Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:20:23.372Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Perceptions of Threat to Religious Liberty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 July 2016

Kirby Goidel ,
Brian Smentkowski  and
Craig Freeman
Kirby Goidel
Affiliation:
Texas A&M University
Brian Smentkowski
Affiliation:
Queens University of Charlotte
Craig Freeman
Affiliation:
Oklahoma State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Religious freedom in the United States is widely enjoyed and vigorously protected. Yet, a substantial percentage of Americans believe that their religious liberties are threatened. This article investigates the origins of these perceptions, focusing on the role of political orientations, religious identities and behaviors, social issues (i.e., gay marriage and abortion), and news attentiveness. We found that perceptions of threat are related to political orientations (i.e., partisan affiliation, ideology, and Tea Party identification) and issue positions (i.e., opposition to gay marriage). Consistent with theories of elite cue-taking, the effects of partisan affiliation are contingent on news attentiveness. Republicans who pay closer attention to the news are more likely to state that their religious liberties are threatened.

Type
Politics
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 49 , Issue 3 , July 2016 , pp. 426 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arceneaux, Kevin and Johnson, Martin. 2013. Changing Minds or Changing Channels: Partisan News in an Age of Choice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bennett, Lance. 1991. “Toward a Theory of Press–State Relations in the United States.” Journal of Communication 40 (2): 103–25.Google Scholar
Berinsky, Adam J. 2007. “Assuming the Costs of War: Events, Elites, and American Public Support for Military Conflict.” Journal of Politics 69 (4): 975–7.Google Scholar
Blake, Aaron. 2015. “The Striking Decline of ‘Values’ in American Politics.” The Washington Post’s The Fix Blog. Available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/07/the-striking-decline-of-values-in-american-politics/. Accessed March 21, 2016.Google Scholar
Brewer, Paul R. 2002. “Framing, Value Words, and Citizens’ Explanations of Their Issue Opinions.” Political Communication 19: 303–16.Google Scholar
Brewer, Paul R. 2003. “Values, Political Knowledge, and Public Opinion About Gay Rights.” Public Opinion Quarterly 67 (2): 173–201.Google Scholar
Campbell, David E. 2006. “Religious ‘Threat’ in Contemporary Presidential Elections.” Journal of Politics 68 (1): 104–15.Google Scholar
Dancey, Logan and Goren, Paul. 2010. “Party Identification, Issue Attitudes, and the Dynamics of Political Debate.” American Journal of Political Science 54 (3): 686–99.Google Scholar
Djupe, Paul A. and Calfano, Brian R.. 2013a. “Religious Value Priming, Threat, and Political Tolerance.” Political Research Quarterly 66: 768–80.Google Scholar
Djupe, Paul A. and Calfano, Brian R.. 2013b. “Divine Intervention? The Influence of Religious Value Communication on US Intervention Policy.” Political Behavior 35 (4): 643–63.Google Scholar
Djupe, Paul A. and Gilbert, Christopher P.. 2008. “Politics and Church: Byproduct or Central Mission?” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 47 (1): 45–62.Google Scholar
Djupe, Paul A., Lewis, Andrew R., and Jelen, Ted G.. 2015. “Rights, Reflection, and Reciprocity: How Rights Talk Affects the Political Process.” Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April 18, 2015.Google Scholar
Domke, David and Watts, Mark D.. 1999. “The Politics of Conservative Elites and the ‘Liberal Media’ Argument.” Journal of Communication 49 (4): 35–58.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N. 2001. “The Implications of Framing Effects for Citizen Competence.” Political Behavior 23: 225–56.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N. and Nelson, Kjersten R.. 2003. “Framing and Deliberation: How Citizens’ Conversations Limit Elite Influence.” American Journal of Political Science 47 (4): 729–45.Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan T. and Taylor, Shelley E.. 1991. Social Cognition. 2nd edition. McGraw-Hill Series in Social Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Goidel, Kirby and Nisbet, Matthew. 2006. “Exploring the Roots of Public Participation in the Controversy over Embryonic Stem Cell Research and Cloning.” Political Behavior 28: 175–92.Google Scholar
Guth, James L., Green, John C., Kellstedt, Lyman A., and Smidt, Corwin E.. 1995. “Faith and the Environment: Religious Beliefs and Attitudes on Environmental Policy.” American Journal of Political Science 39 (2): 364–82.Google Scholar
Guth, James L., Green, John C., Kellstedt, Lyman A., and Smidt, Corwin E.. 1996. “Onward Christian Soldiers: Religious Activists Groups in American Politics.” In Religion and the Culture Wars: Dispatches from the Front, ed. Green, John C; Guth, James L.; Smidt, CorwinE.; and Kellstedt, Lyman A., 174–92. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Guth, James L., Smidt, Corwin E., Kellstedt, Lyman A., and Green, John C.. 1993. “The Sources of Antiabortion Attitudes: The Case of Religious Political Activists.” American Politics Research 21 (1): 65–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, Brian F. and Michelson, Melissa R.. 2015. “God and Marriage: The Impact of Religious Identity Priming on Attitudes toward Same-Sex Marriage.” Social Science Quarterly 96 (5): 1411–23.Google Scholar
Hibbing, John R., Smith, Kevin B., and Alford, John R.. 2014. “Negativity Bias and Political Preferences: A Response to Commentators.” Behavioral & Brain Sciences 37 (3): 333–50.Google Scholar
Huckfeldt, R. Robert and Sprague, John D.. 1995. Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication: Information and Influence in an Election Campaign. Cambridge Studies in Political Psychology and Public Opinion. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto and Kinder, Donald R.. 1987. News That Matters: Television and American Opinion, American Politics and Political Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
James, William. 1890. The Principles of Psychology. American Science Series Advanced Course. New York: H. Holt and Company.Google Scholar
Jelen, Ted G. 1991. The Political Mobilization of Religious Beliefs. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Johnson, Tyler. 2012. “Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing: Explaining Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions.” Politics & Policy 40 (6): 1053–80.Google Scholar
Kellstedt, Lyman A., Green, John C., Guth, James L., and Smidt, Corwin. 1996. “Grasping the Essentials: The Social Embodiment of Religion and Political Behavior.” In Religion and the Culture Wars: Dispatches from the Front, ed. Green, John C; Guth, James L.; Smidt, CorwinE.; and Kellstedt, Lyman A., 174–92. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Ladd, Jonathan. 2010. “The Neglected Power of Elite Opinion Leadership to Produce Antipathy toward the News Media: Evidence from a Survey Experiment.” Political Behavior 32: 29–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leege, David C. and Kellstedt, Lyman A.. 1993. Rediscovering the Religious Factor in American Politics. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Levendusky, Matthew. 2013. How Partisan Media Polarize America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, Andrew R. 2014. “Abortion Politics and the Decline of the Separation of Church and State: The Southern Baptist Case.” Politics and Religion 7 (3): 521–49.Google Scholar
Lilienfeld, Scott O. and Latzman, Robert D.. 2014. “Threat Bias, Not Negativity Bias, Underpins Differences in Political Ideology.” Behavioral & Brain Sciences 37 (3): 318–19.Google Scholar
Martin, Paul S. 2004. “Inside the Black Box of Negative Campaign Effects: Three Reasons Why Negative Campaigns Mobilize.” Political Psychology 25 (4): 545–62.Google Scholar
McCabe, Brian J. and Heerwig, Jennifer A.. 2011. “Reframing the Marriage Debate: Wording, Context, and Intensity of Support for Marriage and Civil Unions.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 24 (4): 429–49Google Scholar
Miller, Joanne M. and Krosnick, Jon A.. 2004. “Threat as a Motivator of Political Activism: A Field Experiment.” Political Psychology 25 (4): 507–23.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Amy. 2013. “News Coverage Conveys Strong Momentum for Same-Sex Marriage.” Pew Research Center. Available at www.journalism.org/files/legacy/EMBARGOED_Same-SexMarriageandNews.pdf. Accessed March 23, 2016.Google Scholar
Mutz, Diana Carole, Sniderman, Paul M., and Brody, Richard A.. 1996. Political Persuasion and Attitude Change. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Nisbet, Matthew C., Brossard, Dominique, and Kroepsch, Adrianne. 2003. “Framing Science: The Stem Cell Controversy in an Age of Press/Politics.” Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 8 (2): 36–70.Google Scholar
Nisbet, Matthew C. and Mooney, Chris. 2007. “Framing Science.” Science 316 (5821): 56–56.Google Scholar
Nteta, Tatishe M. and Wallsten, Kevin J.. 2012. “Preaching to the Choir? Religious Leaders and American Opinion on Immigration Reform.” Social Science Quarterly (Wiley-Blackwell) 93: 891–910.Google Scholar
Prior, Markus. 2007. Post-Broadcast Democracy : How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections. Cambridge Studies in Public Opinion and Political Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Slothuus, Rune. 2010. “When Can Political Parties Lead Public Opinion? Evidence from a Natural Experiment.” Political Communication 27 (2): 158–77.Google Scholar
Smidt, Corwin. 2003. “Clergy in American Politics: An Introduction.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 42 (4): 495–9.Google Scholar
Smith, Glen R. 2010. “Politicians and the News Media: How Elite Attacks Influence Perceptions of Media Bias.” International Journal of Press/Politics 15 (3): 319–43.Google Scholar
Stroud, Natalie Jomini. 2011. Niche News: The Politics of News Choice. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tomz, Michael, Wittenberg, Jason, and King, Gary. 2003. “Clarify: Software for Interpreting and Presenting Statistical Results.” Journal of Statistical Software 8: 1–30.Google Scholar
Valentino, Nicholas A., Hutchings, Vincent L., Banks, Antoine J., and Davis, Anne K.. 2008. “Is a Worried Citizen a Good Citizen? Emotions, Political Information Seeking, and Learning Via the Internet.” Political Psychology 29 (2): 247–73.Google Scholar
Wald, Kenneth D. 1992. Religion and Politics in the United States. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Wilcox, Clyde and Sigelman, Lee. 2001. “Political Mobilization in the Pews: Religious Contacting and Electoral Turnout.” Social Science Quarterly 82 (3): 524–35.Google Scholar
Zaller, John. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar