Rejecting <scp>D</scp>arwin and Support for Science Funding

Freeman, Patricia K.; Houston, David J.

doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00812.x

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The performance of our social and demographic controls across the four models also deserves attention. Consistent with past research (Evans 2012, Freeman andHouston 2011, Gauchat 2008), Christians report less trust in scientists in general, less trust in both production scientists and impact scientists, and less support for science to be used in policy-making than non-religious respondents. Further, compared to non-religious respondents, non-Christians report less trust in both production and impact scientists.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 77%

The influence of political ideology on trust in science

McCright

Dentzman

Charters

et al. 2013

Environ. Res. Lett.

207

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 77%

The influence of political ideology on trust in science

McCright

Dentzman

Charters

et al. 2013

Environ. Res. Lett.

207

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…First, many studies treat attitudes about science as either outcomes or antecedents of religious attitudes and behaviors (Evans 2011;Freeman and Houston 2011;Sherkat 2011). Yet conceptualizing the relationship in this way assumes that views of science and religion are causally related.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Traditional, Modern, and Post-Secular Perspectives on Science and Religion in the United States

O’Brien

Noy

2015

Am Sociol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using General Social Survey data, we examine perspectives on science and religion in the United States. Latent class analysis reveals three groups based on knowledge and attitudes about science, religiosity, and preferences for certain religious interpretations of the world. The traditional perspective (43 percent) is marked by a preference for religion compared to science; the modern perspective (36 percent) holds the opposite view. A third perspective, which we call post-secular (21 percent), views both science and religion favorably. However, when faced with competing accounts of events such as creation and evolution, post-seculars root their views in religion rather than in mainstream science. Regression models indicate that perspectives on science and religion do not simply mirror other denominational or ideological differences. Furthermore, religio-scientific perspectives shape attitudes about political issues where scientific and some religious communities diverge, including on abortion rights and stem cell research. Overall, most individuals favor either scientific or religious ways of understanding, but many scientifically inclined individuals prefer certain religious accounts. This suggests that public divisions related to science and religion are cultural and epistemological. This article underscores the complexity of the boundary between reason and faith and highlights the roots of political conflict in perspectives on science and religion in the United States.

show abstract

“…Although many recent studies have examined why this may be the case, with religion often serving as the focal predictor (e.g., Evans 2011;Hill 2014;Sherkat 2011), none have examined how belief about evolution influences individuals' life outcomes. Rejecting evolution is linked to lower levels of support for science funding (Freeman and Houston 2011) and higher levels of support for teaching creation in public schools (Berkman, Pacheco, and Plutzer 2008), but there is a lack of research on how these beliefs impact individuals' life chances broadly, and particularly with respect to important domains such as socioeconomic status generally and educational attainment specifically.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beliefs About Evolution and Educational Attainment

Longest

Uecker

2018

Sociological Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using panel data from the National Study of Youth and Religion, we examine the effect of beliefs about evolution in high school on several postsecondary educational outcomes. Results indicate that net of a host of background factors and potential alternative explanatory factors, there are significant associations between beliefs about evolution and pursuing or obtaining a bachelor's degree, such that pure creationists (i.e., creationists who do not allow for the possibility that God used evolution to create the world) are less likely than naturalists to be on this trajectory. Further, when they do attend college, pure creationists and flexible creationists (i.e., creationists who allow for the possibility that God used evolution) both attend less selective colleges than naturalists, and pure creationists are less likely than naturalists to major in biology. These results suggest that evolution is a morally salient issue for many that influences their educational trajectories, highlighting the role that cultural schemas can play in shaping socioeconomic status.

show abstract

Rejecting Darwin and Support for Science Funding

Cited by 8 publications

References 23 publications

The influence of political ideology on trust in science

The influence of political ideology on trust in science

Traditional, Modern, and Post-Secular Perspectives on Science and Religion in the United States

Beliefs About Evolution and Educational Attainment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About