Research on the dark side of religion has recently found evidence that anti-atheist prejudice is embedded in distrust (Gervais et al, 2011). Anti-atheist prejudice though old in its form, has only been systemically researched on over the last couple of years. This study seeks to extend on research in anti-atheist prejudice by examining religious dehumanization of atheists in comparison with other religious outgroups – gays and Muslims. Study 1 utilized a two factor model of dehumanization (Haslam, 2006) to examine dehumanization. Study 2 serves as a conceptual replication and extension using two different measures of dehumanization. Study 1 failed to find support for religious dehumanization while study 2 found partial support.

The number self-identified non-theists is on the rise in the United States. With a recent influx of religious skepticism in various forms of media, the existence of this ideological minority is becoming more salient. This growing population remains understudied in the social sciences. The present survey research attempts to improve this deficit by examining prejudice toward atheists among college students and exploring possible correlates and predictors, including irrational beliefs, self-esteem, and religiosity. More than 80% of respondents exhibited some form of bias against atheists, with religiosity emerging as a viable predictor. This study found a significant correlation between prejudice scores and irrational beliefs. This significance does not hold true, however, for all demographic groups.

Thesis (doctoral)--Université de Nice, 1976. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 871-910).

Thesis (M.A.)--West Virginia University, 2007. / Title from document title page. Document formatted into pages; contains vi, 63 p. : ill. Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (p. 59-61).

In recent years, the number, size, and budgets of America's nonbeliever organizations have all grown. Though these groups participate in avowedly "secular" coalitions, they relate to religion in diverse ways that the scholars who study them have thus far overlooked. Some groups want nothing to do with religion, some seek to emulate it, and others are avowedly religious. This dissertation is an ethnographic study of the leaders and activists who run these groups and promote secularism. Relying on sixty-five in-depth interviews with group leaders and members, as well as more than two years of participant observation, it situates organized nonbelief within the evolving landscape of American religion. Because existing studies have mapped nonbeliever groups onto a polarized secular/religious spectrum, they have failed to account for the religious diversity within the secular. To make it legible, I argue for a rhizomatic framework that attends to the many different ways in which organized nonbelievers imagine the secular/religious boundary and their relationship to it. Working from the discipline of Religious Studies, I unite two emerging fields that have thus far stood apart: the social scientific study of nonbelievers and the study of the secular and secularism. Drawing from recent theoretical work on the secular, I argue for a more nuanced understanding of the secular/religious boundary, and I demonstrate how it shifts over time and across groups. Drawing from my ethnographic and historical research, I argue for a new framework that can account for the everyday forms of secularism that bear little resemblance to the pervasive, structuring condition described by theorists. In turn, I argue that scholars should adopt a more reflexive approach that acknowledges their entanglement in making the American secular.

The purpose of this dissertation was to examine coping and outcomes of grief for atheist individuals during bereavement. The landscape of grief research has significantly changed since the days of Freud, and widely accepted stage theory models of grief have not held up to empirical review (Wortman & Silver, 1989). Emerging research examines factors that may lead to positive changes as a result of loss or trauma, known as posttraumatic growth. However, atheist individuals continue to be an understudied group in the psychological and bereavement literature, while people with religious beliefs continue to receive the most focus (Brewster, Robinson, Sandil, Esposito, & Geiger, 2014; D’Andrea & Sprenger, 2007). This study explored how cognitive (e.g., assumptions about the world), existential (e.g., meaning), and behavioral (active and emotional) coping methods are associated with posttraumatic growth, complicated grief, and psychological distress in a believer and atheist sample after the death of a close friend or family member. Specifically, posttraumatic growth, complicated grief, and psychological distress were regressed onto the three types of coping (cognitive, existential, and behavioral) using a hierarchical regression analysis. The first analysis controlled for demographic variables and the second analysis consisted of matched groups on demographic variables that were found to be associated with grief outcomes in prior research (e.g., Bonanno et al., 2008; Bonanno, Galea, Bucciarelli, & Vlahov, 2007). Exploratory bivariate correlations were conducted to assess interrelations between the variables of interest. Additionally, MANOVA was used to assess differences in demographic variables between the believer and atheist sample. Significant cognitive, existential, and behavioral coping methods were found to be associated with posttraumatic growth, complicated grief, and psychological distress. Furthermore, the endorsement of a belief in God(s) was significantly and positively associated with posttraumatic growth, but also significantly and positively associated with complicated grief and psychological distress. Results from this study can be used to identify appropriate clinical strategies for counselors working with grieving atheists, and will deepen the breadth of literature on bereavement and coping within diverse populations. Limitations and directions for future research are also discussed.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of North Texas, Dec., 2007. / Title from title page display. Includes bibliographical references.

abstract: National surveys indicate that Americans hold greater prejudice toward atheists than many other historically stigmatized groups. The religious prosociality perspective posits that people will demonstrate prejudice toward anyone who does not believe in a monitoring and punishing god, including atheists, because of the perception that those who lack belief in a monitoring and punishing god cannot be trusted to act in a prosocial manner. The sociofunctional perspective posits that people will demonstrate distinct forms of prejudice toward individuals who present certain types of threats to the group, and previous research suggests that atheists are perceived as posing a threat to group values. In the current study, participants rated targets whose values largely matched their own values more favorably than targets whose values did not largely match their own values. Also, participants rated both targets who believed in a monitoring and punishing god and targets who believed in a god who does not monitor nor punish more favorably than atheist targets. These judgments spanned a variety of measures, including emotional reactions to the target, judgments of target traits, and preferred social distance from the target. Results were consistent with the sociofunctional perspective but did not support the religious prosociality perspective. / Dissertation/Thesis / M.A. Psychology 2013

Extensive literature in the social and medical sciences link religiosity to positive health outcomes. Conversely it is often assumed that secularity carries negative consequences for health; however, recent research outlining different types of secular individuals complicates this assumption. Using a national sample of American adults, we compare physical and mental health outcomes for atheists, agnostics, religiously nonaffiliated theists, and theistic members of organized religious traditions. Results indicate better physical health outcomes for atheists compared to other secular individuals and members of some religious traditions. Atheists also reported significantly lower levels of psychiatric symptoms (anxiety, paranoia, obsession, and compulsion) compared to both other seculars and members of most religious traditions. In contrast, physical and mental health were significantly worse for nonaffiliated theists compared to other seculars and religious affiliates on most outcomes. These findings highlight the necessity of distinguishing among different types of secular individuals in future research on health.

No description available.