Religiosity and Prejudice against Ethnic Minorities in Europe: Cross-National Tests on a Controversial Relationship

Scheepers, P.L.H.; Gijsberts, Mérove

doi:10.2307/3512331

Cited by 216 publications

(181 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

148

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the findings in the literature are inconclusive. A number of early (Glock and Stark 1969;Johnson 1977) and contemporary studies (Guiso et al 2003;Scheepers, Gijsberts, and Hello 2002) find church attendance to be positively related to out-group intolerance. Strabac and Listhaug (2008, 280) find a positive relationship in Eastern but not in Western Europe.…”

Section: Religion As a Three-dimensional Phenomenonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Religion has been found to be positively related to racial intolerance (Allport 1966;Bagley 1970;Johnson, Rowatt, and LaBouff 2010;Hall, Matz, and Wood 2010) and antiimmigrant attitudes (Scheepers, Gijsberts, and Hello 2002), despite the fact that the commandment to "love thy neighbor as thyself" is an essential teaching of the three major monotheistic religions in Europe (Anonymous 2007;Vaticana 2011). Political conflicts involving religious and ethnic identities have long been a part of European national histories.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are a few case studies looking at anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim attitudes in selected countries (Billiet and De Witte 2008;Ford 2008;Cutts, Ford, and Goodwin 2011;Frølund Thomsen 2012;Hodson, Sekulic, and Massey 1994) and a few large-scale cross-national comparisons (Coenders and Scheepers 2003;Eisinga, Billiet, and Felling 1999;Doebler 2013;Scheepers, Gijsberts, and Hello 2002;Schneider 2007;Strabac and Listhaug 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Love Thy Neighbor? Relationships between Religion and Racial Intolerance in Europe

Doebler

2015

Politics and Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:This article examines relationships between religion and racial intolerance across 47 countries by applying multi-level modeling to European survey data and is the first in-depth analysis of moderation of these relationships by European national contexts. The analysis distinguishes a believing, belonging, and practice-dimension of religiosity. The results yield little evidence of a link between denominational belonging, religious practice, and racial intolerance. The religiosity dimension that matters most for racial intolerance in Europe is believing: believers in a traditional God and believers in a Spirit/Life Force are decidedly less likely, and fundamentalists are more likely than non-believers to be racially intolerant. National contexts also matter greatly: individuals living in Europe's most religious countries, countries with legacies of ethnic-religious conflict and countries with low GDP are significantly more likely to be racially intolerant than those living in wealthier, secular and politically stable countries. This is especially the case for the religiously devout.2

show abstract

Section: Religion As a Three-dimensional Phenomenonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Love Thy Neighbor? Relationships between Religion and Racial Intolerance in Europe

Doebler

2015

Politics and Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The vast majority (over 95 %) of individuals from Moroccan or Turkish descent in the Netherlands is Muslim (Gijsberts et al 2012) whereas the majority of native Dutch people have a Christian background. More religious native Dutch individuals will perceive more cultural competition and be more likely to discriminate against Muslims (c.f., Scheepers et al 2002b). Although many younger native Dutch individuals do not attend religious services and are not registered as church members, religious identity, norms and values may still have been important in their upbringing.…”

Section: Ethnic Competitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethnic Discrimination in Recruitment and Decision Makers’ Features: Evidence from Laboratory Experiment and Survey Data using a Student Sample

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines which individual-level factors are related to people's likelihood of discriminating against ethnic minority job applicants. It moves beyond describing to what extent discrimination occurs by examining the role of individuals' interethnic contacts, education and religion in shaping their behavior towards ethnic minority job applicants. We derive expectations from theories from the interethnic attitudes literature. Data are collected via (1) a laboratory experiment in which student participants (n = 272) reviewed résumés of fictitious applicants who varied regarding ethnicity, gender, education and work experience and (2) a survey amongst the same participants. During the experiment, participants assess applicants' suitability for a job and select applicants for an interview. Additionally, participants complete a questionnaire including questions on several personal and background features. Results show that individuals who have more positive interethnic contacts, higher educational levels and higher educated parents are less likely to discriminate against ethnic minority applicants. Individuals whose parents are church members are more likely to discriminate, as are males. We find interesting differences regarding the role of decision makers' features between different stages of the recruitment process. First assessments of applicants' suitability for a job are predominantly affected by applicants' features. Differences between decision makers here are relatively small. Eventual choices about which applicants to invite for a job interview, however, are affected by both applicants' and decision makers' features; here differences between decision makers are more pronounced. Theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.

show abstract

“…120 Pluralist supernatural beliefs, as well as orthodox religious teachings of tolerance, may neutralise or limit some of this aggression and discrimination, 121 but overall -as one meta-analysis of race in the US has recently confirmed -it appears that the large majority of religious humanitarianism is still expressed towards our particular in-group. 122 And cross-cultural research is making it increasingly clear that prejudice and religiosity tend to correlate with each another across the globe, 123 whether measured by self-report or more implicit methods. 124 The relationship is not, however, uncomplicated, and a more fine-grained approach would seem to suggest that prejudice, in general, is most strongly associated with the authoritarian aspects of fundamentalism.…”

Section: Religion Intergroup Conflict and Globalisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Common-Core/Diversity Dilemma: Revisions of Humean thought, New Empirical Research, and the Limits of Rational Religious Belief

Thornhill-Miller

Millican

2015

EJPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper is the product of an interdisciplinary, interreligious dialogue aiming to outline some of the possibilities and rational limits of supernatural religious belief, in the light of a critique of David Hume's familiar sceptical arguments -including a rejection of his famous Maxim on miraclescombined with a range of striking recent empirical research. The Humean nexus leads us to the formulation of a new 'Common-Core/Diversity Dilemma' (CCDD), which suggests that the contradictions between different religious belief systems, in conjunction with new understandings of the cognitive forces that shape their common features, persuasively challenge the rationality of most kinds of supernatural belief. In support of this conclusion, we survey empirical research concerning intercessory prayer, religious experience, near-death experience, and various cognitive biases (e.g. agency detection, theory of mind, egocentric and confirmation bias). But we then go on to consider evidence that supernaturalism -even when rationally unwarranted -has significant beneficial individual and social effects, despite others (such as tribalism) that are far less desirable. This prompts the formulation of a 'Normal/Objective Dilemma' (NOD), identifying important trade-offs to be found in the choice between our humanly evolved 'normal' outlook on the world, and one that is more rational and 'objective' . Can we retain the pragmatic benefits of supernatural belief while avoiding irrationality and intergroup conflict? It may well seem that rationality is incompatible with any wilful sacrifice of objectivity (and we appreciate the force of this austere view). But in a situation of uncertainty, an attractive compromise may be available by moving from the competing factions and mutual contradictions of 'first-order' supernaturalism to a more abstract and tolerant 'second-order' view, which itself can be given some distinctive (albeit controversial) intellectual support through the increasingly popular Fine Tuning Argument. We end by proposing a 'Maxim of the Moon' to express the undogmatic spirit of this second-order religiosity, providing a cautionary

show abstract

Religiosity and Prejudice against Ethnic Minorities in Europe: Cross-National Tests on a Controversial Relationship

Cited by 216 publications

References 39 publications

Love Thy Neighbor? Relationships between Religion and Racial Intolerance in Europe

Love Thy Neighbor? Relationships between Religion and Racial Intolerance in Europe

Ethnic Discrimination in Recruitment and Decision Makers’ Features: Evidence from Laboratory Experiment and Survey Data using a Student Sample

The Common-Core/Diversity Dilemma: Revisions of Humean thought, New Empirical Research, and the Limits of Rational Religious Belief

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About