Cited by 449Crime Patterns and InterventionsReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyReligion and Society Interactions

Religion as Context: Hellfire and Delinquency One More Time

Stark, Rodney·1996·Sociology of Religion

Abstract

More than 10 years ago the author proposed a contextual-interactional explanation of the fact that research done on the West Coast fails to find a relationship between religious commitment and delinquency, while studies done elsewhere invariably find a strong negatit)e correlation. Unfortunately, because of various deficiencies, subsequent studies that claimed to test the contextual explanation have not done so-leaving the literature more confused than ever. In an effort to clarify matters, this paper carefully restates the contextual thee and then tests it on data from a ve7y large survey of high school seniors. The results demonstrate the erastence of a very potent contextual effect.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3711948

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Of the 60 delinquency/crime studies with quality ratings of 7 or higher, 49 (82%) reported inverse relationships and only one study found a positive relationship.

    “Of the 60 studies with quality ratings of 7 or higher, 49 (82%) reported inverse relationships [240–252] and only one study found a positive relationship [253].”
  • The full effect of religiosity on crime will be felt only in areas marked by a relatively high level of aggregate religiosity.

    “Herein the full effect of religiosity on crime will be felt only in areas that are marked by a relatively high level of aggregate religiosity.”
  • The overwhelming majority of studies fail to test the moral communities hypothesis.

    “First, the overwhelming majority of studies fail to test the moral communities hypothesis that holds that individual-level religiosity will have the strongest effect on deviance when individual-level religiosity is reinforced by a high level of religiosity in the community (Baier and Wright 2001;Regnerus 2003;Stark 1996).”
  • The first measure of a moral community is based on the religious heterogeneity meaning of moral community (Stark 1996). This is simply whether a nation has at least 50 percent of its population affiliating with any religion.

    “The first measure of a moral community is based on the religious heterogeneity meaning of moral community (Stark 1996).This is simply whether a nation has at least 50 percent of its population affiliating with any religion.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stark, R.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Stark, Rodney
Venue
Sociology of Religion
Published
1996
Volume
57
Issue
2
Pages
163
ISSN
1069-4404 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2163430099
Cited by
449
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 53 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 21
FWCI
8.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Sociology of Religion (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Religion and Society Interactions
Keywords
religious commitment, delinquency, hellfire, contextual effects, high school seniors, juvenile delinquency

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review