TL;DR: Many people still observe taboos even when they don't believe in them, because intuition generates a belief while reason recognizes it as unfounded yet does not correct it, and the cost of compliance is usually very low. Psychology calls this acquiescence, described by Jane L. Risen in 2016. Surveys show very few people neither believe nor practice at all, while many practice more than they believe.
Short answer: what is acquiescence?
Many people know a taboo has no basis yet still follow it, because intuition generates a belief, reason recognizes that belief as unfounded but leaves it alone, and the cost of compliance is usually very low. Psychology calls this mechanism acquiescence: the deliberative system registers the belief as false but does not correct it, so behavior continues even though awareness has changed. In other words, people do not need to believe in order to act; they only need to see that following along costs nothing.
Jane L. Risen described this model in an article in Psychological Review in 2016. According to that model, when a strong intuition appears (for example, a feeling that doing something will bring good luck), people tend to accept it as a working belief. The deliberative system may recognize that the belief has no basis, but correcting it requires cognitive effort and brings no clear benefit, so it is ignored. The result is a state of "half-believing": people deny it in words yet act as though they believe.
Why does this model explain 'half-believing'?
Risen's model explains 'half-believing' by separating two processes: intuition and reason. Intuition generates a working belief (for example: abstaining will be safer), while reason can assess that belief as unfounded. The key point is that reason does not necessarily have to correct the belief; recognizing it is enough. When the cost of compliance is low (not much effort, nothing lost), letting intuition guide behavior is the cognitively economical choice.
This model also explains why highly educated people with strong reasoning ability still observe taboos. Strong reasoning ability helps them recognize the belief as false, but does not automatically make them change their behavior. Changing behavior requires actively resisting intuition, and that only happens when the cost of compliance is large enough to be worth the effort.
Measured: what does the 1,014-person survey (Caspi 2024) say?
Avner Caspi and colleagues published in 2024 in the Journal of Individual Differences a quantitative survey on the 'half-believing' phenomenon in superstition. The results showed very few people neither believe nor follow the taboo at all; many practice more than they believe. Anxiety is linked to both sides: linked to the level of belief and linked to the level of practice. This reinforces the idea that taboo behavior is not only a matter of belief, but also a way of coping with anxiety.
No 'half-believing' survey has been conducted on Vietnamese people, and there are no figures on the proportion of Vietnamese who abstain without believing. The results above come from samples abroad, mainly students and online survey participants, so they cannot be extrapolated to Vietnamese people without research in Vietnam.
Why do students use exam rituals yet deny they work?
Jeffrey M. Rudski and Ashleigh Edwards published in 2007 in The Journal of General Psychology a study on students using rituals and superstitions before exams. The results showed that ritual use increased with the importance of the event: the more important the exam, the more rituals students used. Notably, many people used rituals yet denied that they had any effect. This is a clear example of the 'half-believing' state: the behavior occurs, but the words deny it.
Anthropologist Bronisław Malinowski once observed that the more uncertain the environment and the more precarious the outcome, the more people tend to need ritual and magic. Rudski and Edwards' study on university students shows that this pattern still holds in a modern context: an exam is an event with an uncertain outcome, and ritual is a way of coping.
Entrepreneurs and feng shui: 'half-believing' as anxiety reduction
Eric W. K. Tsang published in 2004 in Organization Studies a study on how Chinese entrepreneurs use feng shui in business decisions. Tsang argued that in a business environment full of uncertainty, entrepreneurs are often in a 'half-believing' state: they do not fully believe that feng shui determines success or failure, but still consult it and follow it in part as a way to reduce anxiety and increase a sense of control. This is a level B result: the study is theoretical and observational, has not been widely replicated, and needs more evidence to confirm.
Richard Wiseman and Caroline Watt published in 2004 in Personality and Individual Differences a study distinguishing positive and negative superstition. The study pointed out that the earlier Paranormal Belief Scale only measured negative superstition (such as believing that breaking a mirror brings bad luck), ignoring positive superstition (such as carrying a lucky charm, knocking on wood). These two types may serve different psychological functions: negative superstition is linked to anxiety and poor adjustment, while positive superstition may be adaptive. This matters because it shows that not all taboo behavior can be lumped into a single category.
Table comparing the main studies
| Study | Year | Sample size / scope | Main result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Risen, Psychological Review | 2016 | Theoretical overview | Acquiescence model: reason recognizes a false belief without correcting it |
| Caspi et al., Journal of Individual Differences | 2024 | 1,014 people | Very few neither believe nor practice; many practice more than they believe |
| Rudski and Edwards, The Journal of General Psychology | 2007 | University students | Ritual use increases with event importance; many use it yet deny its effect |
| Tsang, Organization Studies | 2004 | Chinese entrepreneurs | 'Half-believing' feng shui to cope with uncertainty (level B) |
| Wiseman and Watt, Personality and Individual Differences | 2004 | 4,339 people (study 1) | Distinguishes positive and negative superstition; the old scale measured only negative |
Why does 'abstaining brings good fortune' persist among the highly educated?
The acquiescence model shows that high education does not automatically eliminate taboo behavior. Highly educated people can recognize the belief as false, but changing behavior requires effort to resist intuition, and that effort is only worth it when the cost of compliance is large enough. When the cost is low (abstaining a little, avoiding a little), letting intuition guide behavior is the cognitively economical choice.
Rudski and Edwards' study on university students shows that even those studying in a scientific environment use rituals before important exams. This shows that the academic environment does not create immunity to taboo behavior; it can only change how people talk about that behavior.
Where is the evidence still lacking?
There is no 'half-believing' survey on Vietnamese people, and no figures on the proportion of Vietnamese who abstain without believing. Existing studies are mainly conducted abroad, on university students or online survey participants, so they cannot be extrapolated to Vietnamese people without research in Vietnam. Tsang's study on Chinese entrepreneurs is at level B, needing more evidence to confirm.
What does Nhật Nguyệt suggest?
Nhật Nguyệt's suggestion: a taboo that costs only a little effort does not warrant self-blame. If you find yourself abstaining from something despite not believing, and the abstinence does not cost you a real opportunity, that is normal behavior with a clear psychological mechanism. Conversely, a taboo that makes you miss a real opportunity (not daring to accept a job, not daring to travel far, not daring to try something new) is worth reconsidering: at that point the cost of abstinence is large enough for you to actively examine it.
This article helps you understand yourself, not to advise you to abandon or keep taboos. If you want to distinguish more clearly between belief, superstition, and pseudoscience, you can read the article Belief, superstition, and pseudoscience are three different things, but are often lumped together.
Conclusion
Abstaining without believing is very normal behavior with a clear psychological mechanism. Risen's acquiescence model shows that reason can recognize a false belief without correcting it, and the low cost of compliance keeps the behavior going. Studies on students and entrepreneurs show that this model repeats across different groups. What is still missing is data on Vietnamese people: no survey has measured the level of 'half-believing' in Vietnam, so any inference for Vietnamese people can only be a hypothesis.
