Social Psychology Of Religion Research Articles

A Social Psychology of Religion with a Phenomenological Case Study

This article defines religion in terms of some of its major characteristics. Special attention is paid to how religion is attuned to the structure of a prevailing social order. Religion renders valuable functions within the psyche of individuals and renders justification to the integrity of a community. A brief qualitative investigation utilizing interviews challenges Freud’s viewpoint about religion being a neurosis. It also illustrates that religion can be studied phenomenologically without having to bracket the concept, of God. Finally, people can live comfortably with paradoxes in their interpretations of reality. The awareness of personal limitations and the need for a sacred, embodied, immanent and transcendental world ensures the future of religion.

Hume and Smith on Natural Religion

AbstractThe prominence of David Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion in contemporary philosophy of religion has led it to overshadow his other short work, The Natural History of Religion, and thus obscure the fact that the social psychology of religion was in many ways of greater interest and more widely debated among the philosophers of the Scottish Enlightenment than philosophical theology. This paper examines and compares the social psychology of religion advanced by Hume and Adam Smith. It argues that Hume's account of the psychological sources and social significance of religion is less satisfactory than Smith's.

Philosophical commitments, empirical evidence, and theoretical psychology

The philosophical or theoretical commitments informing psychological research are sometimes characterized, even by theoretical psychologists themselves, as nonempirical, outside the bounds of methodological consideration, and/or nonrational. We argue that this characterization is incoherent. We illustrate our concern by analogy with problematic appeals to Kuhn’s work that have been influential in theoretical psychology. Following the contemporary pragmatist tradition, we argue that our philosophical/theoretical commitments are part of our larger webs of belief, and that for any of these beliefs to have meaning their content must be informed by our practical engagement with the world, i.e., they are based on empirical evidence, broadly construed. It is this empirical basis that allows us to recognize our commitments at all and rationally to assess and criticize them when necessary. We conclude by demonstrating a rational assessment of the philosophical/theoretical commitments underlying a recent study in the social psychology of religion.

Who can give ‘spiritual care’? The management of spiritually sensitive interactions between nurses and patients

This article considers the purpose of contemporary 'spiritual care' in order to help managers make informed decisions about its appropriate delivery in a clinical context. Although there are national policies in place concerning spiritual care, surveys indicate that nurses are reluctant to engage with the spiritual needs of patients. A consideration of the character of spiritual care indicates the need to take account of the context of contemporary Western society. A model drawn from the social psychology of religion is used to analyse the different types of nurse-patient interaction available in the provision of spiritual care. Although religious and spiritual commitments can vary widely, they are subject to the same pressures in a secular and pluralist social context. This enables some general guidelines to be developed. Effective spiritual care requires a consideration of both the patient's and the nurse's implicit and explicit religious commitments. Nurse managers need to take account of the personal commitments of nurses when directing them to offer spiritual care. This article offers a diagnostic tool for deploying nurses in an appropriate way.

THE EXPERIMENTAL ECONOMICS OF RELIGION

AbstractThis paper surveys the experimental economics approach to the study of religion. The field has a place in the context of the scientific study of religion generally and the social psychology of religion in particular, but employs distinct economic methods which promise new and different insights. In particular, certain features of the experimental approach as used by economists such as incentive compatibility are particularly appropriate for studying the effect of religion on individual behaviour. The paper discusses results obtained so far in terms of two roles of religion in shaping individual behaviour, that is, as a social group identifier and as a set of values.

The Social Psychology of Religion: Current Research Themes

In the Western world in recent years, concerns about the (potential and actual) social and political implications of the rise of ‘fundamentalist Islam’ have seen a range of questions being raised and culturally debated concerning the social risk/value of Islam in particular and religion in general and its role within the state. These debates have often become polarized, with anti-religious definitive positions attracting considerable attention, most notably in the form of Richard Dawkins’ (2006) best-selling book, The God Delusion. This book (and those embodying the same outlook published around the same time and subsequently) represents belief in God as irrational and constructs religion as having a corrupting influence on values and ethics and as having lain at the heart of a variety of social evils across history. This body of literature has inspired critical responses from religious and, more frequently, specifically Christian writers (for example, see Beattie, 2007; Ward, 2008). Some of the questions raised in these debates invoke standard social psychological concerns such as identity, group processes and intergroup relations, with a focus on trying to understand what fosters pro-social and anti-social behaviours that appear to be motivated and justified by religion. These questions have been studied in relation to religion by scholars within social psychology and within the psychology and sociology of religion, even if the complexity of the issues identified in this research has not always been reflected in cultural debates. For example, the Dawkins-related and other literature has sought to defend the Western liberal ‘moral zeitgeist’ against what it has constructed as the threat posed by inherently prejudiced (fundamentalist) religion. However, social psychological research on prejudice and religion suggests a complex relationship between the two, with religion potentially promoting prejudice and also potentially attenuating it, depending upon contextual and mediating factors (see Hunsberger & Jackson, 2005). More generally, it has been proposed that to understand religiously-based social behaviours, it is necessary to see them as regulated by a set of personal, social and cognitive systems of meanings, with these systems interacting with each other and with religion (Paloutzian & Silberman, 2003). Such viewpoints are quite different from the simplistic, decontextualized understandings of religious behaviours that are sometimes seen within current cultural debates. It therefore seems an opportune time to review some of the themes that are currently being explored within research that can be located under the heading of ‘the social psychology of religion’. However, exactly what constitutes ‘the social psychology of religion’ is open to debate, as is the nature of broader domain, ‘the psychology of religion’.

The Experimental Economics of Religion

This paper surveys the experimental economics approach to the study of religion. The field has a place in the context of the scientific study of religion generally and the social psychology of religion in particular, but employs distinct economic methods which promise new and different insights. In particular, certain features of the experimental approach as used by economists such as incentive compatibility are particularly appropriate for studying the effect of religion on individual behaviour. The paper discusses results obtained so far in terms of two roles of religion in shaping individual behaviour, that is, as a social group identifier and as a set of values.

Religion and Views on Reproductive Technologies: A Comparative Study of Jews and Non-Jews

Volume 10, No.1 Fall1991 57 RELIGION AND VIEWS ON REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF JEWS AND NON-JEWS1 Harriet L. Parmet and Judith N. Lasker Harriet L. Parmet is Lecturer in Hebrew in the modern foreign languages department at Lehigh University. She has a particular interest in modern Israeli literature, especially the work of women writers. She is currently conducting research on the life of freedom fighter Haviva Reik, who was killed after returning from Israel to her native Czechoslovakia during World War II to fight the Nazis. Judith N. Lasker is Professor of Sociology in the Department of Social Relations at Lehigh University. Her research has been primarily in medical sociology and women's health issues, in particular on the impact of pregnancy loss and infertility. She is co-author of Mzen Pregnancy Fails: Families Coping with Miscamage, Ectopic Pregnancy, Stillbirth and Infant Death and of In Search of Parenthood: Coping with Infertility and High-Tech Conception. New developments in reproductive technology have proliferated throughout the last decade and received enormous attention from the public. In vitro fertilization, artificial insemination, and surrogate motherhood have all been the subject of controversy at the same time as they are becoming more widely used by infertile people seeking a solution to their desire for children. A few public opinion polls have been conducted in an attempt to assess attitudes toward these methods of conception.2 None have considered the possible impact of religious affiliation or of religious commitment on these 1Acknowledgments are due to Alice Mesaros and Aileen Wells for assisting with the data analysis and to the Lehigh University Unsponsored Research Fund for financial support. Thanks to Marshall Sklare, Daniel Lasker, Steven M. Cohen, Larry Greil, and Jonathan Parmet for their suggestions on earlier drafts and to Renee Cohen at the American Jewish Committee for supplying data on college freshmen . An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Association for Jewish Studies meetings, December 1986. 58 SHOFAR attitudes, although religious leaders have often taken strong positions (both for and against) on the new technologies, and religious affiliation and religiosity are often important predictors of beliefs and attitudes. In this paper we report the results of a study of college students' attitudes to a variety of reproductive technologies, comparing the results for Jews, Protestants, and Catholics in order to assess whether there is a significant difference in attitudes among the three groups. We are also interested in whether variations in self-reported religiosity in the sample as a whole are associated with differences in opinions on these new methods of conception. Background Research on the relationship of religious affiliation to attitudes has consistently uncovered distinctions among Protestants, Catholics, and Jews. This has been true in the American political arena, where Protestants have been more likely to vote Republican, while Jews and Catholics have traditionally been more inclined to the Democrats. There are also differences in attitudes toward issues such as civil rights, with Jews consistently taking what has been cOnsidered a more liberal position.3 Protestants have regularly been found to be more conservative than non-Protestants on a variety of attitudes.4 Gerhard Lenski, in his classic study of American religious groups. The Religious Factor,5 found that only Jews were consistently liberal on each of four socio-political issues (freedom of speech, foreign aid, welfare state, and racial integration). Everett Ladd, in reviewing studies of the relative liberalism of Jews, Protestants, and Catholics,6 concluded that Jews continue to be appreciably more liberal in their views and continue to describe themselves as more liberal than the other two groups. The differences were particularly 2Judith N. Lasker and Susan Borg, In Search ofParenthood: Coping with Infertility and High Tech Conception (Boston: Beacon Press, 1987). 3Michael Argyle and Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, The Social Psychology of Religion (London: Routledge, 1975). 4Adrian Furnham, Christopher Johnson, and Richard Rawles, "The Determinants of Beliefs in Human Nature," Personality and Individual Differences 6 (1985): 675-684; Adrian Furnham and B. Gunter, "Just World.Beliefs and Attitudes Toward the Poor," British Joumal ofSocial Psychology 23 (1984): 265-269. 5Gerhard E. Lenski, The Religious Factor: A Sociological Study ofReligion's Impact on Politics, Economics, and...

The Social Psychology of Religion

The Social Psychology of Religion

The Social Psychology of Religion

The Social Psychology of Religion

BOOK REVIEWS

Book reviewed in this article:The Illusion of Attitude Change: Towards a Response Contagion Theory of Persuasion. By J. M. Nuttin, Snr.Society, Stress and Disease. Volume 2. Childhood and Adolescence. Edited by Lenart Levi.Stressful Life Events: Their Nature and Effects. Edited by B. S. Dohrenwend and B. P. Dohrenwend.The Origins of Fear. Edited by M. R. Lewis and L. A. Rosenblum.Principles of Psychotherapy. By I. B. Weiner.The Psychoanalysis of Artistic Vision and Hearing. An Introduction to a Theory of Unconscious Perception. By Anton Ehrenzweig.Hemispheric Disconnection and Cerebral Function. Edited by M. Kinsbourne and W. Lynn Smith.Frames and Cages: Repertory Grid Explorations of Personal Space. By Anthony Ryle.Clinical Psychology: The Study of Personality and Behaviour. By Sol L. Garfield.Understanding Conflict and War. Volume 1. The Dynamic Psychological Field. By Rudolph J. Rummel.The Social Psychology of Religion. By Michael Argyle and Benjamin Beit‐Hallahmi.Community Mental Health Programmes in England: An American View. by N. Rosenzweig.Varieties of Residential Experience. Edited by Jack Tizard, Ian Sinclair and R. V. G. Clarke.The Gifted Child. By Cyril Burt.ognition and the Symbolic Processes. Edited by Walter B. Weimer and David S. Palermo.The Tell‐Tale Eye. By Eckhard H. Hess.The Perception of Color. By Ralph M. Evans.Architectural Psychology. Proceedings of the Lund Conference. Edited by R. Kuller.Soviet Psychology: History, Theory, Content. By J. McLeish.Measurement of Human Resources. Edited by W. T. Singleton and P. Spurgeon.Lithium Research and Therapy. Edited by F. N. Johnson.

The Social Psychology of Religion

The Social Psychology of Religion

The Social Psychology of Religion

The Social Psychology of Religion

Review of Book: The Social Psychology of Religion

Review of Book: The Social Psychology of Religion

Church Adaptation to Urban Social Change: A Typology of Protestant City Congregations

EMPIRICAL research in the sociology of religion has varied widely in terms of units of analysis. Three general foci have tended to underlie most of the empirical work done in this field: the individual (e.g. the social psychology of religion)2; religion as a social movement (e.g. the sect-church typology)3; and individual churches of a deviant or unusual nature.4 With certain exceptions5 there has been relatively little attention paid to the more normal type of urban congregation. This is unfortunate because it is in these local congregations that the majority of church-goers can be found, and empirical research which ignores this aspect of religious organization is incomplete and somewhat truncated. This paper seeks to remedy the deficiency in this area of research by presenting an analysis of urban congregations in one city based upon research carried out on a sample of 37 local congregations representing two denominations. First we will present a brief discussion of the research on which the typology is based. Then we will proceed with a detailed discussion of the typology itself, ending with a brief summary of what the paper has attempted to accomplish.