Fulltext.pdf 1Between Sacral Belief and Moral Community: A Multidimensional Approach to the...

8/13/2019 Fulltext.pdf 1Between Sacral Belief and Moral Community: A Multidimensional Approach to the Relationship Betwe

1/25

Sociological Forum, Vol. 17, No. 2, June 2002 (C2002)

Between Sacral Belief and Moral Community:A Multidimensional Approach to the RelationshipBetween Religion and Alcohol Among

Whites and Blacks

1

Julie Ford2,4 and Charles Kadushin3

This study explores the conditions under which two dimensions of religionfirst specified by Durkheim (1995), the normative and the integrative, may berelated to a particular aspect of alcohol use among white and black adults.The analysis compares those denominations that oppose the use of alcoholto those that do not, while simultaneously examining the effects of the rela-tive strength of the commitment to the religious community on the risk fordependency. Because a substantially large sample drawn from 41 mid-sizedcities nationwide is employed, the study is able to expand the set of denomina-tions considered, and, more importantly, to conduct a more refined analysisof differences between black and white respondents than is typically possible.The findings indicate that although effects due to religious denomination arecertainly a factor in the risk for dependency, this is much more so the caseamong whites than among blacks. By contrast, among blacks, frequency ofchurch attendance, a measure of integration, is a more powerful predictor ofrisk than it is for whites. These results suggest that to more fully comprehendthe manner in which alcohol use and religion are linked, especially in theblack community, the organizational nature of the churchand not solely

1A preliminary version of this paper was presented by the junior author to a Festschrift in honorof Samuel Klausner at the University of Pennsylvania in October 1997. An earlier version ofthis paper was presented at the 1998 annual meeting of the American Sociological Association,San Francisco, CA.

2

Medical Health and Research Association of New York City, Inc., 40 Worth St, New York,NY 10013.

3Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts.4To whom correspondence should be addressed; e-mail: [email protected].

255

0884-8971/02/0600-0255/0 C 2002 Plenum Publishing Corporation


2/25

256 Ford and Kadushin

its denominationneeds to be considered in the attempt to assess the risk ofalcohol dependency.

KEY WORDS:religion; alcohol; race/ethnicity.

Social scientists have devoted considerable energy to analyzing the my-riad relationships between religion and alcohol use. However, although nu-merous studies have indicated that the role of the church in the lives of blackcongregants is often different than it is in those of whites with respect to theservices offered (Chaves and Higgins, 1992) and the nature of interactionscharacteristic of the institution (Pattillo-McCoy, 1998), little attention has

been given to the way in which the relationship between religion and alcoholconsumption may be contingent upon race. Overconsumption of alcohol isa major health concern in the United States. Moreover, religious denomina-tions take differing stances toward the use of alcohol. This paper thereforeexamines patterns of risk for alcohol dependency by denomination and fre-quency of church attendance and explores whether these patterns vary forblacks and whites. We argue that denomination and frequency of attendancecan be seen as measures of two different dimensions of religionthe nor-mative and the integrative aspectseither or both of which may be related

to alcohol use. Furthermore, we propose that the salience of these two di-mensions may be different for the two groups with respect to the risk foralcohol dependency, and that these differences stem, in part, from the dis-tinctive traditions of their respective churches. The purpose of this paper,then, is to bring together two existing bodies of research by attending to themultiple sociological functions of religion, while simultaneously examiningthe variations of these functions across the two groups.

Almost a century ago, Durkheim provided a multidimensional defini-tion of religion: [a] religion is a set of beliefs and practices relative to sacred

things. . .

beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral commu-nity called a Church, all those who adhere to them (1995:44). Accordingto this famous account, religion entails both a commitment to collectivelybinding norms and the affirmation of membership within the social group.Durkheim clamped these two constitutive elements together tightly, and hisstudy sought to establish both the nature and direction of their relations.5 Inthis study we seek to retain his definition. However, we also propose that thetwo elements can, to some extent, be detached from each other and allowedto vary independently.

5InDurkheimsview,theritualpracticesoftheculticcommunityarerelatedtomoralnormsbothexpressively and causally: [ritual] movements symbolize those [collective] representationsonly because they have helped to form them (1995:232; our additions; see also 418ff.).


3/25


4/25


of what he called faith achievingthe integrative function of affiliatingwith others which enables the individual to act in the face of anxiety (1961,1964). Klausners work is relevant here not only because it relates group

integration to alcohol consumption behavior, but also because it providesa theoretical account of the mechanism by which group membership mayinfluence such behavior. If alcohol consumed in moderate quantities acts asa social lubricant, then strong affiliation with a group, especially a religiousone whose purpose is not associated with drinking, may decrease the amountof drinking, since the affiliative functions are otherwise fulfilled. Moreover,alcohol can be viewed as self-medication against anxiety (Neff and Husaini,1985). But as Klausner argues, integration into a religious group tends toreduce anxiety. Thus, integration, especially into a religious group, is asso-

ciated with less rather than with more drinkinga reduction that has littleto do with any particular religions prohibition against the consumption ofalcohol.

In recent years, researchers investigating the social correlates of physicaland mental health have turned their attention to religion and the potentialbenefits that may be derived from integration into a religious community(Crawford et al., 1989; Ellison, 1991; for a review, see Levin et al., 1994).Drawing upon the stress and social support literature (for a review, seeThoits, 1995), one explanation6 for the salutary relationship between reli-

gion and health expressly thematizes religious organizations as contexts ofsocial support. As with any other social group, membership in a religiouscommunity introduces the individual into a network, a connection that canprovide access to emotional, cognitive, and material support, fostering theindividuals perception that he is cared for and esteemed (Idler, 1987:228).At an institutional level, this support is manifest not only in the clergy, whichfunctions as a resource for counseling and assistance with personal problems(Chalfantet al., 1990), but also in various forms of material support (such asfamily services, food, clothing, shelter, etc.) that are provided by the congre-

gation (Chaves and Higgins, 1992; Maton, 1989). Such benefits can also beobtained at the individual level, as fellow church members represent a po-tential source of informal support (Maton, 1987; Taylor and Chatters, 1988).Moreover, in addition to these tangible benefits, religion has been linked toimproved health, in that participation in a religious community allows for

6In addition to social integration and support, the literature suggests three other ways in whichreligion maycontribute to well-being, including throughtheformation of relationship with a di-vine other, the provision of systems of meaning and existential coherence, and encouragement

of certain lifestyles (for a review, see Ellison, 1991). As Ellison states, although conceptu-ally and empirically distinct, these relationships are not mutually exclusive (80). In particular,the first three can be seen as facets or elements of the moral community dimension ofreligion.


5/25

Between Sacral Belief and Moral Community 259

regular social interaction, and provides the opportunity for the formation ofsocial ties and friendships (Bradley, 1995) which can buffer the ill effects ofstress (Ellison and George, 1994). Ferraro and Albrecht-Jensen (1991:200)

assessed the link between religion and health and concluded that, even aftersocial class differences were accounted for, social integration in a religiouscommunity, by connecting individuals to others, is the reason that religionmay positively affect health.

Of particular significance for this paper, a few scholars have also in-vestigated how the relationship between religion and health may vary byrace. For example, in a rare study that included Latinos as well as blacksand whites, Drevenstedt (1998) tested the social support hypothesis andfound that the health-enhancing benefits of participation in religious ser-

vices depended upon race, age, and gender. Religious service attendancepredicted self-reported health for whites, especially men, but among non-whites, the association held only for younger black women. In another study,Ferraro and Koch (1994) compared the effects of certain aspects of religionon health among subsamples of blacks and whites to assess whether race mayinteract with religion and support. Their findings indicate that while blacksand whites benefit equally from social support, even when controlling forseveral dimensions of religious expression, blacks are more likely to turn toreligion when faced with health problems, and that religious practice is as-

sociated with improved health among blacks, but not among whites. Musick(1996) also employed a subsample comparison as a way to investigate possi-ble interactive effects of race among elderly adults in a southern community.While little difference was discovered between blacks and whites in terms ofsubjective health and religion, Musick suggests that the lack of findings maybe due to generally high levels of religious activity in the sample, and arguesthat future analyses warrant differentiation by race. Although not address-ing alcohol use, this body of research suggests that the integrative aspectsof religion contribute in important ways to a variety of health outcomes.

Moreover, it compels us to consider the role played by sociodemographicfactorsmost notably raceand leads us to ask whether the differentialpatterns by religion for blacks and whites may hold for other behaviors suchas alcohol consumption.

The literature examining the role of the black church and patterns ofAfrican American religious life also provides a basis for anticipating possi-ble variability by race in any relationship that includes a religious dimen-sion. Research shows that, historically, religious institutions have been piv-otal within African American communities (DuBois, 1903; Frazier, 1974;

Taylor et al., 1987). And while the place of religion in contemporary lifehas changed for many Americans, both black and white, evidence suggeststhat the black church continues to be uniquely important for many of its


6/25


members, functioning as an anchoring institution within the black com-munity (Pattillo-McCoy, 1998). Although a number of these studies employblack-only samples, findings indicate that in addition to its spiritual mission,

the black church plays an active role in other, more secular aspects of thelives of its congregants, including that of acting as a mobilizing force withinthe community (Wilcox and Gomez, 1990), as a catalyst for organizationwithin the civil rights movement (Morris, 1984), and, generally, as a siteof political and civic activity (Harris, 1994). In one of the few comparativestudies, Chaves and Higgins (1992) report that while the position of the con-temporary black church within African American communities may be lesscentral than it has been in the past, black congregations are more involvedthan white congregations in certain kinds of secular activities, notably those

concerned with civil rights and with providing aid for the disprivileged seg-ments of the immediately surrounding community. On the other hand, whitecongregations are more likely to be engaged in activities with targets outsidethe local community, such as refugee programs. More concretely, many ofthe activities aimed at the disprivileged or in crisis segment of the com-munity include not only family-oriented outreach programs (Billingsley andCaldwell, 1994) but also services related to substance use. Caldwell et al.(1992) thematized this distinction at a more general level and examined theservices offered by the black church as a support system that assists families

in fulfilling either instrumental or expressive needs. Instrumental needs referto the basic requirements for food, clothing, and shelter, whereas expressiveneeds include such things as emotional, spiritual, and intellectual develop-ment and education. Caldwell and colleagues found that almost half of theprograms could be categorized as meeting instrumental needs, and anotherquarter were oriented toward a combination of instrumental and expressiveneeds, including assistance with substance use issues. In their analysis of thecontemporary centrality of the black church, Lincoln and Mamiya (1990)found that community outreach programs constituted a major activity of

urban black churches, with nearly 68% reporting that they were involved insuch activities, offering, among other things, substance abuse programs.

Thus, on the one hand, we are confronted with a large body of researchon social support and the role that religious institutions in particular (as asite of group formation and integration) can play in providing such support.Much of the literature on the distinctiveness of the black church can beread within the context of this broad theoretical orientation. Although so-cial support research does not generally take up outcomes such as substanceconsumption and abuse, the widespread prevalence of programs related to

such issues suggests an extension of the support perspective in this direc-tion. On the other hand, however, reference group theory, focusing largelyon the normative dimension, has demonstrated an ability to provide robust


7/25


accounts precisely of the ways in which religion may be implicated in variousoutcomes concerning substance use. The present paper attempts to examineboth of the constitutive dimensions of religion and to analyze the conditions

under which the normative context and/or the integrative role of religionmay be related to alcohol use. Taking risk for alcohol dependency as theoutcome, we compare those denominations that oppose the use of alcohol tothose that do not, while simultaneously examining the effects of the relativestrength of the commitment to the religious community. We propose thatwhile each of these perspectives has a contribution to make, their relativeimportance in modeling the relation between religion and risk for alcoholdependency will vary across racial groups. Specifically, given the distinctivenature of the black church, we expect that integrative dimension of reli-

gion will be more salient for blacks than for whites with respect to risk foralcohol dependency. The goal here is not to adjudicate between these twoapproaches, but rather to explore the conditions under which one, or both,may be applicable. By doing so, we attempt to acknowledge both aspectsof religion as it has been understood by sociologists: not only as a systemof obligatory beliefs, but also an eminently collective thing (Durkheim,1995:44).

METHOD

Sample

The data reported here were obtained from a national evaluation ofFighting Back, a community-based substance intervention program sup-ported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. A telephone survey usingrandom digit dialing sampling procedures was conducted in spring of 1995and replicated in spring of 1997. There were no significant differences over

the 2 years, which allows us to pool the two datasets. The overall responserate for the two surveys was 78% (completed interviews divided by thoserespondents initially contacted). The survey averaged 23 min in length andtargeted individuals aged 1644 years old. For these analyses, we omit the16 through 20 age group since they are illegal drinkers, as well as thoseindividuals who are not black or white. This leaves an available sample of18,817 respondents, composed of 10,982 whites and 7835 blacks.

Data were gathered from 12 mid-sized cities that were part of theFighting Back initiative, and 29 other control site communities, to assess

the relationships between the physical and social environments and sub-stance use. The comparison sites were matched to the Fighting Back commu-nities on demographic characteristics, and the selection of these comparison


8/25


sites was confined to the same state for purposes of state policy and datacomparability (Beveridge et al., 2000).7 The instrument utilizes questionsthat have been previously administered in other national surveys such as

the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, Monitoring the Future,and the National Comorbidity Survey, as well as regional academic surveys(e.g., the Eagleton Institute), and underwent extensive pretesting. Withinmost communities, the survey focused on the inner city, matching the areastargeted by the Fighting Back program. The 41 sites represent middle- tomoderate-sized American cites, and while exhibiting considerable regional,cultural, and economic diversity, each site has a large ethnic and racial mi-nority population, as well as endemic poverty and unemployment. Althoughnot representative of the nation as a whole, the sites do represent middle- to

larger-sized American cities, which have major substance abuse and relatedproblems. The survey fairly closely replicates findings for all U.S. middle-sized Metropolitan Statistical Areas, although our sites are somewhat poorerand include a greater number of minorities.

This dataset offers several advantages for this study. First, since the sam-ple is large and not confined to a specific region, there are sufficient num-bers to permit an analysis of several denominations, rather than the single ordual denominational analysis typical of many studies on religion and alcohol.Second, the sample size also permits us to test for race effects through the

creation of black and white subsamples and to include interaction terms aswell, in contrast to most studies which consider racial differences by simplyadding a term to control for race or ethnic status.

Measures

Alcohol Use

Estimates of alcohol use are based on a question that asked whether therespondent had consumed more than four drinks in any single day withinthe past 12 months. Thus, an affirmative response meant that on at least one

7The following treatment and comparison sites were surveyed: (1) Milwaukee, WI; compar-isons: Racine and Madison, WI. (2) New Haven, CT; comparisons: Bridgeport, Hartford,and Waterbury, CT. (3) Santa Barbara, CA; comparisons: Carlsbad and Redondo Beach,CA. (4) Vallejo, CA; comparisons: San Bernardino and Stockton, CA. (5) Washington, DC(Marshall Heights); comparisons: downtown Baltimore, MD, and downtown Washington, DC.(6) Worcester, MA; comparisons: Fall River, Lowell, and Springfield, MA. (7) Charlotte,NC; comparisons: Greensboro, Raleigh, and Winston-Salem, NC. (8) Columbia, SC; compar-

isons: Greenville, Charleston, and North Charleston, SC. (9) Kansas City, MO; comparisons:Columbia, Springfield, and St. Louis, MO. (10) Little Rock, AR; comparisons: Fort Smith andPine Bluff, AR. (11) Newark, NJ; comparisons: Camden and Jersey City, NJ. (12) San Antonio,TX; comparisons: Dallas, Fort Worth, and Houston, TX.


9/25


occasion in the last year, the respondent was potentially more than just acasual drinker. The measure is dichotomous, where 0 indicates absenceof risk, and 1 indicates risk.8 This item is taken from National Comorbidity

Study (see Kessler, 2000) and follows the criteria established in theDSM-IVandICD 9for estimating what is termed risk for alcohol dependency.9

Religion and Service Attendance

Using the format established by the GSS, denomination was measuredby asking respondents, What is your religious preference? Is it Protestant,Catholic, Jewish, some other religion, or no religion? If the respondent

answered, Protestant, she or he was then asked to specify which denom-ination. Responses to the two questions included Catholic, Episcopalian,Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, Baptist, Pentecostal, other Protestantdenominations, Protestant no denomination, Other (non-Protestant), andno religion. Muslims and Jews have been omitted from this analysis becausethere were so few black Jews or white Muslims. Next, on the basis of dis-tinctions that are standard in the literature, denominations were categorizedinto those that oppose or object to the use of alcohol and those that do not(Clark et al., 1990; Nelsen and Rooney, 1982). Objector denominations

include Baptist, Pentecostal, Protestant no denomination (labeled Protes-tantND), Protestant Other, and Other. Those denominations categorizedas Nonobjectors include Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Catholic,Methodist. No religion is the contrast category.

Group membership, the integrative aspect of religion, is measured bymeans of a variable capturing the frequency with which respondents at-tended religious services. The four response categories are never/rarely (0),once or twice a month (1), once a week or more (2), and daily (3). However,since there were too few individuals who reported attending services daily

to use this last category as a reasonable comparison group, the variable hasbeen trichotomized, and daily attendance is included in the category ofonce a week or more. Using the procedure offered by the statistical pack-age SPSS for recoding categorical variables, this measure was transformed

8It should be noted that this dichotomous distinction derives from the medical model thatdominates the field of substance use and abuse research, where it is assumed that an individualis either at risk for alcohol dependency or not, alcohol dependent or not dependent. It can beargued, however, as the second author of this paper has done elsewhere, that dependencycannot be so easily and distinctly identified (see Kadushin et al., 1998). Nevertheless, thisclassification risk for alcohol dependency is the standard in the field, and so will be used in

this paper. It reflects the psychiatric opinion that persons who have four or more drinks on asingle day are potentially more than merely casual drinkers.

9See Stacy et al. (1985) regarding the reliability and validity of self-reported measures of alcoholconsumption.


10/25


Table I. Percentage Distribution for Denomination, Service Attendance, Region, and atRisk for Alcohol Dependency: Pooled and by Race

Pooled White Black

N % n % n %

DenominationCatholic 3767 21.0 3220 30.7 547 7.3Episcopalian 356 2.0 283 2.7 73 1.0Lutheran 488 2.7 456 4.3 32 0.5Methodist 1079 6.0 636 6.1 443 6.0Presbyterian 483 2.7 421 4.0 62 0.8Baptist 5179 28.9 1460 13.9 3719 50.0Pentecostal 403 2.2 84 0.8 319 4.3Protestant Other 903 5.0 501 4.8 402 5.4ProtestantNDa 1479 8.2 934 8.9 545 7.3

Other 880 4.9 474 4.5 406 5.5No religion 2913 16.2 2016 19.2 897 12.0Services: Never 8627 47.0 5930 54.7 2697 35.9Services: Once or twice a month 4004 21.8 2161 19.9 1843 24.5Services: Weekly 5725 31.2 2750 25.4 2975 39.6Reside in the south 8429 44.8 3895 35.5 4534 57.9At risk for alcohol dependency 6558 35.0 5056 46.2 1502 19.3

a ND = No denomination.

into dummy variables, and the category of once or twice a month labeled

ServicesM, and that of once a week or more ServicesW. Nonattendanceis the omitted category.

A breakdown of responses for each denomination and services by raceis provided in Table I. The number of cases for almost all of the subcells isquite substantial, and none falls below 30. As is typically the case, there areconsiderably fewer black than white Lutherans, Episcopalians, Presbyteriansand, to a lesser degree, Catholics. Specifically, 9.6% of the blacks in oursample report belonging to one of these historically white denominations.This is consistent with Stark, who estimated that approximately 10% of

blacks belong to nonblack denominations (1987). However, it is importantto note that even within these historically white denominations, there arecongregations which are predominately or wholly black (see Cavendish,2000; Hunt, 1996). The issue is germane to our paper, because it is primarilyin the form of a particular church that any denomination takes on a palpablereality for its adherents. While the data do not permit us to evaluate theextent to which this may hold for our respondents, research indicates that theoverwhelming majority of church-going African Americans belong to blackdenominations or to black churches (Billingsley and Caldwell, 1994; Roof

and McKinney, 1987; Wilcox and Gomez, 1990). And while congregationalhomogamy may be dissipating (Hunt, 1998), religious participation still tendsto be highly segregated (for several reasons, not the least of which is that


11/25


residential patterns in the United States tend to be segregated (Massey andDenton, 1993)).

With respect to service attendance, Table I indicates that a larger per-

centage of blacks attend weekly than do whites, and whites are more likelyto never attend than are blacks. This is also consistent with the literature(Tayloret al., 1996).

Importantly, however, when both the denomination and service vari-ables are included in a model as predictors, a misspecification problem arises.Specifically, almost no one in the sample who reported no religion also re-ported attending services (n = 62). Therefore, in the models that include thedummy variable for services, those who report no religion are omitted andthe contrast category becomesallnonobjecting denominations. This proce-

dure also addresses the problem of the small number of black Lutherans,Episcopalians, and Presbyterians.

Interactions

According to reference group theory, the more contact an individual haswith a religion and its norms, the more that religions norms are reinforced.Thus, a second predictor variable measuring the normative dimension was

created, the interaction terms of denomination by the two dummy cate-gories of service attendance. This set of terms essentially measures strengthof commitment to a particular religion. Under the normative hypothesis,we would expect to find that, in the case of religions that have proscriptivealcohol norms, attending services more often leads to a decrease in reportsof alcohol use. In other words, the more contact an individual has with thegroup and its discouraging alcohol norms, the less likely she or he wouldbe to drink. Conversely, for individuals whose religion allows or permitsalcohol consumption, more frequent service attendance would not be asso-

ciated with any decrease in alcohol consumption, since no prohibitive normis being reinforced by this attendance. As we interpret it, therefore, theeffects pointed to by reference group theory are contingent upon the de-gree to which an individual is integrated into a social group (just as withthe integration perspective); however, these effects will also vary accordingto the nature of the particulargroup to which she or he belongsin thiscase by virtue of differences in doctrinally legitimated norms concerningalcohol use. Thus, significant interactions would indicate that the effect ofservices is not constantthat is, not independentbut varies by denom-

ination. On the other hand, a lack of significant interactions would offersupport to the integrative argument, indicating that the effect of attendingservices is constant, regardless of denomination. In this manner, we are able


12/25


to more rigorously isolate the denominational factor postulated by referencegroup theory, while simultaneously registering a phenomenon that it tendsto overlook.

Background Variables

The control variables include gender (males = 0); age, centered on thesample mean of 32; household income, reported in nine categories rangingfrom less than $5000 to $75,000 and over, and treated as a continuous vari-able centered around the median category of $25,00035,000; region of thecountry, dichotomized (non-South = 0, South = 1); and education, reportedin six categories ranging from eighth grade or less to graduate degree, alsotreated as a continuous variable centered on some college. Additionally, twovariables that were part of the sampling design are included in each equa-tion in lieu of sampling weights: one for the number of telephones (wherethe contrast category is one phone) and one for the size of the household(standardized to the mean, 2) (Kadushin et al., 1998).

In the analyses presented below, the data are not postweighted. Thatis, no adjustments have been made to control for potential demographicdifferences between the sample and census data for the target sites. Com-parisons of the survey to 1990 Census data suggest a fairly good match on the

basis of demography (Saxe et al., 1997) with the exception of a slightly higherrate of blacks. Current debates regarding the possible use of a samplingmethodology in the 2000 U.S. census suggest that general population surveysmay actually be more accurate in their counts of blacks (and Hispanics).

Finally, it should be noted that all effects in these models are consideredpredictive only in a statistical sense; that is, we do not necessarily makeany strong inferences of causality. For example, if an association is shownbetween attendance at religious services and risk for alcohol dependency,it is possible that something that happens in the services acts to reduce

alcohol consumption; conversely, however, it is entirely possible that thosewho drink do not choose to go to religious services. By and large, given theliterature, we do assume that it is something about religion or integration intoa religious group that has an effect on alcohol consumption. Nevertheless,we also entertain the possibility that alcohol users are not welcome in certainchurches.

RESULTS

Tables II and III present the results of a series of logistic regression equa-tions (using SPSS 9.0) designed to test the theoretical arguments guiding our


13/25


Table II. Logistic Coefficients of Risk for Alcohol Dependency by Objector and Non-objector Denominationsa,b

Model 1: Pooled Model 2: White Model 3: Black

(N= 16,119) (n = 9516) (n = 6603)Nonobjector Denominations

Catholic 0.06 (0.06) 0.20 (0.06) 0.13 (0.14)Episcopalian 0.37 (0.12) 0.19 (0.14) 0.47 (0.31)Lutheran 0.54 (0.11) 0.25 (0.12) 0.03 (0.49)Methodist 0.16 (0.08) 0.24 (0.10) 0.27 (0.16)Presbyterian 0.16 (0.11) 0.09 (0.12) 0.62 (0.45)

Objector DenominationsBaptist 0.72 (0.06) 0.77 (0.08) 0.07 (0.10)Pentecostal 1.37 (0.16) 1.17 (0.28) 0.59 (0.21)Protestant Other 0.87 (0.10) 1.02 (0.12) 0.26 (0.17)ProtestantNDc 0.63 (0.08) 0.63 (0.09) 0.53 (0.16)

Other 0.47 (0.09) 0.45 (0.12) 0.06 (0.16)Constant 0.31 (0.05) 0.56 (0.06) 0.75 (0.11)

Note. Standard errors are in parentheses. Boldface type indicates significant difference betweenwhites and blacks.a Controlling for age, gender, household income, education, region, number of phones and

household size.bContrast category for denomination is No Religion.cND = No denomination.p


14/25


These findings offer preliminary support to reference group theorys con-tention that the particular doctrinal norms of a religious group are relatedto alcohol use behavior.

Models 2 and 3 parallel Model 1 and examine whether the main effectof religious denomination on the likelihood of risk for alcohol dependencydiffers for whites and blacks, respectively. The overall pattern within eachsubgroup indicates that membership in a denomination that objects to theuse of alcohol is more important for whites than for blacks, implying that thenormative context provided by religion may play a greater role in predictingrisk for alcohol dependency for whites. For blacks, none of the nonobjectorand only two out of five objector denominations are statistically significant(those of Pentecostal and ProtestantND). For whites, Catholic and each of

the objector denominations are significantly associated with a decrease inrisk. The magnitude of the effects are also different for blacks and whites.Among white Pentecostals, for example, the log odds likelihood for beingat risk for alcohol dependency is 0.61 (Bconstant + Bpentecostal), whereas forblack Pentecostals the log odds likelihood is1.34. This means that there is a28.5% decrease in the likelihood of risk for alcohol dependency among whitePentecostals, as compared to a 11.4% decrease in the risk likelihood amongblack Pentecostals. To determine whether the observed differences betweenthe subsamples are statistically significantly (e.g., Glass and Hopkins, 1996;

Lindgren, 1993),tscores were calculated (two-tailed; p


15/25

TableIII.MainandInteractionLog

isticCoefficientsofRiskforAl

coholDependencybyDenomin

ationandFrequencyofService

Attendance

Pooled(N=

13,1

49)

White(n=

7582)

Black(n=5567)

Model1

M

odel2

Model3

Mod

el4

Model5

Model

6

Model7

Model8

Model9

Maineffects

Baptist

0.83

(0.0

5)0.76

(0.0

5)0.59

(0.0

8)0.6

4

(0.0

7)0.59

(0.0

8)0.23(0.11)

0.10(0.0

9)

0.0

6(0.0

9)

0.10(0.1

6)

Penteco

stal

1.43

(0.1

6)1.13

(0.1

6)1.04

(0.3

1)1.0

4

(0.2

8)0.7

8

(0.2

9)

0.86(0.52)

0.70

(0.2

1)0.4

5(0.2

1)

0.2

3(0.4

0)

Protesta

ntOther

0.93

(0.0

9)0.71

(0.0

9)0.38(0.1

7)

0.8

8

(0.1

1)0.72

(0.1

2)0.40(0.20)

0.37(0.1

7)

0.1

3(0.1

7)

0.38(0.3

3)

Protesta

ntNDc

0.70

(0.0

7)0.65

(0.0

7)0.38

(0.1

0)0.4

8

(0.0

8)0.46

(0.0

8)0.12(0.12)

0.69

(0.1

6)0.6

0

(0.16)0.5

2(0.2

6)

Other

0.51

(0.0

9)0.40

(0.0

9)0.27(0.1

4)

0.29

(0.1

1)

0.2

9

(0.1

1)

0.10(0.16)

0.17(0.1

6)

0.0

6(0.1

7)

0.0

8(0.3

1)

ServicesMonthly

0.34

(0.0

5)0.31

(0.0

7)

0.33

(0.0

6)0.26(0.0

8)

0.0

8(0.0

9)

0.10(0.1

9)

ServicesWeekly

1.07

(0.0

5)0.74

(0.0

7)

1.00

(0.0

6)0.63(0.0

8)

0.9

3

(0.09)0.7

3

(0.2

1)

Interactionsb

Baptist

0.10(0.1

1)

0.26(0.17)

0.2

9(0.2

2)

ServicesMonthly

Penteco

stal

0.49(0.4

4)

0.58(0.79)

0.2

5(0.5

5)

ServicesMonthly

Protesta

ntOther

0.12(0.2

4)

0.06(0.29)

0.1

8(0.4

5)

ServicesMonthly

Protesta

ntND

0.29(0.1

9)

0.39(0.22)

0.1

3(0.4

0)

ServicesMonthly

Other

0.22(22)

0.09(0.27)

0.2

3(0.4

4)

ServicesMonthly

Baptist

0.52

(0.1

2)

1.0

3(

0.1

7)

0.1

9(0.2

4)

ServicesWeekly

Penteco

stal

0.6

0(0.4

0)

0.25(0.67)

0.70(0.5

4)

ServicesWeekly

Protesta

ntOther

1.0

3

(0.2

3)

0.99(0.2

8)

1.0

9(0.4

5)

ServicesWeekly

Protesta

ntND

0.7

4

(0.1

7)

0.9

1(

0.2

0)

0.1

0(0.3

9)

ServicesWeekly

Other

0.65

(0.2

1)

0.9

0(0

.30)

0.1

4(0.4

0)

SerivcesWeekly

Constant

0.39(0.0

4)

0.73(0.0

5)

0.6

3(0.0

6)

0.4

1(0.0

5)

0.74(0.0

6)

0.62(0.06)

0.57(0.1

1)

0.3

2(0.1

2)

0.4

4(0.1

6)

Note.

Boldfacetypeindicatessignificant

differencebetweenwhitesand

blacks.

aEacheq

uationcontrolsforrespondentsage,householdincome,education,regionofthecountry,numberofphonesandhouseholdresidents.S

tandard

errorsareinparenthesis.

bForterm

sinvolvedininteractions,themaineffectsrepresentthelog

isticcoefficientwhentheother

termintheinteractiontakesthevalueof0.

cND=N

odenominations.

p

Fulltext.pdf 1Between Sacral Belief and Moral Community: A Multidimensional Approach to the...

Documents

Transcript of Fulltext.pdf 1Between Sacral Belief and Moral Community: A Multidimensional Approach to the...