Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1


Ratings: (0)|Views: 0|Likes:
Published by emissaryofyhvh
Sociology of Religion article
Sociology of Religion article

More info:

Published by: emissaryofyhvh on May 09, 2014
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Education, Religiosity and Moral Attitudes: Explaining Cross-National Effect DifferencesAuthor(s): Peer Scheepers, Manfred Te Grotenhuis and Frans Van Der SlikSource:
Sociology of Religion,
Vol. 63, No. 2 (Summer, 2002), pp. 157-176Published by:
Stable URL:
Accessed: 15/04/2013 03:32
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Oxford University Press
 Association for the Sociology of Religion, Inc.
 are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to
Sociology of Religion.
This content downloaded from on Mon, 15 Apr 2013 03:32:31 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Sociology f Religion 002, 3:2 157-176
Education, eligiosity nd Moral Attitudes: Explaining ross-National ffect ifferences
Manfred e Grotenhuis Frans an Der lik
University f Nijmegen The Netherlands The im f he resent tudy s to nswer hree esearch uestions n moral ttitudes i.e., attitudes oncerning bortion, remarital nd xtramarital elations, nd homosexual elations). Which arental nd ndividual haracteristics ffect oral ttitudes? o the ffects f arental nd individual haracteristics ary cross ountries? nd, f o, can these ffect ifferences n moral issues e xplained y national haracteristics? o answer hese uestions, e use he 991 SSP database ontaining elevant ata f 6,604 nhabitants f 5 countries. ypotheses re ested sing multi-level nalyses. e ind hat arental nd ndividual eligiosity, s well s ndividual ducational attainment, ave trong ffects n moral ttitudes. owever, e bserve onsiderable ffect iffer- ences cross ountries, hich s a rather ew inding. ffects f ndividual eligiosity n moral attitudes ppear o be tronger n more eligious ountries nd weaker n more ecularized ountries. Effects f ndividual ducation re tronger n more eligiously eterogeneous ountries nd weaker n more eligiously omogeneous ountries. inally, ffects f ndividual ducation n moral ttitudes are weaker n hort-standing emocracies han n ong- tanding nes.
Debates n moral ssues ave, ime nd gain, isrupted amily atherings,
community eetings, olitical onventions nd even nations s a whole,
because eople end o hold trong nd ivergent iews n hese atters. he
legal ermissibility f bortion as been n the olitical nd he ublic gendas
for many ears. he ermissibility f xtramarital elationships as een n he private genda f many ouples n ountries ll ver he world, articularly ince
the ate 1960s.
Drect esponden to eer chees, Departme f MedWology, nversity f Nqmegen,
Box 104, 6500 E Nqmegen, he eteknds. maid: .s&km
w .k=m
This content downloaded from on Mon, 15 Apr 2013 03:32:31 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
One of he most requently ound elationships s hat ell-educated eople are more n favor f iberal iews n moral ssues Hyman nd Wright 979; Vogt 997). n recent tudy, ayes 1995:188) laims hat he ffect f duca- tion s similar cross ountries, hereas eil 1985) laims hat he ffect f education aries cross ountries. hese nconsistent indings ay e due o he differential ffects f national ontexts, s was uggested y Vogt 1997:62-64). There re lso requent eports n the elationship etween eligion nd moral attitudes Ebaugh nd Haney 978; elen 984; picer 994; cheepers nd Van
Der Slik 1998). In a recent ross-national tudy, he contention s that n
shaping n ndividual's eligious ttitudes, he eligious haracter f nation s
an mportant ormative actor, ext o parental r ndividual haracteristics. he
authors uggest hat his might lso hold rue or ther ttitudes Kelley nd De Graaf 997:654). ll of hese ropositions nd findings uggest hat articular characteristics f he ational ontext ay ffect he trength f he elationship between ndividual haracteristics nd moral ttitudes. n this ontribution e
set out to elaborate pon hese uggestions, erive ypotheses nd then est
them sing ross-national ata. We will nswer he ollowing uestions. irst, which arental nd ndividual haracteristics ffect oral ttitudes? econd nd of more nterest s the uestion f whether hese ffects n moral ssues ary
across ountries. nd f o, hird, o what xtent an the ifferences n effects f
parental nd ndividual haracteristics n moral ttitudes e explained y
national haracteristics?
The arguments ffered or he assertion hat effects f individual harac- teristics n moral ttitudes may vary cross ountries re based on the idea of differential ocialization rocesses. he first rucial dea s that ffects f ndivid- ual characteristics mply xposure o similar socializing gents' which may ffect compliance with similar ocial norms, general thesis already stated by Durkheim [18971 1951). The second dea s that xposure o similar socializing circumstances' ay ffect imilar alues nd similar ways f behavior, general thesis nspired y Mannheim [19361 1972). Whereas Durkheim efers o social institutions n which he individual s incorporated family, eligious ommu- nity, chool), Mannheim efers o larger ational ontexts the political ystem, religious haracteristics f a nation as a whole). In the next sections we will elaborate pon hese ocializing gents nd circumstances.
Hypotheses egarding ffects f arental nd ndividual Characteristics n Moral ttitudes
Of course, here re many ocializing gents n the lives of individuals, among which parents ppear to be most nfluential Benson, Donahue, and
This content downloaded from on Mon, 15 Apr 2013 03:32:31 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->