maheswaran & Agrawal, 2003).

The findings of a meta-analysis by Bulut (2015) examining TMT in Turkey showed that using scales for mortality salience has more impact than using projective life attitudes assessment. Therefore, the fear of death scale was used in this study, but still the expected difference could not be obtained. Another point is that many studies conducted to test TMT could not support TMT hypotheses (e.g., Aslıtürk, 2001; Derviş, 2015; Doğulu, 2012; Sözen, 2014; Şimşek, 2005). These may be due to the fact that opinions and beliefs about death and life, experience and exposure to death events daily are different for Turkish people. These bring to mind the question of whether this theory truly works in Turkey.

The limitation of this study was that it is not able to differentiate the effect of PA by the reason of significant PA difference between groups. It is uncommon to observe significant difference between groups. For future studies, it is recommended to conduct the second PANAS.

In this study, the participants were divided into two groups, namely, the control condition (toothache) and the experimental condition (death). In future studies, instead of two groups, three groups, namely, neutral condition (does not trigger negative or positive emotion), control condition, and experimental condition, can be used.

Condition	Life Satisfaction Scale	Condition	PANAS	Puzzle	Belief in a Just World Scale	Self-Esteem Scale	Religious Worldviews Scale
Control	+	Death Fearfulness Scale (the word “death” replaced with “toothache”)	+	+	+	+	+
Experimental	+	Death Fearfulness Scale	+	+	+	+	+

Organization type	Condition type	Personal Belief in a Just World	General Belief in a Just World	Self-Esteem	Religious Worldviews
Mortality salient organization	Control condition	2.90*	0.82	50	3.02°	0.75	50	3.79°	0.65	50	3.72°	0.79	48
Experimental condition	2.54°	0.95	54	2.80°	0.93	54	3.73°	0.67	54	3.55°	0.74	51
Nonmortality salient organization	Control condition	3.14°	0.68	49	3.26*	0.78	49	3.79°	0.57	49	3.52°	0.53	48
Experimental condition	2.88°	0.74	52	2.87°	0.67	52	3.63°	0.69	52	3.65°	0.58	50

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The author wish to express her sincere gratitude to Mrs. Ayşe Suçatı (health employee) and Mr. İsmail Tok (bank employee) for contributing to scientific work by collecting the data. This work would not have been possible without their support.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biography

Meryem B. Bulut is an assistant professor in the department of Psychology at Sivas Cumhuriyet University. Her work focuses on death, group dynamics and social issues.

ORCID iD

Meryem B. Bulut

References

Aksüt-Çiçek

(2008). Dindarlık İle Saldırganlık Arasındaki Etkileşimin Terör Yönetimi Kuramı Çerçevesinde İncelenmesi [The analysis of interaction between religiousness and aggressiveness in the framework of terror management theory]. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Mersin Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusü.

Arndt

Greenberg

Solomon

Pyszczynski

Schimel

(1999). Creativity and terror management: Evidence that creative activity increases guilt and social projection following mortality salience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 19–32.

Arndt

Greenberg

Solomon

Pyszczynski

Simon

(1997). Suppression, accessibility of death-related thoughts, and cultural worldview defense: Exploring the psychodynamics of terror management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(1), 5–18.

Arrowood

R. B.

Jong

Vail

I. I. I., K. E.

Hood

R. W.

(2018). Guest editors’ foreword: On the importance of integrating terror management and psychology of religion. Religion, Brain & Behavior, 8(1), 1–3.

Aslıtürk

(2001). A test of terror management theory in a collectivistic culture: Buffering role of collective self-esteem [Unpublished master’s dissertation]. METU Graduate School of Social Sciences.

Bandura

(1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.

Bassett

J. F.

Cate

K. L.

(2014). Mortality salience increases belief in a just world but not schadenfreude in response to a natural disaster affecting a religious out-group. The Open Psychology Journal, 7, 64–69.

Baumeister

R. F.

(1998). The self. In Gilbert

D. T.

Fiske

S. T.

Lindzey

(Ed.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 680–740). McGraw-Hill.

Baumeister

R. F.

Campbell

J. D.

Krueger

J. I.

Vohs

K. D.

(2003). Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(1), 1–44.

10.

Becker

(1973). The denial of death. Free Press Paperbacks.

11.

Bulut

M. B.

(2015). Terör Yönetimi Kuramı [Terror management theory] (Dehşet Yönetimi Kuramı). Akdeniz İnsani Bilimler Dergisi [Mediterranean Journal of Humanities], 5(1), 161–174.

12.

Bulut

M. B.

(2020). Terror management theory: Studies conducted in Turkey. In Özyurt-Kaptanoğlu

(Ed.), Niche approaches in a changing world (pp. 223–264). İKSAD.

13.

Bulut

M. B.

McDermott

McEwan

(2017). Çok boyutlu ölüm farkındalığı ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması [Adapting the multidimensional mortality awareness measure: A study of validity and reliability]. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi [The Journal of International Social Research], 10(49), 268–275.

14.

Bulut

M. B.

Yıldız

(2018). Tanrı’ya Bağlanma Biçimlerinin Beş Faktör Kişilik Özelliklerine Göre Yordanması [Predicting God attachment styles by five factor persobality traits]. Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 32(44), 79–98.

15.

Burke

B. L.

Kosloff

Landau

M. J.

(2013). Death goes to the polls: A meta-analysis of mortality salience effects on political attitudes. Political Psychology, 34, 183–200.

16.

Carifio

Nasser

(2012). Belief in a just world and depression in elderly nursing home residents. Work, 43(3), 303–312.

17.

Cox

C. R.

Arndt

Pyszczynski

Greenberg

Abdollahi

Solomon

(2008). Terror management and adults’ attachment to their parents: The safe haven remains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 696–717.

18.

Cox

C. R.

Arrowood

R. B.

(2018). Religion as a defense against the awareness of death: Comment on Jong and Halberstadt (2016). Religion, Brain & Behavior, 9(2), 179–185.

19.

Çuhadaroğlu

(1986). Adölesanlarda Benlik Saygısı [Adolescence self-esteem]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi [Specialty Dissertation, Hacettepe University, Faculty of Medicine], Psikiyatri ABD, Yayımlanmamış Uzmanlık Tezi.

20.

Dağlı

Baysal

(2016). Yaşam doyumu ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması [Adaption of the satisfaction with life scale into Turkish: The study of validity and reliability]. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi [Electronic Journal of Social Sciences], 15(59), 1250–1263.

21.

Dalbert

(1999). The world is more just for me than generally: About the Personal Belief in a Just World Scale’s validity. Social Justice Research, 12, 79–98.

22.

Dalbert

(2001). The justice motive as a personal resource: Dealing with challenges and critical life events. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

23.

Dalbert

Donat

(2015). Belief in a just world. In Wright

J. D.

(Ed.), International Encyclopaedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 487–492). Elsevier.

24.

Dalda

(2011). The effects of relationship commitment and gender on death-anxiety among Turkish young adults: A terror management theory perspective [Master’s dissertation]. METU Graduate School of Social Sciences.

25.

Derviş

(2015). Promoting organ donation through mortality salience for different levels and orientations of religiosity [Master’s dissertation]. METU Graduate School of Social Sciences.

26.

Diener

Emmons

R. A.

Larsen

R. J.

Griffin

(1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.

27.

Doğulu

(2012). System justification and terror management: Mortality salience as a moderator of system justifying tendencies in gender context [Master’s dissertation]. METU Graduate School of Social Sciences.

28.

Fernandez

Castano

Singh

(2010). Managing death in the burning grounds of Varanasi, India: A terror management investigation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 41(2), 182–194.

29.

Florian

Mikulincer

Hirschberger

(2002). The anxiety buffering function of close relationships: Evidence that relationship commitment acts as a terror management mechanism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 527–542.

30.

Florian

Snowden

(1989). Fear of personal death and positive life regard: A study of different ethnic and religious-affiliated American college students. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 20, 64–79.

31.

Furnham

Reilly

(1991). A cross-cultural comparison of British and Japanese Protestant work ethic and just world beliefs. Psychologia: An International Journal of Psychology in the Orient, 34(1), 1–14.

32.

Galek

Flannelly

K. J.

Ellison

C. G.

Silton

N. R.

Jankowski

K. R. B.

(2015). Religion, meaning and purpose, and mental health. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 7(1), 1–12.

33.

Gençöz

(2000). Pozitif ve negatif duygu ölcegi: Gecerlik ve guvenirlik calısması [Positive and negative affect Schedule: A study of validity and reliability]. Turk Psikoloji Dergisi [Turkish Journal of Psychology], 15(46), 19–26.

34.

Goplen

Plant

(2015). A religious worldview: Protecting one’s meaning system through religious prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(11), 1–14.

35.

Göregenli

(2003). Şiddet, kötü muamele ve işkenceye ilişkin değerlendirmeler, tutumlar ve deneyimler [Evaluations, attitudes and experiences related to violence, ill-treatment and torture]. İşkencenin Önlenmesinde Hukukçuların Rolü Projesi Raporu [Report on the role of lawyers in the prevention of torture, Izmir].

36.

Graham

Haidt

(2010). Beyond Beliefs: Religions binds individuals into moral communities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 140–150.

37.

Greenberg

Pyszczynski

Solomon

(1986). The causes and consequences of a need for self-esteem: A terror management theory. In Baumeister

R. F.

(Ed.), Public self and private self (pp. 189–212). Springer.

38.

Greenberg

Pyszczynski

Solomon

Simon

Breus

(1994). Role of consciousness and accessibility of death-related thoughts in mortality salience effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 627–637.

39.

Greenberg

Solomon

Pyszczynski

(1997). Terror management theory of self-esteem and cultural worldviews: Empirical assessments and conceptual refinements. In Zanna

M. P.

(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 29, pp. 61–139). Academic Press.

40.

Harmon-Jones

Simon

Greenberg

Pyszczynski

Solomon

McGregor

(1997). Terror management theory and self-esteem: Evidence that increased self-esteem reduces mortality salience effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(1), 24–36.

41.

Heatherton

T. F.

Wyland

C. L.

(2003). Assessing self-esteem. In lopes

S. J.

Snyder

C. R.

(Ed.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures (pp. 219–233). American Psychological Association.

42.

Henrie

Patrick

J. H.

(2014). Religiousness, religious doubt, and death anxiety. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 78(3), 203–227.

43.

Hofstede

(1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Sage.

44.

Hofstede

(2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1–26.

45.

Jonas

Fischer

(2006). Terror management and religion: Evidence that intrinsic religiousness mitigates worldview defense following mortality salience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(3), 553–567.

46.

Jonas

Sullivan

Greenberg

(2013). Generosity, greed, norms and death—Differential effects of mortality salience on charitable behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 35, 47–57.

47.

Kaplan

(2012). Belief in a just World, religiosity and victim blaming. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 34, 397–409.

48.

Kıral

(2011). Demans hasta yakınlarında depresyon ve yaşam doyumu: Bilişsel duygu ayarlama, sosyal destek ve adil dünya inancı ilişkisi [Depression and life satisfaction in dementia caregivers: The relation of cognitive emotion regulation, social support and belief in a just world]. Mersin Üniversitesi, Yükseklisans Tezi [Master's Dissertation, Mersin University, Social Science Insrtitute, Mersin].

49.

Kirkpatrick

L. A.

Shaver

P. R.

(1992). An attachment-theoretical approach to romantic love and religious belief. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(3), 266–275.

50.

Koca-Atabey

Öner-Özkan

(2011). Defensive or existential religious orientations and mortality salience hypothesis: Using conservatism as a dependent measure. Death Studies, 35(9), 852–865.

51.

Kurtay-Doğan

(2018). Evlilikte kadına yönelik fiziksel şiddeti meşru görme ile cinsiyetçi tutumlar ve adil dünya inancı arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [The research on the relationship between the sexist attitudes and belief in a just world in the context of the legitimacy of the physical violence against women in the marriage]. İstanbul Arel Üniversitesi, Yükseklisans tezi [Master's Dissertation, Istanbul Arel University, Social Science Insrtitute, Istanbul].

52.

Kuşat

Ve Bulut

M. B.

(2016). Dini Dünya Görüşleri Ölçeği’nin Türkçeye Uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması [Adapting the worldviews scale to Turkish: A study of validity and reliability]. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi [The Journal of International Social Research], 9(43), 2502–2509.

53.

Leary

M. R.

(2004). The function of self-esteem in terror management theory and sociometer theory: Comment on Pyszczynski et al. (2004). Psychological Bulletin, 130, 478–482.

54.

Lerner

M. J.

(1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. Springer Science+Business Media.

55.

Lerner

M. J.

Simmons

C. H.

(1966). The observer’s reaction to the “innocent victim”: Compassion or rejection? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 203–210.

56.

Levasseur

McDermott

M. R.

Lafreniere

(2015). The Multidimensional Mortality Awareness Measure and Model (MMAMM): Development and validation of a new self-report questionnaire and psychological framework. Journal of Death and Dying, 70(3), 317–341.

57.

Maheswaran

Agrawal

(2003). Motivational and cultural variations in mortality salience effects: Contemplations on terror management theory and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(3), 213–218.

58.

McGregor

H. A.

Lieberman

J. D.

Greenberg

Solomon

Arndt

Simon

, & Pyszczynski, T. (1998). Terror management and aggression: Evidence that mortality salience motivates aggression against worldview-threatening others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 590–605.

59.

Mruk

C. J.

(2006). Self-esteem, research, theory, and practice: Toward a positive psychology of self-esteem. Springer Publishing Company.

60.

Muramatsu

Hoyem

R. L.

Yin

Campbell

R. T.

(2008). Place of death among older Americans: Does state spending on home- and community-based services promote home death? Med Care, 46(8), 829–838.

61.

Öcel

Aydın

(2010). Adil dünya inancı ve cinsiyetin üretim karşıtı iş davranışları üzerindeki etkisi [The effects of belief in a just World and gender on counterproductive work behaviors]. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi [Turkish Journal of Psychology], 25(66), 73–83.

62.

Otto

Boos

Dalbert

Schöps

Hoyer

(2006). Posttraumatic symptoms, depression, and anxiety of flood victims: The impact of the belief in a just world. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1075–1084.

63.

Pargament

Hahn

(1986). God and the just world: Causal and coping attributions to God in health situations. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 25(2), 193–207.

64.

Pyszczynski

Greenberg

Solomon

(1997). Why do we need what we need? A terror management perspective on the roots of human social motivation. Psychological Inquiry, 8(1), 1–20.

65.

Pyszczynski

Greenberg

Solomon

(1999). A dual-process model of defense against conscious and unconscious death-related thoughts: An extension of terror management theory. Psychological Review, 106, 835–845.

66.

Renkema

L. J.

Stapel

D. A.

Maringer

van Yperen

N. W.

(2008). Terror management and stereotyping: Why do people stereotype when mortality is salient? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(4), 553–564.

67.

Rosenberg

(1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton University Press.

68.

Rosenblatt

Greenberg

Solomon

Pyszczynski

Lyon

(1989). Evidence for terror management theory I: The effects of mortality salience on reactions to those who violate or uphold cultural values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(4), 681–690.

69.

Sapancı

Bahtiyar

(2018). Adil dünya inancı, sürekli umut, pozitif ve negatif duygu durumu ve sosyal desteğin yaşamda anlamı yordama gücü [The predictive power of just in World belief, hope, positive and negative affect, perceived social support for meaning in life]. Turkish Studies [Turkish Studies], 13(19), 1537–1549.

70.

Schmeichel

B. J.

Gailliot

M. T.

Filardo

E.-A.

McGregor

Gitter

Baumeister

R. F.

(2009). Terror management theory and self-esteem revisited: The roles of implicit and explicit self-esteem in mortality salience effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1077–1087.

71.

Silberman

(2005). Religion as a meaning system: Implications for the new millennium. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 641–663.

72.

Simon

Arndt

Greenberg

Pyszczynski

Solomon

(1998). Terror management and meaning: Evidence that the opportunity to defend the worldview in response to mortality salience increases the meaningfulness of life in the mildly depressed. Journal of Personality, 66, 359–382.

73.

Şimşek

O. F.

(2005). Paths from fear of death to subjective well-being: A study of structural equation modeling based on the terror management theory perspective [Unpublished master’s dissertation]. METU Graduate School of Social Sciences.

74.

Solomon

Greenberg

Pyszczynski

(1991). A terror management theory of social behaviour: The psychological functions of self-esteem and cultural worldviews. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 93–159.

75.

Sözen

A. I.

(2014). Parasocial interaction. Terror management theory and football fandom [Master’s dissertation]. Ankara University.

76.

Taubman-Ben-Ari

(2011). Is the meaning of life also the meaning of death? A terror management perspective reply. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(3), 385–399.

77.

Uğurlar

N. P.

(2011). Tüketici Davranışlarının Terrör Yönetimi Teorisi Çercevesinde İncelenmesi [Investigation of consumer behavior from the perspective of terror management theory]. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Ege Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusü [Master's Dissertation, Ege University, Social Sciences Institute, Izmir].

78.

Vess

Arndt

Cox

C. R.

Routledge

Goldenberg

J. L.

(2009). Exploring the existential function of religion: The effect of religious fundamentalism and mortality salience on faith-based medical refusals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 334–350.

79.

Watson

Clark

L. A.

Tellegen

(1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070.

80.

Xie

Liu

Gan

(2011). Belief in a just world when encountering the 5/12 Wenchuan earthquake. Environment and Behavior, 43, 566–586.