Suggest that some of the conflicting results of religious priming studies (e.g. [23, 27]) may be due to conflation of these two distinct aspects of religion. This distinction between the supernatural and institutional effects of religious cognition on interpersonal behavior has been examined in a recent study. Preston and Ritter [44] investigated the effects of supernatural versus religious j.addbeh.2012.10.012 institutional priming on helping and cooperating with ingroup and outgroup members. They found s11606-015-3271-0 that individuals primed with the word “religion” displayed enhanced charitable giving and cooperation in a laboratory task when the RG1662 custom synthesis target of their behavior was presumed to be a fellow ingroup member. Conversely, individuals primed with the word “God” displayed greater generosity and cooperation when the target was presumed to be an outgroup member. Together, these results support their dual-process model, suggesting that activation of supernatural religious cognitions promotes altruism toward outgroup members, possibly due to concerns regarding supernatural monitoring, while activation of religious institutional cognitions activates concerns for the protection of the ingroup, resulting in parochial altruism. These intriguing findings beg an important question. It is currently unclear whether Preston and Ritter’s [44] findings can be extended to the attitudinal domain, given that enhanced prosociality was investigated using two QVD-OPH manufacturer behavioral measures. While investigating effects on observable behavior is of paramount importance, it is also important to understand effects on affect and cognition, the other two components in the triarchic model of attitudes [45]. As such, it is important to investigate the effects of supernatural and religious institutional primes on stereotypic beliefs regarding ingroup or outgroup members, such as appraisals of their warmth or ability [46].The Present ResearchThe present research sought to extend the research described above by providing the first empirical investigation of the effects of God (supernatural) and religion (institutional) priming on attitudes–both positive and negative–towards ingroup and outgroup members. Specifically, we sought to examine how God and religion primes affect intergroup attitudinal judgments. Following the argument of Preston and Ritter [44], we anticipated divergent effects for these two types of religious prime. For individuals exposed to religious institutional primes, we anticipated an increase in parochial altruism, manifesting predominantly as outgroup derogation rather than ingroup favoritism. While Johnson, Rowatt, and LaBouff [36] reported that religious priming (in this case both supernatural and religious institutional primes) resulted in increases in both ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation, their results were obtained using difference scores reflecting disparities in attitudes. Usage of difference scores causes interpretative difficulties [47], and it is hard to definitively conclude whether ingroup favoritism, outgroup derogation, or a combination of the two phenomena drove these effects. Ramsay, Pang, Shen, and Rowatt [28] found that mixed supernatural and religious institutional primesPLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0147178 January 26,3 /Failure to Observe Different Effects of God and Religion Primes on Intergroup Attitudesyielded more negative attitudes towards an outgroup in both Christians and Buddhists, suggesting that outgroup derogation is an important consequen.Suggest that some of the conflicting results of religious priming studies (e.g. [23, 27]) may be due to conflation of these two distinct aspects of religion. This distinction between the supernatural and institutional effects of religious cognition on interpersonal behavior has been examined in a recent study. Preston and Ritter [44] investigated the effects of supernatural versus religious j.addbeh.2012.10.012 institutional priming on helping and cooperating with ingroup and outgroup members. They found s11606-015-3271-0 that individuals primed with the word “religion” displayed enhanced charitable giving and cooperation in a laboratory task when the target of their behavior was presumed to be a fellow ingroup member. Conversely, individuals primed with the word “God” displayed greater generosity and cooperation when the target was presumed to be an outgroup member. Together, these results support their dual-process model, suggesting that activation of supernatural religious cognitions promotes altruism toward outgroup members, possibly due to concerns regarding supernatural monitoring, while activation of religious institutional cognitions activates concerns for the protection of the ingroup, resulting in parochial altruism. These intriguing findings beg an important question. It is currently unclear whether Preston and Ritter’s [44] findings can be extended to the attitudinal domain, given that enhanced prosociality was investigated using two behavioral measures. While investigating effects on observable behavior is of paramount importance, it is also important to understand effects on affect and cognition, the other two components in the triarchic model of attitudes [45]. As such, it is important to investigate the effects of supernatural and religious institutional primes on stereotypic beliefs regarding ingroup or outgroup members, such as appraisals of their warmth or ability [46].The Present ResearchThe present research sought to extend the research described above by providing the first empirical investigation of the effects of God (supernatural) and religion (institutional) priming on attitudes–both positive and negative–towards ingroup and outgroup members. Specifically, we sought to examine how God and religion primes affect intergroup attitudinal judgments. Following the argument of Preston and Ritter [44], we anticipated divergent effects for these two types of religious prime. For individuals exposed to religious institutional primes, we anticipated an increase in parochial altruism, manifesting predominantly as outgroup derogation rather than ingroup favoritism. While Johnson, Rowatt, and LaBouff [36] reported that religious priming (in this case both supernatural and religious institutional primes) resulted in increases in both ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation, their results were obtained using difference scores reflecting disparities in attitudes. Usage of difference scores causes interpretative difficulties [47], and it is hard to definitively conclude whether ingroup favoritism, outgroup derogation, or a combination of the two phenomena drove these effects. Ramsay, Pang, Shen, and Rowatt [28] found that mixed supernatural and religious institutional primesPLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0147178 January 26,3 /Failure to Observe Different Effects of God and Religion Primes on Intergroup Attitudesyielded more negative attitudes towards an outgroup in both Christians and Buddhists, suggesting that outgroup derogation is an important consequen.