Here it appears that, in general,
subjects
professing the same religion as the mother have a higher score on A-S or E than do subjects professing a religion different from that of the mother.
Adorno-T-Authoritarian-Personality-Harper-Bros-1950
72 4.
19 1.
90
C o ~m b i n e d
N Mean N~an N--rii'ean N
3. 37 297 3. 45 0 0 47
1. 46
4. 70 140 1. 90 52 2. 50 42 1. 70 63
1. 43
1. 48
1. 36
. . . . , ;I:
1:'-i
Oyer-all
. . . . , ;I: 0 ~
:::1
~
. . . . . . 1. 26 > z
1. 32 "d 1:'-i ~ Cll
1. 59
z
>
1. 60 r<
1. 63 :::1
><I
? ETHNOCENTRISM AND RELIGIOUS A TTITUDES
213
obtained by means of the question, "How often do you attend services? " which appeared in all forms of the questionnaire are given in Table z(VI). Our supposition with respect to those who attend regularly is not borne out. The mean score for subjects in this category is not significantly different from the means of those who attend often or of those who attend seldom. If, however, we combine these three categories, "regularly," "often," "sel- dom," and compare the mean score of subjects in this broader category with that of subjects who say they never attend, then it appears that the latter score very notably lower. Once again, it appears that those who reject re- ligion have less ethnocentrism than those who seem to accept it. What it is among the latter that makes for high or for low scores has still to be discovered.
d. RELIGIOUS AFFILIATIONS OF PARENTS. It may be inquired whether re- ligious subjects do not differ, in a way that is significant for prejudice, with respect to the manner in which religious pressures have been applied and the manner in which they have been accepted. It has been pointed out earlier that a group membership which the subject chooses for himself may have a different significance than a group membership which he has by virtue of having grown up within it. It may be suggested also that the homogeneity of the religious pattern to which the subject was subjected during his forma- tive years and the consistency with which religious pressures have been applied have a bearing upon prejudice. Some light may be shed upon these matters by examining the data obtained by asking the subjects to state on their questionnaires what was or is the religion of their father and of their mother. This made it possible to consider various relations between father's religion and that of the mother as possible correlates of ethnocentrism score.
The results of this proceeding are shown in Table 3(VI). Here it is worth noting that, with each form of the questionnaire, A-S or E score is slightly higher on the average in those subjects whose father and mother had the same religion than in those whose parents had different religions. 4 The dif- ference which appears in the over-all totals probably approaches statistical significance. In groups taking Forms 78 and 6o the mean score is slightly lower for subjects neither of whose parents was religious than for subjects in either of the first two categories; in the case of the three groups taking Forms 40 and 45 whose responses were analyzed, the number of subjects in the category "neither religious" is so small as to be negligible. These results suggest that ethnocentrism may be higher in subjects whose parents presented
4 Calculations of this relationship were performed on only one group taking Form 45 and two groups taking Form 40. The relationships with which we were concerned had appeared so consistently in all groups examined up to the time Form 6o was revised, that it seemed we might economize merely by sampling the remaining groups. This, as it turned out, was not very fortunate, in as much as some of the relationships found with Forms 78 and 6o are not confirmed in the groups selected for analysis from among those taking Forms 40 and 45?
? TABLE 3 (VI)
MEAN A? S OR E SCORES FOR GROUPS SHOWING VARIOUS RELATIONS BETWEEN FATHER'S RELIGION AND MOTHER'S RELIGION
Groups taking Form 78:
Public Speaking Class Women 75 Public Speaking Class Men 36 Extension Psychology Class Women 25 Professional Women 35
Totals: 171
Groups taking Form 60:
3. 42 3. 40 3. 43 2. 73 3. 28
14 2. 89 2 1. 40 5 2. 66 6 3. 00 140 3. 32 1. 43 53. 66 0 21. 20 24. 30 523. 34 1. 48
M >
Univ. of Oregon Student Women 22
Univ. of Oregon and Univ. of 37 3. 54 7
3. 43 l. 38 z 3. 25 1. 29 '"0
California Student Women
Univ. o f Oregon and Univ. o f 41
California Student Men
Totals: 100
Groups taking For111 45:
Maritime School Men 120
Groups taking Form 40:
Geo. washington Univ. Women 78 Maritime School Men 115 Totals: 193
M
~
Over-all Totals: 584 4. 03 186
I. 96
21 2. 81 63 3. 78 929 3. 87
9
3. 17 6 3. 38 22
4. 36 30
4. 29 45 5. 20 19 4. 83 64
47
3. 47
8
3. 54 4 2. 88 4
2. 21 3 2. 88 11
4. 60 18
Relation Between Father? sand Mother's Religion
Same Different M~Relig! QJIS F Religious Neither
Reli~ion Reli~ion MNot R e l i g i o u s Blank O v e r - a l l ,. . . ,
N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean S. D.
:I:
38 7 10 15
70
3. 53 3. 19 3. 20 2. 37 3. 20
3. 69
2. 66 3
2. 94 5 3. 16 16
4. 24 9
3. 84 3 4. 80 12 4. 12 15
3. 68 70
~
9 30
2. 3702
1. 05 2. 13
3. 75 3. 42
2. 71
1. 71 54
2. 57 1. 37 ~
4. 55 0 2 2. 80 3. 47 42 3. 40 1. 36 :I: 230
2. 97 2
3. 72 2 3. 47 1
2. 10 0 3. 17 3
4. 94 0
2. 67 0 4. 47 0 4. 11 0
3. 51 5
1. 40 11
2. 00 2 3. 00 2
2 2. 33 6
2 13
63 297
3. 18 1. 46
::J
>~ . . . . >
I. 78 2. 09
57 158
2. 95 3. 20
1. 26
1. 32 > t"' . . . . . ,. . . ,
~
4. 21 178
4. 36 1. 60
1 3. 40 5 2. 96 132
2 5. 20 16 '4. 99 164 5. 08 1. 76 3 4. 60 21 4. 51 296 4. 61
4. 04 l. 58
N
. . . . . . j::>.
. . . . . ;
"0'
z
? ETHNOCENTRISM AND RELIGIOUS A TTITUDES 215
a united religious front thari in subjects in whose case the religious influence from the parents was inconsistent, partial, or nonexistent. It may be that in the ethnocentric subjects whose mother and father were both religious, we are dealing with submission to ingroup authority and that the effects are the more pronounced the more consistent that authority has been.
But regardless of what might have been the relation between the father's religion and that of the mother, the subject may or may not have accepted the religious pressures of his family. Going on the assumption that in America religion is most largely a "maternal" matter, we have brought together in Table 4(VI) the mean A-S or E scores of groups showing various relations between the subject's religion and the mother's religion.
Here it appears that, in general, subjects professing the same religion as the mother have a higher score on A-S or E than do subjects professing a religion different from that of the mother. Where the mother is religious but the subject not, or the sub- ject is religious while the mother is not, the prejudice score is still lower and as we should expect, the lowest means appear when neither the subject nor the mother is religious. Concerning these results as a whole, one might say that whereas religious affiliation goes with higher scores on the scales, this is less likely to be the case if the religion is "one's own," that is to say, if it has been accepted independently of or in revolt against the main carrier of re- ligious influence in the family. Where this has been the case, the chances are that the religion has been fairly well internalized. More than this, we have reason to believe that submission to and dependence upon parental authority is an important determinant of ethnocentrism; subjects, particularly women, who profess a religion that is different from that of the mother have probably been able to free themselves from these attitudes and hence, to a considerable degree, from prejudice.
The results just presented are much more pronounced in women than in men. The explanation here might be that for men the mother is not usually a center of conflict with respect to authority and that men who side with the mother in the matter of religion may gain thereby something of that Christian humanism which works against prejudice.
These results on family relationships in relation to religion and ethnocen- trism suggest that in order to understand why some religious people are prejudiced and others are not, it is necessary to explore the deeper psycho- logical aspects of the problem rather than limit ourselves to gross sociological factors.
2. "IMPORTANCE" OF RELIGION AND THE CHURCH
One approach to the psychological aspects of religion was to ask subjects directly, "How important in your opinion are religion and the Church? " This question appeared on the questionnaire form used just prior to Form 78. Answers were obtained from 12 3 women students in an Introductory Psy-
? . . . . . TABLE 4 (VI) "' 0\
MEAN A-SORE SCORES FOR GROUPS SHOWING VARIOUS RELATIONS BETWEEN SUBJECT'S RELIGION AND MOTHER'S RELIGION
Groups taking Form 78:
Public Speaking Class Women
Public Speaking Class Men
Extension Psychology Class women 19 3. 90 10 Professional Women
3. 32 9 3. 48 7 3. 23 10 2. 95 9 3. 22 35
3. 00 1 3. 18 4
3. 11 5 3. 10 10
4. 13 22 2. 94 6 3. 75 9 3. 62 37
3. 88 8 5. 43 12 3. 38 10 3. 75 13 3. 83 11 3. 86 54
2. 47 6 3. 71 1 2. 62 1 1. 48 0 2. 51 8
1. 17 4 2. 29 2
1. 60 1 1. 83 7
3. 61 0 3. 17 0 2. 22 0 3. 20 0
3. 08 0 4. 33 0 1. 22 1 2. 60 0 2. 62 5 2. 80 6
2. 23 0
2 3. 45 140 0 52 1 4. 70 42 0 63 3 3. 87 297
3. 32 1. 43 . . . , 3. 34 1. 48 II:
Totals:
Groups taking Form 60:
Univ. of Oregon Student Women Univ. of Oregon and Univ. of
California Student Women Univ. of Oregon and Univ. of
California Student Men Totals:
Groups taking Form 45:
Maritime School Men Psychiatric Clinic Men Psychiatric Clinic Women
Totals:
Groups taking Form 40:
Geo. washington Univ. Women Maritime School Men Middle-Class Women Middle-Class Men Working-Cla. ss Men
Totals: Over-all Totals:
. . . ,
Relation Between Subject? s and Mother's Religion MReligious S Religious Neither
Same Different s Not MNot Reli&ious Blank Over-all
N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean S,D.
82 3. 50 41 38 3. 37 5
1. 3) 4. 00
2. 33
2. 85 3. 21
1. 67 2. 79
1 1. 20 1 1. 60 2 1. 05 4 1. 23
2 1. 17 1 2. 33
2. 75 4 1. 85
1 4. 50 10
0 6
4 1. 18 7
5 1. 84 23 3. 64
M
31 2. 74 21 170 3. 37 77
1. 37 > cj
II:
~
. . . . . . . . . ,
21 4. 22 16 28 3. 45 18
25 3. 15 22
1 2. 50 3 2. 78 7 2. 98
3. 43 54 3. 25
57 2. 95 158 3. 19
178 4. 36
50 3. 67
~
74
3. 57 56
129 4. 56 16 24 4. 16 14 40 4. 25 11
193 4. 44 41
85 4. 27 33 128 5. 10 15 84 4. 22 47 40 4. 49 13 33 4. 16 7 370 4. 56 115
807 4. 19 289
3. 72 3. 88 3. 30
1. 59 1. 63
1. 58 1. 76 1. 96 2. 08 1. 72 1. 90
z
3. 51 136
2. 76 21 3. 07 19 2. 03 60 3. 53
1. 40
5. 00 4. 40
2. 95 2. 70 3. 40
2. 92 2 5. 20 7 5. 17
1 3. 405
1 1. 20 11
1 1. 00 2
1 1. 00 2
6 2. 83 27 3. 53
3 3. 33 47
1. 46
1. 38 1. 29
1. 26
1. 32 >t:l
M
~
CJl 1. 60 0
3. 40 2. 57 3. 18
1. 36
71 3. 65 1. 60 t"'
299 4:07
132 4. 04 164 5. 08 154 3. 64
69 3. 89
59 3. 83 578 4. 19
1332 3. 82
. . . . . . . . . ,
. . . .
C o ~m b i n e d
N Mean N~an N--rii'ean N
3. 37 297 3. 45 0 0 47
1. 46
4. 70 140 1. 90 52 2. 50 42 1. 70 63
1. 43
1. 48
1. 36
. . . . , ;I:
1:'-i
Oyer-all
. . . . , ;I: 0 ~
:::1
~
. . . . . . 1. 26 > z
1. 32 "d 1:'-i ~ Cll
1. 59
z
>
1. 60 r<
1. 63 :::1
><I
? ETHNOCENTRISM AND RELIGIOUS A TTITUDES
213
obtained by means of the question, "How often do you attend services? " which appeared in all forms of the questionnaire are given in Table z(VI). Our supposition with respect to those who attend regularly is not borne out. The mean score for subjects in this category is not significantly different from the means of those who attend often or of those who attend seldom. If, however, we combine these three categories, "regularly," "often," "sel- dom," and compare the mean score of subjects in this broader category with that of subjects who say they never attend, then it appears that the latter score very notably lower. Once again, it appears that those who reject re- ligion have less ethnocentrism than those who seem to accept it. What it is among the latter that makes for high or for low scores has still to be discovered.
d. RELIGIOUS AFFILIATIONS OF PARENTS. It may be inquired whether re- ligious subjects do not differ, in a way that is significant for prejudice, with respect to the manner in which religious pressures have been applied and the manner in which they have been accepted. It has been pointed out earlier that a group membership which the subject chooses for himself may have a different significance than a group membership which he has by virtue of having grown up within it. It may be suggested also that the homogeneity of the religious pattern to which the subject was subjected during his forma- tive years and the consistency with which religious pressures have been applied have a bearing upon prejudice. Some light may be shed upon these matters by examining the data obtained by asking the subjects to state on their questionnaires what was or is the religion of their father and of their mother. This made it possible to consider various relations between father's religion and that of the mother as possible correlates of ethnocentrism score.
The results of this proceeding are shown in Table 3(VI). Here it is worth noting that, with each form of the questionnaire, A-S or E score is slightly higher on the average in those subjects whose father and mother had the same religion than in those whose parents had different religions. 4 The dif- ference which appears in the over-all totals probably approaches statistical significance. In groups taking Forms 78 and 6o the mean score is slightly lower for subjects neither of whose parents was religious than for subjects in either of the first two categories; in the case of the three groups taking Forms 40 and 45 whose responses were analyzed, the number of subjects in the category "neither religious" is so small as to be negligible. These results suggest that ethnocentrism may be higher in subjects whose parents presented
4 Calculations of this relationship were performed on only one group taking Form 45 and two groups taking Form 40. The relationships with which we were concerned had appeared so consistently in all groups examined up to the time Form 6o was revised, that it seemed we might economize merely by sampling the remaining groups. This, as it turned out, was not very fortunate, in as much as some of the relationships found with Forms 78 and 6o are not confirmed in the groups selected for analysis from among those taking Forms 40 and 45?
? TABLE 3 (VI)
MEAN A? S OR E SCORES FOR GROUPS SHOWING VARIOUS RELATIONS BETWEEN FATHER'S RELIGION AND MOTHER'S RELIGION
Groups taking Form 78:
Public Speaking Class Women 75 Public Speaking Class Men 36 Extension Psychology Class Women 25 Professional Women 35
Totals: 171
Groups taking Form 60:
3. 42 3. 40 3. 43 2. 73 3. 28
14 2. 89 2 1. 40 5 2. 66 6 3. 00 140 3. 32 1. 43 53. 66 0 21. 20 24. 30 523. 34 1. 48
M >
Univ. of Oregon Student Women 22
Univ. of Oregon and Univ. of 37 3. 54 7
3. 43 l. 38 z 3. 25 1. 29 '"0
California Student Women
Univ. o f Oregon and Univ. o f 41
California Student Men
Totals: 100
Groups taking For111 45:
Maritime School Men 120
Groups taking Form 40:
Geo. washington Univ. Women 78 Maritime School Men 115 Totals: 193
M
~
Over-all Totals: 584 4. 03 186
I. 96
21 2. 81 63 3. 78 929 3. 87
9
3. 17 6 3. 38 22
4. 36 30
4. 29 45 5. 20 19 4. 83 64
47
3. 47
8
3. 54 4 2. 88 4
2. 21 3 2. 88 11
4. 60 18
Relation Between Father? sand Mother's Religion
Same Different M~Relig! QJIS F Religious Neither
Reli~ion Reli~ion MNot R e l i g i o u s Blank O v e r - a l l ,. . . ,
N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean S. D.
:I:
38 7 10 15
70
3. 53 3. 19 3. 20 2. 37 3. 20
3. 69
2. 66 3
2. 94 5 3. 16 16
4. 24 9
3. 84 3 4. 80 12 4. 12 15
3. 68 70
~
9 30
2. 3702
1. 05 2. 13
3. 75 3. 42
2. 71
1. 71 54
2. 57 1. 37 ~
4. 55 0 2 2. 80 3. 47 42 3. 40 1. 36 :I: 230
2. 97 2
3. 72 2 3. 47 1
2. 10 0 3. 17 3
4. 94 0
2. 67 0 4. 47 0 4. 11 0
3. 51 5
1. 40 11
2. 00 2 3. 00 2
2 2. 33 6
2 13
63 297
3. 18 1. 46
::J
>~ . . . . >
I. 78 2. 09
57 158
2. 95 3. 20
1. 26
1. 32 > t"' . . . . . ,. . . ,
~
4. 21 178
4. 36 1. 60
1 3. 40 5 2. 96 132
2 5. 20 16 '4. 99 164 5. 08 1. 76 3 4. 60 21 4. 51 296 4. 61
4. 04 l. 58
N
. . . . . . j::>.
. . . . . ;
"0'
z
? ETHNOCENTRISM AND RELIGIOUS A TTITUDES 215
a united religious front thari in subjects in whose case the religious influence from the parents was inconsistent, partial, or nonexistent. It may be that in the ethnocentric subjects whose mother and father were both religious, we are dealing with submission to ingroup authority and that the effects are the more pronounced the more consistent that authority has been.
But regardless of what might have been the relation between the father's religion and that of the mother, the subject may or may not have accepted the religious pressures of his family. Going on the assumption that in America religion is most largely a "maternal" matter, we have brought together in Table 4(VI) the mean A-S or E scores of groups showing various relations between the subject's religion and the mother's religion.
Here it appears that, in general, subjects professing the same religion as the mother have a higher score on A-S or E than do subjects professing a religion different from that of the mother. Where the mother is religious but the subject not, or the sub- ject is religious while the mother is not, the prejudice score is still lower and as we should expect, the lowest means appear when neither the subject nor the mother is religious. Concerning these results as a whole, one might say that whereas religious affiliation goes with higher scores on the scales, this is less likely to be the case if the religion is "one's own," that is to say, if it has been accepted independently of or in revolt against the main carrier of re- ligious influence in the family. Where this has been the case, the chances are that the religion has been fairly well internalized. More than this, we have reason to believe that submission to and dependence upon parental authority is an important determinant of ethnocentrism; subjects, particularly women, who profess a religion that is different from that of the mother have probably been able to free themselves from these attitudes and hence, to a considerable degree, from prejudice.
The results just presented are much more pronounced in women than in men. The explanation here might be that for men the mother is not usually a center of conflict with respect to authority and that men who side with the mother in the matter of religion may gain thereby something of that Christian humanism which works against prejudice.
These results on family relationships in relation to religion and ethnocen- trism suggest that in order to understand why some religious people are prejudiced and others are not, it is necessary to explore the deeper psycho- logical aspects of the problem rather than limit ourselves to gross sociological factors.
2. "IMPORTANCE" OF RELIGION AND THE CHURCH
One approach to the psychological aspects of religion was to ask subjects directly, "How important in your opinion are religion and the Church? " This question appeared on the questionnaire form used just prior to Form 78. Answers were obtained from 12 3 women students in an Introductory Psy-
? . . . . . TABLE 4 (VI) "' 0\
MEAN A-SORE SCORES FOR GROUPS SHOWING VARIOUS RELATIONS BETWEEN SUBJECT'S RELIGION AND MOTHER'S RELIGION
Groups taking Form 78:
Public Speaking Class Women
Public Speaking Class Men
Extension Psychology Class women 19 3. 90 10 Professional Women
3. 32 9 3. 48 7 3. 23 10 2. 95 9 3. 22 35
3. 00 1 3. 18 4
3. 11 5 3. 10 10
4. 13 22 2. 94 6 3. 75 9 3. 62 37
3. 88 8 5. 43 12 3. 38 10 3. 75 13 3. 83 11 3. 86 54
2. 47 6 3. 71 1 2. 62 1 1. 48 0 2. 51 8
1. 17 4 2. 29 2
1. 60 1 1. 83 7
3. 61 0 3. 17 0 2. 22 0 3. 20 0
3. 08 0 4. 33 0 1. 22 1 2. 60 0 2. 62 5 2. 80 6
2. 23 0
2 3. 45 140 0 52 1 4. 70 42 0 63 3 3. 87 297
3. 32 1. 43 . . . , 3. 34 1. 48 II:
Totals:
Groups taking Form 60:
Univ. of Oregon Student Women Univ. of Oregon and Univ. of
California Student Women Univ. of Oregon and Univ. of
California Student Men Totals:
Groups taking Form 45:
Maritime School Men Psychiatric Clinic Men Psychiatric Clinic Women
Totals:
Groups taking Form 40:
Geo. washington Univ. Women Maritime School Men Middle-Class Women Middle-Class Men Working-Cla. ss Men
Totals: Over-all Totals:
. . . ,
Relation Between Subject? s and Mother's Religion MReligious S Religious Neither
Same Different s Not MNot Reli&ious Blank Over-all
N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean S,D.
82 3. 50 41 38 3. 37 5
1. 3) 4. 00
2. 33
2. 85 3. 21
1. 67 2. 79
1 1. 20 1 1. 60 2 1. 05 4 1. 23
2 1. 17 1 2. 33
2. 75 4 1. 85
1 4. 50 10
0 6
4 1. 18 7
5 1. 84 23 3. 64
M
31 2. 74 21 170 3. 37 77
1. 37 > cj
II:
~
. . . . . . . . . ,
21 4. 22 16 28 3. 45 18
25 3. 15 22
1 2. 50 3 2. 78 7 2. 98
3. 43 54 3. 25
57 2. 95 158 3. 19
178 4. 36
50 3. 67
~
74
3. 57 56
129 4. 56 16 24 4. 16 14 40 4. 25 11
193 4. 44 41
85 4. 27 33 128 5. 10 15 84 4. 22 47 40 4. 49 13 33 4. 16 7 370 4. 56 115
807 4. 19 289
3. 72 3. 88 3. 30
1. 59 1. 63
1. 58 1. 76 1. 96 2. 08 1. 72 1. 90
z
3. 51 136
2. 76 21 3. 07 19 2. 03 60 3. 53
1. 40
5. 00 4. 40
2. 95 2. 70 3. 40
2. 92 2 5. 20 7 5. 17
1 3. 405
1 1. 20 11
1 1. 00 2
1 1. 00 2
6 2. 83 27 3. 53
3 3. 33 47
1. 46
1. 38 1. 29
1. 26
1. 32 >t:l
M
~
CJl 1. 60 0
3. 40 2. 57 3. 18
1. 36
71 3. 65 1. 60 t"'
299 4:07
132 4. 04 164 5. 08 154 3. 64
69 3. 89
59 3. 83 578 4. 19
1332 3. 82
. . . . . . . . . ,
. . . .
