SA Health - N.D. asdde Graaf.ppt

8/12/2019 SA Health - N.D. asdde Graaf.ppt

1/22

Religion

Course: Sociological Analysis

2013

Nan Dirk De Graaf

Nuffield College, Oxford


2/22

Religion, behavioural

consequences and secularization

Three parts:A.Theories: Secularization & supply sideB.Testing theories: Secularization?

Trends in religiosity /

church membership, etc.

& explanation of trends

C. Consequences of religion:

Volunteering and (un)expected ((un)intended)

consequences


3/22

A. Secularization versus supply

side approach

Secularization: modernization and religion(see Bruce 2011) - Decline in religious

commitment and church attendance

Supply side: (see 7 propositions of S & I1994) - More commitment and attendancewhen there is religious competition in a

weak regulated market


4/22

B. Testing secularization and

market theory

General questions: Is there secularization with

respect to:

Membership/religiosity ? Traditional belief ? Belief in the supernatural ? (stable demand) Believing and belonging ? How do these trends relate the predictors of both

approaches? (pluralism / modernization)


5/22

B.1 Membership

Need & De Graaf, ESR1996 (& in Crocket, A. &OLeary R. 2004) (Single country studies)

Using event history data: strongsecularization process for membership

Explanation: very strong cohort effect,

For advantages of using event history data in this context,see Quality & Quantity 1999


6/22

Conversion and switching between

denominations

21 Dutch surveys 1966 2003: N = 35.000

4.5 % switches (marriage is key factor)2.6 % becomes a convert

24.5 % Leaves the church

Conclusion: very strong secularization process


7/22

B.2 Traditional belief and belief in

supernatural

JSSR 2008 (Dutch surveys: 1979-2005)Argument: maybe traditional belief declines

but not belief (in anything) in general

Decline in traditional belief AND decline inbelief in the supernatural.

Measurement: There is something like a supernatural force thatcontrols life / belief in the existence of a Supreme Being.

For bothbeliefs very strong cohort effectin the Netherlands (counterfactualanalysis)


8/22


9/22

B.3 Membership / Religiosity

ASR1997 (ISSP 1991: 15 nations including US)1. Parental socialization and devoutness of

context matters for religiosity

2. In a predominantly religious society, devoutparents need not to worry about the possibilityof their children acquiring secular beliefs fromfriends, teachers, colleagues, etc.., becausealmost everyone is devout

Network interaction hypothesis: Effect ofparental socialization conditional ondevoutness of society


10/22


11/22


12/22

B.4 continueed

Puzzle for supply side theory (cf. ASR

1997):

In US relative weak relationship between

believing and belonging.Finding is again opposite to supply-side

expectation.


13/22

B.5 Church attendance

JSSR 2010 (EVS/WVS 1981, 1990, 2000,and 2006)

Argument of supporters of supply side

theory: de-relugation of market might notwork because it needs time

Test of deregulation hypothesis in 26countries by examining differences in

religious involvement between and withinsocieties


14/22

Hypothesis: societies having deregulatedreligious markets for a longer period oftime are supposed to have higher levels ofinvolvement.

Measurement:

Number of years religious freedom existsin a country (variation between countries 0

205 years and within 0-25 years) Degree of deregulation (Norris & Inglehart)


15/22

Results:

Betweensocieties religious degreeof

deregulation matters, but modernization is

more important (HDI)Withincountries: duration of religious

deregulation negatively affects religious

involvement !


16/22

Finding: modernization corrodes church

attendance to a larger extent than

deregulation can stimulate church

attendance.


17/22

C. Religion matters

Religiosity at the individual and contextlevel matters for social capital: i.e.

volunteering

However, religion also pays indirectly


18/22

C.1 Volunteering in 53 countries

ASR2006; 2010Those who attend church are more active in

volunteer work, but devout national

context (seeASR 1997 paper) has anadditional positive effect.

Finding: + (see discussion inASR2010)

See also latest issue of ASR 2012:

Chaeyoon Lim and Carol Ann MacGregor


19/22


As an analogy to ASR 1997 paper weexpect: Individual church attendanceinfluences volunteering lessin moredevout societies

Explanation: religious people in secularnations face the problem of insufficientvolunteer involvement

Finding: + Church attendance hardlyrelevant in devout nations


20/22


Spill over effect (network and skillsexplanation)

Religious volunteering has a strong spill

over effect, implying that religious citizensalso volunteer more for secularorganizations.

Spill over is strongest for Catholics

(unexpected and controlled for churchattendance).


21/22

C.2 (indirectly) it pays to be

religious!

European Sociological Review(2009, 25: 425-442)

Data: Life-course data of the Family Survey of theDutch Population 2000.Endogeneity problem less problematic: complete job history

voluntary association involvement over the life-course / we alsocontrolled for Big 5 personality traits

Religious people are more involved involunteering and voluntary association

involvement pays off. (strength of weak tiesargument)


22/22

(indirectly) it pays to be religious!

Involvement in volunteering:

More likely to get new job / better job (in terms of statusand income)

If someone joins an association with more high-statusco-members, this increases the likelihood to find a new

job with a higher status.

Joining associations with relatively many co-members insupervising positions seems to lead to better paid jobs.

Documents

SA Health - N.D. asdde Graaf.ppt