Suchergebnisse

AbstractMany hypothesize that religious individualism is associated with progressive moral attitudes. Our analysis of data from US adults from the fourth wave of the Baylor Religion Survey finds that those who navigate moral conjunctures as religious individualists, knowing what God wants them to do "in their hearts" or through "human reason," are more likely than those who draw on institutional religious sources of authority, like the Bible or religious teachings, to express progressive attitudes on issues of same-sex marriage, divorce, and premarital sex, but not abortion. Our findings indicate that perceived sources of moral authority further explain differences in moral attitudes within the population of religious decision-makers, specifically with regard to issues that are culturally in flux. This supports the idea that religious individualism, even among religious individuals and within religiously conservative traditions, makes people more accepting of contemporary cultural trends in morality.

This study instead focuses on culture wars among religious elites—clergy—and tests three aspects of the culture wars thesis: (1) whether cultural wars exist at all among religious elites, (2) whether clergy attitudes are polarized on these issues, and (3) whether religious authority or religious affiliation is more salient in creating culture wars cleavages. Using data from a large random sample of Protestant clergy, we find a substantial amount of engagement in culture wars by all types of Protestant clergy. The amount of polarization is more attributable to views of religious authority (i.e., biblical inerrancy) than to religious tradition. Moreover, polarization among clergy is somewhat more evident on culture wars issues than on other social and political issues. These findings are generally supportive of the culture wars thesis and should help return examinations of culture wars back to where they were originally theorized to be waged: among elites.

Abstract
Sociologists know very little about the religious lives of the current generation of American adolescents. This study provides an updated portrait of adolescent religious commitment and direct tests of religious change across cohorts by comparing data from the 2017–2018 National Survey of Moral Formation to the 2002–2003 National Study of Youth and Religion. There has been a significant growth in the percentage of adolescents who are not at all religious (by multiple measures). There has been a less substantial decline in the percentage of adolescents who are highly religious. Changes in religiosity have occurred across sociodemographic groups, though not always at the same rate, resulting in new patterns across gender, race, regional, and socioeconomic lines on some aspects of religiosity. Despite declines in religiosity, however, parental transmission of religion is similar to what it was in the previous generation. The decline in adolescent religiosity, notably, reflects a decline in parental religiosity.

Using panel data from the National Study of Youth and Religion, we examine the effect of beliefs about evolution in high school on several postsecondary educational outcomes. Results indicate that net of a host of background factors and potential alternative explanatory factors, there are significant associations between beliefs about evolution and pursuing or obtaining a bachelor's degree, such that pure creationists (i.e., creationists who do not allow for the possibility that God used evolution to create the world) are less likely than naturalists to be on this trajectory. Further, when they do attend college, pure creationists and flexible creationists (i.e., creationists who allow for the possibility that God used evolution) both attend less selective colleges than naturalists, and pure creationists are less likely than naturalists to major in biology. These results suggest that evolution is a morally salient issue for many that influences their educational trajectories, highlighting the role that cultural schemas can play in shaping socioeconomic status.

Research indicates that religiosity inhibits adolescent and young adult sexual behavior, but few studies examine how religious contexts may shape sexual behavior. When religious contexts are considered, studies rarely test multiple spheres of religious influence simultaneously. Moreover, little research examines how either individual religiosity or religious contexts shape emotional responses to sex. We analyze nationally representative, longitudinal data that allow for concurrent examination of multiple religious contexts and several measures of young adult sexual behaviors and sexual regret. The influence of religiosity on sexual behavior and regret varies within and across both the spheres and outcomes tested. Individual religious salience and close ties with parents are the most consistent deterrents to initiation of sexual intercourse and having numerous intercourse partners. Closeness to parents and participation in religious activities are associated with lower odds of sexual regret, but ties to adults in one's religious congregation are associated with increased sexual regret.

College students' "hookups" have been the subject of a great deal of research in recent years. Motivations for hooking up have been linked to differences in well-being after the hookup, but studies detailing college students' motivations for engaging in hookups focus on single motivations. Using data from the 2010 Duke Hookup Survey, we consider how motivations for hooking up cluster to produce different classes, or profiles, of students who hook up, and how these classes are related to hookup regret. Four distinct classes of motivations emerged from our latent class analysis: Utilitarians (50 percent), Uninhibiteds (27 percent), Uninspireds (19 percent), and Unreflectives (4 percent). We find a number of differences in hookup motivation classes across social characteristics, including gender, year in school, race-ethnicity, self-esteem, and attitudes about sexual behavior outside committed relationships. In addition, Uninspireds regret hookups more frequently than members of the other classes, and Uninhibiteds report regret less frequently than Utilitarians and Uninspireds. These findings reveal the complexity of motivations for hooking up and the link between motivations and regret.

Prior research has documented the influence of religion on a variety of stratification processes. Largely absent from this research, however, are explicit examinations of the role religious contexts play in educational outcomes. In this study, we focus on the congregation-level prevalence of a salient religious belief: biblical literalism. Using national multilevel data (U.S. Congregational Life Survey [USCLS]; N = 92,344), we examine whether individuals' likelihood of completing college is dependent on the percentage of fellow congregation members who are biblical literalists. We find that college completion is tied to congregational literalism in important ways. Net of individual biblical literalism and other controls, congregational literalism decreases the likelihood of completing college. In addition, while congregational biblical literalism decreases the likelihood of college completion for both biblical literalists and non-literalists, the relationship is strongest for non-literalists such that in highly literalist congregations, non-literalists' likelihood of college completion more closely resembles that of literalists.

This review discusses the state of theory and research on how and under what conditions religion shapes various adolescent outcomes such as health, education, sexual behavior, and substance use. We focus on the latest theoretical advancements with respect to the avenues through which religious practice and belief might play positive or negative roles in the lives of adolescents. We also summarize an emerging literature on the conditions under which religion has stronger or weaker relationships with certain outcomes. In the end, we call on sociologists to extend the study of religion and adolescents through greater attention to the religious and sociocultural contexts in which religiousness is experienced (e.g., religious tradition or congregation, gender, race/ethnicity, sexuality, and social class).