Why are Women More Religious than Men? Do Risk Preferences and Genetic Risk Predispositions Explain the Gender Gap?
Risk preference theory argues that the gender gap in religiosity is caused by greater female risk aversion. Although widely debated, risk preference theory has been inadequately tested. Our study tests the theory directly with phenotypic and genetic risk preferences in three dimensions—general, impu...
| VerfasserInnen: | ; ; ; |
|---|---|
| Medienart: | Elektronisch Aufsatz |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Verfügbarkeit prüfen: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Lade...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Wiley-Blackwell
[2020]
|
| In: |
Journal for the scientific study of religion
Jahr: 2020, Band: 59, Heft: 2, Seiten: 289-310 |
| normierte Schlagwort(-folgen): | B
Frau
/ Religiosität
|
| RelBib Classification: | AD Religionssoziologie; Religionspolitik ZB Soziologie |
| weitere Schlagwörter: | B
genetic risk preferences
B Gender B Religiosity B risk preferences |
| Online Zugang: |
Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Zusammenfassung: | Risk preference theory argues that the gender gap in religiosity is caused by greater female risk aversion. Although widely debated, risk preference theory has been inadequately tested. Our study tests the theory directly with phenotypic and genetic risk preferences in three dimensions—general, impulsive, and sensation-seeking risk. Moreover, we examine whether the effects of different dimensions of risk preferences on the gender gap vary across different dimensions of religiosity. We find that general and impulsive risk preferences do not explain gender differences in religiosity, whereas sensation-seeking risk preference makes the gender gap in self-assessed religiousness and church attendance insignificant, but not belief in God, prayer, or importance of religion. Genetic risk preferences do not remove any of the gender gaps in religiosity, suggesting that the causal order is not from risk preference to religiosity. Evidence suggests that risk preferences are not a strong predictor for gender differences in religiosity. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1468-5906 |
| Enthält: | Enthalten in: Journal for the scientific study of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/jssr.12657 |