:en:Efficacy of prayer

File:Bolivia aymara praying loc.jpg woman praying]]

Studies can verify that those who pray are affected by the experience, including certain physiological outcomes. An example of a study on meditative prayer was the Bernardi study in the British Medical Journal in 2001. It reported that by praying the rosary or reciting yoga mantras at specific rates, baroreflex sensitivity increased significantly in cardiovascular patients.{{Cite journal|vauthors=Bernardi L, Sleight P, Bandinelli G |title=Effect of rosary prayer and yoga mantras on autonomic cardiovascular rhythms: comparative study |journal=BMJ |volume=323 |issue=7327 |pages=1446–1449 |year=2001 |pmid=11751348 |pmc=61046 |doi=10.1136/bmj.323.7327.1446|display-authors=etal}}

A study published in 2008 used Eysenck's dimensional model of personality based on neuroticism and psychoticism to assess the mental health of high school students based on their self-reported frequency of prayer. For students both in Catholic and Protestant schools, higher levels of prayer were associated with better mental health as measured by lower psychoticism scores. However, among pupils attending Catholic schools, higher levels of prayer were also associated with higher neuroticism scores.{{Cite journal|doi=10.1080/13674670701709055 |title=Prayer and psychological health: A study among sixth-form pupils attending Catholic and Protestant schools in Northern Ireland |year=2008 |last1=Francis |first1=Leslie |last2=Robbins |first2=Mandy |last3=Lewis |first3=Christopher Alan |last4=Barnes |first4=L. Philip |journal=Mental Health, Religion & Culture |volume=11 |pages=85–92 |issue=1|s2cid=56432949 |url=http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/2894/1/WRAP_Francis_0673558-ie-170210-prayer_and_psychological_health.pdf }}

File:Hoping for a miracle, CUT.jpg, where healing miracles had been reported at Our Lady of Lourdes.]]

It has also been suggested that if a person knows that he or she is being prayed for it can be uplifting and increase morale, thus aiding recovery. (See Subject-expectancy effect.) Studies have suggested that prayer can reduce psychological stress, regardless of the god or gods a person prays to, a result that is consistent with a variety of hypotheses as to what may cause such an effect. According to a study by CentraState Healthcare System, "the psychological benefits of prayer may help reduce stress and anxiety, promote a more positive outlook, and strengthen the will to live."[http://www.centrastate.com/body.cfm?id=520&action=detail&articlepath=/Atoz/dc/cen/canc/gen/mindspirit.html#7 Mind and Spirit] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090201075605/http://www.centrastate.com/body.cfm?id=520&action=detail&articlepath=%2FAtoz%2Fdc%2Fcen%2Fcanc%2Fgen%2Fmindspirit.html |date=2009-02-01 }} from the Health Library section of [http://www.centrastate.com CentraState Healthcare System]. Accessed May 18, 2006. Other practices such as yoga, tai chi, and meditation may also have a positive impact on physical and psychological health.{{Citation Needed|date=November 2024}}

A 2001 study by Meisenhelder and Chandler analyzed data obtained from 1,421 Presbyterian pastors surveyed by mail and found that their self-reported frequency of prayer was well-correlated with their self-perception of health and vitality.{{Cite journal|doi=10.1111/0021-8294.00059 |title=Frequency of Prayer and Functional Health in Presbyterian Pastors |year=2001 |last1=Meisenhelder |first1=Janice Bell |last2=Chandler |first2=Emily N. |journal=Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion |volume=40 |pages=323–330|issue=2}} This research methodology has inherent problems with self-selection, selection bias, and residual confounding, and the authors admitted that the direction of perceived prayer and health relationships "remains inconclusive due to the limits of the correlational research design".

Various controlled studies have addressed the topic of the efficacy of prayer at least since Francis Galton in 1872,Galton, Francis. [https://www.galton.org/essays/1870-1879/galton-1872-fortnightly-review-efficacy-prayer.html Statistical Inquiries into the Efficacy of Prayer]. The Fortnightly Review 1872;12:125–35 which spawned an entire series of commentary-debates that lasted for several years.{{Cite book |last1=Tyndall |first1=John |url=http://archive.org/details/prayergaugedeba00meangoog |title=The Prayer-gauge debate |last2=Galton |first2=Sir Francis |last3=Littledale |first3=Richard Frederick |last4=McCosh |first4=James |last5=Means |first5=John O. (John Oliver) |last6=Congregational Publishing Society |date=1876 |publisher=Boston, Congregational Publishing Society |others=University of Michigan}} Carefully monitored studies of prayer are relatively scarce with $5 million spent worldwide on such research each year.

{{cite web|last=Boorstein|first=Michelle|date=6 December 2008|title=Study of Health and Religiosity Growing Despite Criticism|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/05/AR2008120502813.html|access-date=18 November 2016|via=washingtonpost.com|quote=While the field remains tiny – about $5 million is spent worldwide on such research, experts estimate – both sides view the stakes as huge.}}

The largest study, from the 2006 STEP project, found no significant differences in patients recovering from heart surgery whether the patients were prayed for or not.Realized religion: research on the relationship between religion and health Theodore J. Chamberlain, Christopher Alan Hall 2007 {{ISBN|1-890151-53-X}} pages 33–35Benson, H., Dusek, J. A., Sherwood, J. B., Lam, P., Bethea, C. F., Carpenter, W., Levitsky, S., Hill, P. C., Clem, D. W., Jain, M. K., Drumel, D., Kopecky, S. L., Mueller, P. S., Marek, D., Rollins, S., & Hibberd, P. L. (2006). Study of the therapeutic effects of intercessory prayer (STEP) in cardiac bypass patients: A Multicenter randomized trial of uncertainty and certainty of receiving intercessory prayer. American Heart Journal, 151(4), 934–942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2005.05.028

The third party studies reported either null results, correlated results, or contradictory results in which beneficiaries of prayer had worsened health outcomes. For instance, a meta-analysis of several studies related to distant intercessory healing published in the Annals of Internal Medicine in 2000 looked at 2774 patients in 23 studies, and found that 13 studies showed statistically significant positive results, 9 studies showed no effect, and 1 study showed a negative result.John A. Astin, et al. The Efficacy of "Distant Healing" A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials Annals of Internal Medicine June 6, 2000 vol. 132 no. 11 903–910 [http://www.annals.org/content/132/11/903.abstract]

A 2003 levels of evidence review found evidence for the hypothesis that "Being prayed for improves physical recovery from acute illness".{{Cite journal|vauthors=Powell LH, Shahabi L, Thoresen CE |title=Religion and spirituality. Linkages to physical health |journal=The American Psychologist |volume=58 |issue=1 |pages=36–52 |date=January 2003 |pmid=12674817 |doi=10.1037/0003-066X.58.1.36|citeseerx=10.1.1.404.4403 }} It concluded that although "a number of studies" have tested this hypothesis, "only three have sufficient rigor for review here" (Byrd 1988, Harris et al. 1999, and Sicher et al. 1998). In all three, "the strongest findings were for the variables that were evaluated most subjectively", raising concerns about the possible inadvertent unmasking of the outcomes' assessors. Other meta-studies of the broader literature have been performed showing evidence only for no effect or a potentially small effect. For instance, a 2006 meta analysis on 14 studies concluded that there is "no discernible effect" while a 2007 systemic review of intercessory prayer reported inconclusive results, noting that 7 of 17 studies had "small, but significant, effect sizes" but the review noted that the three most methodologically rigorous studies failed to produce significant findings.{{cite journal | last1 = Hodge | first1 = David R. | year = 2007 | title = A Systematic Review of the Empirical Literature on Intercessory Prayer | journal = Research on Social Work Practice | volume = 17 | issue = 2| pages = 174–187 | doi = 10.1177/1049731506296170 | s2cid = 43547918 }}{{cite journal | last1 = Masters | first1 = K. | last2 = Spielmans | first2 = G. | last3 = Goodson | first3 = J. | date = Aug 2006 | title = Are there demonstrable effects of distant intercessory prayer? A meta-analytic review | journal = Annals of Behavioral Medicine | volume = 32 | issue = 1| pages = 21–26 | pmid = 16827626 | doi=10.1207/s15324796abm3201_3| citeseerx = 10.1.1.599.3036 | s2cid = 3672308 }}

Most{{efn|name="All"|"Despite the lack of generally accepted demarcation criteria, we find remarkable agreement among virtually all philosophers and scientists that fields like astrology, creationism, homeopathy, dowsing, psychokinesis, faith healing, clairvoyance, or ufology are either pseudosciences or at least lack the epistemic warrant to be taken seriously." Martin Mahner, 2013.{{rp|30–31}}}} scientists dismiss "faith healing" practitioners.{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6s4o07FwUNwC&q=%22most+scientists%22+faith+healing|title=Every Contact Leaves a Trace: Scientific Detection in the Twentieth Century|first=Zakaria|last=Erzinclioglu|page=60|publisher=Carlton Books|date=2000|quote=For example, most scientists dismiss the notion of faith-healing, a phenomenon for which there is a certain amount of evidence.|isbn=9781842221617}}{{cite book|last1=Hassani|first1=Sadri|title=From Atoms to Galaxies: A Conceptual Physics Approach to Scientific Awareness|date=2010|publisher=CRC Press|isbn=9781439882849|page=641|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eVzNBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA641|access-date=18 April 2018|language=en|quote=There are also activities that, although not classified (or claimed) as science, have implications that trespass into the scientific territories. Examples of this category of activities are the claim that we have been visited by aliens riding unidentified flying objects, all psychic phenomena, and faith healing. We study the nature of all these activities under the general heading of pseudoscience. . .}}{{cite book|editor-last1=Pigliucci|editor-first1=Massimo|editor-last2=Boudry|editor-first2=Maarten|last=Mahner|first=Martin|title=Philosophy of pseudoscience reconsidering the demarcation problem|date=2013|publisher=University of Chicago Press|location=Chicago|isbn=9780226051826|page=30|edition=Online-Ausg.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Pc4OAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA30|access-date=18 April 2018|ref={{harvid|Pigliucci|Boudry|2013}}}}See also:

{{cite book|last1=Pitt|first1=Joseph C.|last2=Pera|first2=Marcello|title=Rational Changes in Science: Essays on Scientific Reasoning|date=2012|publisher=Springer Science & Business Media|isbn=9789400937796|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=JXWhBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA96|access-date=18 April 2018|language=en|quote=Such examples of pseudoscience as the theory of biorhythms, astrology, dianetics, creationism, faith healing may seem too obvious examples of pseudoscience for academic readers.}}

{{cite book|last1=Zerbe|first1=Michael J.|title=Composition and the Rhetoric of Science: Engaging the Dominant Discourse|date=2007|publisher=SIU Press|isbn=9780809327409|page=86|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=GahwviSqjC4C&pg=PA86|language=en|quote=[T]he authors of the 2002 National Science Foundation Science and Engineering Indicators devoted and entire section of their report to the concern that the public is increasingly trusting in pseudoscience such as astrology, UFOs and alien abduction, extrasensory perception, channeling the dead, faith healing, and psychic hotlines.}}

{{cite book|publisher=University Press of America|title=Critical Thinking: Step by Step|author=Robert Cogan|page=[https://archive.org/details/criticalthinking0000coga/page/217 217]|quote=Faith healing is probably the most dangerous pseudoscience.|url=https://archive.org/details/criticalthinking0000coga|url-access=registration|isbn=9780761810674|year=1998}}

{{cite book|last1=Leonard|first1=Bill J.|last2=Crainshaw|first2=Jill Y.|author-link1=Bill J. Leonard|author-link2=Jill Y. Crainshaw|title=Encyclopedia of Religious Controversies in the United States: A-L|date=2013|publisher=ABC-CLIO|isbn=9781598848670|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vnWE00YVeJQC&pg=PA625|access-date=18 April 2018|language=en|quote=Certain approaches to faith healing are also widely considered to be pseudoscientific, including those of Christian Science, voodoo, and Spiritualism.}}

File:Prayer before leaving.jpg

In a debate/interview in Newsweek with Christian evangelical Rick Warren, atheist Sam Harris commented that most lay perceptions of the efficacy of prayer (personal impressions as opposed to empirical studies) were related to sampling error because "we know that humans have a terrible sense of probability." That is, humans are more inclined to recognize confirmations of their faith than they are to recognize disconfirmations.

Harris also criticized existing empirical studies for limiting themselves to prayers for relatively unmiraculous events, such as recovery from heart surgery. He suggested a simple experiment to settle the issue:[http://richarddawkins.net/article,825,The-God-Debate,Sam-Harris-Rick-Warren-Newsweek 'The God Debate' by Sam Harris, Rick Warren, Newsweek – RichardDawkins.net]

Get a billion Christians to pray for a single amputee. Get them to pray that God regrow that missing limb. This happens to salamanders every day, presumably without prayer; this is within the capacity of God. I find it interesting that people of faith only tend to pray for conditions that are self-limiting.

File:Michelangelo Caravaggio 067.jpg of the Rosary, by Caravaggio, 1606–1607]]

{{See also|Relationship between religion and science}}

Religious and philosophical objections to the very study of prayer's efficacy exist. Some interpret Deuteronomy (6:16 "You shall not put the Lord your God to the test"{{cite web|url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy%206:16;&version=49;|title=Bible Gateway passage: Deuteronomy 6:16 – New American Standard Bible|access-date=18 November 2016}}) to mean that prayer cannot, or should not, be examined.

The religious viewpoint objects to the claim that prayer is susceptible to experimental designs or statistical analysis, and other assumptions in many experiments, e.g. that a thousand prayers are statistically different from one. The objections also include the complaint that religion generally deals with unique, uncontrollable events; statistics, and science in general, deal with recurring phenomena which are possible to sample or control and are susceptible to general laws.

Religious objections also include the complaint that as prayer starts to be measured, it is no longer real prayer once it gets involved in an experiment and that the concept of conducting prayer experiments reflects a misunderstanding of the purpose of prayer. The 2006 STEP experiment indicated that some of the intercessors who took part in it complained about the scripted nature of the prayers that were imposed to them,{{cite journal |vauthors=Benson H, Dusek JA, Sherwood JB |title= Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP) in cardiac bypass patients: a multicenter randomized trial of uncertainty and certainty of receiving intercessory prayer |journal= American Heart Journal |volume= 151 |issue= 4 |pages= 934–942 |date= April 2006 |pmid= 16569567 |doi= 10.1016/j.ahj.2005.05.028 |display-authors=etal}}

• {{cite press release |date=April 5, 2006 |title=Largest Study of Third-Party Prayer Suggests Such Prayer Not Effective In Reducing Complications Following Heart Surgery |website=John Templeton Foundation |url=http://www.templeton.org/pdfs/press_releases/060407STEP.pdf |access-date=March 26, 2010 |archive-date=September 15, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110915195711/http://www.templeton.org/pdfs/press_releases/060407STEP.pdf |url-status=dead }} saying that this is not the way they usually conduct prayer: {{quote|Prior to the start of this study, intercessors reported that they usually receive information about the patient's age, gender and progress reports on their medical condition; converse with family members or the patient (not by fax from a third party); use individualized prayers of their own choosing; and pray for a variable time period based on patient or family request.}}

With respect to expectation of a response to prayer, the 18th-century philosopher William Paley wrote:William Paley, 1835, Paley's moral and political philosophy Uriah Hunt Press, Philadelphia page 157

To pray for particular favors is to dictate to Divine Wisdom, and savors of presumption; and to intercede for other individuals or for nations, is to presume that their happiness depends upon our choice, and that the prosperity of communities hangs upon our interest.

During the 20th century, philosopher Bertrand Russell believed that religion and science "have long been at war, claiming for themselves the same territory, ideas and allegiances". He also believed that the war had been decisively won by science.Bertrand Russell, Religion and science Oxford University Press, 1997

{{ISBN|0-19-511551-1}} page xi Almost 40 years earlier, a 22-year-old Russell also wrote: "For although I had long ceased to believe in the efficacy of prayer, I was so lonely and so in need of some supporter such as the Christian God, that I took to saying prayers again when I ceased to believe in their efficacy."Bertrand Russell, The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell: Cambridge Essays Published by Routledge, 1983 {{ISBN|0-04-920067-4}}

The 21st-century evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, describing how Richard Swinburne explained away the STEP experiment's negative results "on the grounds that God answers prayers only if they are offered up for good reasons",Richard Swinburne, [http://users.ox.ac.uk/~orie0087/framesetpdfs.shtml Response to a Statistical Study of the Effect of Petitionary Prayer], originally in Science and Theology News 2006. finds one predictable result of prayer:Dawkins, "The God Delusion", p. 65

Other theologians joined NOMA-inspired sceptics in contending that studying prayer in this way is a waste of money because supernatural influences are by definition beyond the reach of science. But as the Templeton Foundation correctly recognized when it financed the study, the alleged power of intercessory prayer is at least in principle within the reach of science. A double-blind experiment can be done and was done. It could have yielded a positive result. And if it had, can you imagine that a single religious apologist would have dismissed it on the grounds that scientific research has no bearing on religious matters? Of course not.

• Magical thinking
• Thoughts and prayers

{{notelist}}

{{Reflist|2}}

• {{Cite book |last=Sloan |first=Richard P. |url=https://archive.org/details/blindfaithunholy00sloa |title=Blind faith: the unholy alliance of religion and medicine |date=2006 |location=New York|publisher=St. Martin's Press |isbn=978-0-312-34881-6}}
• Behrman, E. J., "Testing Prayer", Skeptic, 11:4, 15(2005)

{{Portal bar|Religion}}

{{Wikiquote}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Efficacy Of Prayer}}

Category:Prayer

Category:Psychology of religion

Category:Religion and science

Category:Religious studies

Category:Supernatural healing

sv:Vetenskapliga studier av förbön