Does Religiosity Affect Support for Political Compromise?

Abstract

Does religiosity affect adherents' attitude toward political compromise? To address this question and overcome the potential simultaneity of religious activity and political attitudes, we exploit exogenous variation in the start date of the Selichot (“Forgiveness”), a period in which many Jews, including nonadherents, take part in an intense prayer schedule. Using a two‐wave survey, we find that an increase in the salience of religiosity leads to the adoption of more hard‐line positions against a land‐for‐peace compromise. Examining several potential mechanisms for this attitudinal shift, our evidence points to the impact of the intensified prayer period on adherents' tolerance for risk.

Framing and fighting: The impact of conflict frames on political attitudes

“…https://en.idi.org.il/centers/1159/1520.11 This reflects the findings from the focus group stage, where a religious framing of land frequently involved land paired with a religious indicator, such as 'holy land' or 'Muslim land', but a more material framing of land would refer to land alongside words like 'security' or 'contiguity'. These multiple meanings of land were carefully converted into the questionnaire.12 See for exampleCohen-Zada, Margalit & Rigbi (2016) for evidence on how religiosity impacts willingness to compromise in conflict.13 MANOVA (multiple ANOVA) was used here because we were interested in assessing differences between the groups on three related continuous dependent variables (the three conflict subscales).…”

“… 12 See for example Cohen-Zada, Margalit & Rigbi (2016) for evidence on how religiosity impacts willingness to compromise in conflict. …”

Charitable behaviour and political affiliation: Evidence for the UK

“…These findings at both the extensive and intensive margins relating to the effects of political affiliation remain after including a large number of controls such as religious denomination and frequency of attending religious services, where an individual's religiosity is likely to be related to their political attitudes, e.g. see Brooks (2006) and Cohen-Zada et al (2016). Interestingly, the marginal effects are relatively similar in magnitude between columns 2 and 3 of Table 2 for both the extensive and intensive margins, where the latter column incorporates demographic controls, which include religion and frequency of attending religious events.…”

The Causes of Societal Discrimination against Religious Minorities in Christian-Majority Countries

“…McDermott (2009) argued that religious identity is used to stereotype others often as a heuristic shortcut 3 . The dynamics are used to explain the link between religious identity and a number of relevant factors, including conflict (Alexander 2017;Basedau et al 2011Basedau et al , 2014Kose and Ozcan 2016;Lai 2006;Neuberg et al 2014;Pearce 2005), anti-immigrant sentiment (Ben-Nun Bloom et al 2015;Bohman and Hjerm 2014), political compromise and tolerance (Cohen-Zada et al 2016;Djupe and Calfino 2012;Eisenstein 2008;Milligan et al 2014), religion-state arrangements (Driessen 2014a(Driessen , 2014b, influences for specific political issues such as support for Turkish ascension to the European Union (De Vreese et al 2009), and religious integration in Europe (Nelsen et al 2011).…”