Social Support and the Religious Dimensions of Close Ties

Abstract

Despite the influence of social support on physical and mental health, few studies have examined why some close ties are more supportive than others. Though religion provides a rich context for social interaction and a meaningful social identity, it has received little attention in the social support literature. A growing literature on religion and health offers insight into how religion affects social support processes. Using dyadic network data derived from the nationally representative 2006 Portraits of American Life Study, I examine how the religious dimensions of close, nonhousehold ties relate to provision of social support. Results from logistic regression analyses indicate that (controlling for a range of other social tie characteristics) same‐faith ties are significantly more likely to be sources of help “in times of need,” while religious discussion is a strong predictor of receiving both help and advice. The effect of religious homophily is strongest for evangelical Protestants and African‐American Protestants. My findings underscore the need for social support researchers to consider the role of religion in shaping support processes in close relationships.

Family Formation and Close Social Ties Within Religious Congregations

“…The two dependent variables have different relative strengths, which is why both are used in the study. The total number of close friendship ties within one's congregation may reflect more opportunity for social support from the religious community because having a higher number of close ties positively correlates with more social support (Merino, ). The latter dependent variable reflects “social encapsulation” because higher religious homogeneity often entails greater social influence through a lack of exposure to alternative views (see Stark & Bainbridge, ).…”

“…Religious organizations often help connect fellow congregants to one another (Edgell, ; Ellison & George, ), providing potential ties to like‐minded individuals and access to important family life advice. Congregational social ties have been linked to improvements in health (Krause, ), life satisfaction (Lim & Putnam, ), and general social support (Merino, ). According to Stolzenberg, Blair‐Loy, and Waite (, p. 99), the social support found within congregations is particularly valuable for “young adults facing the demands of launching a marriage and rearing children.” In a modern context, where younger adults are increasingly using congregations as “social insurance” in times of need (Wuthnow, , p. 151), the social support found in congregations may attract younger families seeking additional help because of the various stressors that accompany childrearing.…”

The Influence of Close Ties on Depression: Does Network Religiosity Matter?

“…If social networks tend to exhibit religious homophily, this may have implications for the receipt of social support. Previous findings show that help and advice is more likely to flow from same‐faith friends (Merino 2014). Religious adherents may feel a moral obligation to help and trust their coreligionists more than those who do not share the same faith (Goodman and Dollahite 2006; Graham and Haidt 2010; Putnam and Campbell 2010).…”

“…For instance, Perry and Pescosolido (2010) found that individuals only discuss health matters with a select few confidants. But past research has found that religious discussion is a fairly common phenomenon: Americans report discussing religious matters with approximately half of their closest nonresidential network ties (Merino 2014; Schafer 2018).…”

Atheism, Social Networks and Health: A Review and Theoretical Model

“…As regards demographic diversity, the social networks of religious people, particularly those who are politically conservative and religiously devout (e.g., evangelical Protestants), tend to be less racially diverse compared to the social networks of non-church attenders (Blanchard, 2007;Porter, 2010;Lewis et al, 2013;Merino, 2014;Porter & Capellan, 2014). Devout Christians in the US have been found to belong to exclusionary "closed communities," that are intolerant of homosexuals, immigrants and nonwhites (Emerson & Smith, 2000;Tranby & Hartmann, 2008;Edgell & Tranby, 2010;Sherkat, 2014).…”