The hazard-precaution system is used to explain both action ritualization
andcollective rituals. (1) First, the system directly underlies ritualized action
(Boyer & Liénard, 2006, p. 601) and the hyperactivation of the system results
in OCD (Liénard & Boyer, 2006, p. 821). One of the characteristics of the
resulting ritualization is that the individual loses sight of the connection
between the purpose of the overall action (if there is such) and the elementary
steps that are carried out, a phenomenon calledgoal-demotion(Boyer &
Liénard, 2006, p. 605). Although ritual scripts may have a goal (e.g., warding
of intruders), the contribution of each step is not connected to it. The
concentration on the disconnected sub-goals of the script results in an over-
load of the individual’s attention (which the authors call the“swamping”of
working memory; pp. 605–6), which, in turn, provides temporary relief
from the anxiety that elicited the ritualization. Further research elaborated
on the consequences of overloading working memory, suggesting that it
makes participants of collective rituals susceptible to uncritically accepting
information (Schjoedt & Sørensen, 2013). (2) Second, collective rituals devel-
oped in an epidemiological process. In Chapter 4, as we examined the factors
influencing cultural transmission, we discussed how the structure of the
human mind exerts selective pressures on the bits of culture that are trans-
mitted. Many aspects of collective rituals, Liénard and Boyer (2006, p. 822)
suggest, activate the hazard-precaution system. In particular, the occasion for
the ritual is often directly related to concerns that activate the hazard-
precaution system; ritual participants are convinced that the ritual should be
performed and skipping it is potentially dangerous; and participants follow a
blueprint of the required course of action. Consequently, Liénard and Boyer
argue (p. 823), goal demotion and the“swamping of working memory”also
occur in collective rituals. Aspects of collective rituals that engage the hazard-
precaution system thus make collective rituals more likely to be repeated and
transmitted, which accounts for the presence of the properties of ritualized
action in them.
Although the three theories of ritual presented in this section share an
interest in explaining the similarities between rituals, on the one hand, and
compulsive behavior, on the other hand, they arrive at different explanations
and partly address different problems. Boyer and Liénard explicitly state that
they do not want to explain all rituals. For Freud, ritual is a group-level
adaptation in evolution, particularly by overcoming anti-social tendencies,
making his theory a predecessor of the theories of Irons, Sosis, and Bulbulia.
For Fiske as well as for Boyer and Liénard, rituals grow out of an adaptive trait
at the level of the individual that is, the ability (or the subjective feeling
thereof) to control some aspect of the world. We will address such aspects
of rituals in more detail in Chapter 6 on magic. Both Freud and Fiske consider
individual compulsions as pathological versions of rituals, whereas for Boyer
and Liénard ritualization in collective rituals seems a secondary development
Ritual 93