Religiosity and gender as predictors of prejudice Nino Javakhishvili, Irina Vardanashvili, Ana Makashvili D. Uznadze Psychology Institute Ilia State University Edinburg, July 2017

Religiosity, Gender Religiosity – is positively linked to prejudice. Contradictory findings. (Scheepers, Gijsberts and Hello, 2002;Rowatt, LaBouff, Johnson, Froese, Tsang, 2009; Hall, Matz, Wood, 2010; Ugurlu, 2013)

Religiosity, Gender Gender - males, compared to females, are more prone to being prejudiced. Findings of multiple studies on gender are not consistent (McFarland &Adelson, 1996; Altemayer, 1998; Herek, 2002; Hughes &Tuch, 2003; Parillo and Donoghue, 2005; McFarland, 2010; Javakhishvili, et al., 2012 )

2 studies Both contain measures of prejudice Both contain measures of religiosity (differ) and gender Both conducted on students in Georgia

Study 1

2 samples Study 1 – 611 students from various universities in Tbilisi, capital city, Georgia Mean age - 20.36 (SD=4.9) 177 (29%) - men, 434 (71%) - women Study 2 – 528 students from various universities in Tbilisi, capital city, Georgia Mean age - 21.50 (SD=1.9) 140(26%) - men, 388 (74%) – women

2 procedures Study 1 – paper and pencil Study 2 – online 5 points Likert-scale

Measures of Prejudice Study 1 – to Abirians – a fictitious group of people – ethnic, religious, sexual

Measures of Prejudice Study 2 Catholic Religious Muslim Gay Sexual Lesbian Armenian Ethnic Greek Wheelchair Disabilities Schizophrenia

Measures of prejudice Study 1- 8 items, loading on two factors Bogardus social distance scale Study 1- 8 items, loading on two factors Chi-square=20.38, df=14; CFI=0.997, TLI=0.993 RMSEA=0.027, SRMR=0.018 Study 2 – 7 items, loading on six factors (less and more sensitive) Chi-Square=2849.972 df=1331; CFI=0.926, TLI=0.914 RMSEA=0.046, SRMR=0.043

Measures of Prejudice Factor 1: Would Marry Would have as teacher of my child Would have as my boss at work More sensitive prejudice Factor 2: Would make friends Would have as a neighbor Would sit next in public transport Would have as an acquaintance Would have as a guest in my country Less sensitive prejudice

Measures of Prejudice Factor 1 Religious minorities Factor 2 Less vs. more sensitive Factor 1 Religious minorities Factor 2 Sexual minorities Factor 3 – ethnic minorities (Armenians) Factor 4 – ethnic minorities (Greek) Factor 5 – disabled (Schizophrenia) Factor 6 – disabled (Wheelchair) *

Measures of Religion Study 1 – question: not at all religious – to very religious (10 points) Study 2 - question: not at all religious – to very religious (7 points)

Results – Study 1 Level of religiosity significantly predicted both forms of prejudice: more sensitive prejudice beta =.402, p=.000, less sensitive prejudice beta =.300, p=.000.  

Results – Study 1 Gender significantly predicts less sensitive prejudice, beta =.171, p=.000; men and women tend to have similar attitudes when it comes to delicate relations with an out-group while the distinction comes into play with more distant relations

Results – Study 2 Gender is predictor of less sensitive types of prejudice except to those with schizophrenia In addition, Gender is predictor of more sensitive types of prejudice for homosexuals Gender is predictor of prejudice to Armenians and Disabled (wheelchair)

Results – Study 2 Religiosity is predictor of all types of prejudice Religiosity and gender interact to predict prejudice to homosexuals/gays ß=.156, p=.001 Model is significant F (3, 524)=50.335 p=.000 R2=.219

Results – Study 2 Gender moderates effect of religiosity on prejudice to homosexuals/gays Those who report to be more religious, show stronger prejudice and this relation is stronger for males

Results – Study 1 Religion as a mediator between traditional values and prejudice (both forms) Traditional values: measured by Portrait Values Questionnaire-Revised (Schwartz, 2012): It is important to him/her to maintain traditional values and ways of thinking It is important to him/her to follow his family’s customs or the customs of a religion It is important to him/her to honor the traditional practices of his culture.

Results – Study 1 Tradition Religion More sensitive prejudice 0.19 (0.30) More sensitive prejudice Tradition 1.09 0.10 Religion 0.11

Results – Study 1 Tradition Religion Less sensitive prejudice 0.08 (0.18) Less sensitive prejudice Tradition 1.09 0.09 Religion 0.10

Results – Both Studies Summing up: Religiosity is a predictor for all types of prejudice – 1, 2 Gender moderates effect of religiosity on prejudice to homosexuals/gays – 2 Religiosity is a mediator between traditional values and prejudice - 1

Religion the findings are consistent with the literature that show that level of religiosity is a predictor of prejudice (e.g., McFarland, 2010)

Results – Both Studies Summing up: Gender is a predictor only for less sensitive prejudice – 1, 2 Gender is a predictor for more sensitive prejudice to homosexuals (gays to blame) as well – 2 Gender is a predictor for prejudice to those with wheelchairs – generally less sensitive group - 2

Gender the findings are consistent with the studies that show that males, compared to females, are more likely to be prejudiced (e.g., McFarland, 2010) and with those studies, too, that argue that gender does not account for significant difference in negative attitudes (e.g., Hughes &Tuch, 2003; Javakhishvili et al., 2012).

Thank You