Highly religious adults more engaged with family, more likely to volunteer Highly religious adults not distinctive in interpersonal interactions, health, social religious beliefs, values and connections in their day-to-day lives. Much of the literature examining the influence of religious socialization has been on the religious development of children than did a parochial school education. the importance of “social learning” and the construction of a religious worldview. The impact of family, church, and peer socialization on adult religiosity as. as aspects of a more extended interpersonal relations approach to development within culture. since marriage and parenthood is no longer a normative event in the life of an adult. Theoretical Approaches on Social Development in Culture caretaker psychology (i.e., parents' cultural belief systems).
Women report higher levels of home religious observance, greater frequency of attendance at religious services, a greater proportion of active LDS friends during the teenage years, and more decline in active LDS friends from the teenage years to young adulthood.
Furthermore, they also report higher levels of adult religious belief and commitment. While the effect of gender on frequency of attendance at religious services, active LDS friends, and adult religiosity is not surprising, one might question the theoretical link between gender and the amount of home religious observance reported in the teenage years.
Two explanations for this are possible. First, response bias may account for the slight correlation. Women report higher levels of religiosity and recall greater religious activity in their homes during the teenage years. However, another explanation is just as compelling. It may mean that women experience more home religious observance in their youth than men.
Much of the responsibility for initiating home religious observance may fall upon women, and perhaps the young women themselves act as an important catalyst for encouraging parents and siblings to have family prayer, scripture reading, and the like. At this point, the analysis suggests family socialization variables have less impact than church and peer socialization variables. However, because the family, church, and peer socialization variables are highly correlated, further analysis must be done to isolate the impact of each of the variables and to examine their interrelatedness.
The advantages of LISREL over other analysis programs are 1 it provides a chi square measure of fit, 2 it requires specificity of assumptions about measurement error, and 3 it handles reciprocal causation or interdependence among the variables in the model. It also allows for the introduction of latent, unobserv-able variables.
LISREL was used for this analysis because it enables us to control for the effect of uncorrelated errors. Recall data is often suspect, and the introduction of measurement error is particularly likely with respect to data about frequency of parental church attendance and frequency of religious observance in the home.
Interdependence is a problem because it is difficult to know whether attending church during the teenage years influences friendship patterns or whether friendship patterns influence attendance at church. These relationships are reciprocal. Those teenagers who attend church on a regular basis are more likely to attend seminary, but attendance at seminary is not as likely to influence attendance at religious services.
The findings presented here are the result of an iterative process. Early model specification was based on both empirical results correlation matrix and regression analysis and theoretical insights. In some cases, the T-value less than 2. In other cases, the modification index indicated a path should be included.
Once the model was fit, both theoretically and empirically, the same model was used to predict the four measures of belief and commitment. Final model specification assumed a direct effect of six variables on adult religiosity: Each of the three family variables operate differently in the socialization process.
Theoretically, we would expect LDS family completeness would have the strongest direct effect on frequency of parental church attendance. When both parents are present and both belong to the same church, their level of religious activity is likely to be higher than if parents are of different religions, or only one parent is present.
How Religion Affects Everyday Life
Friendship choices and seminary attendance are also directly affected because of the lack of support in the family for in-group association and church participation.
However, as might be expected, parental religious activity is strongly correlated with amount of religious observance in the home, and with frequency of attendance at church during the teenage years. Teenagers are more likely to attend church if their parents attend with them. Final model specification is presented in Figure 1. The chi-squares for all models ranged between 10 and 16 with 14 degrees of freedom, indicating no significant difference between the model and the data probability levels between.
Each figure contains essentially the same structural equation model but a different measure of adult religiosity is examined. Understanding the processes of religious socialization requires careful examination of the relationships among these variables alone.
In the following discussion, the size of relevant path coefficients will be noted within parentheses. Coming from a complete LDS family increases the likelihood of also having parents who attend church regularly.
Frequency of parental church attendance has a strong positive influence on the amount of religious observance in the home. Home religious observance has a slight positive influence on seminary attendance.
Having active LDS friends is associated with both church. Proportion of active LDS friends also has a strong positive influence on decline in active LDS friends during the young adult years.Age Stereotyping, Communication, and Adult Development: Promoting Well-Being
In addition, women report higher levels of home religious observance and more frequent church attendance during their teenage years.
Contrary to earlier findings, frequency of home religious observance does not have the same direct effect on all measures of adult religiosity. The significant direct effect of YHRO on traditional orthodoxy. Frequency of home religious observance during the teenage years influences personal religiosity, but not institutional religiosity. Further model testing using frequency of personal prayer and attendance at worship services as dependent variables gives additional evidence of the relative importance of home religious observance on the private, more personalized aspects of religion.
In the meeting attendance model not shownhome religious observance does not have a direct effect on frequency of attendance. However, there is a significant direct effect of home religious observance on frequency of personal prayer.
Although seminary attendance does have an impact on adult religiosity, its impact is primarily indirect through its influence on friendship networks. Seminary attendance influences friendship choices in the young adult years coefficient equals. It is weakest for traditional orthodoxy. The strength of the DECLINE variable in predicting adult religiosity can in part be understood in light of recent research suggesting the importance of the teenage and young adult years in the development of a religious identity Albrecht, Cornwall, Cunningham, forthcoming.
Religious change frequently occurs during these years. Those who drop out or disengage from religious participation do so during the teenage or young adult years. The impact of proportion of active LDS friends during the teenage years is different for each dimension of adult religiosity.
The significance of such patterns emphasizes the importance of in-group association for institutional religiosity and the relative less importance of such association for personal religiosity. A direct effect for gender is found in the two personal religiosity models, but gender has no direct influence on institutional religiosity once the effect of other variables is controlled.
Women report higher levels of traditional orthodoxy. Attendance at meetings during the teenage years has a stronger influence on institutional commitment than on personal religious commitment. Data analysis reveals a significant direct effect of frequency of attendance during the teenage years on church commitment. Further model testing reveals youth church attendance also directly influenced adult attendance standardized coefficient equals.
The R-square for each model differs significantly from a low of. The R-square for particularistic orthodoxy is. We are less able to account for the variance in personal religiosity than we are to account for the variance in institutional religiosity, but even so, the overall amount of explained variance using religious socialization variables is less than one-fourth.
However, other model testing produced an R-square of. The amount of variance explained in these models is relatively low. One reason for this may be that we are examining the relationship between religious experiences and socialization during the teenage years with adult religiosity.
The low R-square may be an indicator of the many other factors which influence religiosity as the individual becomes an adult. This interpretation is strengthened by the results Himmelfarb found in his study of American Jews. His analysis of the effect of similar variables on eight different dimensions of religiosity produced an average R-square of.
He was able to explain slightly more of the variance in his dependent variables by including a measure of spouse religiosity. Even so, an average R-square of. Conclusions The primary importance of the family is apparent in this research, although in somewhat unexpected ways.
For the most part, the family variables did not directly influence adult religiosity, although they had a significant influence on almost every other variable in the model.
Religion in Everyday Life
When both parents are present and both are LDS, a teenager is more likely to attend seminary and is also more likely to have active LDS friends during the teenage years. When frequency of parental church attendance is high, the teenager attends church more frequently.
Findings about non-Christians are discussed in more detail at the end of Chapter 2. The survey shows a clear link between what people see as essential to their faith and their self-reported day-to-day behavior. Simply put, those who believe that behaving in a particular way or performing certain actions are key elements of their faith are much more likely to say they actually perform those actions on a regular basis.
For example, among Christians who say that working to help the poor is essential to what being Christian means to them, about six-in-ten say they donated time, money or goods to help the poor in the past week. Relatively few Christians see living a healthy lifestyle, buying from companies that pay fair wages or protecting the environment as key elements of their faith.
But those who do see these things as essential to what it means to be a Christian are more likely than others to say they live a healthy lifestyle by exercising, for exampleconsider how a company treats its employees and the environment when making purchasing decisions, or attempt to recycle or reduce waste as much as possible.
Of course, survey data like these cannot prove that believing certain actions are obligatory for Christians actually causes Christians to behave in particular ways.
The causal arrow could point in the other direction: It may be easier for those who regularly engage in particular behaviors to cite those behaviors as essential to their faith. Conversely, it may be harder for those who do not regularly engage in particular activities such as helping the poor to describe those activities as essential to their faith. Nevertheless, the survey data suggest that Christians are more likely to live healthy lives, work on behalf of the poor and behave in environmentally conscious ways if they consider these things essential to what it means to be a Christian.
When asked where they look for guidance when making major life decisions, Americans overall say they rely more on their own research than on direction from experts. But while relatively few people look to religious leaders for guidance on major decisions, many Americans do turn to prayer when faced with important choices.
Other key findings in this report include: For more details on how Americans say they relate to God, see Chapter 1. One-third of religiously unaffiliated Americans say they thanked God for something in the past week, and one-in-four have asked God for help in the past week.
Chapter 11: The Influence of Three Agents of Religious Socialization: Family, Church, and Peers
For more details, see Chapter 1. Having regular conversations about religion is most common among evangelicals and people who belong to churches in the historically black Protestant tradition.
For more details on how often Americans talk about religion, see Chapter 1. For more details on volunteering, see Chapter 1. For more details on meditation and stress, see Chapter 1. For more details on how Americans make purchasing decisions, see Chapter 1. For more details, see Chapter 3. For more details, see Chapter 2. The remainder of this report explores these and other findings in greater depth.
Chapter 1 provides greater detail on how Americans from various religious backgrounds say they live their day-to-day lives.