Does religion affect people’s basic values? Comparing Roman Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox, Moslems, Jews and religiously unaffiliated across

  • Published on

  • View

  • Download

Embed Size (px)


<ul><li> Slide 1 </li> <li> Does religion affect peoples basic values? Comparing Roman Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox, Moslems, Jews and religiously unaffiliated across 33 countries Shalom H. Schwartz National Research UniversityHigher School of Economics, Moscow and The Hebrew University of Jerusalem October 17, 2012 </li> <li> Slide 2 </li> <li> Questions Religion as a cause: Does peoples religion affect what they consider the most important guiding principles in their lives? A telephoto snapshot: How do the basic values of adherents of Western monotheistic religions differ? Alternative causes: What else besides religion might account for these value differences? Solving the mystery: What value differences are attributable to religion? </li> <li> Slide 3 </li> <li> Data Used European Social Survey, 2002-2010, 5 rounds Representative national samples 33 countries Face-to-face interviews Age 15-102 years Who responded to at least 19/21 value items Who said belong to a religion or denomination classifiable as one of the following or reported do not have a religion: Roman CatholicEastern OrthodoxJewish Protestant MuslimNo religion </li> <li> Slide 4 </li> <li> 33 ESS Countries in Study Russia </li> <li> Slide 5 </li> <li> Countries by Historically Dominant Religion Roman Catholicism Austria Belgium Croatia Czech Republic France Hungary Ireland Italy Lithuania Luxembourg Poland Portugal Slovenia Slovakia Spain Switzerland Protestantism Eastern Orthodoxy DenmarkBulgaria EstoniaCyprus FinlandGreece GermanyRomania LatviaRussia NetherlandsUkraine Norway Sweden United Kingdom JudaismIslam IsraelTurkey </li> <li> Slide 6 </li> <li> Religious Affiliations of Sample Do you consider yourself as belonging to (identifying with) any particular religion or denomination? Yes/No If yes: Which one? [open ended] No Religion 75,336 Roman Catholics 61,607 Protestants 28,486 Eastern Orthodox 19,911 Moslems 8,125 Jews 5,326 Total N= 198,791 (19333 missing or not classifiable in above categories) </li> <li> Slide 7 </li> <li> Basic ValuesContinuum </li> <li> Slide 8 </li> <li> Measuring Basic Values 21 PVQ style items to tap 10 basic values Describe a person in terms of his/her important goals It is important to him/her to have a good time and enjoy life(Hedonism) Rate how similar to self: 6pt scale (not at all very) Reveals, how important the goal is to respondent Analyze invariance of values across 6 religious groups with multi-group CFA Obtained partial scalar invariance after combining related values to form 6 values Permits comparison of group means Used individually centered mean scores in analyses r &gt;.9 for correlations of each of 6 values with latent scores across groups (mean r =.96) </li> <li> Slide 9 </li> <li> Basic Values </li> <li> Slide 10 </li> <li> Definitions of Values 1 GOALEXEMPLARY ITEMS It is important to him/her to Power/Achievement: control of people &amp; resources, status, success, showing competence be in charge and tell others what to do be very successful, impress others Hedonism: pleasure &amp; sensuous gratification for oneself have a good time and enjoy life take every opportunity to have fun Self-direction/Stimulation: independent thought &amp; action, creativity, excitement, challenge be curious, try to understand everything look for adventures, have an exciting life </li> <li> Slide 11 </li> <li> GOALEXEMPLARY ITEMS It is important to him/her to Universalism/Benevolence: appreciation, tolerance, caring for welfare of others &amp; nature justice and equality help &amp; care for other people protect the environment Conformity/Tradition: restraint of impulses, acceptance of social expectations, customs, traditions follow rules avoid upsetting other people keep family or religious traditions Security: safety, stability, harmony of society, relationships &amp; self avoid anything dangerous to his/her safety have a stable government &amp; orderly society Definitions of Values 2 </li> <li> Slide 12 </li> <li> Slide 13 </li> <li> The Snapshot HedonismJ=NR&gt;P&gt;M&gt;RC&gt;EO Slf-Dirctn/StimltnNR&gt;P&gt;J&gt;RC=M&gt;EO Univrslm/BenvlncP&gt;RC&gt;NR&gt;J=EO&gt;M Confrmty/TraditnM=RC&gt;EO&gt;P&gt;J&gt;NR SecurityEO&gt;RC&gt;J&gt;NR=P&gt;M Power/AchievmntM&gt;J=EO&gt;NR&gt;RC&gt;P But are the observed differences due to religion? </li> <li> Slide 14 </li> <li> Distorted Lens?Not Religion Itself? Individual differences among religious groups Age, education, gender, immigrant status, religiosity AgeEducation Years Religiosity (.3-7.1 scale) % Female % Immigrants R Catholic47.6 (18.5)11.5 (4.3)4.1 (1.5)54%5% Protestant51.6 (18.0)12.8 (3.7)3.6 (1.6)57%6% E Orthodox46.6 (18.0)11.9 (3.5)3.9 (1.4)63%7% Jews43.1 (18.7)13.4 (3.4)3.3 (1.9)54%35% Moslems38.4 (16.8)7.7 (4.6)5.1 (1.4)51%8% No religion42.0 (17.1)12.8 (3.5)1.7 (1.2)48%7% Need to control these variables </li> <li> Slide 15 </li> <li> Changes in Order of Religion Groups Confrmty/TraditnRC=M=EO&gt;P&gt;NR=J SecurityEO&gt;RC=J&gt;NR&gt;P&gt;M Confrmty/TraditnM=RC&gt;EO&gt;P&gt;J&gt;NR SecurityEO&gt;RC&gt;J&gt;NR=P&gt;M No ControlsIndividual Controls Slf-Dirctn/StimltnNR&gt;P&gt;J&gt;RC=M&gt;EO Slf-Dirctn/StimltnP&gt;NR&gt;RC&gt;M=J&gt;EO </li> <li> Slide 16 </li> <li> Changes in Order of Religion Groups HedonismP=J&gt;NR&gt;RC=M&gt;EO HedonismJ=NR&gt;P&gt;M&gt;RC&gt;EO Univrslm/BenvlncP&gt;RC&gt;NR&gt;J=EO=M Univrslm/BenvlncP&gt;RC&gt;NR&gt;J=EO&gt;M Power/AchievmntM&gt;J=EO&gt;NR&gt;RC&gt;P Power/AchievmntM&gt;EO=J&gt;NR&gt;RC&gt;P No ControlsIndividual Controls Overall, order of religion differences changes little. What about strength of effects? reduced or increased? </li> <li> Slide 17 </li> <li> Changes in Strength of Religion Effects Controlling age, education, gender, immigrant status, religiosity, reduces variance religion group explains Age explains mean 6.5% variance, more in all but PowAch, Religion still explains more variance than education, gender, religiosity, or immigrant status Controls SecurConfTradSDirStimHedonUnivBenePowAch None 2.4%6.3.%3.3%3.0%4.8%6.5% Individual characteristics 2.1%0.8%2.7%1.2%1.1%4.8% </li> <li> Slide 18 </li> <li> Distorted Lens?Country Not Religion? Country differences confounded with religion Economic, security, historical, political factors Majority vs. minority religion in country Example: Finland vs. Russia ( Protestant vs. E Orthodox) All differences (except COTR) p </li> <li> Changes in Religion Differences Due to Controls HedonismJ=NR&gt;RC&gt;EO=P&gt;M Slf-Dirctn/StimltnNR&gt;J=P&gt;RC=EO&gt;M Univrslm/BenvlncP=NR&gt;M=RC&gt;EO=J Confrmty/TraditnM&gt;P=EO=RC&gt;NR&gt;J SecurityEO&gt;J=M=RC=P&gt;NR Power/AchievmntJ&gt;M=EO&gt;RC=P=NR Univrslm/BenvlncP&gt;RC&gt;NR&gt;J=EO&gt;M Power/AchievmntM&gt;J=EO&gt;NR&gt;RC&gt;P HedonismJ=NR&gt;P&gt;M&gt;RC&gt;EO Slf-Dirctn/StimltnNR&gt;P&gt;J&gt;RC=M&gt;EO Confrmty/TraditnM=RC&gt;EO&gt;P&gt;J&gt;NR SecurityEO&gt;RC&gt;J&gt;NR=P&gt;M </li> <li> Slide 25 </li> <li> Group Differences Due to Religion HedonismJ=NR&gt;RC&gt;EO=P&gt;M Slf-Dirctn/StimltnNR&gt;J=P&gt;RC=EO&gt;M Univrslm/BenvlncP=NR&gt;M=RC&gt;EO=J Confrmty/TraditnM&gt;P=EO=RC&gt;NR&gt;J SecurityEO&gt;J=M=RC=P&gt;NR Power/AchievmntJ&gt;M=EO&gt;RC=P=NR </li> <li> Slide 26 </li> <li> Interactions with Majority Status HedonismJ=NR&gt;RC&gt;EO= P&gt; - M - Slf-Dirctn/StimltnNR&gt; J= - P&gt;RC=EO&gt;M Univrslm/Benvlnc P= - NR&gt;M= RC&gt; - EO= - J Confrmty/Traditn M&gt; - P=EO=RC&gt;NR&gt;J SecurityEO&gt;J=M= RC= + P&gt;NR Power/AchievmntJ&gt;M= EO&gt; - RC= - P=NR + higher where this religion is traditional majority - lower where this religion is traditional majority </li> <li> Slide 27 </li> <li> Conclusions Data from representative samples in 33 countries enable 1 st attempt to discern effects of religion on values Snapshot of existing differences is misleading: Reflects Personal characteristics of religious group members Country characteristics entwined with religion Controls reveal many changes in relative value priorities Order of religious groups changes most for RC &amp; M Values of M most grounded in anxiety &amp; self-protection NR = P most concern for others vs. own interests NR findings suggests personal values of openness &amp; growth cause rejection of religion </li> <li> Slide 28 </li> <li> Conclusions 2 Religion accounts for very little variance in individual values ignoring confounds 2 to 6.5% (ave. 4.4%)second to age (ave. 8.5%) eliminating confounds.2 to 1.8% (ave.6%)less than age, religiosity, similar to gender &amp; education; most in POAC Viewing religion per se as major cause of national differences in psychological variables probably wrong Studies confound religion with country characteristics Using country characteristics (e.g. HDI) to predict explains country mean differences but does not eliminate confounds from psychological variablesrequires within-country analysis Limitations Only Western monotheistic religions Only Europe, Turkey, Israel 5 Religions are each heterogeneous </li> <li> Slide 29 </li> <li> Thank You Feedback: Shalom.Schwartz @ </li> <li> Slide 30 </li> <li> Correcting the Lens: Controlling Effects of Age, Education, Gender, Immigrant Status, Religiosity </li> <li> Slide 31 </li> <li> Interactions of Religion with Traditional Majority Religion Status Italic indicates a significant cross-level interaction with whether the religion is the traditional majority religion in countries + higher where this religion is traditional majority - lower where this religion is traditional majority </li> </ul>


View more >