2025/04/22 by Robert M. Kunovich · 1 voice
Social Sciences · Arts and Humanities · #Religion, Ecology, and Ethics #Evolution and Science Education #Religious Studies and Spiritual Practices
paper · doi:10.1080/00380253.2025.2491447
openalex publication_date 2025/04/22 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/06/14
Using data from the General Social Survey and O*NET, I examine public perspectives on science and religion. I use latent class analysis to identify clusters of people with shared science-religion beliefs, which I label as modernists, traditionalists, and post-secularists. Next, I examine the relationship between these perspectives with political ideology and science-intensive work. I test competing hypotheses predicting that either political ideology or science work is a master identity. Results indicate that political ideology is a master identity. Political ideology and science-intensive work interact in such a way that liberals and conservatives working in science-related fields are even less similar in their perspectives on science and religion than those not working in science-related fields. For example, the probability of holding traditional views is lower for liberals and moderates working in more science-intensive occupations compared to liberals and moderates working in less science-intensive occupations. At the same time, the probability of holding traditional views is higher for conservatives working in more science-intensive occupations compared to conservatives working in less science-intensive occupations. The results suggest greater polarization and division among those working in science-intensive fields—even more so than among people not working in science-intensive occupations.