Content uploaded by Xiaohe Xu
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Xiaohe Xu on Sep 14, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Wiley Blackwell Companion to the Sociology of Families, First Edition.
Edited by Judith Treas, Jacqueline Scott, and Martin Richards.
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published 2014 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
14
Introduction
Social scientists are once again actively interested in the connections between
religion and family, two institutions that have enjoyed a long and complementary
relationship (Wilcox, 2004; Edgell, 2006). This interest can be observed in the
increased number of works on this topic that have appeared in recent years in major
peer-reviewed outlets in sociology, family studies, psychology, religious studies,
andallied fields and the significant volumes now published on prominent university
and trade presses. In this chapter, we will review the existing theoretical and
empirical literature linking multiple dimensions of religion with various facets of
family life.
Several caveats are in order. First, because much of the work on this topic has
been conducted about and within the United States, our review will necessarily
concentrate on this context, and we will return to this as a limitation in the
concludingsection. Second, most studies on religion and family in the United
States and other Western societies center on the Judeo-Christian tradition, and
consequently, our work will emphasize this theme as well. Third, although there
are important literatures on religious variations toward family-related issues
(e.g., women’s roles, equal rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender per-
sons), due to space limitations, we will focus primarily on specific family-related
behaviors.
The remainder of this chapter is organized as follows. First, we will briefly
reviewkey patterns and trends in religion and spirituality in the United States over
the past 25 years. Then, we will review recent theory and research linking religion
with the following areas of family life, organized primarily by life course stage:
(i)premarital interactions, (ii) cohabitation and timing of marriage, (iii) relationship
dynamics and quality, (iv) childbearing, (v) child-rearing, and (vi) intergenerational
Religion and Families
C G. E X X
278 CHRISTOPHER G. ELLISON AND XIAOHE XU
relations. Finally, we will call attention to substantive and methodological issues and
gaps in religion–family research. We will underscore the importance of research
innon-Western contexts, where attention to religion has often been consigned to
studies of fertility and related issues.
The American Religious Landscape: A Brief Overview
Because much of the research on religion and family has been conducted in
US context, it is appropriate to begin with a very brief glimpse of the contempo-
rary American religious scene. Although much of the developed West has been
heavily influenced by secularization – manifested by diminished public role of reli-
gious institutions and values and in many settings by reduced individual religious
commitment and belief – for the most part, the United States has been regarded as
a stubborn outlier (Norris and Inglehart, 2004). The United States is also charac-
terized by substantial religious diversity; it has been estimated that more than 2000
religious groups and faith traditions are active in the United States. Despite the
absence of any single official source of data on religion in the United States, it is
possible to combine data from a number of nationwide surveys of individuals and
congregations to reach several broad conclusions (Chaves, 2011; Ellison and
McFarland, 2013).
First, when asked, most American adults report an affinity (but not necessarily
affiliation) with a Christian religious group or tradition. Specifically, approxi-
mately 30% of Americans associate themselves with conservative (evangelical, fun-
damentalist, or charismatic) Protestant groups (e.g., Southern Baptist, Assemblies
of God, many smaller denominations and independent churches, as well as many
nondenominational groups, including many of the rapidly growing megachurches).
Significant proportions of African Americans, as well as increasing numbers of
Latinos and Asian Americans, belong to such conservative faith communities.
These groups and many of their members tend to affirm the inerrancy and authority
of the Bible as well as beliefs about Original Sin, the imperative of salvation
through grace, and others (Hempel and Bartkowski, 2008). Around 12% of
Americans are affiliated with moderate and liberal Protestant groups (e.g.,
Episcopal, Methodist, most Presbyterian churches, etc.). In general, the more con-
servative groups have gained membership and social influence over the past 30–50
years, while the more moderate and liberal groups have declined. Approximately
25% of US adults self-identify as Roman Catholics. The percentage of US adults
reporting no religion on surveys has climbed to roughly 20%. The remainder
(13%) of the American public consists of members of non-Christian faiths (e.g.,
Judaism, Islam), sectarian groups (e.g., Mormons, or Latter-Day Saints), and a
myriad others. One of the fastest growing segments of theUS population self-
identifies as spiritual but not religious. This group – now approximately 25% of
the adult population and higher among younger cohorts – includes some individ-
uals who retain tenuous denominational identities, as well as many who have
rejected organized religion entirely.
Second, religious affiliation, practice, and belief are socially patterned. For
example, scholars have long referred to the social sources of American religious
279RELIGION AND FAMILIES
affiliation, especially region and socioeconomic status (Ellison and McFarland,
2013). Conservative Protestants have been historically concentrated in the Southeast
and lower Midwest, while Catholics have long maintained cultural strongholds in
the Northeast, upper Midwest, and Southwest. Liberal Protestants have been con-
centrated in the Northeast, while Jews have typically resided in coastal urban
contexts. Mormons have long dominated Utah, and now maintain majorities or
pluralities in many otherparts of the Mountain West. With respect to education and
SES, conservative Protestants have historically lagged behind most other groups in
education, income, and wealth. This has also been true of Catholics, although they
have experienced considerable upward mobility across generations. Liberal
Protestants and Jews have traditionally enjoyed comparatively high levels of educa-
tion and social and economic standing. Although many of these social sources
remain influential, specific patterns are shifting under the weight of geographical
mobility, assimilation, intermarriage, and other factors. Moreover, during the past
few decades, a number of factors have shifted the focus of many Americans’ reli-
gious attentions and loyalties away from denominations and toward local congre-
gations (Chaves, 2011).
It has proven to be difficult to estimate levels of religious attendance with precision,
due to the biases inherent in self reports of behavior in general, and especially this
particular behavior (Chaves, 2011). Observers cautiously estimate that perhaps
25% of US adults attend some type of religious service in a given week. Large
majorities of Americans pray weekly or more, while the frequency of meditation is
much lower. Two-thirds or more of US adults say that religion is very important to
them. In terms of core doctrine, levels of support for the concepts of Heaven and
Hell (especially the latter) have declined over the past few decades, while beliefs in
some type of God and some type of afterlife have remained strong and stable
(Schwadel, 2011).
By most indicators of personal religiosity (e.g., attendance at services, prayer,
religious salience), women are more religious than men. Comparatively high
levels of religiousness are found among racial and ethnic minorities, married
people (especially those with children), and older adults. Contrary to many
popular impressions, the associations between religious involvement and socio-
economic status are uneven. For example, income and education are positively
associated with the frequency of attendance and the occupation of church lead-
ership positions. On the other hand, less educated and less affluent persons tend
to engage in more frequent devotional activities (e.g., prayer, scriptural study)
and to hold more conservative or orthodox religious beliefs (Ellison and
McFarland, 2013).
In recent years, social scientists have assessed trends in American religion by
decomposing age, period, and cohort influences. Overall, most forms of religious
practice and belief increase modestly with age. Controlling for these age-related
patterns, recent studies have revealed significant cohort-based declines in the
likelihood of regular attendance, weekly prayer, and belief in biblical inerrancy,
which have accelerated for those born after the mid-1940s (Schwadel, 2011). It is
also important to note that Americans’ confidence in organized religion has been
on the decline for some time, and is plummeting even more rapidly than their
confidence in most other social institutions (Chaves, 2011). Thus, although the
280 CHRISTOPHER G. ELLISON AND XIAOHE XU
United States clearly remains one of the most conventionally religious nations in
the developed West, there are also signs of change and possible secularization on
the American religious scene.
Religious Influences and Family Life
At the broadest level, can religion be said to influence family life? If so, how
might this occur? First, denominations and faith traditions may embrace distinc-
tive religious teachings regarding the family or aspects thereof. For example,
conservative Protestants tend to believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of
God and that itis the authoritative source of guidance in all human affairs; that
is, levels of support for these core doctrines are significantly higher in conserva-
tive Protestant denominations than in other religious groups. In practice, how-
ever, not all parts of the Bible receive equal emphasis among self-described
inerrantists. Given their beliefs about the doctrine of original sin and the primacy
of the (heterosexual) family unit, conservative Protestant readings of the Bible
often stress passages about human sexuality (e.g., fornication, adultery, homo-
sexuality), marital and gender roles, and other family-related themes (Hempel
and Bartkowski, 2008). Mormons (Latter-Day Saints) have strong beliefs about
marriage, sexuality, and procreation as well, all of which are intertwined with a
very distinctive view of the family as an eternal unit. These and other faith com-
munities may constitute subcultures within which specific understandings of
family life are socialized.
In addition, religious participation and salience may also have implications for
family attitudes and behaviors. Although certain denominations and traditions
hold particularly distinctive ideologies, most religious groups attempt, to varying
degrees and with varying levels of effectiveness, to guide the morality and behav-
iors of their members. This may be especially true in certain areas, such as sexu-
ality and other family matters. The frequency of attendance at services may reflect
one’s level of religious commitment, because attendance requires the expenditure
of scarce resources such as time and energy (and may involve financial contribu-
tions as well). This form of religious involvement may also reflect the degree of
one’s immersion in religious teachings about the family, which may be communi-
cated formally (via sermons and religious education classes) and informally (via
social network ties).
Compliance with religious teachings about family-related matters may result
from the threat of shame due to the actual or prospective violation of internal-
ized norms, among persons for whom religion is important, a significant compo-
nent of their personal identity. In addition, for those enmeshed in networks of
coreligionists, deviance may be deterred by social sanctions, or rewards for desir-
able conduct, or diminished opportunities within religious networks for certain
types of deviant behavior, such as illicit sexual conduct (Hoffmann and Bahr,
2005). Of course, it is also possible that apparent religious effects may partly
reflect the role of selectivity, as individuals who do not wish to adhere to the
guidelines of a particular faith (or any religion) may switch denominations or
abandon organized religion altogether.
281RELIGION AND FAMILIES
Dating and premarital sex
Dating is an extremely important element of the lives of adolescents. In contrast
to the patterns observed among previous cohorts of youth, who tended to
transition into marriage and childbearing at much earlier ages, today’s adoles-
cents and young adults engage in a succession of premarital romantic relation-
ships. Although the nature of these relationships can vary widely, they are often
characterized by emotional attachment and physical (and sometimes sexual)
attraction, and they meet a number of needs and desires, ranging from compan-
ionship, personal discovery, and anticipatory socialization. Researchers have
linked dating experiences with subsequent family and life course transitions as
well as adolescent mental health and well-being. Although investigators have
explored a number of influences on dating behavior, with few exceptions, the role
of religion has received short shrift.
Recent research suggests that this has been a significant oversight. Work by
Bartkowski, Xu, and Fondren (2011) revealed a number of noteworthy links bet-
ween teen and family religion and dating behavior. For example, they have shown
that members of conservative Protestant and sectarian groups tend to date more
often than others and do so primarily with coreligionist partners. Jewish teens date
less often, on average, but tend to engage in comparatively high levels of interfaith
dating. Teen beliefs in the religious exclusivity, that is, the superiority of their own
faith, are associated with less frequent dating and lower levels of interfaith dating.
Although teens’ organizational religious involvement and family religious engage-
ment are weakly and inconsistently associated with the frequency of overall dating
and interfaith dating, more religiously devoted teens are less inclined to date persons
from other faiths.
Over the years, a much larger body of work has explored the links between
religious factors and adolescent sex, with a particular focus on the timing of
coital debut and to a lesser extent the frequency of sexual activity and the
number of sexual partners (e.g., Hardy and Raffaelli, 2003; Meier, 2003). Most
researchers have concluded that religious teens hold more conservative attitudes
about premarital sex, due partly to parental religious socialization (Pearce and
Thornton, 2007), tend to delay their sexual debut, and to have sex less often
and with fewer partners than other adolescents. However, investigators have
differed over the precise nature of these patterns, as well as denominational var-
iations in adolescent sexual behavior, due to differences in data sources and
analytic strategies.
Perhaps, the most exhaustive project in this area has been executed by Regnerus
(2007), who combined the data from multiple nationwide surveys with the data from
a large number of in-depth interviews with a representative sample of teens. Although
his results were complex and defy easy summary, his key results showed that, despite
their distinctive sexual scripts, for example, strong beliefs and rhetoric regarding teen
chastity, conservative Protestant sexual behavior does not differ greatly from that of
other religious groups. Mormon (Latter-Day Saint) youths are more consistent in their
conservative beliefs and practices. Jewish youth combine liberal attitudes with relatively
conservative sexual behaviors in most areas. Inaddition, consistent with much previous
research, religiosity, defined as the frequency of religious attendance and the degree of
282 CHRISTOPHER G. ELLISON AND XIAOHE XU
religious salience, is a much stronger predictor of most sexual attitudes and behaviors
than denominational identification.
Regnerus also showed that the virginity pledge movement, started by conserva-
tive Protestants and exemplified by such groups as True Love Waits, has involved
only a small minority of adolescents (Bearman and Bruckner, 2001). While not
entirely curtailing premarital sex even among pledgers, the movement has never-
theless had several notable effects. On average, pledgers delay first sex longer,
have fewer sexual partners prior to marriage, and choose partners who themselves
have had fewer sexual partners.
Finally, and somewhat paradoxically, Regnerus showed that new forms and ratio-
nales of sexual restraint are emerging among youths who come from those religious
groups with comparatively relaxed sexual mores, especially Jews and liberal
Protestants. Adolescents from these religious backgrounds (and especially males)
appear to be comparatively likely to engage in oral sex, masturbation, and pornog-
raphy (especially from the Internet) as substitutes for vaginal intercourse. According
to Regnerus, the motivations for these patterns may be largely strategic, and
mayreflect the social class composition of these religious denominations. This new
middle-class sexual morality, as he labeled it, is aimed at avoiding the risks associ-
ated with early sexual activity in order to enhance the likelihood of educational
completion and the formation of rewarding nuclear families.
One important topic that has received recent attention in the literature is the
phenomenon of hooking up among young adults, particularly on college cam-
puses. Hookups are loosely defined as casual, unplanned physical liaisons, often
sexual in nature, with no expectation of any future relationship. A number of
scholars have observed that such encounters have largely supplanted more formal
dating among college students and young adults. Although some commentators
view these practices as relatively benign, critics have expressed concern over the
potential negative consequences for social, emotional, and physical well-being,
especially for women (Freitas, 2009). Researchers have identified religious varia-
tions in hooking up using both quantitative and qualitative data. For example, in
one sample of 1000 college women, Burdette et al. (2009) found that (i) Catholic
women were more likely to have hooked up than others; (ii) conservative Protestant
women were less likely to have hooked up, largely due to their higher levels of reli-
gious attendance; and (iii) women attending Catholic institutions were especially
prone to have hooked up, over and above the estimated net effects of individual
affiliation. Although there were limitations to their data, the results dovetailed
with the findings of other research on hooking up (Freitas, 2009), and with broader
observations that the depth of religious and moral socialization of young Catholics
may be declining (Smith and Denton, 2005). It has been suggested that conserva-
tive Protestant colleges, by contrast, are relatively successful in deterring the
hookup culture.
Marriage and cohabitation
A significant body of theoretical and empirical work has demonstrated that more
religious individuals, and especially those with conservative Protestant affiliations
and beliefs, were more likely to oppose cohabitation and to embrace promarriage
283RELIGION AND FAMILIES
attitudes (e.g., Pearce and Thornton, 2007; Ellison, Acevedo, and Ramos-Wada,
2013). Although numerous studies document associations between multiple
dimensions of religiousness and family-related attitudes, does religious involve-
ment actually shape patterns of cohabitation and marriage? The available evi-
dence suggests an affirmative answer to this question. Young adults with low
rates of religious salience were much more likely to cohabit than others, and less
likely to marry. Parental religiosity also influenced these behaviors, largely (but
not entirely) by shaping their religiosity. Religious affiliation effects on cohabita-
tion and marriage were weak and inconsistent (Thornton, Axinn, and Hill, 1992).
Fine-grained analyses of religious effects on marriage and cohabitation have gen-
erally yielded several conclusions. Conservative Protestants, especially those with
high levels of personal religiosity, and Mormons were particularly unlikely to
cohabit. Individuals from these religious backgrounds also tended to marry ear-
lier than other persons. Moderate Protestants and Catholics tended to marry at
roughly similar ages, and thus occupied a middle ground in terms of age at (first)
marriage. Liberal Protestants, Jews (except for Hasidim), and nonreligious per-
sons married significantly later than other persons (Xu, Hudspeth, and Bartkowski,
2005; Lehrer, 2011).
Another important issue involves the choice of marital partners. Specifically,
along tradition of theory and research addresses causes, patterns, and trends in
religious homogamy and intermarriage, with religion typically measured via
denominational affiliation. Researchers have been interested in the probability of
intermarriage and the distance of intermarriage if it occurs (Sherkat, 2004; Lehrer,
2011). Several key findings have emerged from this literature. First, in the United
States, although religious homogamy remains an important phenomenon, rates of
interfaith marriage have increased significantly among younger cohorts (Sherkat,
2004). This overall pattern may reflect declining theological differences and degrees
of social distance among many religious groups, as well as reduced ability of many
religious groups to sanction marital decisions. Educational upgrading, especially
among women, geographical mobility, the growth of mass media and culture, and
perhaps other factors are also thought to influence the general trend toward greater
intermarriage. Second, although interfaith marriage is clearly on the rise, the trend
toward greater exogamy in the United States has occurred more slowly among
Catholics, conservative Protestants, and Mormons, as compared with more liberal
denominations; however, the relative ordering of distances between Catholics and
conservative Protestants stands out as a particularly formidable barrier to inter-
marriage (Sherkat, 2004). Third, the study of religious homogamy and interfaith
marriage has long been complicated by the issue of religious switching; many part-
ners who married outside the faith tended to convert to the religion of their spouse,
resulting in higher apparent levels of religious homogamy. However, such ten-
dencies toward conversion for marital reasons are waning among younger cohorts
(Waite and Lewin, 2010).
In the United States and most Western European societies, Catholics have
generallyremained more endogamous than Protestants, and the more conservative
Protestant groups (e.g., the conservative Reformed Protestants in the Netherlands)
have maintained comparatively low rates of interfaith marriage (Kalmijn, 1998).
However, the prevailing trends point to increasing rates of exogamy among most
284 CHRISTOPHER G. ELLISON AND XIAOHE XU
religious groups throughout Europe. Although many studies on this topic have
omitted Jews due to their small numbers in most datasets, it has been widely assumed
that rates of interfaith marriage have been quite low (Kalmijn, 1998). However, at
least among non-Orthodox Jews in the United States, rates of exogamy have
increased significantly, raising concerns about the intergenerational transmission of
Judaism (Lazerwitz, 1995).
Childbearing
A number of distinguished scholars have explored religious differentials in fertility
and fertility-related behaviors. According to one well-cited formulation, religion
should be expected to make a difference when three important conditions are met:
(i) religious groups and traditions hold distinctive theological beliefs regarding ideal
family size, contraception, and other relevant factors; (ii) these religious groups
have sufficient cultural and organizational strength to enforce these norms and
tosanction violators; and (iii) religion is an important component of individuals’
identities, such that they would be deterred from violating these norms (McQuillan,
2004). To this list, one might also add the importance of parental religion in the
intergenerational transmission of attitudes and preferences regarding ideal family
size and other fertility-related matters (Pearce, 2002). For several decades, most
research conducted in the United States focused on Catholic–Protestant fertility
differences; Catholics tended to have significantly higher fertility rates, due to
lower levels of contraceptive use as well as thehigher percentage of European
American immigrants in the Catholic population. However, these differences
declined with rising rates of contraceptive use by Catholic women, and increases
in assimilation and upward mobility by most European American ethnic groups
(Westoff and Jones, 1979). Indeed, with the exception of specific groups such as
Hispanic immigrants to the United States, evidence of Catholic distinctiveness in
fertility rates has virtually disappeared in the United States and much of Europe
(Frejka and Westoff, 2008).
By the early 1990s, investigators in the United States redirected their gaze toward
the comparatively high fertility rates of three other groups (Mosher, Williams, and
Johnson, 1992). First, although their Total Fertility Rates (TFRs) have declined over
time and across cohorts, Mormons (Latter-Day Saints) still outpace nearly all other
religio-ethnic groups in the United States. Second, although most Protestant denom-
inations across the theological spectrum had reached broad agreement in support
of family planning by the 1970s, some segments of conservative Protestantism
beganto reconsider this view 10–15 years later. Thus, as a group, conservative (i.e.,
fundamentalist, evangelical, and charismatic) Protestants now tend to have TFRs
that surpass most other segments of the US population (Mosher, Williams, and
Johnson, 1992). These patterns stand in marked contrast to the relatively low (below
replacement value) TFRs of members of liberal Protestant groups and religiously
unaffiliated persons. Third, although most segments of the Jewish population
(Reform, secular, and even Conservative) have TFRs well below replacement level
(i.e., below 2.0), Orthodox, and especially Hasidic, Jews have extremely high TFRs
(over 3.0 for Orthodox and well over 6.0 for Hasidim). This high level of reproduction,
accompanied by exceptionally low rates of intermarriage, has led some observers
285RELIGION AND FAMILIES
toconclude that they will dominate the US Jewish population in scarcely more than
a generation (Stark, 2012).
In addition to these subgroup variations in fertility, several scholars have
emphasized the role of religious commitment in general (e.g., frequency of
attendance at services, religious salience) in predicting fertility intentions and
behavior. According to one exhaustive set of analyses, both attendance and
salience bear independent associations with the likelihood of having two or more
children among women ages 18–44 in the United States (Frejka and Westoff,
2008). Another study in the United States revealed broadly consistent findings
and also showed that a substantial portion of the link between religious salience
(especially high salience) and fertility intentions was linked with a broader
complex of traditional value orientations with respect to gender roles, marriage,
and sexuality (Hayford and Morgan, 2008).
Religious attendance and salience are linked with fertility patterns in various
European nations, albeit less strongly and less consistently than in the United States.
After noting considerable regional variation in fertility patterns across Europe,
Frejka and Westoff (2008) concluded that “if Europeans were as religious as
Americans one might theoretically expect a small fertility increase for Europe as a
whole, but considerably more for Western Europe.” Indeed, other scholars have
gone much further, even suggesting that the low fertility rates among the least reli-
gious segments of the European population may imply that secularization (now
widely heralded in many parts of Europe) may be a demographically self-limiting
process, and that the differential fertility rates now observed between more and less
(or non-) religious subgroups could lead to a de facto religious revival in Europe
(Kaufmann, 2010).
Finally, one noteworthy recent contribution has explored religious differences
inthe timing of first births (Pearce, 2010). Briefly, and perhaps surprisingly, conser-
vative Protestant and Catholic affiliations were positively associated with, while
religious attendance was inversely related to, the likelihood of having a premari-
tally conceived first birth. The denominational patterns may reflect a combination
of the focus on abstinence-based sex education and lack of contraception in
some quarters and the greater cultural pressure to legitimize childbearing
through marriage. Although there were no meaningful denominational differ-
ences, religious attendance was associated with faster rate of maritally conceived
first births.
Child-rearing values
For several decades, scholars have investigated adult and parental child-rearing
values, or the traits that are most preferred in children. Much of this attention
hascentered on two such values: obedience to authority and intellectual autonomy
(or thinking for oneself). Studies have shown that the preference for autonomy in
children increased steadily throughout much of the twentieth century, while the
emphasis on obedience has declined (Alwin and Felson, 2010).
Early studies focused on Catholic–Protestant differences in child-rearing
orientations, showing that Catholics expressed greater enthusiasm for obedience
and less support for intellectual autonomy. However, by the 1980s, such differences
286 CHRISTOPHER G. ELLISON AND XIAOHE XU
had all but disappeared (Alwin and Felson, 2010), and the gaze of researchers has
shifted to conservative Protestants, whose preferences for obedience in children
have now been well established in the literature (Ellison and Sherkat, 1993a; Starks
and Robinson, 2005). One trend analysis using NORC General Social Survey Data
from 1986 to 2002 revealed no change in the valuation of obedience among
Catholics, but an increase in support for obedience among frequently attending
conservative Protestants over the 16-year study period (Starks and Robinson,
2005). One notable finding in some of these studies is that while early research on
religion and child-rearing values presumed that obedience and autonomy were
antithetical preferences, contemporary research suggests that conservative
Protestants tend to value both of these traits highly, perhaps because they want
children to obey parental and religious authority figures but also want them to
exercise independent judgment in sifting through secular information and cultural
messages that may be incompatible with their religious worldviews (Ellison and
Sherkat, 1993a).
Although most work on religion and child-rearing values has been conducted in
the United States, a handful of studies have explored these issues in other contexts.
For example, research among Turkish Muslims has linked higher levels of religious-
ness (orthodox belief, frequency of prayer, religious salience) with greater preference
for thetraits of obedience and good manners in children while also showing that
more religious adults are less supportive of intellectual autonomy and creativity
(Acevedo, Ellison, and Yilmaz, 2013). A comparative study of child-rearing values in
11 European nations reported that adults in societies with higher proportions of
Protestants were more prone to value imagination and creativity in children than
those persons inpredominantly Catholic countries. However, religious cultural tra-
dition was unrelated to the valuation of obedience and religious faith in children
(Fjellvag, 2011).
Child-rearing practices and child discipline
Beginning in the 1990s, an expanding body of research in the United States has
focused on the distinctive parenting philosophies of conservative Protestants.
One study of advice manuals produced for parents revealed sharp differences
between materials generated within these religious circles and those written by
secular child-rearing experts. According to this work, conservative Protestants
are distinctive with regard to long-term parenting objectives (authority-mindedness
in preparation for spiritual salvation, as opposed to emotional health and social
skills), structure of parent–child relations (hierarchal rather than egalitarian),
definition of parental roles (preference for clearly defined and gendered parental
roles), and firm child discipline, including corporal punishment (Alwin and
Felson, 2010).
Building on this research, subsequent scholarly inquiry has focused on religious
variations in approaches to child discipline, including corporal punishment of chil-
dren. Those who initiated research in this area found that members of conservative
Protestant groups were more prone to support, and to use, mild-to-moderate forms
of corporal punishment (i.e., spanking and slapping) to discipline children than
persons from other (or no) religious backgrounds (Ellison and Sherkat, 1993b;
287RELIGION AND FAMILIES
Ellison, Bartkowski, and Segal, 1996). These patterns have been traced to several
specific theological tenets that are disproportionately embraced by conservative
Protestants, including the belief that the Bible is without error and is the authori-
tative guide for human behavior, the belief in original sin, the belief that God is
judgmental as well as loving, and the belief in a literal Hell. To achieve spiritual
salvation, conservative Protestant theology holds that individuals must repent of
their sinful ways, submit to divine authority, and accept salvation through God’s
grace (Hempel and Bartkowski, 2008). These core conservative Protestant beliefs
help to explain the high premium placed on obedience, as parents believe they have
a duty to shape the will of children, making them more submissive and setting the
stage for their salvation (Ellison and Sherkat, 1993b). Moreover, corporal punish-
ment (the rod) is prescribed as the appropriate punishment for willful disobedience
and rebellion against parental authority (Ellison, Bartkowski, and Segal, 1996).
Research has shown that conservative Protestant mothers tend to employ corporal
punishment as part of a coherent parenting strategy, rather than a spontaneous
expression of anger or frustration, and that these mothers are unconvinced by the
arguments of secular experts about the harm that this practice might do (Gershoff,
Miller, and Holden, 1999).
In recent years, investigators have also explored religious differentials in other
aspects of parental – and especially paternal – involvement in the lives of children.
Here, as in many other domains of family life, some scholars have been particularly
interested in the potential distinctiveness of conservative Protestantism. Some
observers in this area have conceptualized paternal involvement as a three-dimensional
construct, comprising paternal supervision, affective fathering, and father–child
interaction. Contrary to some popular assumptions, this work found that conserva-
tive Protestant fathers tended to engage in greater supervision and affective fathering
than other fathers; the contrast with their nonreligious counterparts was especially
marked (Bartkowski and Xu, 2000). Other studies have explored the association
between the overall religiousness of parents (fathers and mothers) and their involve-
ment in the lives of their children. For example, one study using data from a nation-
wide probability sample of parents linked the frequency of attendance with paternal
supervision, affective parenting, father–child interaction, and several specific paternal
behaviors with school-age children, including one-on-one activities, having dinner
together, and youth-related activities such as school or community activities, and
scouting (Bartkowski and Xu, 2000; Wilcox, 2002). An important alternative
hypothesis – that these associations stemmed from a broader set of values, mores,
and practices, termed middle-class conventionalism – received no empirical support
(Wilcox, 2002).
Although most of this research has been conducted using probability samples
drawn from the general population, a parallel set of studies have explored similar
issues among fragile families, that is, samples of urban, lower SES, disproportion-
ately minority, and mostly unmarried parents of young children. Several findings are
noteworthy. First, paternal religious attendance was positively associated with
asummary measure of paternal engagement with children ages 1–5, and this pattern
was especially strong for fathers who increased their attendance immediately follow-
ing the birth of a new child (Petts, 2007). Second, in contrast to findings in the
general population, conservative Protestant affiliation was inversely associated with
288 CHRISTOPHER G. ELLISON AND XIAOHE XU
an omnibus measure of paternal engagement (Wildeman, 2008). After examining
associations between parental (and especially maternal) religious attendance and
paternal and child well-being in fragile families, one researcher concluded that
religious practices and communities offer valuable resources for single mothers,
in particular. Such resources could conceivably encompass formal programs and
ministries, informal support networks, and norms of successful, spiritually grounded
child-rearing (Petts, 2012).
Child outcomes
In addition to parental values and child-rearing practices, researchers have increas-
ingly focused on religious differences in child outcomes. One area of interest has
involved corporal punishment, which is widely presumed to foster externalizing
behavior problems (aggression, antisocial conduct) and internalizing problems
( emotional distress), as well as other developmental issues for children. An emerg-
ing body of work has suggested that mild-to-moderate forms of corporal punish-
ment (i.e., spanking and slapping) may bear fewer (or no) negative associations
on childrenfrom conservative Protestant families, as compared with those from
other backgrounds (Gunnoe, Hetherington, and Reiss, 2006; Ellison, Musick,
and Holden, 2011). Indeed, in one longitudinal study, children of conservative
Protestant mothers who were spanked at the initial data collection point (when the
children were ages 2–4) but were no longer spanked 5 years later exhibited partic-
ularly low levels of antisocial behavior and emotional problems compared with
other children. Several factors could mitigate any deleterious effects of corporal
punishment for this specific subgroup. These may include (i) distinctive modes of
administering corporal punishment, about which much advice has been offered by
conservative Protestant leaders and writers, and (ii) a cultural climate within this
religious community – clergy, peers, relatives, and others – that may normalize and
support corporal punishment as an appropriate disciplinary response to certain
types of childish misbehavior (Ellison, Musick, and Holden, 2011). In addition,
any harmful effects of this type of discipline may be mitigated by the lower levels
of yelling and verbal abuse (Bartkowski and Wilcox, 2000) and the higher levels of
parental warmth and nurturance (Wilcox, 1998), which are exhibited by conserva-
tive Protestant parents. Clearly, this is a topic that begs for additional investigation
in the future.
In addition to the research summarized earlier, many studies have explored
relationships between facets of parental, child, and/or adolescent religiousness and a
range of other child and adolescent outcomes, often reporting salutary patterns in
the samples of the general population as well as major subgroups (Regnerus, 2003).
For example, studies have demonstrated that children (school-age children and ado-
lescents) from more religiously active backgrounds have often exhibited fewer inter-
nalizing and externalizing behaviors. In several studies, they achieved better academic
outcomes and interpersonal relationships and tended to follow instructions and
avoid disciplinary problems more than those from less religious backgrounds
(Mullerand Ellison, 2001; Bartkowski, Xu, and Levin, 2008). Many other studies –
too numerous to review here – have linked aspects of religiousness (on the part of
parents and children or adolescents) with a host of outcomes, ranging from reduced
289RELIGION AND FAMILIES
delinquency to increased levels of volunteering and civic involvement (Regnerus,
2003). There is evidence that these links between parental religiousness and child
outcomes may be due to higher levels of parental supervision and expectations, as
well as greater intergenerational closure within religious families and networks
(Smith, 2003).
One important area of research involves the role of religious similarity or dissim-
ilarity (in terms of denominational affiliation, attendance patterns, or theological
beliefs) among family members in shaping child outcomes. For example, couples
with highly dissonant affiliation patterns have reported increased marital conflict
and reduced religious participation compared to those couples with similar religious
affiliations; according to one study, the adolescent children of these unions were
more likely than others to engage in marijuana use and underage drinking (Pearce
and Haynie, 2004). Other research has revealed that the more religious mothers and
adolescents were, the less likely adolescents were to engage in acts of delinquency;
however, significant religious discord between mothers and adolescents – especially
when mothers valued religion much more than their children did – was associated
with elevated levels of delinquent behavior (Stokes and Regnerus, 2009). Nor are
these patterns restricted to the quality of relationships between parents and adoles-
cents. Similar findings have surfaced in research on the associations between the
religious congruence between mothers and their adult children and positive perceptions
of their relationships by both parties (Pearce and Axinn, 1998). Finally, one recent
study of mothers’ perceptions in late life revealed that their perceptions of religious
value similarity to their adult children predicted assessments of greater affection and
lower levels of conflict. These patterns were especially pronounced in African
American families (Sechrist et al., 2011).
Studies of general parental religiousness highlight its possible role in shaping
relationship quality between parents and older adult children. Some of these
works have focused on paternal religiousness and relationship quality among
fathers and older adult children. In the work by King (2010), father’s religious
salience predicted positive assessments of father–child relationship quality (mea-
sured in terms of understanding, trust, fairness, and affection) as reported by
older adult offspring. It is striking that these patterns persisted despite statistical
adjustments for parental involvement during the teen years, offspring reports of
antisocial behavior during adolescence, and multiple indicators of marital quality.
Maternal religiousness (attendance, salience) has also been linked with positive
relationships with adult children (Pearce and Axinn, 1998). Further, more reli-
gious grandparents tend to be more active in the lives of their grandchildren than
their less religious counterparts, partly because they are more enmeshed in family
relationships of many types (King and Elder, 1999). Such findings clearly under-
score the need to understand the role of religion in shaping family relationships
across generations.
Marital functioning and marital dissolution
A long tradition of theory and research has linked religion and spirituality with
marital quality. However, over the past 10–15 years, there have been several
i nnovations in this literature, such as the emergence of new measures in the domain
290 CHRISTOPHER G. ELLISON AND XIAOHE XU
of religion and spirituality, the development of fresh ways of conceptualizing and
modeling the links between religion and marital quality, and attention to an
expanded array of marital outcomes, including satisfaction and happiness,
dependence, conflict and conflict resolution, domestic violence, and risk of marital
dissolution.
A wealth of studies has centered on the association between religious factors
– primarily affiliation, attendance, and salience or commitment – and positive
indicators of marital quality, such as marital happiness and satisfaction. With
only a few notable exceptions, the vast majority of work in this area has reported
salutary associations between religious involvement and positive indicators of
marital quality. Although many studies in this area have used generic measures of
religiosity such as religious attendance and salience, as reported by one partner,
more recent works have focused on dyadic information, with particular attention
to the couple’s joint religious activities, such as devotional activities (e.g., prayer,
scriptural study) in the home (Lichter and Carmalt, 2009; Ellison, Burdette, and
Wilcox, 2010).
Why might we expect a connection between the institutions of religion and
marriage? One conceptual scheme points to three elements: norms, networks, and
nomos (Wilcox and Wolfinger, 2008). Briefly, most religious groups and traditions
promote norms that can facilitate happy and stable relationships. These may be
general norms, involving kindness, generosity, forgiveness, and Golden Rule ethics.
However, religious norms regarding marriage may be more specific. Religious
groups often embrace certain expectations about appropriate marital roles (i.e.,
what it means to be a good husband, a good wife), as well as particular types of
behaviors to be avoided. Both types of norms are typically grounded in scripture
and theology, and they may be communicated through written materials and ser-
mons. In addition to these two types of norms, religious communities consist of
networks that can also foster positive marital outcomes. This may occur through
informal mechanisms, such as relationships among individuals and couples within
the congregation, or through formal mechanisms such as premarital counseling,
couples’ ministries and marital enrichment programs, and religious education
classes. Finally, the term nomos refers to a religious interpretive framework,
through which the marital bond takes on added spiritual significance. Such a reli-
gious perspective, a version of which is discussed more fully later, may foster a
shared understanding between partners that the union is more covenantal than
contractual in nature.
Family researchers influenced by developments in psychology have increasingly
conceptualized the links between religion and marital quality in terms of a relational
spirituality approach, which often distinguishes between distal and proximal
religious constructs. Examples of the former include religious practice and commit-
ment, while examples of the latter include interconnected relational virtues such as
forgiveness and sanctification, among others (Mahoney, 2010). The latter has
become a particularly important construct in this literature. Briefly, sanctification
refers to the extent to which individuals ascribe sacred characteristics to the rela-
tionship or to one’s partner, or view the relationship having sacred meaning or sig-
nificance. Researchers have linked sanctification with a range of desirable outcomes,
including greater marital satisfaction, happiness, and bonding, as well as lower
291RELIGION AND FAMILIES
levels of negative interaction and conflict, and improved communication andconflict
resolution skills (Mahoney et al., 1999; Mahoney, 2010). In addition, controls for
sanctification often eliminate the associations between religious practice or com-
mitment and these marital outcomes, sometimes even reversing the signs of the
coefficients. Sanctification has also been shown to moderate the deleterious effects
of general relationship stress, financial strain, and marital inequity on relationship
quality (Ellison et al., 2011).
Several additional factors have been advanced to account for the links between
religiousness and intimate relationship quality. Among the most prominent
explanations are forgiveness (Fincham, Hall, and Beach, 2006), joint communica-
tion, especially around religious or spiritual matters (Mahoney et al., 1999),
self-sacrifice, and the expression of love and affection in the form of compliments,
emotional supportiveness, and gratitude (Wilcox and Wolfinger, 2008; Wolfinger
and Wilcox, 2008). To date, however, the precise nature of these associations
remains unclear (Stafford, David, and McPherson, 2013), and additional research
is needed to establish their role in marital and relationship quality.
Another important topic involves the association between religious homogamy,
or religious similarity of partners, and marital quality. Although investigators
focused on denominational homogamy, the importance of denomination as a
marker of same-faith (or mixed-faith) unions appears to have declined over the past
several decades (Myers, 2006). Thus, in more recent studies, investigators have
tended to focus on other facets of religious similarity among partners. Some
researchers have emphasized the importance of shared religious commitment, often
measured in terms of similar or joint attendance at worship services (Wilcox and
Wolfinger, 2008). In a recent study that considered multiple aspects of couples’
religion, shared religious and spiritual values – along with joint family religious
activities – strongly predicted relationship quality among working-age couples
(Ellison, Burdette, and Wilcox, 2010).
In addition to marital happiness and satisfaction, social scientists have also examined
several additional facets of marital quality, and we turn to those briefly. One such
dimension is marital dependency, or the extent to which either spouse believes that the
quality of his or her life (in terms of money, companionship, sex, or various other
factors) would decline should the marriage end. This gauges the extent to which
marital partners depend upon the union for various types of resources. One study of a
large sample of US adults has explored the associations between spouses’ religiosity
and dependency using dyadic data. This work found that conservative Protestants
(especially non-Baptists), members of quasiethnic religions (e.g., Lutherans, Mormons),
regular churchgoers, and persons in same-faith unions expressed greater marital
dependency than others, although those patterns varied somewhat by gender (Wilson
and Musick, 1996).
Studies have also addressed religious variations in marital conflict. For example,
various forms of religious similarity and dissimilarity have been shown to be
linked with the levels and types of arguments in a large sample of US married
couples (Curtis and Ellison, 2002). The estimated effects of denominational heter-
ogamy on marital conflict were modest and inconsistent; however, spousal differ-
ences in attendance patterns, and especially differences in core theological beliefs
(e.g., the belief that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God), were linked with more
292 CHRISTOPHER G. ELLISON AND XIAOHE XU
frequent arguments. In addition to the frequency of such conflicts, research has
alsoprovided information on religious differences in the risk of specific types of
conflicts. For example, sexual infidelity is a key source of marital strife, and studies
have shownthat regular churchgoers, persons who believe that the Bible is error-
free, and conservative Protestants with high religious commitment and inerrantist
beliefs areespecially unlikely to engage in extramarital sex (Burdette et al., 2007).
Theological dissimilarity among partners has been associated with more frequent
conflicts in twospecific areas: finances and household labor. One possible explana-
tion for housework conflicts between very conservative and very liberal partners
involves the tendency of the former to embrace separate spheres ideology, according
to which household labor is divided fairly rigidly along gender lines, with women
primarily responsible for daily domestic chores (e.g., cooking, cleaning) and men
responsible for sporadic tasks (e.g., repairs). Among couples in which both partners
share conservative beliefs about the inerrancy and authority of the Bible, women
perform more housework than their counterparts from other backgrounds, and in
those households, domestic tasks are also more gender segregated (Ellison and
Bartkowski, 2002).
Turning to the issue of more severe forms of conflict, a modest body of research
has also examined the connections between religion and intimate partner violence.
Briefly, nationwide survey data indicate that frequency of religious attendance is
strongly inversely associated with the perpetration of acts of violence by men and
women. This pattern among men was stronger for African Americans than men
fromother ethnic backgrounds, due largely to elevated rates of perpetration among
nonattending African American men. In addition, dissimilarities of theological
conservatism were associated with violence; specifically, the risk of violence was
elevated among couples in which the man held much more conservative beliefs
about the Bible than the woman (Ellison, Bartkowski, and Anderson, 1999). A
parallel literature has explored partner violence within religious communities in
more detail (Nason-Clark, 1997). Although the findings defy easy summary, this line
of work has suggested that many congregations and (male) clergy members may be
poorly informed and ill-suited to address women’s victimization by intimate part-
ners. For example, some clergy dismiss the possibility of violence within the church
community, while others can give inappropriate advice (e.g., counseling abused
women to remain in violent relationships for religious or other reasons). On the
other hand, informal networks (primarily fellow churchwomen) can be valuable
sources of solace and assistance (Nason-Clark, 1997).
Finally, a number of studies have explored the role of religious factors in shaping
the risk of divorce or marital dissolution. Clearly, religious groups have differed
sharply on their views regarding marriage and divorce. For example, in recent
nationwide studies, conservative Protestants have expressed particular discomfort
with the phenomenon of divorce, and greater enthusiasm for restricting divorce,
than other Americans (Stokes and Ellison, 2010; Ellison, Wolfinger, and Ramos-
Wada, 2013). Indeed, religious conservatives were the key force behind the
phenomenon of covenant marriage, a specific, legally recognized form of marriage
in some parts of the United States, in which couples agree to premarital counseling
and a more restricted set of conditions for divorce (Nock, Sanchez, and Wright,
2008). Although the goals of this movement included reducing divorce rates
293RELIGION AND FAMILIES
and strengthening individual marriages (and strengthening marriage as a social
institution), recent research has cast doubt on the effectiveness of covenant marriage
in at least one state (DeMaris, Sanchez, and Krivickas, 2012). Despite the deep
concerns in religious circles about the current state of the institution of marriage, it
is interesting to note that conservative Protestant congregations have been no more
likely than others to offer marital counseling or other marital support programs
(Wilcox, Chaves, and Franz, 2004).
Early research centered on whether mixed-faith unions, that is, those in which
partners belonged to disparate denominations or faith traditions, faced height-
ened risk of divorce. This was a reasonable line of inquiry to the extent that
denominational differences were also indicative of broader differences in life-
styles, cultural preferences, and social networks. However, most recent studies
have reported only modest links between denominational homogamy and marital
stability, with a few caveats (Lehrer, 2011). In particular, certain patterns of
mixed-faith marriage, especially those in which one partner belonged to an exclu-
sivist (or conservative) denomination and the other belonged to an ecumenical
(ormore liberal) denomination, were at particularly high risk of dissolution. In
addition, specific types of homogamy (e.g., among Mormons) appeared to be
more insulated from dissolution than other unions. Finally, although there is no
evidence of a protective effect forconservative Protestants overall, homogamous
conservative Protestant couples in which both partners attended services regularly
had lower rates of marital dissolution than other types of unions (Vaaler, Ellison,
and Powers, 2009).
Many investigators have turned their focus to other facets of religion that may
influence marital stability. Some observers argued that religious participation,
especially attendance at services, was more closely linked with marital stability,
due to shared networks and activities, as well as common religious socialization
among partners. However, religious homogamy remains a topic of interest; several
researchers have concluded that spousal differences in attendance patterns and
core theological beliefs are linked with heightened risk of marital dissolution
(Call and Heaton, 1997; Vaaler, Ellison, and Powers, 2009). These findings may
track broader changes in American religion (e.g., restructuring along conserva-
tive–liberal or religious–secular lines), as religious beliefs such as biblical iner-
rancy increasingly cross denominational boundaries. One study has reported
gendered patterns, indicating that unions in which the men attend much more
often than the women, and those in which the women are much more conserva-
tive than the men, may face elevated risk of dissolution than others (Vaaler,
Ellison, and Powers, 2009), although this finding needs additional replication
andinvestigation.
Conclusion
In this chapter, we have reviewed a large and growing body of empirical research
onthe associations between multiple aspects of religion and a wide array of family-
related attitudes and behaviors. As we noted at the outset, space limitations required
that we focus on a limited set of outcomes, and the structure of scholarly literature
294 CHRISTOPHER G. ELLISON AND XIAOHE XU
dictated that much of our review centered on (Judeo-)Christian religion and on
studies conducted primarily in the United States. We conclude the chapter with sev-
eral general observations about the limitations of the literature in this area, as well
as broad suggestions for future work.
First, we have dealt solely with studies that have treated religion as an independent
variable, demonstrating or suggesting effects on family-related outcomes. However,
it is also important to remember that the religion–family connection is bidirectional,
that is, that family structures and relations can shape religious affiliations, practices,
and beliefs. This is particularly evident in the research on religious socialization
among adolescents and young adults. For example, adults may alter their religious
participation when they marry or have children, at least partly with the needs of
partners and offspring in mind. In addition, parental marital discord and divorce can
alter or impair the intergenerational transmission of faith. There are many additional
examples of this other religion–family connection.
Second, the religion–family literature has focused almost exclusively on heterosexual
families. At one level, this may not be surprising, given the widespread derogation and
exclusion of GLBT persons and same-sex couples within many religious commu-
nities. However, new religious denominations (e.g., the Metropolitan Community
Church) with a focus on the GLBT population are flourishing, existing denomina-
tions (e.g., the United Methodist Church) are reevaluating their positions with respect
to homosexuality and same-sex unions, and new expressions of GLBT spirituality
areemerging beyond the bounds of organized religion. Limited evidence has linked
religiosity with positive relationship functioning among same-sex couples as well
(Oswald et al., 2008). The role of religion and spirituality among GLBT couples and
families clearly warrants further research.
Third, expanding on the previous point, nontraditional families (not just GLBT
but also divorced, cohabiting, and single-parent families) are becoming increasingly
common in the United States and other Western societies. Most religious institutions
have been heavily invested in the traditional model of the two-parent heterosexual
family for both theological and institutional reasons. Others have not always been
well served by existing religious institutions, in terms of formal programming or
informal social climates. In a very real sense, however, the long-term viability of
organized religion in the United States may well depend upon how quickly and
successfully existing religious structures adapt to changing family definitions
andrealities (Edgell, 2006).
Although we have focused heavily on general population samples, we note an
important paradox: some of the most highly religious segments of the US population,
notably African Americans, also face some of the greatest obstacles to marriage and
family stability. A few studies have used data on a large sample of fragile families,
which includes a disproportionate share of ethnic minority parents (e.g., Wolfinger
and Wilcox, 2008), and a small number of studies have compared the associations
between religion and family among multiple ethnic groups (Brown, Orbuch, and
Bauermeister, 2008; Ellison, Burdette, and Wilcox, 2010). But there are few studies
on African Americans specifically, and there remains a dearth of information on
the role of religion in the family lives of Latinos, Asian Americans, and other
minority populations. Remedying this defect should be an urgent priority for
futureinvestigators.
295RELIGION AND FAMILIES
Finally, with the exception of fertility-related attitudes and behaviors, to our
reading, there is a significant shortage of systematic empirical research on the
linksbetween religion and family life outside the United States and especially in non-
Western contexts. (Our search was necessarily limited to English language mate-
rials.) Thus, additional comparative research on varied religions and family life
should be strongly encouraged. It is hoped that future inquiry along the lines sketched
earlier will further illuminate the continuing, and changing, associations between
thesocial institutions of religion and family.
References
Acevedo, G., Ellison, C.G. and Yilmaz, M. (2013) Religion and child-rearing values in Turkey.
Journal of Family Issues. doi.10.1177/0192513X13504921.
Alwin, D. and Felson, J. (2010) Religion and child-rearing, in Religion, Families, and Health:
Population-based Research in the United States (eds C.G. Ellison and R.A. Hummer),
Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, pp. 40–60.
Bartkowski, J.P. and Wilcox, W.B. (2000) Conservative protestant child discipline: the case
ofparental yelling. Social Forces, 79, 265–290.
Bartkowski, J.P. and Xu, X. (2000) Distant patriarchs or expressive dads? The discourse
and practice of fathering in conservative protestant families. The Sociological
Quarterly, 41, 865–885.
Bartkowski, J.P., Xu, X. and Levin, M.L. (2008) The impact of religion on child development:
evidence from the early childhood longitudinal study. Social Science Research, 37,
18–36.
Bartkowski, J.P., Xu, X. and Fondren, K.E. (2011) Faith, family, and teen dating: examining
the effects of personal and household religiosity on adolescent romantic relationships.
Review of Religious Research, 52, 248–265.
Bearman, P.S. and Bruckner, H. (2001) Promising the future: virginity pledges and first
intercourse. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 859–912.
Brown, E., Orbuch, T. and Bauermeister, J. (2008) Religiosity and marital stability among
black American and white American couples. Family Relations, 57, 185–196.
Burdette, A.M., Ellison, C.G., Sherkat, D.E. and Gore, K. (2007) Are there religious variations
in marital infidelity? Journal of Family Issues, 28, 1553–1581.
Burdette, A.M., Ellison, C.G., Hill, T.D and Glenn, N.D. (2009) “Hooking up” at college: does
religion make a difference? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 48, 535–551.
Call, V.R.A. and Heaton, T.B. (1997) Religious influence on marital stability. Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, 36, 382–392.
Chaves, M. (2011) American Religion: Contemporary Trends, Princeton University Press,
Princeton.
Curtis, K.T. and Ellison, C.G. (2002) Religious heterogamy and marital conflict: findings from
the national survey of families and households. Journal of Family Issues, 23, 551–576.
DeMaris, A., Sanchez, L.A. and Krivickas, K. (2012) Developmental patterns in marital
satisfaction: another look at covenant marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74,
989–1004.
Edgell, P.A. (2006) Religion and Family in a Changing Society, Princeton University Press,
Princeton.
Ellison, C.G. and Sherkat, D.E. (1993a) Obedience and autonomy: religion and parental
values reconsidered. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 32, 313–329.
296 CHRISTOPHER G. ELLISON AND XIAOHE XU
Ellison, C.G. and Sherkat, D.E. (1993b) Conservative protestantism and support for corporal
punishment. American Sociological Review, 58, 131–144.
Ellison, C.G. and Bartkowski, J.P. (2002) Conservative protestantism and the division of
household labor among married couples. Journal of Family Issues, 23, 950–985.
Ellison, C.G. and McFarland, M.J. (2013) The social context of religion and spirituality in
theUnited States, in Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, vol. 1 (eds
K. Pargament, J. Jones, and J. Exline), American Psychological Association, pp. 21–50.
Ellison, C.G., Bartkowski, J.P. and Segal, M.L. (1996) Conservative protestantism and the
parental use of corporal punishment. Social Forces, 74, 1003–1028.
Ellison, C.G., Bartkowski, J.P. and Anderson, K.L. (1999) Are there religious variations in
domestic violence? Journal of Family Issues, 20, 87–113.
Ellison, C.G., Burdette, A.M. and Wilcox, W.B. (2010) “The couple that prays together”:
couples’ religion, race, ethnicity, and relationship quality among working-age couples.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 963–975.
Ellison, C.G., Musick, M.A. and Holden, G.W. (2011) Does conservative protestantism
moderate the association between corporal punishment and child outcomes? Journal of
Marriage and Family, 73, 946–961.
Ellison, C.G., Wolfinger, N.H. and Ramos-Wada, A. (2013) Attitudes toward marriage,
divorce, cohabitation, and casual sex among working-age Latinos: does religion matter?
Journal of Family Issues, 34, 295–322.
Ellison, C.G., Henderson, A.K., Glenn, N.D. and Harkrider, K. (2011) Sanctification, stress,
and marital quality. Family Relations, 60, 404–420.
Fincham, F.D., Hall, J. and Beach, S.R.H. (2006) Forgiveness in marriage: current status and
future directions. Family Relations, 55, 415–427.
Fjellvag, T. (2011) Socialization values, cultural-religious zones, and modernization theory.
European Sociological Review, 27, 196–211.
Freitas, D. (2009) Sex and the Soul: Spirituality, Sexuality, Romance, and Religion on America’s
College Campuses, Oxford University Press, New York.
Frejka, T. and Westoff, C.F. (2008) Religion, religiousness, and fertility in the U.S. and in
Europe. European Journal of Population, 24, 5–31.
Gershoff, E.T., Miller, P.C. and Holden, G.W. (1999) Parenting influences from the pulpit:
religious affiliation as a determinant of parental corporal punishment. Journal of Family
Psychology, 13, 307–320.
Gunnoe, M.L., Hetherington, E. and Reiss, D. (2006) Differential impact of fathers’ authori-
tarian parenting on early adolescent adjustment in conservative protestant versus other
families. Journal of Family Psychology, 4, 589–596.
Hardy, S.A. and Raffaelli, M. (2003) Adolescent religiosity and sexuality: an investigation of
reciprocal influences. Journal of Adolescence, 26, 731–739.
Hayford, S.R. and Morgan, S.P. (2008) Religiosity and fertility in the United States: the role
of fertility intentions. Social Forces, 86, 1163–1188.
Hempel, L.M. and Bartkowski, J.P. (2008) Scripture, sin, and salvation: theological conserva-
tism reconsidered. Social Forces, 86, 1647–1674.
Hoffmann, J.P. and Bahr, S.M. (2005) Crime and deviance, in Handbook of Religion and
Social Institutions (ed. H.R. Ebaugh), Springer, New York, pp. 241–263.
Kalmijn, M. (1998) Intermarriage and homogamy: causes, patterns, and trends. Annual
Review of Sociology, 24, 395–421.
Kaufmann, E. (2010) Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth? Demography and Politics in the
Twenty-first Century, Profile Books, London.
297RELIGION AND FAMILIES
King, V. (2010) The influence of religion on ties between the generations, in Religion, Families,
and Health: Population-based Research in the United States, (eds C.G. Ellison and R.A.
Hummer), Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, pp. 86–105.
King, V. and Elder, G.H. Jr. (1999) Are religious grandparents more involved grandparents?
Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 54B, S317–S328.
Lazerwitz, B. (1995) Jewish-Christian marriages and conversions 1971 and 1990. Sociology
of Religion, 56, 433–443.
Lehrer, E.L. (2011) Religion, Economics, and Demography: The Effects of Religion on
Education, Work, and Family, Routledge, New York.
Lichter, D.T. and Carmalt, J.H. (2009) Religion and marital quality among low-income
couples. Social Science Research, 38, 168–187.
Mahoney, A. (2010) Religion and families, 1999–2009: a relational spirituality framework.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 805–827.
Mahoney, A., Pargament, K.I., Jewell, T. et al. (1999) Marriage and the spiritual realm: the
role of proximal and distal religious constructs in marital functioning. Journal of Family
Psychology, 13, 321–338.
McQuillan, K. (2004) When does religion influence fertility? Population and Development
Review, 30, 25–56.
Meier, A.M. (2003) Adolescents’ transition to first intercourse, religiosity, and attitudes about
sex. Social Forces, 81, 1031–1052.
Mosher, W.D., Williams, L.B. and Johnson, D.P. (1992) Religion and fertility in the United
States: new patterns. Demography, 29, 199–214.
Muller, C. and Ellison, C.G. (2001) Religious involvement, social capital, and adolescent
academic progress: evidence from the national educational longitudinal study of 1988.
Sociological Focus, 34, 155–183.
Myers, S.M. (2006) Religious homogamy and marital quality: historical and generational
patterns, 1980–1997. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 292–304.
Nason-Clark, N. (1997) The Battered Wife: How Christians Confront Family Violence,
Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville.
Nock, S.L., Sanchez, L.A. and Wright, J.D. (2008) Covenant Marriage: The Movement to
Reclaim Tradition in America, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick.
Norris, P. and Inglehart, R. (2004) Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide,
Cambridge University Press, New York.
Oswald, R.F., Goldberg, A., Kuvalanka, K. and Clausell, E. (2008) Structural and moral
commitment among same-sex couples: relationship duration, religiosity, and parental
status. Journal of Family Psychology, 22, 411–419.
Pearce, L.D. (2002) The influence of early life course religious exposure on young adults’
dispositions toward childbearing. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41,
325–340.
Pearce, L.D. (2010) Religion and the timing of first births in the United States, in Religion,
Families, and Health: Population-Based Research in the United States (eds C. G. Ellison
and R.A. Hummer), Rutgers University Press, pp. 19–39.
Pearce, L.D. and Axinn, W.G. (1998) The impact of family religious life on the quality of
mother-child relationships. American Sociological Review, 63, 810–828.
Pearce, L.D. and Haynie, D. (2004) Intergenerational religious dynamics and adolescent
delinquency. Social Forces, 82, 1553–1571.
Pearce, L.D. and Thornton, A. (2007) Religious identity and family ideologies in the transition
to adulthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 1227–1243.
298 CHRISTOPHER G. ELLISON AND XIAOHE XU
Petts, R.J. (2007) Religious participation, religious affiliation, and engagement with children
among fathers experiencing the birth of a new child. Journal of Family Issues, 28,
1139–1161.
Petts, R.J. (2012) Single mothers’ religious involvement and early childhood behavior. Journal
of Marriage and Family, 74, 251–268.
Regnerus, M.D. (2003) Religion and positive adolescent outcomes: a review of theory and
research. Review of Religious Research, 44, 394–413.
Regnerus, M.D. (2007) Forbidden Fruit: Sex and Religion in the Lives of American Teenagers,
Oxford University Press, New York.
Schwadel, P. (2011) Age, period, and cohort effects on religious activities and beliefs. Social
Science Research, 40, 181–192.
Sechrist, J., Suitor, J.J., Vargas, N. and Pillemer, K. (2011) The role of perceived religious sim-
ilarity in the quality of mother-child relations in later life: differences within families and
between races. Research on Aging, 33, 3–27.
Sherkat, D.E. (2004) Religious intermarriage in the United States: trends, patterns, and predic-
tors. Social Science Research, 33, 606–625.
Smith, C. (2003) Religious participation and network closure among american adolescents.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 42, 259–267.
Smith, C., with Denton, M.L. (2005) Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of
American Teenagers, Oxford University Press, New York.
Stafford, L., David, P. and McPherson, S. (2013) Sanctity of marriage and marital quality.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. doi.10.1177/0265407513486975.
Stark, R. (2012) America’s Blessings: How Religion Benefits Everyone, Including Atheists,
Templeton Press, West Conshohocken.
Starks, B. and Robinson, R.V. (2005) Who values the obedient child now? The religious factor
in adult values for children, 1986–2002. Social Forces, 84, 343–359.
Stokes, C.E. and Regnerus, M.D. (2009) When faith divides family: religious discord and
adolescent reports of parent-child relations. Social Science Research, 38, 155–167.
Stokes, C.E. and Ellison, C.G. (2010) Religion and attitudes toward divorce laws among U.S.
adults. Journal of Family Issues, 31, 1279–1304.
Thornton, A., Axinn, W.G. and Hill, D.H. (1992) Reciprocal effects of religiosity, cohabitation,
and marriage. American Journal of Sociology, 98, 628–651.
Vaaler, M.L., Ellison, C.G. and Powers, D.A. (2009) Religious influences on the risk of marital
dissolution. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 917–934.
Waite, L.J. and Lewin, A.C. (2010) Religious intermarriage and conversion in the United
States: patterns and changes over time, in Religion, Families, and Health: Population-
based Research in the United States (eds C.G. Ellison and R.A. Hummer), Rutgers
University Press, New Brunswick, pp. 148–163.
Westoff, C.B. and Jones, E.F. (1979) The end of “catholic” fertility. Demography, 16, 209–217.
Wilcox, W.B. (1998) Conservative protestant childrearing: authoritarian or authoritative?
American Sociological Review, 63, 786–809.
Wilcox, W.B. (2002) Religion, convention, and paternal involvement. Journal of Marriage and
Family, 64, 780–792.
Wilcox, W.B. (2004) Soft Patriarchs, New Men: How Christianity Shapes Fathers and
Husbands, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Wilcox, W.B., Chaves, M. and Franz, D. (2004) Focused on the family? Religious traditions,
family discourse, and pastoral practice. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 43,
491–504.
299RELIGION AND FAMILIES
Wilcox, W.B. and Wolfinger, N.H. (2008) Living and loving “decent”: religion and relationship
quality among urban parents. Social Science Research, 37, 828–843.
Wildeman, C. (2008) Conservative protestantism and paternal engagement in fragile families.
Sociological Forum, 23, 556–574.
Wolfinger, N.H. and Wilcox, W.B. (2008) Happily ever after? Religion, marital status, gender,
and relationship quality in urban families. Social Forces, 86, 1311–1337.
Wilson, J. and Musick, M.A. (1996) Religion and marital dependency. Journal for the Scientific
Study of Religion, 35, 30–40.
Xu, X., Hudspeth, C.H. and Bartkowski, J.P. (2005) The timing of first marriage: are there
religious variations? Journal of Family Issues, 26, 584–618.
