2017
DOI: 10.1177/2329496516686615
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Religion and the Sense of Control in Cross-National Perspective: The Importance of Religious Context

Abstract: Is individual religiosity associated with the sense of control? If so, does a nation’s religious context modify that association? Multilevel analyses with data from the sixth wave of the World Values Survey (2010–2014) demonstrate that religious attendance and prayer are positively associated with the sense of control, net of individual- and country-level controls. However, belief in God is not associated with the sense of control. Furthermore, cross-level interactions suggest that the association between indi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The religious hypocrisy scale was developed from the works of Moberg (1987), Yousaf and Gobet (2013) and Wollschleger and Beach (2013). The religious social control scale was developed from the works of Jung (2017) and Wollschleger and Beach (2011). The religious guilt scale was adapted from the work of Exline et al (2000).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The religious hypocrisy scale was developed from the works of Moberg (1987), Yousaf and Gobet (2013) and Wollschleger and Beach (2013). The religious social control scale was developed from the works of Jung (2017) and Wollschleger and Beach (2011). The religious guilt scale was adapted from the work of Exline et al (2000).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Firstly, the literature is loaded with agnosticism. It has shown that effects of religiosity on SOC are varying (i.e., sometimes positive; other times negative or non-existent) from one set of empirical measures of religiosity to another or from one study population to another (Ellison and Burdette 2012;Jung 2019;Pargament 2002;Schieman 2008;Schieman et al 2005;Pascoe et al 2016;Speed and Fowler 2017;Clements 2014). Based on these inconsistencies, the current literature suggests that the sociological imagination of actors' SOC along with their submission to sociality, especially to deity as its religious kind, is doubtful.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meanwhile, a methodological fix on study populations rather than a conceptual revisit to religiosity has recently been made by a study that uses a cross-national dataset to specify a global model that includes as many study populations as possible (Jung 2019). By identifying a macro-national factor that conditions the effects of religiosity on SOC among different study populations, Jung (2019) presents a substantive theoretical gain, compared to the heretofore unwitting and unorganized reports of agnosticism.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sense of control, which has been the focus of social psychologically oriented studies, represents the general beliefs that individuals master and control and that shape various aspects of their lives and reflect the learned generalized expectation that outcomes are contingent on their own choices and actions (Jung, 2019;Ross & Mirowsky, 2013;Schieman et al, 2005). Individuals with a high sense of control report being effective agents in their own lives (Mirowsky & Ross, 2003).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%