IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v4y2014i1p2158244013518932.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Religion, Partisanship, and Attitudes Toward Science Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Ted G. Jelen
  • Linda A. Lockett

Abstract

We examine issues involving science which have been contested in recent public debate. These “contested science†issues include human evolution, stem-cell research, and climate change. We find that few respondents evince consistently skeptical attitudes toward science issues, and that religious variables are generally strong predictors of attitudes toward individual issues. Furthermore, and contrary to analyses of elite discourse, partisan identification is not generally predictive of attitudes toward contested scientific issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Ted G. Jelen & Linda A. Lockett, 2014. "Religion, Partisanship, and Attitudes Toward Science Policy," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(1), pages 21582440135, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:4:y:2014:i:1:p:2158244013518932
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244013518932
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244013518932
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244013518932?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carmines, Edward G. & Stimson, James A., 1980. "The Two Faces of Issue Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(1), pages 78-91, March.
    2. Tony Reichhardt & David Cyranoski & Quirin Schiermeier, 2004. "Studies of faith," Nature, Nature, vol. 432(7018), pages 666-669, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Melanie Morgan & William B. Collins & Glenn G. Sparks & Jessica R. Welch, 2018. "Identifying Relevant Anti-Science Perceptions to Improve Science-Based Communication: The Negative Perceptions of Science Scale," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Allison Joy Bailey & Caitlin M. Wills & Jamie Mitchem, 2022. "Attitudes towards climate change and scientific stories," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(4), pages 714-726, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lee Dutter, 1985. "An application of the multicandidate calculus of voting to the 1972 and 1976 German federal elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 405-424, January.
    2. Clareta Treger, 2023. "When do people accept government paternalism? Theory and experimental evidence," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 195-214, January.
    3. Marthe Hårvik Austgulen, 2016. "Environmentally Sustainable Textile Consumption—What Characterizes the Political Textile Consumers?," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 441-466, December.
    4. Denisova, Irina & Eller, Markus & Frye, Timothy & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2009. "Who Wants To Revise Privatization? The Complementarity of Market Skills and Institutions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(2), pages 284-304, May.
    5. Alston, Lee J. & Jenkins, Jeffery A. & Nonnenmacher, Tomas, 2006. "Who Should Govern Congress? Access to Power and the Salary Grab of 1873," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(3), pages 674-706, September.
    6. Christopher Z. Mooney & Mei-Hsien Lee, 1999. "Morality Policy Reinvention: State Death Penalties," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 566(1), pages 80-92, November.
    7. David T Yi, 2009. "The effect of post-election asymmetry information possibility on pre-election policy platform choices," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(4), pages 3233-3243.
    8. Hoch, Felix & Kellermann, Kim Leonie, 2020. "Why so negative? Negative party positioning in spatial models of voting," CIW Discussion Papers 1/2020, University of Münster, Center for Interdisciplinary Economics (CIW).
    9. repec:esx:essedp:748 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Mariano Torcal & Sergio Martini & Lluis Orriols, 2018. "Deciding about the unknown: The effect of party and ideological cues on forming opinions about the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(3), pages 502-523, September.
    11. Hermann Schmitt & Jacques Thomassen, 2000. "Dynamic Representation: The Case of European Integration," MZES Working Papers 21, MZES.
    12. Logan Dancey & Paul Goren, 2010. "Party Identification, Issue Attitudes, and the Dynamics of Political Debate," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 686-699, July.
    13. Seth J. Hill & Chris Tausanovitch, 2018. "Southern realignment, party sorting, and the polarization of American primary electorates, 1958–2012," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 107-132, July.
    14. Healy, Andrew J. & Malhotra, Neil & Mo, Cecilia H., 2009. "Personal Emotions and Political Decision Making: Implications for Voter Competence," Research Papers 2034, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    15. De Toni, Alberto & Nassimbeni, Guido, 2000. "Just-in-time purchasing: an empirical study of operational practices, supplier development and performance," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 631-651, December.
    16. Roberto Pannico, 2017. "Is the European Union too complicated? Citizens’ lack of information and party cue effectiveness," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 424-446, September.
    17. Jensen, Nathan M. & Li, Quan & Rahman, Aminur, 2007. "Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard are sweeter : understanding corruption using cross-national firm-level surveys," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4413, The World Bank.
    18. Matthew Eshbaugh‐Soha, 2010. "How Policy Conditions the Impact of Presidential Speeches on Legislative Success," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(2), pages 415-435, June.
    19. Nowak, Anna, 2018. "You failed! Government satisfaction and party preferences facing Islamist terrorism," CIW Discussion Papers 6/2018, University of Münster, Center for Interdisciplinary Economics (CIW).
    20. Kevin Arceneaux & Robin Kolodny, 2009. "Educating the Least Informed: Group Endorsements in a Grassroots Campaign," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(4), pages 755-770, October.
    21. Bechtel, Michael & Hainmueller, Jens & Hangartner, Dominik & Helbling, Marc, 2015. "Reality Bites: The Limits of Framing Effects for Salient and Contested Policy Issues," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 3(3), pages 683-695.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:4:y:2014:i:1:p:2158244013518932. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.