Opinion about U.S. foreign intervention depends on both one’s belief about how the world works and those cognitively available value conceptions about how it should work. Consistent with social identity theory, we argue that values can shape social group boundaries and that these boundaries are analogous to the position of the U.S. in the world. Thus, the religious values we explore neatly map onto opinion about whether U.S. intervention should be qualified in its scope and rationale. In this investigation, we first provide experimental tests of religious value priming conducted on Christians, Muslims, and Jews. We then assess the degree to which American Protestant clergy communicate these values. The results of both investigations support the efficacy of considering the communication of religious values in shaping public opinion on U.S. foreign intervention.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
For instance, a 2007 Gallup poll (Newport 2007) found explicit support that people look for guidance from their house of worship—23 % attended church “for spiritual growth and guidance” and 20 % attended because it “keeps me grounded/inspired.” The remainder suggested they attend “because it’s my faith” (15 %), “to worship God” (15 %), for “the fellowship of other believers/the community” (12 %), “believe in God/believe in religion” (12 %), and because they were “brought up that way/a family value/tradition” (12 %), all of which are not incompatible with the value setting potential of churches.
These areas were selected because of proximity to the authors.
This was also a stated condition of the Institutional Review Board’s permission to sanction this project.
These items load heavily on two factors split along the expected inclusive/exclusive lines. There are no other items in use that tap these concepts. We draw heavily on Finke and Stark (2005) for broad conceptual development and include an economic item in the exclusive battery given a growing literature on the ingroup reinforcing effects of participation in the Christian economy (e.g., Park and Baker 2007; Wuthnow 1998).
We thank an anonymous reviewer for raising this possibility.
We also elected to include these controls to address any concern that the random assignment mechanism may have been less effective than in a lab setting. We created interaction terms between the controls and stimuli and found no significant effects.
The denominations surveyed (the primary sponsor for each denomination is in parentheses followed by the final n and the response rate) included the Assemblies of God (John C. Green, n = 208, response rate(rr) = 21.1), Christian Reformed Church (Corwin Smidt, n = 370, rr = 53.3), Disciples of Christ (Christopher Devine, n = 335, rr = 34.9), Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (Laura Olson; n = 272, rr = 34.1), Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (Jeff Walz and Steve Montreal; n = 359, rr = 41.7), Reformed Church of America (Corwin Smidt, 312, rr = 50.9), Southern Baptist Church (James Guth, n = 248, rr = 25.4), United Methodist Church (John C. Green, n = 282, rr = 28.7), and the Mennonites (Kyle Kopko, n = 520, rr = 53.6).
Inclusive and exclusive value presentations are significantly and positively correlated with each other within each denomination as well, all at least at the .05 level with the exception of the CRC, in which r = .09 and p = .09.
Allport, G. W. (1959). Religion and prejudice. Crane Review, 2, 1–10.
Alvarez, R. M., & Brehm, J. (1995). American ambivalence toward abortion policy: Development of a heteroscedastic probit model of competing values. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 1055–1082.
Appleby, R. S. (2003). Serving two masters? Affirming religious belief and human rights in a pluralistic world. In J. D. Carlson & E. C. Owens (Eds.), The sacred and the sovereign: Religion and international politics. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Barker, D. C., Hurwitz, J., & Nelson, T. L. (2008). Of crusades and culture wars: ‘‘messianic’’ militarism and political conflict in the United States. Journal of Politics, 70(2), 307–322.
Bellah, R. N., Tipton, S. M., Sullivan, W. M., Madsen, R., & Swidler, A. (1985). Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Brady, H. E., & Sniderman, P. M. (1985). Attitude attribution: A group basis for political reasoning. American Political Science Review, 79, 1061–1078.
Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Berntson, G. G. (1997). Beyond bipolar conceptualizations and measures: The case of attitudes and evaluative space. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1(1), 3–25.
Cairns, E. E. (1996). Christianity through the centuries: A history of the Christian church (3rd ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Calfano, B. R., Djupe, P. A., & Green, J. C. (2008). Muslims and the American presidency. In G. Espinosa (Ed.), Religion, race, and the American presidency. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Campbell, E. Q., & Pettigrew, T. F. (1959). Christians in racial crisis: A study of Littlerock’s ministry. Washington: Public Affairs Press.
Chaiken, S., Giner-Sorolla, R., & Chen, S. (1996). Beyond accuracy: Defense and impression motives in heuristic and systematic information processing. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 553–578). New York: Guilford.
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). A theory of framing and opinion formation in competitive elite environments. Journal of Communication, 57, 99–118.
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2008). Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. American Political Science Review, 101(4), 637–655.
Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent. New York: Free Press.
Crites, S. L, Jr, Fabrigar, L. R., & Petty, R. E. (1994). Measuring the affective and cognitive properties of attitudes: Conceptual and methodological issues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(6), 619–634.
Djupe, P. A., & Calfano, B. R. (2009). Justification not by faith alone: Clergy generating trust and certainty by revealing thought. Politics & Religion, 2(1), 1–30.
Djupe, P. A., & Calfano, B. R. (2012). American Muslim investment in civil society: Political discussion, disagreement, and tolerance. Political Research Quarterly, 65(3), 517–529.
Djupe, P. A., & Gilbert, C. P. (2003). The prophetic pulpit: Clergy, churches, and communities in American politics. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Djupe, P. A., & Gilbert, C. P. (2009). The political influence of churches. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Djupe, P. A., & Gwiasda, G. W. (2010). Evangelizing the environment: Decision process effects in political persuasion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 49(1), 73–86.
Eagly, A. H., Mladinic, A., & Otto, S. (1994). Cognitive and affective bases of attitudes toward social groups and social policies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 113–137.
Finke, R., & Stark, R. (2005). The churching of America 1776–2005: Winners and losers in our religious economy. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1984). Social cognition. New York: Random House.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Philadelphia, PA: Taylor and Francis.
Gainous, J. (2008). Who’s ambivalent and who’s not? Social welfare ambivalence across ideology. American Politics Research, 36(2), 210–235.
Gibson, J. L., & Gouws, A. (2002). Overcoming intolerance in South Africa: Experiments in democratic persuasion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gilbert, C. P. (1993). The impact of churches on political behavior. Westport: Greenwood Press.
Goren, P. (2005). Party identification and core political values. American Journal of Political Science, 49(4), 881–896.
Guth, J. L. (2009). Religion and public opinion: Foreign policy issues. In C. E. Smidt, L. Kellstedt, & J. Guth (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of religion and American politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Guth, J. L., Fraser, C. R., Green, J. C., Kellstedt, L. A., & Smidt, C. E. (1996). Religion and foreign policy attitudes: The case of Christian zionism. In J. C. Green, J. L. Guth, C. E. Smidt, & L. A. Kellstedt (Eds.), Religion and the culture wars. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Guth, J. L., Green, J. C., Smidt, C. E., Kellstedt, L. A., & Poloma, M. (1997). The bully pulpit: The politics of protestant clergy. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
Hadden, J. K. (1969). The gathering storm in the churches. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Herrmann, R. K., Tetlock, P. E., & Visser, P. S. (1999). Mass public decisions to go to war: A cognitive-interactionist framework. American Political Science Review, 93(3), 553–573.
Hilpold, P. (2001). Humanitarian intervention: Is there a need for a legal reappraisal? European Journal of International Law, 12(3), 437–468.
Hinckley, R. H. (1988). Public attitudes toward key foreign policy events. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 32(2), 295–318.
Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relationships and group processes. New York: Routledge.
Holmes, J. E. (1985). The mood/interest theory of American foreign policy. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.
Huckfeldt, R., & Sprague, J. (1995). Citizens, politics, and social communications: Information and influence in an election campaign. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Huddy, L. (2001). From social to political identity: A critical examination of social identity theory. Political Psychology, 22(1), 127–156.
Hurwitz, J., & Peffley, M. (1987). How are foreign policy attitudes structured? A hierarchical model. American Political Science Review, 81(4), 1099–1120.
Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News that matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Jacoby, W. G. (2006). Value choices and American public opinion. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 706–723.
Jelen, T. G. (1992). Political Christianity: A contextual analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 36(3), 692–714.
Jennings, M. K., & Niemi, R. G. (1968). The transmission of political values from parent to child. American Political Science Review, 69, 169–184.
Johnson, B. (1963). On church and sect. American Sociological Review, 28, 539–549.
Kam, C. D., Wilking, J. R., & Zechmeister, E. J. (2007). Beyond the ‘narrow data base’: Another convenience sample for experimental research. Political Behavior, 29(4), 415–440.
Katz, I., & Glen Haas, R. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(6), 893–905.
Kohut, A., Green, J. C., Keeter, S., & Toth, R. C. (2000). The diminishing divide: Religion’s changing role in American politics. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
Krosnick, J. A. (1989). Attitude importance and attitude accessibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15(3), 297–308.
Krosnick, J. A., Boninger, D. S., Chuang, Y. C., Berent, M. K., & Carnot, C. G. (1993). Attitude strength: One construct or many related constructs? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(6), 1132–1151.
Krosnick, J. A., & Kinder, D. R. (1990). Altering the foundations of support for the president through priming. American Political Science Review, 84, 497–512.
Kull, S., & Destler, I. M. (1999). Misreading the public: The myth of a new isolationism. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
Leege, D. C. (1985). The findings of the notre dame study of catholic parish life. Mahwah, NJ: New Catholic World.
Leege, D. C., & Kellstedt, L. A. (1993). Religious worldviews and political philosophies: Capturing theory in the grand manner through empirical data. In D. C. Leege & L. A. Kellstedt (Eds.), Rediscovering the religious factor in American politics. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Leege, D. C., & Trozzolo, T. A. (1989/2006). Report no. 4. Religious values and parish participation: The paradox of individual needs in a communitarian church. http://www.nd.edu/~icl/nd_study.shtml, Accessed 24 Jan 2010.
Leege, D. C., & Welch, M. R. (1989). Religious roots of political orientations: Variation among American catholic parishioners. Journal of Politics, 51(1), 137–162.
Lodge, M., McGraw, K. M., & Stroh, P. (1989). An impression-driven model of candidate evaluation. American Political Science Review, 83(2), 399–419.
Lucas, J. W. (2003). Theory-testing, generalization, and the problem of external validity. Sociological Theory, 21, 236–253.
Lupia, A. (1994). Shortcuts versus encyclopedias: Information and voting behavior in california insurance reform initiatives. American Political Science Review, 88(1), 63–76.
Mandelbaum, M., & Schneider, W. (1979). The new internationalism: Public opinion and American foreign policy. In K. Oye, D. Rothchild, & Robert E Lieber (Eds.), Eagle entangled: U.S. policy in a complex world. New York: Longman.
Mayer, J. D. (2004). ‘Christian fundamentalists and public opinion toward the middle east: Israel’s new best friends?’. Social Science Quarterly, 85(3), 695–712.
Mockabee, S. T., Wald, K. D., & Leege, D. C. (2007). Reexamining religiosity: A report on the new religion items in the ANES 2006 pilot study. ANES pilot study reports. Ann Arbor, MI: American National Election Studies.
Modigliani, A. (1972). Hawks and doves, isolationism and political distrust: An analysis of public opinion on military policy. The American Political Science Review, 66(3), 960–978.
Monroe, K. R., Hankin, J., & Van Vechten, R. B. (2000). The psychological foundations of identity politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 3, 419–447.
Mueller, J. (1973). War, presidents, and public opinion. New York: Wiley.
Munro, G. D., Ditto, P. H., Lockhart, L. K., Fagerlin, A., Gready, M., & Peterson, E. (2002). Biased assimilation of sociopolitical arguments: Evaluating the 1996 presidential debate. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 24(1), 15–26.
Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M., & Clawson, R. A. (1997). Toward a psychology of framing effects. Political Behavior, 19(3), 221–246.
Niebuhr, H. R. (1951). Christ and culture. New York: Harper.
Page, B. I., & Shapiro, R. Y. (1992). The rational public: Fifty years of trends in Americans’ policy opinions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Park, J. Z., & Baker, J. (2007). What would Jesus buy: American consumption of religious and spiritual material goods. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 46(4), 501–517.
Parsons, T. (1937). The structure of social action. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Price, V., Cappella, J. N., & Nir, L. (2002). Does disagreement contribute to more deliberative opinion? Political Communication, 19(1), 95–112.
Pugh, M. (1996). Humanitarianism and peacekeeping. Global Society, 10(3), 205–224.
Quinley, H. E. (1974). The prophetic clergy: Social activism among protestant ministers. New York: Wiley.
Regan, P. (2002). Civil wars and foreign powers: Outside intervention in intrastate conflict. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
Roozen, D. A., McKinney, W., & Carroll, J. W. (1984). Varieties of religious presence: Mission in public life. Cleveland: Pilgrim Press.
Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57, 9–20.
Sears, D. O. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology’s view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(3), 515–530.
Sherif, M. (1967). Group conflict and cooperation. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., Jack White, B., Hood, W. R., & Sherif, C. W. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The robbers cave experiment. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
Smidt, C. (Ed.). (2004). Pulpits and politics: Clergy and the 2000 presidential election. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press.
Smith, G. A. (2008). Politics in the parish: The political influence of catholic priests. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
Sniderman, P. M., Brody, R. A., & Tetlock, P. E. (1991). Reasoning and choice: Explorations in political psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sniderman, P. M., & Theriault, S. M. (2004). The dynamics of political argument and the logic of issue framing. In W. E. Saris & P. M. Sniderman (Eds.), Studies in public opinion: Gauging attitudes, nonattitudes, measurement error and change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sowle Cahill, L. (1994). Love your enemies: Discipleship, pacifism and just war. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Stark, R., & Finke, R. (2000). Acts of faith: Explaining the human side of religion. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Stark, R., Foster, B. D., Glock, C. Y., & Quinley, H. (1971). Wayward shepherds: Prejudice and the protestant clergy. New York: Harper and Row.
Stark, R., & Glock, C. Y. (1968). American piety: The nature of religious commitment. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755–769.
Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American, 232, 96–102.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations. Chicago: Nelson.
Taylor, D. M., & Moghaddam, F. M. (1994). Theories of intergroup relations: International social psychological perspectives. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Thompson, M. M., Zanna, M. P., & Griffin, D. W. (1995). Let’s not be indifferent about (attitudinal) ambivalence. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tocqueville, A. D. (1994/1840). Democracy in America (Vol. 2). New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Todorov, A., & Mandisodsa, A. N. (2004). Public opinion on foreign policy: The multilateral public that perceives itself as unilateral. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68, 323–348.
Transue, J. E. (2007). Identity salience, identity acceptance, and racial policy attitudes: American national identity as a uniting force. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 78–91.
Troeltsch, E. (1931). The social teaching of the Christian churches. New York: Macmillan.
Volf, M. (1996). Exclusion and embrace: A theological exploration of identity, otherness, and reconciliation. Nashville: Abingdon Press.
Wald, K. D., Owen, D., & Hill, S. (1988). Churches as political communities. American Political Science Review, 82, 531–548.
Whitley, B. E. (2009). Religiosity and attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: A meta-analysis. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 19, 21–38.
Wilson, T. D., & Dunn, E. W. (2004). Self-knowledge: Its limits, value, and potential for improvement. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 493–518.
Wilson, T. D., Kraft, D., & Dunn, D. S. (1989). The disruptive effects of explaining attitudes: The moderating effect of knowledge about the attitude object. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 379–400.
Wittkopf, E. R. (1986). On the foreign policy beliefs of the American people: A critique and some evidence. International Studies Quarterly, 30, 425–445.
Wuthnow, R. (1988). The restructuring of American religion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Wuthnow, R. (1998). After heaven: Spirituality in America since the 1950s. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Zaller, J. R. (1991). Information, values, and opinion. American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1215–1237.
Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Zaller, J., & Feldman, S. (1992). A simple theory of the survey response: Answering questions versus revealing preferences. American Political Science Review, 36(3), 579–616.
We wish to thank Phaik See Lim, Kris Kanthak, and Cathy Johnson for their assistance with this project, and David Barker, Jeff Kurtz, Dave Peterson, David Woodyard, and Ted Jelen for helpful suggestions along the way. We also thank the editors and the three anonymous reviewers for a very productive review process.
About this article
Cite this article
Djupe, P.A., Calfano, B.R. Divine Intervention? The Influence of Religious Value Communication on U.S. Intervention Policy. Polit Behav 35, 643–663 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-012-9211-3
- Religion and politics
- Foreign policy attitudes
- Clergy politics