Explaining Differing Democratic Norm Commitment: Rethinking the Religion-Psychological Security-Democratic Norm Support Connection

Abstract

The psychological security index is an important predictor of democratic norm support. However, insufficient attention has been paid to the separate but independent contributions of dogmatism, self-esteem, and trust, the three components typically combined to create that index. Thus, we do not know the unique influence of these components on democratic norm commitment. We also do not know the exact nature of the influence of the multiple dimensions of religion (belief, belonging, behavior) on the separate psychological security components. Using structural equation modeling and two national surveys, we examine the religion-psychological security-democratic norm support relationship. Our findings do not fully support a negative association between religion and democratic values. In fact, no matter the influence of religious belief, belonging, or behavior on psychological security, the mediating link of psychological security to democratic norm support is what is most important. Indeed, any differences that manifest as a consequence of the various dimensions of religion disappear in the religion-psychological security-democratic norm support linkage. As such, anti-democratic values are a product of one's psychological attributes and are almost entirely unrelated to one's religion. Further, our findings challenge the theoretical underpinnings of the psychological security index, as we find little evidence that the separate components used to construct the composite measure, particularly trust, are an appropriate proxy for authoritarianism.

Religion and Democratic Commitment: A Unifying Motivational Framework

“…Multidimensional studies suggest that these different expressions of religiosity may have different and even conflicting effects on endorsement of democratic norms due to their association with different psychological mechanisms (Arikan & Ben‐Nun Bloom, 2019a, 2019b; Ben‐Nun Bloom & Arikan, 2012, 2013a, 2013b; Ben‐Nun Bloom et al, 2015; Eisenstein, 2006; Eisenstein & Clark, 2017; Verkuyten et al, 2014). In most of these studies, the focus is on the effects of belief and behavior (Arikan & Ben‐Nun Bloom, 2019a, 2019b; Ben‐Nun Bloom & Arikan, 2012, 2013a; Meyer, Tope, & Price, 2008), while belonging to a specific religious group (often a religious tradition, denomination, or congregation) is often thought to set the context and affect the political expression of religious belief, identity, and behavior (Kellstedt & Green, 1993; Layman, 1997; Wald & Wilcox, 2006).…”