Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-79b67bcb76-6rw4p Total loading time: 0.216 Render date: 2021-05-12T09:47:42.135Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Who's In and Who's Out: The Politics of Religious Norms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 August 2016

Christopher F. Karpowitz
Affiliation:
Brigham Young University
J. Quin Monson
Affiliation:
Brigham Young University
Kelly D. Patterson
Affiliation:
Brigham Young University

Abstract

What are the boundaries for discussing a candidate's religion? In the 2008 and the 2012 presidential campaigns, the religious beliefs and practices of at least one of the candidates became a subject of intense scrutiny from the media and the public. To ascertain the limits of social discourse for religious out-group, we conducted a survey experiment on the 2012 CCES survey. We find strong evidence that norms of social discourse do not apply to all religions equally. Furthermore, the application of norms differs by political party because Democrats and Republicans express concerns about different religious groups. Overall, there is a large difference for Muslims when it comes to social discourse. Finally, individuals have internalized the norms because most of them are willing to sanction those who violate them, even if the norms on social discourse are not applied equally among American voters.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Religion and Politics Section of the American Political Science Association 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

American Association for Public Opinion Research. 2011. Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys. 7th ed. Washington, DC: AAPOR.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen. 2013. “Guide to the 2012 Cooperative Congressional Election Survey. Data Release No. 1.” http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/cces/data?dvn_subpage=/faces/study/StudyPage.xhtml?globalId=hdl:1902.1/21447 (Accessed on July 7, 2016).Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Persily, Nathaniel. 2008. “Vote Fraud in the Eye of the Beholder: The Role of Public Opinion in the Challenge to Voter Identification Requirements.” Harvard Law Review 121:17371774.Google Scholar
Benson, Brett V., Merolla, Jennifer L., and Geer, John G.. 2011. “Two Steps Forward, One Step Back? Bias in the 2008 Presidential Election.” Electoral Studies 30:607620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berinsky, Adam J., and Mendelberg, Tali. 2005. “The Indirect Effects of Discredited Stereotypes in Judgments of Jewish Leaders.” American Journal of Political Science 49:845864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolce, Louis, and De Maio, Gerald. 1999. “Religious Outlook, Culture War Politics, and Antipathy toward Christian Fundamentalists.” Public Opinion Quarterly 63:2961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolce, Louis, and De Maio, Gerald. 2008. “A Prejudice for the Thinking Classes: Media Exposure, Political Sophistication, and the Anti-Christian Fundamentalist.” American Politics Research 36:155185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolsen, Toby, and Thornton, Judd R.. 2014. “Overlapping Confidence Intervals and Null Hypothesis Testing.” The Experimental Political Scientist 4:1216.Google Scholar
Campbell, David E., Green, John C., and Monson, J. Quin. 2009. “Framing Faith: How Voters Responded to Candidates’ Religions in the 2008 Presidential Campaign.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Toronto, Ontario.Google Scholar
Campbell, David E., Green, John C., and Monson, J. Quin. 2012. “The Stained Glass Ceiling: Social Contact and Mitt Romney's ‘Religion Problem.’” Political Behavior 34:277299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, David E, Green, John C., and Monson, J. Quin. 2014. Seeking the Promised Land: Mormons and American Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, Dennis. 1993. “How People Think, Reason, and Feel about Rights and Liberties.” American Journal of Political Science 37:867899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, Dennis. 1994. “Tolerance and Social Adjustment to New Norms and Practices.” Political Behavior 16:2153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1966. “Religion and Politics: The 1960 Election.” In Elections and the Political Order, eds. Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E., Stokes, Donald E., and Campbell, Angus. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Darley, John M., and Latané, Bibb. 1970. “‘Norms’ and Normative Behavior.” In Altruism and Helping Behavior, eds. Maccaulay, J.M., and Berkowitz, L.. New York, NY: Academic Press, 83101.Google Scholar
Dinnerstein, Leonard. 1994. Antisemitism in America. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Djupe, Paul A., ed. 2015. Religion and Political Tolerance in America: Advances in the State of the Art. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Dovidio, John F., and Gaertner, Samuel L.. 2010. “Intergroup Bias.” In Handbook of Social Psychology, eds. Fiske, Susan T., Gilbert, Daniel T., and Lindzey, Gardner. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 10841121.Google Scholar
Dulce, Berton, and Richter, Edward J.. 1962. Religion and the Presidency, a Recurring American Problem. New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Elster, Jon. 2007. Explaining Social Behavior: More Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fluhman, J. Spencer. 2012. A Peculiar People: Anti-Mormonism and the Making of Religion in Nineteenth-Century America. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., Green, Donald P., and Larimer, Christopher W.. 2008. “Social Pressure and Voter Turnout: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review 102:3348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 2013. “Measuring Political Tolerance and General Support for Pro–Civil Liberties Policies: Notes, Evidence, and Cautions.” Public Opinion Quarterly 77:4568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Givens, Terryl L. 1997. The Viper on the Hearth: Mormons, Myths, and the Construction of Heresy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Glock, Charles Y., and Stark, Rodney. 1966. Christian Beliefs and Anti-Semitism. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Harvey, and Healy, Michael J. R.. 1995. “The Graphical Presentation of a Collection of Means.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (Statistics in Society) 158:175177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greeley, Andrew M. 1967. The Catholic Experience: An Interpretation of the History of American Catholicism. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Greeley, Andrew M. 1977. An Ugly Little Secret: Anti-Catholicism in North America. Kansas City, MO: Sheed Andrews and McMeel.Google Scholar
Greeley, Andrew M., and Hout, Michael. 2006. The Truth about Conservative Christians: What They Think and What They Believe. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, John C. 2007. The Faith Factor: How Religion Influences American Elections. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Hill, Seth, Ho, James, Vavreck, Lynn, and Zaller, John. 2007. “The Opt-in Internet Panel: Survey Mode, Sampling Methodology and the Implications for Political Research.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Hollander, Barry A. 2010. “Persistence in the Perception of Barack Obama as a Muslim in the 2008 Presidential Campaign.” Journal of Media and Religion 9:5566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horne, Christine. 2009. The Rewards of Punishment: A Relational Theory of Norm Enforcement. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackman, Simon, and Vavreck, Lynn. 2010. “Primary Politics: Race, Gender, and Age in the 2008 Democratic Primary.” Journal of Elections, Public Opinion, and Policy 20:153186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, Philip. 2003. The New Anti-Catholicism: The Last Acceptable Prejudice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jensen, Richard J. 1971. The Winning of the Midwest: Social and Political Conflict, 1888–1896. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kalkan, Kerem Ozan, Layman, Geoffrey C., and Uslaner, Eric M.. 2009. “‘Bands of Others’? Attitudes toward Muslims in Contemporary American Society.” The Journal of Politics 71:847862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kane, James G., Craig, Stephen C., and Wald, Ken D.. 2004. “Religion and Presidential Politics in Florida: A List Experiment.” Social Science Quarterly 85:281293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kellstedt, L.A., Green, J.C., Guth, J.L., and Smidt, C.E.. 1996. “Grasping the Essentials: The Social Embodiment of Religion and Political Behavior.” In Religion and the Culture Wars, eds. Green, John C., Guth, James L., Smidt, Corwin E., and Kellstedt, Lyman A.. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 174192.Google Scholar
Kleppner, Paul. 1979. The Third Electoral System 1853–1892: Parties, Voters, and Political Cultures. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Kleppner, Paul. 1987. Continuity and Change in Electoral Politics, 1893–1928. New York, NY: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Marcus, George E., Sullivan, John L., Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth, and Wood, Sandra L.. 1995. With Malice toward Some: How People Make Civil Liberties Judgments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDermott, Monika. 2009 “Mormon Stereotypes, Voters’ Choices and Mitt Romney’s 2008 Run for the Presidency” Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Mendelberg, Tali. 2001. The Race Card: Campaign Strategy, Implicit Messages, and the Norm of Equality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Monson, J. Quin, and Riding, Scott. 2008. “Social Equality Norms for Race, Gender, and Religion in the American Public during the 2008 Presidential Primaries.” Presented at the The Transformative Election of 2008 Conference, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Moore, Edmond. 1956. A Catholic Runs for President: The Campaign of 1928. New York, NY: Ronald Press Co.Google Scholar
Nyhan, Brendan, and Reifler, Jason. 2016. “Answering on Cue? How Corrective Information Can Produce Social Desirability Bias When Racial Differences are Salient.” http://www.dartmouth.edu/~nyhan/obama-muslim.pdf (Accessed on July 7, 2016).Google Scholar
Patrikios, Stratos. 2013. “Self-Stereotyping as ‘Evangelical Republican’: An Empirical Test.” Politics and Religion 6:800822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payton, Mark E., Greenstone, Matthew H., and Schenker, Nathaniel. 2003. “Overlapping Confidence Intervals or Standard Error Intervals: What Do They Mean in Terms of Statistical Significance?” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC524673/ (Accessed on February 21, 2015).Google Scholar
Penning, J. 2009. “Americans’ Views of Muslims and Mormons: A Social Identity Theory Approach.” Politics and Religion 2:277302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, Michael, Slothuus, Rune, Stubager, Rune, and Togeby, Lise. 2011. “Freedom for All? The Strengths and Limits of Political Tolerance.” British Journal of Political Science 41:581597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, Richard A. 1997. “Social Norms and the Law: An Economic Approach.” American Economic Review 87:365369.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard A., and Rasmusen, Eric B.. 1999. “Creating and Enforcing Norms, with Special Reference to Sanctions.” International Review of Law and Economics 19:369382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, Robert D., and Campbell, David E.. 2010. American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Rind, Bruce, and Benjamin, Daniel. 1994. “Effects of Public Image Concerns and Self-Image on Compliance.” Journal of Social Psychology 134:1925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, Carin. 2010. “Cross-Cutting Messages and Political Tolerance: An Experiment Using Evangelical Protestants.” Political Behavior 32:495515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheff, Thomas J. 2000. “Shame and the Social Bond: A Sociological Theory.” Sociological Theory 18:8499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Rogers M. 1993. “Beyond Tocqueville, Myrdal, and Hartz: The Multiple Traditions in America.” The American Political Science Review 87:549566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steensland, Brian, Robinson, Lynn D., Wilcox, W. Bradford, and Park, Jerry Z.. 2000. “The Measure of American Religion: Toward Improving the State of the Art.” Social Forces 79:291318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stouffer, Samuel A. 1955. Communism, Conformity, and Civil Liberties: A Cross-Section of the Nation Speaks Its Mind. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Sullivan, John L., Piereson, James, and Marcus, George E.. 1993. Political Tolerance and American Democracy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Swierenga, Robert P. 1971. “Ethnocultural Political Analysis: A New Approach to American Ethnic Studies.” Journal of American Studies 5:5979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tajfel, Henri. 1974. “Social Identity and Intergroup Behaviour.” Social Science Information 13:6593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vavreck, Lynn, and Rivers, Douglas. 2008. “The 2006 Cooperative Congressional Election Study.” Journal of Elections, Public Opinion, and Policy 18:355366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whatley, Mark A., Webster, Matthew, Smith, Richard H., and Rhodes, Adele. 1999. “The Effect of a Favor on Public and Private Compliance: How Internalized Is the Norm of Reciprocity?Basic and Applied Social Psychology 21:251259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, Clyde, and Kim, Christine. 2015. “Fearful Asymmetry: Tolerance of Christian Fundamentalists.” In Religion and Political Tolerance in America: Advances in the State of the Art, The social logic of politics, ed. Djupe, Paul A. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 6780.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Karpowitz supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Karpowitz supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 1 MB

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Who's In and Who's Out: The Politics of Religious Norms
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Who's In and Who's Out: The Politics of Religious Norms
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Who's In and Who's Out: The Politics of Religious Norms
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *