Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

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.

Keywords

religion atheism social desirability stigma Bayesian estimation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

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

Boyer

(2008). Being human: Religion: Bound to believe? Nature, 455, 1038–1039.

Brown-Iannuzzi

J. L.

Najle

M. B.

Gervais

W. M.

(2017). Illusion of political tolerance. Retrieved from osf.io/7bbba

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.

Coutts

Jann

(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.

Cox

Jones

R. P.

Navarro-Rivera

(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

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.

Edgell

Gerteis

Hartmann

(2006). Atheists as “other”: Moral boundaries and cultural membership in American society. American Sociological Review, 71, 211–234.

Gallup. (2015). Religion. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/1690/Religion.aspx

10.

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

11.

Gervais

W. M.

(2011). Finding the faithless: Perceived atheist prevalence reduces anti-atheist prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 543–556.

12.

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.

13.

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

14.

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.

15.

Hadaway

C. K.

Marler

P. L.

Chaves

(1993). What the polls don’t show: A closer look at us church attendance. American Sociological Review, 58, 741–752.

16.

Inglehart

Norris

(2004). Sacred and secular: Religion and politics worldwide. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

17.

Kruschke

J. K.

(2010). Doing Bayesian data analysis: A tutorial introduction with R. Burlington, MA: Academic Press.

18.

McElreath

(2016). Statistical rethinking: A Bayesian course with examples in r and stan (Vol. 122). Boca Raton, FL:CRC Press.

19.

McKay

Whitehouse

(2014). Religion and morality. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 447–473.

20.

Norenzayan

Gervais

W. M.

(2013). The origins of religious disbelief. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 20–25.

21.

Norenzayan

Gervais

W. M.

(2015). Secular rule of law erodes believers’ political intolerance of atheists. Religion, Brain & Behavior, 5, 3–14.

22.

Norenzayan

Shariff

A. F.

Gervais

W. M.

Willard

A. K.

McNamara

R. A.

Slingerland

Henrich

(2014). The cultural evolution of prosocial religions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, e1.

23.

Pew. (2015). America’s changing religious landscape. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/

24.

Raghavarao

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.

25.

Sedikides

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.

26.

Stark

Bainbridge

W. S.

(1985). The future of religion: Secularization, revival, and cult formation. Berkeley: University of California Press.

27.

Twenge

J. M.

Exline

J. J.

Grubbs

J. B.

Sastry

Campbell

W. K.

(2015). Generational and time period differences in American adolescents’ religious orientation, 1966–2014. PloS One, 10, e0121454.

28.

Vazire

(2016). Most damning result. Retrieved from http://sometimesimwrong.typepad.com/wrong/2015/12/most-damning-result.html

29.

Vuorre

(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/

30.

Wagenmakers

E.-J.

Morey

R. D.

Lee

M. D.

(2016). Bayesian benefits for the pragmatic researcher. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 169–176.

31.

Wilson

E. O.

(1999). Consilience: The unity of knowledge (Vol. 31). New York, NY: Vintage.

32.

Zuckerman

(2007). Atheism: Contemporary numbers and patterns. In Martin

(Ed.), Cambridge Companion to Atheism (pp. 47–68). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

1.28 MB

How Many Atheists Are There?

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material