The Essential Role of Ritual in the Transmission and Reinforcement of Social Norms
Matt J. Rossano
1) Defining rituals
a) Ritual: the performance of formal, invariantly sequenced (constant), and traditionally transmitted
actions and utterances
i) Example: what occurs at weddings or initiation rites
b) Anthropologist Roy Rappaport argued that ritual played a critical role in making us human
i) Human society requires trust, which ritual can provide
ii) HOW?
(1) Ritual is indexical: varies in reference to the individual speaker/person
(a) Reliable indicator of one’s state of mind
(b) Words too easily deceive
(c) Example: Anyone could claim loyalty and bravery, but willingly enduring some sort of
painful initiation rite shows that loyalty and bravery, etc.
(d) Generally, rituals that endure are those that require a high enough personal cost to
deter insincerity or “casual pretention”
(i) Example: Hazing in fraternities, etc.
2) Learning society’s normative standards
a) Normative standards: attitudes and behaviors leading to social approval
b) Learning a society’s normative standards is important, but risky if one predominantly relies on
verbal cues or instruction
i) Puts us at risk for: social manipulation, which leads to a fitness disadvantage relative to those
who more critically evaluate words in relation to actions
c) Ritual actions are deliberate, and meticulously executed behaviors with intent
i) Costly in terms of time, energy, and/or physical endurance
ii) These qualities make ritualistic behaviors more reliable in terms of commitment to an ideal or
belief
(1) Therefore, ritual becomes the mechanism by which words can gain or lose their credibility
(2) Example: Previous research has shown that observers, especially children, look for
credibility enhancers, such as relevant behavior to ensure that one’s words reflect an
individual’s true state of mind
(a) Harper and Sanders study
(i) Female experimenter went into the homes of children ages 14 – 48 mo. and played
with the child until they were comfortable with her
(ii) Then placed a novel food item (one the child had not previously been exposed to)
within the child’s reach and either:
1. Announced “something to eat”
2. Made the same announcement while partaking in the food herself
(iii) 75% of children took some of the food in the 2nd condition (partaking) as opposed
to 25% in the 1st condition (announcement only)
(iv) Children are far more likely to trust another’s words when they are reinforced by
relevant actions
1. Note: parents gave permission for children to eat—they were not waiting out of
“politeness”
(b) Charitable behavior studies
(i) Game situation wherein the child would earn tokens to be exchanged for toys
(ii) Charity jar in the room so that the child could contribute some of his or her tokens
to “poor children”
(iii) Verbal exhortation alone was only slightly effective in encouraging the children to
donate
(iv) When the experimenter actually donated to the jar, children’s donations increased
significantly
iii) The credibility of the words is significantly reduced when not accompanied by credibilityestablishing actions
(1) However, verbal expressions are, in fact, relevant—they provide important details about
the actions involved (who needs charity, etc.)
d) Trust in unfamiliar vs. familiar adults
i) Experimental studies often use unfamiliar adults as models
(1) Would the words of parents, relatives, and familiar caregivers be more trusted and
therefore less in need of credibility-enhancing actions?
(a) Often, yes, the words of familiar adults are trusted more (especially in the presence of
positive emotional attachments)
(b) This trust is not unconditional
(i) Example: if a familiar caregiver is caught mislabeling an object, older children (4and 5-year olds) will exhibit less trust in the caregiver later
1. 5-year old children may even transfer this trust to an unfamiliar adult that
correctly labels the objects
3) Failure to achieve social acceptance leads to serious, negative consequences
a) We have a “need to belong”
b) In the past, social ostracism would have most likely lead to death
c) Acquiring a society’s normative standards therefore remains important, especially for children
i) WHY?
(1) Children are the next generation—they should develop within these societal, normative
standards so that they can adapt to them and pass them down
d) Both language and action interact in this process of learning and adapting
i) Ritual action is a priority, however, due to its credibility-establishing function
4) How does ritual contribute to the transmission/formation of social norms?
a) Social norms are uniquely human
i) Social conventions: mutually agreed-upon, expected-to-be-followed behavioral regularity that
solves a problem
(1) Behavioral regularities that people should follow, because they solve a coordination
problem
(2) Example: Oberlin, OH, experienced an issue with phone calls cutting off unexpectedly after
3 min. in the 1960s
(a) A regularity developed after a while—the original caller would merely initiate a new
call after the drop and continue the conversation
(b) The recipient of the phone call would await the return call of the initiator of the call
(c) In this way, this solution to a problem became a convention for 3 reasons:
(i) It solved a coordination problem, and allowed efficient resumption of the phone
calls
(ii) Everyone followed this regularity
(iii) Everyone expected others to follow this regularity when needed and applicable
(3) Other examples:
(a) Driving on the right side of the road
ii) Social norms: a type of convention that carries a heavier moral weight than conventions
(1) Regularities that people ought to follow
(2) These have greater moral weight, usually leading to more severe social consequences
(3) Examples: keeping promises, taking responsibility for one’s actions, repaying favors, etc.
(4) These allow us to work well together, around one another, and involve gaining acceptance,
respect, and even love from others
(5) Norms are universal among humans
(a) We regulate sexual/aggressive behaviors, we share resources, and we encourage
reciprocity and charity
iii) Major differences:
(1) Those who violate social conventions simply fail to coordinate with other members of that
society
(a) Usually conventions are in everyone’s best interests to follow—they conform to selfinterests
(2) Those who violate social norms displease others and call into question their good character
and personal reputations, putting them at risk
(a) Usually require one to temporarily suspend self-interest in the interest of a larger group
(i) Even so, people tend to be motivated to follow them
(ii) We treat others and expect to be treated (in return) as important ends, rather than
merely means to an end
(3) These two conventions are easy to confuse, and “blur”
(a) Sometimes hard to tell which category something falls under
(b) Example: Driving on the wrong side of a deserted road
(i) Could see this as a mere violation of convention
1. We all know we need to drive on the right side of the road, because it prevents
crashing, damage, etc. We expect others to do it, and we conform, as well.
(ii) Could, though, take it a step further and see it as a disregard for a safety norm
1. Morally, it is wrong to endanger the lives of others, even if danger does not seem
imminent
iv) Cooperative behavior
(1) In other animals, can be largely explained by inclusive fitness theory based on kin selection,
reciprocity, and perhaps indirect reciprocity
(a) Each of these involves benefits related to fitness enhancement
(b) Humans display these behaviors, as well, but evidence suggests our cooperative
abilities go beyond this more shallow level
(2) Strong reciprocity: a tendency to follow and enforce group norms of behavior even if doing
so could incur a fitness disadvantage
(a) Example: An ultimatum game study
(i) Two players—the proposer and the responder
(ii) Proposer is given a sum of money that he/she is allowed to divide however they
choose with the responder
(iii) Responder can accept/reject the proposer’s offer—if the responder accepts, both
players keep the money, but if they reject, both players lose the money
(iv) What should happen to ensure the most benefit for each player?
1. The proposer should always divide the money as $9 for himself and $1 for the
responder (in a $10 example)
2. The responder should accept any nonzero amount, since any nonzero
acceptance will be greater than rejecting the offer and getting no money at all
(v) What actually happened:
1. Both players displayed high levels of cooperation, even under circumstances
where reputation and reciprocity are irrelevant
2. Proposers tended to offer 30-45% of the money, and responders tended to reject
offers lower than this
3. Suggests that both parties are operating using a norm of fairness while foregoing
selfish gains
a. The acceptance/rejection thresholds (% of money) vary depending on the
participants’ culture’s norm of fairness
v) Social norms displayed by humans are most likely extensions of primate social regulatory
mechanisms from our evolutionary history
(1) Deference to social hierarchy
(2) Avoiding unhelpful/uncooperative individuals
(3) Retaliating against those who have caused personal harm
vi) Chimpanzees react differently when presented with similar situations
(1) A chimpanzee is more likely to reject a low-quality food reward after witnessing another
chimp receiving a high-quality food reward—this could be interpreted as being motivated
by a fairness norm stemming from socially comparing with the other chimp
(a) However, simply showing the chimp a high-quality reward without offering it to another
chimp leads to the same rejection of the low-quality reward, suggesting that it is
perhaps a comparison of food as opposed to a social comparison
(2) Ultimatum study with chimps
(a) Species-adapted version of the ultimatum game
(b) Proposer faced with food items pre-divided into two trays, and could “offer” by pulling
a rope that moved the trays halfway toward both players
(c) Responder could “accept” that offer by pulling on a rod that came into reach as a result
of the “offer”
(d) Pulling the rod = trays were drawn the rest of the way toward both chimps and were
then within reaching distance
(e) Failure to pull the rod = rejection, neither gets anything
(f) Now, because human responders consistently reject unfair offers, human proposers
rarely make them
(i) This is not so with chimps!!
1. Proposers consistently made unfair offers (8 to 2 ratio of food), and the
responder accepted nearly all nonzero offers
2. Suggests that these chimps are operating by a selfish rational maximizing
principle, as opposed to a fairness norm
vii) Social norms appear, based on this evidence, to be uniquely human
b) Ritualized behavior: two important functions in transmitting social norms
i) Ritualization: an evolutionary process whereby an incidentally informative behavior becomes
isolated and specialized to be socially informative
(1) Example: Horses’ attack posture
(a) Attack one another by turning their backs and kicking one another
(b) Includes lowering of the head and flattening of the ears
(c) Within horse social groups, this attack pattern quickly gets reduced to simple displays of
a lowered head or flattened ears—this gesture becomes enough for a dominant horse to
get a submissive response
(d) These ritualized behaviors can involve greetings, mating, settling disputes, etc., and are
common in our primate relatives, as well
ii) Process of ritualization
(1) Involves both emancipation and formalization
(a) Emancipation: when the most critically informative element(s) of a larger set of
behaviors becomes isolated from the full, original expression
(b) Formalization: The emancipated, isolated component then becomes formalized, or
more restricted and stylized in its execution so that a more meaningful signal is
transmitted
(c) Example:
(i) [Talked about this last week] A young child wants to be picked up = reach up, grasp
at caregiver, and eventually start climbing
1. Eventually, this arm extension alone is enough to signal the child’s desire and the
caregiver will react accordingly
2. Arm extension then becomes emancipated from the original act and is then
simplified or formalized
a. Add waving hands, but without any climbing/grasping motions
3. The original, full-blown act is now reduced to the most informative element(s),
which are then emphasized and stylized in expression so that they are
exaggerated
4. Can you think of other examples of this, in children or adults?
(2) Ritualized actions also typically include:
(a) Rule governance: they must be executed in a prescribed manner
(b) Repetition: often repeated to attract and hold attention
(c) Goal demotion: the acts are ends themselves and not necessarily associated with the
achievement of some instrumental goal (i.e. ritualized washing is not necessarily to
clean something, etc.)
iii) It is important to distinguish ritualized behavior from ritual.
(1) Ritualized behavior refers only to the emancipation, formalization, and rule-governed
repetition of elementary gestures
(2) Ritual is a broader term—scripted, ceremonial, and symbolic
(a) Include sacredness, symbolism, traditionalism, and performance
(3) Many animals have ritualized behaviors, but rituals are human-specific.
(a) Ritualized behavior may be buried within human rituals—for instance, ritualized
prayer actions may be combined with a symbolic, ceremonial washing
(4) Ritualized behaviors are common among animals, even unsophisticated creatures such as
snapping turtles
(a) This behavior results from progressive shortening of a behavioral pattern where the
shortened form eventually produces the same response as the full, original act
(b) Complex cognition not required
(c) Requires only that the recipient be able to predict the completion of an action sequence
based on a partial realization—ontogenetic ritualization
(i) Likely accounts for most social rituals found in chimps and young children
(5) Humans, however, have the ability to consciously ritualize actions
(a) Requires the ability to focus attention on elemental gestures of a larger, behavioral
sequence
(i) Example: in ritual washing, the wiping motions become the focus of attention, rather
than cleaning the object
1. This important signal is contained within proper execution of the gestures
themselves, thus when someone ritually washes a certain way, the person
communicates reverence for the object, rather than importance of hygiene
(6) Perhaps what led humans to the ability to ritualize behaviors was committed bipedalism
(a) Allowed for greater visual control of hand movements
(7) As well as the development of stone tools
(a) Led to greater conscious control of movement as a result of anatomical and neurological
changes during the development of these tools
(8) Our hominin ancestors, therefore, gained an increased capacity to ritualize actions,
producing intentional signals that were gesture-based and articulate
iv) Humans’ ability to consciously ritualize behavior created the necessary conditions for the
creation and transmission/reinforcement of social norms
(1) Ritualized actions signal an intentional state of mind, and teach normative content
(2) The observer uses this to extract social rules
(3) The social interaction in which these ritualized actions are embedded serve to emotionally
bind participants to one another, as well as to the values of the group—creates an
emotional connection
5) Ritualized infant-caregiver interactions and the acquisition of emotion-laden social rules
a) Earliest exchanges b/t an infant and its caregiver can be understood as ritualized interactions
i) Rule-governed: demonstrated by the “still-face” paradigm
(a) Also when “turns” are not appropriately taken
(2) Georgia showed a video of this last week!
ii) Invariantly sequenced (constant)
(a) Initiation: one engages the other
(b) Mutual orientation: infant’s initial excitement calms; caregiver’s vocalizations are
soothing
(c) Greeting: infant smiling/moving limbs; caregiver becomes animated
(d) Play dialogue: infant/caregiver take turns exchanging sounds/gestures
iii) Formalized: games such as “peek a boo” involve restricted, stylized gestures
b) These interactions become more salient as the infant matures
i) Eventually, these exchanges become learning to use utensils, tying shoes, etc., that use
attention-getting, repetitious, exaggerated gestures and vocalizations (“sing-song” melodies)
that model necessary behaviors
6) Important connection b/t ritualized infant-caregiver interactions and acquiring social norms
i) Ritualized actions signal intent—infants base their imitation on intent
(1) Early ritualized infant-caregiver interactions are effective at transmitting social norms for 2
reasons:
(a) Teaching events
(i) Highlight the presence of important social information, triggering active searching
behaviors on the part of the infant
(b) Emotional bonding events
(i) Shared movements used to share emotions and mental states
(ii) Caregiver embodies values that the infant emotionally commits to—this emotional
connection suggests that these emotion-laden rules carry moral “weight,” upon
which consciously understood reasons for moral correctness can be built later
(c) Moral significance that makes a behavior normative is first felt through emotional
bonding, and then transmitted ritualistically
(2) Human infants use ostensive cues as a basis for imitation, such as gaze following
(a) The infant uses the adult’s attentional focus as an indicator of where his or her own
attention should be—infants as young as 6 months are more likely to follow this gaze if
it is preceded by an ostensive (or directive/pointing) cue, such as direct eye contact or
infant-directed speech
(3) Imitative behavior of infants is “rational,” meaning that they tend to copy what appears to
be a model’s intentional actions, rather than accidental ones
(a) Infants imitate intentional acts wherein ostensive cues serve as indicators of
intentionality
(b) Example: [Georgia used last week] Gergely, Bekkering, and Kiraly (2002) found that 14month-olds were more likely to imitate “irrational” acts if they were apparently
intentional
(i) Used ostensive clues to determine intentionality
(4) Ritualized actions serve as ostensive signals that indicate behaviors with intent that
therefore carry important social information
(a) These ostensive signals trigger the infant to adopt a learning frame of mind where the
infant actively searches for novel and relevant information during the exchange—again,
a teaching experience
ii) Infants’ imitation reflects the acquisition of abstract, generalized social rules
(1) Imitative learning resulting from ostensively cued social interaction possesses 2 additional
qualities relevant to norm acquisition:
(a) It is generalized to an entire category of circumstances (i.e. one should be respectful of
all elders, not just genetic relatives)
(i) Example: Casler and Kelemen study
1. Found that once an adult had demonstrated that a certain tool was for a
particular purpose, both 2- and 5-year olds expected it to be used only for that
purpose, meaning that they applied that one use to all situations in its relevant
category
(b) It involves the acquisition of abstract rule, not just implicit motor procedures
(i) Example: Williamson study
1. 3-year olds observed adults in a sorting task—adults sorted them by both
obvious (color) and nonobvious (sound made when dropped) criteria
a. Children learned to sort the objects on both the obvious and nonobvious
criteria
b. Children in two control conditions, however, failed to correctly sort objects—
in one, they were shown the end states after sorting and in another they
were shown end states along with equivalent sorting movements
c. If children simply learned a motor procedure, there would have been
equivalent sorting performance in the end state plus sorting movements
condition, since both were modeled—rather, the children must have learned
something more abstract relating to the transformational rule embodied in
the sorting actions
iii) Infants and children invest energy in following and enforcing acquired rules, suggesting
emotional attachment
(1) Infants become bonded to their caregivers, as well as to the social rules they embody—
critical to effective norm transmission
(a) Caregiver interactions are an outgrowth of our unique capacity for cognitive/emotional
sharing
(b) Example: A caregiver and infant are playing with a toy
(i) The toy is the object of their shared attentional state—not the diapers, baby wipes,
etc.
(ii) If the caregiver begins to reach for diaper-changing equipment, baby will likely
break attention and begin looking for wipes and moving to the changing table
(2) Infants also use interactions with caregivers to regulate their emotional states by bringing
their state into conformity with that of the caregiver
(a) Unlike other apes, human infants are motivated to establish a common ground—“How
do we feel about this?”
(b) This “we” cognition composes the ontogenetic basis for the shared ideas, history,
customs, and institutions of adult social life, of which norms are a part
(3) Infants extract rules from their early social interactions
(a) Face-to-face encounters should involve mutual turn taking—violation of this (or any
rule) causes distress
(i) “Still-face paradigm”
(ii) Disrupted turn-taking
(b) Infants detect changes or rule violations and demonstrate fewer smiles, more looks
away, more closed mouth expressions, and more general puzzlement/confusion—the
mother’s failure to conform to the expectation is the cause of the infant’s distress
(c) Social expectations are further influenced by the qualitative nature of their ongoing
interactions with caregivers
(i) Affective mirroring: how involved and emotionally sensitive the caregiver is during
infant-caregiver interactions
(4) Infants and children tend to swiftly acquire and then vigorously enforce social rules once
they are understood
(a) Intentional actions alone (without any normative language) is enough for children to
acquire norms and protest against their violation
(b) Children are significantly more likely to imitate the actions of adults performing with
confidence and a sense of familiarity, versus one of improvised uncertainty that seems
more “on the spot”
(i) Also more likely to protest against improper reproductions of these actions if they
were originally performed with confidence/familiarity