Religious Value Priming, Threat, and Political Tolerance

Abstract

The exploration of the religious underpinnings of intolerance has long focused on the effects of religious behaviors and beliefs, but has ignored a variety of important facets of the religious experience that should bear on tolerance judgments: elite communication, religious values about how the world should be ordered, and social networks in churches. We focus on the communication of religious values and argue specifically that values should affect threat judgments and thus affect tolerance judgments indirectly. We test these assertions using data gathered in a survey experiment and find that priming exclusive religious values augments threat and thus reduces tolerance.

Does Higher Education Cause Religious Decline?: A Longitudinal Analysis of the Within- and Between-Person Effects of Higher Education on Religiosity

“…Results for the religious certainty scale should be interpreted with caution because of the marginal reliability of the scale (DeVellis ); although a marginal α, especially with the downward bias associated with noncontinuous items, does not necessarily indicate lack of unidimensionality (see Sijtsma ; Liu, Wu, and Zumbo ). This is an important aspect of religiosity that shapes social and political perspectives among both adults and adolescents (Trinitapoli ; Djupe and Calfano ), and it is expected to be negatively associated with higher education (Schwadel ).…”

Religious influences on Latino ideology and vote choice: are Evangelical Catholics different?

“…Finally, I control for regional location by setting a dummy variable for all respondents who participated in a top 40 metropolitan city. Because the theoretical mechanism is based upon internal belief based or external socially reinforced cognitive heuristic, there is a possibility that, even though the church is centralized in doctrine and belief, larger localities open the individual up to more conflicting voices, or cross-cutting exposure which weakens elite cues (Zaller 1992) increases tolerance for other opinions (Mutz 2002) particularly in moderating religious cues (Robinson 2010;Djupe and Calfano 2013).…”

‘I have Just Understood it from the Story …’: using vignettes in educational research to investigate cultural tolerance

“…The present study adapted some items from measurements that were previously used by scholars such as Akrami, Ekehammar, and Araya (2000) and Haque (2001) to assess attitudes towards minorities in general and Muslims in particular in a Western context. Furthermore, studies on measuring tolerance were reviewed, such as by Stouffer (1955); Sullivan, Piereson, and Marcus (1979), and Gibson and Bingham (1982) in order to formulate the questionnaire (see also Harell 2010;Djupe and Calfano 2013), though the items from these studies were not used.…”

“…They adopt a modified version of the 'least-liked' methodology created by Sullivan, Piereson, and Marcus (1979) while still ensuring comparisons across different types of target groups. Djupe and Calfano (2013) used 'content-controlled' measures of tolerance developed by Sullivan, Piereson, and Marcus (1979). They also adapted a set of questions to gauge tolerance, taken from Marcus et al (1995) cited in Djupe and Calfano (2013), asking the participants whether members of intolerable groups should be banned from standing for presidency elections, and whether their phones should be tapped.…”

“…Djupe and Calfano (2013) used 'content-controlled' measures of tolerance developed by Sullivan, Piereson, and Marcus (1979). They also adapted a set of questions to gauge tolerance, taken from Marcus et al (1995) cited in Djupe and Calfano (2013), asking the participants whether members of intolerable groups should be banned from standing for presidency elections, and whether their phones should be tapped. Moreover, the participants were asked whether members of the least-liked groups should be allowed to teach in public schools, make a speech and hold public rallies.…”