TruthBook Religious News Blog

by Nate Silver

Note: There is a great graph chart in this article which shows clearly the elevls of confidence discussed in this article. Please click "external source" for complete article.

The longstanding project called the General Social Survey, which has polled Americans about their feelings on a variety of political and social issues for more than 35 years, just recently came out with their preliminary 2008 data (which, I should warn you, is a little bit cumbersome to access).

The only major institution to have gained a statistically significant about of trust since 2000 is the military, which is now the most trusted major institution in the country . The gain came as a result, presumably, of 9/11, with the number of Americans expressing a great deal of confidence in the military shooting up from 41 percent in 2000 to 57 percent in 2002. The figure peaked at 59 percent in 2004 and has fallen slightly since, but the rating was slightly higher in 2008 than it had been in 2006 before the Iraq conflict had begun to wind down.

Trust in major corporations plummeted following the Enron scandal and is off slightly further since. In fact, the 16 percent of Americans who said they have a great deal of confidence in such institutions is the lowest figure on record. Banks and financial institutions were holding up a bit better ... until last year, when the trust score dropped to 19 percent from 30 percent two years earlier. This is not an all-time low -- confidence in the banks had been slightly lower during the S&L crisis of the early 90s -- although we'll see where we end up once the financial crisis ends.

Confidence in organized religion also fell significantly under Bush's watch, although most of the decline came between 2000 and 2002, when the rating dropped from 29 percent to 19 percent. I'm not sure whether that was the result of the Catholic priest scandals, some odd kind of ricochet from 9/11, or something else, but the scores have yet to really recover.

Medicine is less trusted than it once was -- the 39 percent score it achieved in 2008 was an all-time low -- and to a lesser extent so is science. Nobody, whatever their political persuasions, has much trust in the press, although the decline came long ago in the 1980s, perhaps as conservatives learned the utility of bashing the institution. And some instutitons are perennially unpopular -- particularly the Congress, which has never polled higher in this survey than 17 percent (in 1984).

We are not a very trusting bunch, it would seem.

Labels: confidence, General Social Survey, medicine, Nate Silver, organized religion, politics, the military

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Monday, November 03, 2008

America's Trust Fall

Trust is essential to strong relationships and a healthy society, but it has been declining for decades, report Pamela Paxton and Jeremy Adam Smith. How can America learn to trust again?

"Trust no one."

That was the slogan of the TV series The X-Files, which followed two FBI agents in their quest to uncover "the truth" about a government conspiracy. Perhaps the most defining series of the 1990s, The X-Files touched a cultural nerve and captured a mood of growing distrust in America.

In the six years since the series ended, however, our trust in each other has declined even further, despite a brief rebound after September 11. The mood of cynicism and distrust captured by The X-Files in the '90s seems just as relevant today indeed, a new X-Files movie was released this past summer. The decline or absence of trust also figures prominently in more recent hit TV series like Mad Men, Survivor, and The Sopranos.

In fact, "trust no one" has essentially served as Americans' motto over the last two generations. For 40 years the years of Vietnam, Watergate, junk bonds, Monica Lewinsky, Enron, the Catholic Church sex scandals, and the Iraq war our trust in each other has been dropping steadily, while trust in many institutions has been seriously shaken in response to scandals.

This trend is documented in a variety of national surveys. The General Social Survey, a periodic assessment of Americans' moods and values, shows a 10-point decline from 1976 to 2006 in the number of Americans who believe other people can generally be trusted. The General Social Survey also shows declines in trust in our institutions, although these declines are often closely linked to specific events. From the 1970s to today, trust has declined in the press (24 to 11 percent), education (36 to 28 percent), banks (35 percent to 31 percent), corporations (26 to 17 percent), and even organized religion (35 to 25 percent). And Gallup's annual Governance survey shows that trust in the government is even lower today than it was during the Watergate era, when the Nixon administration had been caught engaging in criminal acts. It's no wonder popular culture is so preoccupied with questions of trust.

Some researchers, such as Bowling Alone author Robert Putnam, have argued that this rise of distrust reflects profound generational shifts. Americans born roughly between 1910 and 1940 were a particularly civic and trusting generation, these researchers claim, forged in the crises of the Great Depression and World War II crises that required people to rely on one another and band together. Government dealt with these crises effectively through New Deal programs and military victory over the Axis powers, winning the confidence of its citizens. That generation is now dying out, replaced by younger people who, according to this theory, are progressively less trusting (starting with Baby Boomers, whose slogan allegedly was, "Don't trust anyone over 30"). In fact, a series of focus groups, conducted in 2001 by Harvard University's GoodWork Project, revealed an "overwhelming" distrust of politicians, the political process, and the media among the teenagers they interviewed. This generational decline implies that America's waning trust in others will not easily recover.

But why have succeeding generations become progressively less trusting? There are a number of possible explanations, none of them definitive.

For starters, trust in others depends on how much contact people have with other people-and Americans today are measurably more isolated than previous generations. They have fewer close friends, for example, and are less likely to join voluntary associations such as bird-watching groups and church choirs. This is important, because people who belong to such associations tend to become more trusting as a consequence. Experiments, as well as experience, show that people trust people they know before they trust strangers—and so the more people you know, the more you trust. Researchers Nancy Buchan, Rachel Croson, and Robyn Dawes found that even when they created pseudo-groups by randomly giving study participants instructions on differently colored pieces of paper, the participants trusted members of their color "group" more than the others. The more memberships we have in groups—almost any group—the more trust we have in our lives.

The rise of television and electronic media as a major source of entertainment and news may exacerbate isolation, and thus play a role in the decline of trust. When the GoodWork Project ran another series of focus groups with adults in 2004, researchers "found that individuals typically blame the media for loss of trust."

Again, the effect appears to be generational. "Most of the young people we interviewed have a default stance of distrust towards the media," says Carrie James, research director of GoodWork. According to James, young people simply feel less tied to larger institutions and American culture—they might trust family and close friends, but "they don't have good mental models" of how to trust more distant figures.

Falling and rising

The news is not all bad. Trust in institutions hasn't fallen in a straight line; instead, it rises and falls in response to specific events. Consider how people answered the question about their confidence in religion between 1987 and 2006. In early 1987, 30 percent of the population said they had a "great deal" of confidence in organized religion. In 1987, however, several televangelist scandals erupted, including that of Jim Bakker. By 1988, confidence in organized religion had dropped to 21 percent. Americans' confidence then rebounded from 1988 to 2000, eventually climbing back to pre-scandal levels. Then in 2002, as a result of the Catholic Church's sex scandals, confidence in religious institutions dropped dramatically again, to 19 percent. Since 2002, confidence in organized religion has again rebounded—to 25 percent in 2006.

Unfortunately, Americans' trust in one another does not generally react to historical events the way their trust in institutions does. In fact, according to the General Social Survey, trust in each other has declined much more steadily and consistently than has our trust in institutions. Since there are few, if any, scandals that seem to impugn the "average person," it takes a major event to influence America's trust in individuals in the way that their trust in institutions is routinely influenced.

Research has identified steps institutions can take to promote trust and help reduce distrust. For example, by protecting minority rights (through voting protections and antidiscrimination policies), a government can facilitate trust and cooperation among individuals who might otherwise be wary of each other. Indeed, looking at 46 countries over a 10-year period, one of us (Pamela Paxton) found that more democratic countries—countries that safeguard these kinds of rights—produce more trusting citizens.

In the end, it is our natural drive to trust that offers our best hope of rebuilding trust in America. That drive was summed up by the tagline for a recent summer film: "I want to believe." Which film? The new X-Files movie. As the switch suggests, even in the worst of times, lurking under our suspicious gaze lies a need to trust in each other.

Labels: General Social Survey, Jeremy Adam Smith, Pamela Paxton, trust

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Survey: Non-attendees find faith outside church

By Cathy Lynn Grossman

A new survey of U.S. adults who don't go to church, even on holidays, finds 72% say "God, a higher or supreme being, actually exists." But just as many (72%) also say the church is "full of hypocrites."

Indeed, 44% agree with the statement "Christians get on my nerves."

LifeWay Research, the research arm of the Southern Baptist Convention, based in Nashville, conducted the survey of 1,402 "unchurched" adults last spring and summer. The margin of error is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points.

The survey defines "unchurched" as people who had not attended a religious service in a church, synagogue or mosque at any time in the past six months.

More than one in five (22%) of Americans say they never go to church, the highest ever recorded by the General Social Survey, conducted every two years by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago. In 2004, the percentage was 17%.

Many of the unchurched are shaky on Christian basics, says LifeWay Research director Ed Stetzer.

Just 52% agree on the essential Christian belief that "Jesus died and came back to life."

And 61% say the God of the Bible is "no different from the gods or spiritual beings depicted by world religions such as Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.," although Buddhist philosophy has no god and Hindus worship many.

Belief in 'a generic god'

Most of the unchurched (86%) say they believe they can have a "good relationship with God without belonging to a church." And 79% say "Christianity today is more about organized religion than loving God and loving people."

But despite respondents' critical views of organized religion, Stetzer is optimistic. He cites the finding that 78% would "be willing to listen" to someone tell "what he or she believed about Christianity."

They already know believers — 89% of the unchurched have at least one close friend who is Christian, Stetzer noted.

And 71% agreed that "believing in Jesus makes a positive difference in a person's life."

The direct approach

Still, most of Christian belief has seeped into popular culture outside church walls and denominational tethers, says Philip Goff, a professor and director of the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University in Indianapolis.

New forms of community, such as Internet Bible study and prayer circles, also mean some people don't believe they need a church, Goff says.

"Is there a workshop for churches in being less annoying, less hypocritical?" asks Arthur Farnsley, administrator for the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion and a fellow at Goff's center.

"So much of American religion today is therapeutic in approach, focused on things you want to fix in your life," he says.

"The one-to-one approach is more attractive. People don't go to institutions to fix their problems.

"Most people have already heard the basic Christian message. The question for evangelism now is: Do you have a take that is authentic and engaging in a way that works for the unchurched?"

Labels: Cathy Lynn Grossman, Christianity, church, faith, General Social Survey, God, LifeWay Research, Southern Baptist Convention

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Monday, October 29, 2007

Do-it-yourself Christianity

Independent congregations are slowly chipping away at the ‘trusted brands’ as the Christian faith becomes more like Wikipedia and less like Encyclopedia Britannica.

By Henry G. Brinton

The search for accurate information about 2008 presidential hopefuls has become tougher than ever, especially online. Bloggers often tout opinions instead of facts, and amateur editors or even political activists can revise Wikipedia entries on the candidates. The English-language version of this popular online encyclopedia has at least 5.5 million registered users, and any one of them can edit the site. In Virginia, a Republican state legislator recently included comments from a blog in an attack ad against his Democratic opponent — comments that cannot be verified, identified only as what "others are saying."

As a Presbyterian pastor, I'm often approached by people who are on a search for truth, and as I attempt to help them, I draw on my religious tradition, sacred Scriptures and theological training. Unfortunately, more and more people are taking their quest directly to the Internet, surfing for religious as well as political insights.

I'm convinced that the Christian faith is becoming more like Wikipedia and less like Encyclopedia Britannica. Instead of time-tested religious insights, people are accepting "what others are saying."

A generation ago, people turned to trusted authorities such as newspapers and mainline churches to get information. But trust in such institutions has fallen over the past 30 years, eroding the relationship between Americans and a number of traditional sources of trust. A poll called the General Social Survey has asked people whether they have "a great deal of confidence" in social institutions, and their answers reveal a clear decline.

According to this survey by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, confidence has dropped since the 1970s in:

* Banks and financial institutions (From 35% to 28%).

* Major companies (26% to 17%).

* The press (24% to 9%).

* Education (36% to 27%).

* Organized religion (35% to 24%).

Whether you attribute this fall to Watergate or Enron or clergy sexual misconduct, the damage has clearly been done.

Labels: bloggers, General Social Survey, Henry G. Brinton, institutions, religion, Wikipedia

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Study: Upbringing Why Most Scientists Not Religious

2007-07-02 19:02:58

BEIJING, July 2 (Xinhuanet) --

A new study suggests household upbringing -- not the study of science or academic pressure -- is most often the determining factor when it comes to whether or not a scientist is religious.

"Our study data do not strongly support the idea that scientists simply drop their religious identities upon professional training, due to an inherent conflict between science and faith, or to institutional pressure to conform," said Elaine Howard Ecklund, a sociologist at the University at Buffalo and co-author of the study.

"It is important to understand this, because we face religious-scientific controversies over stem-cell research and evolution," Ecklund said Friday.

Detailed in the latest issue of the journal Social Problems, the study is based on a survey of 1,646 scientists at 21 elite research universities and in-depth interviews with 271 of the scientists. The survey contacted researchers specializing in physics, chemistry, biology, sociology, economics, political science, psychology and other fields.

Ecklund used data from the 1998 and 2004 General Social Survey (GSS), a national survey conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, for general population information. Ecklund then compared the data to the scientists’set, which was modeled after the GSS.

The data revealed 52 percent of scientists surveyed had no religious affiliation, compared with only 14 percent of the general population. Of the religious scientists, however, 15 percent identified themselves as Jewish compared to 2 percent of the religious general population.

And 14 percent of the general population described themselves as "evangelical" or "fundamentalist." Less than 2 percent of scientists, however, identified themselves as either of these. Younger scientists were more likely to believe in God and attend religious services than older scientists.

If these young and religious scientists continue to stay religious, Ecklund said, "it could indicate an overall shift in attitudes toward religion among those in the academy."

Labels: Elaine Howard Ecklund, General Social Survey, National Opinion Research Center, religion, scientists, upbringing