Existential Security and Religious Gender Gap in Iran: In-Country Comparative Study

علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

Article 5, Volume 18, Issue 1 - Serial Number 37, September 2021, Pages 159-135   

Document Type: Research

DOI: 10.22067/social.2021.69096.1015

Author

Mohammadreza Taleban^*

Associate Professor in Sociology, Institute of Imam Khomeini and Islamic Revolution, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

The statement that "women are more religious than men" is one of the few general statements upon which social scientists, especially sociologists of religion, have consensus. Nevertheless, its explanation is a scientific puzzle, and several theories have been proposed to explain this gender gap in religiosity. This study was conducted with the aim of examining the empirical validity of the theory of existential security in Iran. The question is: To what extent the indicators of existential security can explain the gender gap of religiosity in Iran? In this regard, the arguments of critical safety theory were first formulated in the form of research hypotheses. Then, by choosing provinces as units of analysis and using comparative method for comparisons within country, the hypotheses were compared with the data of all provinces in Iran to assess the degree of conformity of the predictions of the theory with empirical evidence. Finally, the findings of the empirical test of the relationship between existential security and the gender gap of religiosity in Iran by in-country comparative method and inter-provincial analysis showed that none of the hypotheses representing the theory of existential security are confirmed. In fact, the findings of this study failed to provide serious and reliable support for the theory of existential security in explaining the gender gap of religiosity among Muslim population and different provinces of Iran. Considering the convergence of the results of this in-country study with the cross-national study of Norris and Inglehart (2008) in the empirical inability of existential security theory to explain the gender gap in religiosity, it can be concluded that the empirical basis of this theory to explain the gender gap in religiosity is weak.

Keywords

Existential Security; Religiosity; Religious Gender Gap; Human Development; Economic Inequality

References

1. دواس، دی‌. ای.‌ (1376). پیمایش در تحقیقات اجتماعی (چاپ اول) (ه. نائبی، مترجم). تهران: نشر نی.
2. صالحی، م. ج. (1397) رتبه‌بندی استان‌های کشور بر اساس شاخص‌های توسعه انسانی و سرمایه انسانی. فصلنامه پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی در آموزش عالی، 24(1)، 27-49.
3. کلاین، پ. (1380). راهنمای آسان تحلیل عاملی (چاپ اول) (س. ج. صدرالسادات و ا. مینایی، مترجمان). تهران: انتشارات سمت.
4. هومن، ح. ع. (1384) مدل‌یابی معادلات ساختاری (چاپ اول). تهران: انتشارات سمت.
5. Barber, N. (2011). A cross-national test of the uncertainty hypothesis of religious belief. Cross-Cultural Research, 45(2), 318–333.
6. Bibby, R., & Brinkerhoff, M. (1974). Sources of religious involvement. Review of Religious Research, 15, 71-79.
7. Cornwall, M. (1989). The determinants of religious behavior: A theoretical model and empirical test. Social Forces, 68(2), 572-592.
8. Dittes, J. (1971). Some parallels in the career of church-sect and extrinsic-intrinsic. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 10, 375–383.
9. Finke, R., & Stark, R. (1992). The churching of America 1776-1990. Rutgers: Rutgers University Press.
10. Hackett, C. (2016). The religious gender gap around the world. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
11. Höllinger, F., & Muckenhuber, J. (2019). Religiousness and existential insecurity: A cross-national comparative analysis on the macro and micro level. International Sociology, 34 (1), 19–37.
12. Miller, A., & Stark, R. (2002). Gender and religiousness: Can socialization explanations be saved? American Journal of Sociology, 107(6), 1399–1423.
13. Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2004). Sacred and secular: Religion and politics worldwide. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14. Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2008). Existential security and the gender gap in religious values. SSRC Conference on Religion and International Affairs, February 15–16, New York.
15. Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2011). Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide (2^nd ). New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Rees, T. J. (2009). Is personal insecurity a cause of cross-national differences in the intensity of religious belief ? Journal of Religion and Society, 11, 1–24.
17. Ruiter, , & Van Tubergen, F. (2009). Religious attendance in cross-national perspective: A multilevel analysis of 60 countries. American Journal of Sociology, 115, 863–895.
18. Solt, , Habel, Ph., & Grant, T. (2011) Economic inequality, relative power, and religiosity. Social Science Quarterly, 92(2), 447–465.
19. Stark, R. (1996). The rise of Christianity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
20. Stark, R. (2002) Physiology and faith: Addressing the “Universal" gender difference in religious. Journal for the Scientific of Religion, 41(3), 495–507.
21. Stark, R. (2003). Upper class asceticism: Social origins of ascetic movements and medieval saints. Review of Religious Research, 45, 5–19.
22. Stark, R., & Finke, R. (2000) Acts of faith. California: University of California Press.
23. Stolz, J. (2020) Secularization theories in the twenty-first century. Social Compass, 67(2), 282-308.
24. Sullins, (2006). Gender and religion: Deconstructing universality, constructing complexity, American Journal of Sociology, 112 (3), 838–860.