Suppr超能文献

22个国家的宗教中心地位。

Religious centrality across 22 countries.

作者信息

Woodberry Robert D, Johnson Kathryn A, Case Brendan, Bradshaw Matt, VanderWeele Tyler J, Johnson Byron R

机构信息

Institute for Studies of Religion, Baylor University, One Bear Place #97326, Waco, TX, 76798-7326, USA.

Psychology Department, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2025 Apr 30;15(1):15081. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-99183-6.

Abstract

Religious Centrality has been widely studied in Europe and North America and is generally associated with better psychological and social outcomes. Religious centrality is often assessed as a measure of intrinsic religiosity (IR)-religion as one's guiding approach to life - and has been widely validated in societies around the world. However, most studies of religious centrality/IR are cross-sectional and use samples from 'Western' societies or samples from single non-European societies. Moreover, most samples are not nationally representative. Systematic comparisons are difficult because the samples, measures, and procedures vary between studies. This article examines religious centrality across 22 nationally representative samples from religiously diverse countries from the 1 wave of the Global Flourishing Study (GFS) using a single-item IR measure and identical demographic measures and methods in each country. The study will serve as the foundation for longitudinal studies designed to assess the causal impact of religious centrality on human flourishing. In the current study, we find societies range widely, with religious centrality lowest in Europe and East Asia, moderate in the Americas and Israel, and highest in Africa and the rest of Asia. We discuss the complexities of assessing religious centrality across religious traditions, how the demographic factors associated with religious centrality vary between countries, and provide implications for secularization theory as well as theories of human flourishing.

摘要

宗教核心地位在欧洲和北美已得到广泛研究,通常与更好的心理和社会结果相关联。宗教核心地位常被视为衡量内在宗教性(IR)的指标——宗教作为个人生活的指导方式——并且在世界各地的社会中已得到广泛验证。然而,大多数关于宗教核心地位/内在宗教性的研究都是横断面研究,使用的样本来自“西方”社会或单个非欧洲社会。此外,大多数样本缺乏全国代表性。由于不同研究之间的样本、测量方法和程序各不相同,因此很难进行系统比较。本文使用单一项目的内在宗教性测量方法以及每个国家相同的人口统计测量方法和程序,对来自全球繁荣研究(GFS)第一轮的22个具有全国代表性的宗教多元化国家的样本中的宗教核心地位进行了研究。该研究将为旨在评估宗教核心地位对人类繁荣的因果影响的纵向研究奠定基础。在当前的研究中,我们发现不同社会之间差异很大,宗教核心地位在欧洲和东亚最低,在美洲和以色列适中,在非洲和亚洲其他地区最高。我们讨论了跨宗教传统评估宗教核心地位的复杂性,与宗教核心地位相关的人口因素在不同国家之间如何变化,并对世俗化理论以及人类繁荣理论提出了启示。

相似文献

1
Religious centrality across 22 countries.22个国家的宗教中心地位。
Sci Rep. 2025 Apr 30;15(1):15081. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-99183-6.
7
How secular is Europe?欧洲有多世俗化?
Br J Sociol. 2006 Jun;57(2):263-88. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-4446.2006.00109.x.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

6
The harmonic mean -value for combining dependent tests.合并相关检验的调和平均值。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Jan 22;116(4):1195-1200. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1814092116. Epub 2019 Jan 4.
8
Endogenous Selection Bias: The Problem of Conditioning on a Collider Variable.内生选择偏差:对撞机变量的条件设定问题。
Annu Rev Sociol. 2014 Jul;40:31-53. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-071913-043455. Epub 2014 Jun 2.
9
On the promotion of human flourishing.论人类繁荣的提升。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Aug 1;114(31):8148-8156. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1702996114. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
10
Sensitivity Analysis in Observational Research: Introducing the E-Value.观察性研究中的敏感性分析:引入 E 值。
Ann Intern Med. 2017 Aug 15;167(4):268-274. doi: 10.7326/M16-2607. Epub 2017 Jul 11.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验