Atheists

Schiavone, Sarah R.; Gervais, Will M.

doi:10.1111/spc3.12365

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This supports research by Kossowska et al (2017) finding that more dogmatic believers and atheists alike report increased prejudice against respective ingroup value violators. More recent research, however, suggests that atheists are less likely than Christians to show high ingroup favoritism and resulting outgroup prejudice (Speed & Brewster, 2021), thus reflecting the incongruous nature of nonbelief (Schiavone & Gervais, 2017). However, a direct comparison of (non)religious identification reported by Christians and atheists in Study 1 indicates nearly identical levels of ingroup identification among our participants.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Religious identity and intersectional privilege: (A)symmetric biases in Christians and atheists are unaffected by prompts to consider religious and racial privilege.

Cook¹,

Franks²

2024

Psychology of Religion and Spirituality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present research examined the degree to which experimental prompts asking participants to consider intersectional privilege affect religious (Study 1) and racial (Study 2, White participants only) outgroup bias among Christian and atheist participants. In Study 1, U.S. Christians (n = 263) and atheists/nonbelievers (n = 240) reported advantages or disadvantages afforded by their religious identity, followed by measures of religious outgroup bias. We predicted reminders of social privilege would increase bias from Christians toward atheists, and that reminders of social disadvantage would increase bias from atheists toward Christians. We found no effect of the manipulation for either group, but stronger ingroup identification predicted higher outgroup bias among Christians and atheists. Study 2 replicated a manipulation of White privilege (Branscombe et al., 2007) among Christian (n = 165) and atheist (n = 173) respondents to determine whether privilege prompts would interact with religious identity to affect reported levels of racial bias. We again found no effect of the privilege/disadvantage prompts. However, a significant interaction between religious identity and racial identification indicated that White Christians reported greater racial bias, moderated through greater White racial identification. Content coding of qualitative responses to the privilege prompts likewise suggested group differences in perceptions of privilege; for example, White Christians reported greater disadvantages due to their race than White atheists.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Religious identity and intersectional privilege: (A)symmetric biases in Christians and atheists are unaffected by prompts to consider religious and racial privilege.

Cook¹,

Franks²

2024

Psychology of Religion and Spirituality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Atheists are not a widely organized, coherent social group, but dispersed, heterogeneous, inconspicuous, or hidden individuals (Gervais 2013). Intergroup conflict, which is a well-known driver of prejudice, is typically engendered by widely organized, coherent social groups (Schiavone and Gervais 2017). Therefore, atheists should not arouse prejudice.…”

Section: Prejudice and Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Political Bias against Atheists: Talk Shows Targeting Arabic-Speaking Audiences

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Atheism has stirred up controversy in the Arabic-speaking world since the 2011 uprisings, when atheists there began appearing in public. What role does Arabic mass media play in the modern politics of minorities such as atheists, given the heated debates that it hosts on atheism? This question is important because perceptions of media frames influence the behavior of politicians and the electorate—and, as a result, laws that affect minority groups such as atheists. This article focuses on Lebanon, where eight of the nine television channels are affiliated with and funded by religious–political parties. It explores the existence of bias against atheists on televised Lebanese talk shows and news reports (2010–2022). Our findings reveal significant bias (69% overall and over 85% in speaker prominence bias), with channels that promote communal religious practice exhibiting the highest levels. Ultimately, our findings demonstrate that television, as the most influential Lebanese and Arabic mass medium, likely affects the public’s negative perceptions of Arabic-speaking atheists. Our findings reflect the decrease in objectivity in conflict-based media and such media’s poor understanding or intentional disregard for media’s crucial role in building a fair, democratic society.

show abstract

“…There is good reason to be skeptical that the absence of belief alone could form a coherent worldview or social group due in-part to its inconspicuousness (Schiavone & Gervais, 2017). Atheists do, however, have many other positive beliefs from which to construct a worldview.…”

Section: Atheism As Functionally Adaptive Similar To Religionmentioning

confidence: 99%