Attitudes of Undergraduate Students

Carlson, Hilding B.

doi:10.1080/00224545.1934.9919448

Cited by 71 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In four studies, intelligence was measured long before religiosity, with time gaps ranging from 3 to 25 years (Bender, 1968; Carlson, 1934; Horowitz & Garber, 2003; Kanazawa, 2010a, Study 1). If intelligence measured on one occasion influences religiosity that is measured a number of years later, then a significant correlation between these two variables is consistent with a model in which intelligence drives religiosity.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relation Between Intelligence and Religiosity

Zuckerman

Silberman

Hall

2013

Pers Soc Psychol Rev

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A meta-analysis of 63 studies showed a significant negative association between intelligence and religiosity. The association was stronger for college students and the general population than for participants younger than college age; it was also stronger for religious beliefs than religious behavior. For college students and the general population, means of weighted and unweighted correlations between intelligence and the strength of religious beliefs ranged from -.20 to -.25 (mean r = -.24). Three possible interpretations were discussed. First, intelligent people are less likely to conform and, thus, are more likely to resist religious dogma. Second, intelligent people tend to adopt an analytic (as opposed to intuitive) thinking style, which has been shown to undermine religious beliefs. Third, several functions of religiosity, including compensatory control, self-regulation, self-enhancement, and secure attachment, are also conferred by intelligence. Intelligent people may therefore have less need for religious beliefs and practices.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relation Between Intelligence and Religiosity

Zuckerman

Silberman

Hall

2013

Pers Soc Psychol Rev

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…I t is relatively improbable that this condition will be met in practice. Further, the factors discovered will depend upon the items presented for judgment; thus, Carlson (6) found a general radical-conservative factor in his data, whereas Stagner and Katzoff (15) did not. A fairly obvious explanation of this is that the opinions presented in the latter study had already been selected in such a way that, to all intents and purposes, they gave a linear measure of radicalism-conservatism.…”

Section: Historical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…These studies may, for our purposes, be grouped into three rough categories: (a) those using correlations of opinions or stereotypes to establish empirical clusters of attitudes; (b) those employing factor analysis of specific opinion correlations or correlations of attitude scores (6,15) j and (c) those systematically varying the conditions of judgment in order to reveal basic principles of judgment (1,2,3,4,5). The study of attitude clusters is valuable in so far as it underscores the existence of common determinants of opinion and judgment.…”

Section: Historical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%