Empirical studies of religion’s role in society, especially those focused on individuals and analyzing survey data, conceptualize and measure religiosity on a single measure or a summary index of multiple measures. Other concepts, such as “lived religion,” “believing without belonging,” or “fuzzy fidelity,” emphasize what scholars have noted for decades: humans are rarely consistently low, medium, or high across dimensions of religiosity including institutional involvement, private practice, salience, or belief. A method with great promise for identifying population patterns in how individuals combine types and levels of belief, practice, and personal religious salience is latent class analysis. In this paper, we use data from the first wave of the National Study of Youth and Religion’s telephone survey to discuss how to select indicators of religiosity in an informed manner, as well as the implications of the number and types of indicators used for model fit. We identify five latent classes of religiosity among adolescents in the United States and their socio-demographic correlates. Our findings highlight the value of a person-centered approach to understanding how religion is lived by American adolescents.

Are economic resources related to relationship quality among young couples, and to what extent does this vary by relationship type? To answer these questions, we estimated regression models predicting respondent reports of conflict and affection in cohabiting and married partner relationships using the National Longitudinal Study of Youth, 1997 (NLSY97, N = 2,841) and the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health, N = 1,702). We found that economic factors are an important predictor of conflict for both married and cohabiting couples. Affection was particularly responsive to human capital rather than short-term economic indicators. Economic hardship was associated with more conflict among married and cohabiting couples.

Using data on 2,535 children included in the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, we investigate how the legal status of immigrant parents shapes their children’s behavioral functioning. Variation in internalizing and externalizing problems among Mexican youth with undocumented mothers, documented or naturalized citizen mothers, and U.S.-born mothers is analyzed using a comparative framework that contrasts their experience with that of other ethnoracial groups. Our findings reinforce the importance of differentiating children of immigrants by parental legal status in studying health and well-being. Children of undocumented Mexican migrants have significantly higher risks of internalizing and externalizing behavior problems than their counterparts with documented or naturalized citizen mothers. Regression results are inconsistent with simple explanations that emphasize group differences in socioeconomic status, maternal mental health, or family routines.

Parents play a key role in launching their children into adulthood. Differences in the resources they provide their children have implications for perpetuating patterns of family inequality. Using data on 6,962 young adults included in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997, we examine differences in the support parents provide to young adult children by immigrant status and race/ethnicity and whether and how those differences are explained by parent resources and young adult resources and roles. Immigrant status and race/ethnicity are associated with patterns of support in complex ways. We find that racial/ethnic and immigrant disparities in perceptions of support, financial support, and receiving advice from parents about education or employment are explained by family socioeconomic resources. Group differences in whether young adults say they would turn to a parent for advice and coresidence persist after accounting for these factors, however. Young adult resources and roles also shape parental support of young adults in the transition to adulthood, but taking account of these characteristics does not explain immigrant and racial/ethnic group differences. Our findings highlight the need to consider both race/ethnicity and immigrant status to understand family relationships and sources of support.