![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
One crucible for theories of religion is their ability to predict and explain the patterns of belief and disbelief. Yet, religious nonbelief is often heavily stigmatized, potentially leading many atheists to refrain from outing themselves even in anonymous polls. We used the unmatched count technique and Bayesian estimation to indirectly estimate atheist prevalence in two nationally representative samples of 2,000 U.S. adults apiece. Widely cited telephone polls (e.g., Gallup, Pew) suggest U.S. atheist prevalence of only 3–11%. In contrast, our most credible indirect estimate is 26% (albeit with considerable estimate and method uncertainty). Our data and model predict that atheist prevalence exceeds 11% with greater than .99 probability and exceeds 20% with roughly .8 probability. Prevalence estimates of 11% were even less credible than estimates of 40%, and all intermediate estimates were more credible. Some popular theoretical approaches to religious cognition may require heavy revision to accommodate actual levels of religious disbelief.
References
|
Bering, J. M. (2010). Atheism is only skin deep: Geertz and markússon rely mistakenly on sociodemographic data as meaningful indicators of underlying cognition. Religion, 40, 166–168. doi:10.1016/j.religion.2009.11.001 Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Boyer, P. (2008). Being human: Religion: Bound to believe? Nature, 455, 1038–1039. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Brown-Iannuzzi, J. L., Najle, M. B., Gervais, W. M. (2017). Illusion of political tolerance. Retrieved from osf.io/7bbba Google Scholar | |
|
Coffman, K. B., Coffman, L. C., Ericson, K. M. M. (2016). The size of the LGBT population and the magnitude of antigay sentiment are substantially underestimated. Management Science. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Coutts, E., Jann, B. (2011). Sensitive questions in online surveys: Experimental results for the randomized response technique (RRT) and the unmatched count technique (UCT). Sociological Methods & Research, 40, 169–193. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Cox, D., Jones, R. P., Navarro-Rivera, J. (2014). I know what you did last sunday: Measuring social desirability bias in self-reported religious behavior, belief, and identity. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/AAPOR-2014-Final.pdf Google Scholar | |
|
Dalton, D. R., Wimbush, J. C., Daily, C. M. (1994). Using the unmatched count technique (UCT) to estimate base rates for sensitive behavior. Personnel Psychology, 47, 817. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Edgell, P., Gerteis, J., Hartmann, D. (2006). Atheists as “other”: Moral boundaries and cultural membership in American society. American Sociological Review, 71, 211–234. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Gallup . (2015). Religion. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/1690/Religion.aspx Google Scholar | |
|
Geertz, A. W., Markússon, G. I. (2010). Religion is natural, atheism is not: On why everybody is both right and wrong. Religion, 40, 152–165. doi:10.1016/j.religion.2009.11.003 Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Gervais, W. M. (2011). Finding the faithless: Perceived atheist prevalence reduces anti-atheist prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 543–556. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Gervais, W. M. (2013). In godlessness we distrust: Using social psychology to solve the puzzle of anti-atheist prejudice. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, 366–377. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Gervais, W. M. (2014a). Everything is permitted? People intuitively judge immorality as representative of atheists. PLoS One, 9, e92302. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0092302 Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Gervais, W. M. (2014b). Good for God? Religious motivation reduces perceived responsibility for and morality of good deeds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1616. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Hadaway, C. K., Marler, P. L., Chaves, M. (1993). What the polls don’t show: A closer look at us church attendance. American Sociological Review, 58, 741–752. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Inglehart, R., Norris, P. (2004). Sacred and secular: Religion and politics worldwide. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Kruschke, J. K. (2010). Doing Bayesian data analysis: A tutorial introduction with R. Burlington, MA: Academic Press. Google Scholar | |
|
McElreath, R. (2016). Statistical rethinking: A Bayesian course with examples in r and stan (Vol. 122). Boca Raton, FL:CRC Press. Google Scholar | |
|
McKay, R., Whitehouse, H. (2014). Religion and morality. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 447–473. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Norenzayan, A., Gervais, W. M. (2013). The origins of religious disbelief. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 20–25. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Norenzayan, A., Gervais, W. M. (2015). Secular rule of law erodes believers’ political intolerance of atheists. Religion, Brain & Behavior, 5, 3–14. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Norenzayan, A., Shariff, A. F., Gervais, W. M., Willard, A. K., McNamara, R. A., Slingerland, E., Henrich, J. (2014). The cultural evolution of prosocial religions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, e1. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Pew . (2015). America’s changing religious landscape. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/ Google Scholar | |
|
Raghavarao, D., Federer, W. T. (1979). Block total response as an alternative to the randomized response method in surveys. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 41, 40–45. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Sedikides, C., Gebauer, J. E. (2009). Religiosity as self-enhancement: A meta-analysis of the relation between socially desirable responding and religiosity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 17–36. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Stark, R., Bainbridge, W. S. (1985). The future of religion: Secularization, revival, and cult formation. Berkeley: University of California Press. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Twenge, J. M., Exline, J. J., Grubbs, J. B., Sastry, R., Campbell, W. K. (2015). Generational and time period differences in American adolescents’ religious orientation, 1966–2014. PloS One, 10, e0121454. Google Scholar | Medline | ISI | |
|
Vazire, S. (2016). Most damning result. Retrieved from http://sometimesimwrong.typepad.com/wrong/2015/12/most-damning-result.html Google Scholar | |
|
Vuorre, M. (2017). Meta-analysis is a special case of Bayesian multilevel modeling | matti vuorre. Retrieved from https://mvuorre.github.io/post/2016/2016-09-29-bayesian-meta-analysis/ Google Scholar | |
|
Wagenmakers, E.-J., Morey, R. D., Lee, M. D. (2016). Bayesian benefits for the pragmatic researcher. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 169–176. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Wilson, E. O. (1999). Consilience: The unity of knowledge (Vol. 31). New York, NY: Vintage. Google Scholar | |
|
Zuckerman, P. (2007). Atheism: Contemporary numbers and patterns. In Martin, M. (Ed.), Cambridge Companion to Atheism (pp. 47–68). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar |
