Religiously active Americans are more trusting of others, and they are more involved in groups and in their communities – they also feel better about their locales.

Some 40% of Americans say they are active in a church, religious, or spiritual organization. Compared with those who are not involved with such organizations, religiously active Americans are more trusting of others, are more optimistic about their impact on their community, think more highly of their community, are more involved in more organizations of all kinds, and devote more time to the groups to which they are active.

• 53% of religiously active Americans believe that other people are generally trustworthy, compared with 43% of those not involved with religious groups
• 45% of religiously active view their community as an excellent place to live, compared with 34% of those not active with religious groups
• 38% of religiously active Americans believe that they can have a major impact on their communities, compared with 27% of those not active with religious groups

A survey by the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project asked people about their membership in 28 different kinds of organizations and clubs. Religious and spiritual organizations topped the list, and those who were active in such groups were more active in all kinds of groups. The average number of groups that religiously active Americans are active in is 5.61, and those who are not involved with religious groups participate in 2.11 groups.  

Those who are active in religious groups spend an average of 7.5 hours per week in group activities compared with 5.4 hours for those not active in a religious group.

In many types of groups, the religiously active are involved in considerable greater percentages compared with the non-religious. For example:

• 35% are active in sports or recreation leagues for themselves or for their children (versus 17% for the non-religious).
• 34% are active in charitable or volunteer organizations such as Habitat for Humanity or the Humane Society (versus 15% for the non-religious).
• 30% are active in community groups or neighborhood associations (versus 11% for the non-religious).

With regard to technology, religiously active Americans use the internet, email, broadband, cell phones and social media platforms at similar rates to other Americans.

Americans who are members of religious groups are also engaged with core technology at levels similar to or higher than the overall population. Asked about their technology usage:

• 79% of Americans who are active in religious groups are internet users, compared with 75% of those not involved with religious groups
• 86% of Americans who are active in religious groups are cell phone users, compared with 80% of those not involved with religious groups
• 75% of religiously active Americans are email users, compared with 68% of those who are not involved with religious groups.
• 46% of these religiously active Americans use social networking sites such as Facebook, compared with 49% of those who are not involved with religious groups.
• 9% of these religiously active Americans use Twitter, compared with 10% of those not involved with religious groups

Asked about their own personal involvement with all kinds of groups, those who are religiously active often have good things to say about the role of the internet with those groups. Still, the religiously active are somewhat less likely to salute the internet’s impact on their own groups than their non-religious counterparts. For example:

• 49% of the religiously active view the internet as having a major impact and 34% having a minor impact on the ability to keep up with news and information from the groups in which they are active (compared with 59% and 25% for the non-religious).
• 38% of the religiously active view the internet as having a major impact and 37% having a minor impact on the ability to organize group activities for their groups (compared with 46% and 28% for the non-religious).
• 34% of the religiously active view the internet as having a major impact and 38% having a minor impact on the ability to find interesting groups to join (compared with 42% and 28% for the non-religious).
• 22% of the religiously active view the internet as having a major impact and 43% having a minor impact on the ability to volunteer their time to groups in which they are active (compared with 27% and 37% for the non-religious).
• 20% of the religiously active view the internet as having a major impact and 38% having a minor impact on the ability to contribute money to groups (compared with 28% and 31% for the non-religious).

When people are asked about their group activities, it is clear that they believe the internet is having a wide-ranging impact on their own engagement within civic and social groups.  This is true for all Americans, including those who are active in religious groups and organizations.  Asked to assess the overall impact of the internet on group activities:

• 68% of Americans who are active in religious groups (internet users and non-users alike) said the internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to communicate with members.
• 62% of Americans who are active in religious groups said the internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to draw attention to an issue.
• 57% of Americans who are active in religious groups said the internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to connect with other groups.
• 58% of Americans who are active in religious groups said the internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to impact society at large.
• 57% of Americans who are active in religious groups said the internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to organize activities.
• 46% of Americans who are active in religious groups said the internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to raise money.
• 44% of Americans who are active in religious groups said the internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to recruit new members.
• 46% of Americans who are active in religious groups said the internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to impact local communities.
• 30% of Americans who are active in religious groups said the internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to find people to take leadership roles.

Introduction and findings

The rise of the internet, high-speed connectivity, and cell phones has focused interest among scholars, journalists, and cultural observers on the status of Americans’ social lives, their ties to communities, and the vigor of the organizations to which they belong. There are those who have argued that these technologies are more likely to bind users even more closely and to enrich their social lives.¹ There are others who worry that digital technologies are pulling people away from communities and richer social spheres and drawing them into virtual realms where communication is stunted and inferior and where social interactions are a pale shadow of the “real world.”²

To assess the status of Americans’ social involvement, the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project conducted a national phone survey between November 23 and December 21, 2010. Many of the overall findings are reported in The Social Side of the Internet.³

That report notes that religious and spiritual organizations are by far the most popular groups among Americans, with 40% of American adults stating they are active in such groups. This is considerably higher than the next most popular organizational types, which are sports and recreation leagues (in which 24% of adults are active) and far outpaces other kinds of groups. That makes religiously active Americans a particularly interesting group to explore.

In all, respondents to the survey were asked about their possible membership in 28 different kinds of groups. Findings were:

• 40% of adults say they are active in church groups or other religious or spiritual organizations
• 24% are active in sports or recreation leagues for themselves or for their children
• 24% are active in consumer groups such as AAA or coupon-sharing groups
• 22% are active in charitable or volunteer organizations such as Habitat for Humanity or the Humane Society
• 20% are active in professional or trade associations for people in their occupations
• 19% are active in community groups or neighborhood associations
• 18% are active in support groups for people with a particular illness or personal situation
• 17% are active in hobby groups or clubs
• 15% are active in national or local organizations for older adults such as the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP)
• 15% are active in political parties or organizations
• 14% are active in alumni associations
• 13% are active in parent groups or organizations such as the PTA or local parent support groups
• 11% are active in literary, discussion, or study groups such as book clubs
• 10% are active in performance or arts groups, such as a choir, dance group, or craft guild
• 9% are active in fan groups for a particular sports team or athlete
• 9% are active in youth groups such as the Scouts, YMCA, or 4-H club
• 8% are active in labor unions
• 8% are active in social or fraternal clubs, sororities or fraternities
• 7% are active in environmental groups
• 7% are active in sports fantasy leagues
• 7% are active in veterans organizations such as the American Legion or VFW
• 6% are active in gaming communities
• 6% are active in fan groups for a particular TV show, movie, celebrity, or musical performer
• 5% are active in ethnic or cultural groups
• 5% are active in travel clubs
• 4% are active in farm organizations
• 3% are active in fan groups for a particular brand, company, or product
• 3% say they are active in another kind of group that was not mentioned in the Pew Internet list

Given that religious groups drew by far the most members, we decided to explore more deeply the characteristics of those Americans active in religious organizations and spiritual groups, including their technology profile.

We were especially interested in these findings because there is a significant debate about the role of religious believers in public life. Some commentators have pointed to an increased polarization in America between religious conservatives and secular liberals at the edges of partisan divides, with a dwindling grouping of religious moderates in the middle.⁴ There are also concerns about how this might affect community cohesion and whether religious believers are so focused on their beliefs and spiritual lives that they might not have the inclination or energy to participate in other parts of community life. We wanted to shed some insights on these concerns.

It is important to note at the outset that this survey was conducted to take a broad reading on group activity in America and on the potential impact that technology has on group activities of all kinds – mainly secular. We were anxious to know about how those in religious groups act in their communities, but we did not probe in depth for people’s religious affiliations. Thus, we cannot produce findings comparing those connected to different faiths – for instance, how evangelical Protestants are similar to or different from Roman Catholics. We do look at the differences between those who are active in religious groups and those who aren’t; and we look at those who are serious practitioners of their faiths compared with those who are less-frequent church goers.

The results in this report are based on data from telephone interviews conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International among a sample of 2,303 adults, age 18 and older. Telephone interviews were conducted in English and Spanish by landline (1,555) and cell phone (748, including 310 without a landline phone). For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 2.3 percentage points. For results based on internet users (n=1,811), the margin of sampling error is plus or minus 2.6 percentage points. In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting telephone surveys may introduce some error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.

Who is active in religious groups?

In the survey, we asked if respondents were active in a religious or spiritual organization. We inquired about a variety of demographic information. We also queried for a variety of viewpoints on other people, organizational impact, and communities. We then asked respondents a series of questions on their use of and view of technology.

Findings for those active in religious organizations and spiritual groups show that:

• Women (43%) are more likely to be involved than men (37%)
• Blacks (49%) are more likely to be involved than whites (40%) or Hispanics (28%)
• College graduates (47%) are more likely to be involved than those with lesser educational levels
• Involvement is positively correlated with age (i.e., 53% of those 65+ years are involved with a religious organization or spiritual group, compared with 29% of those ages 18-29)
• Involvement in religious groups is positively correlated with household income (i.e., 47% of those earning $75,000+ are involved with a religious organization or spiritual group, compared with 34% of those who live in households earning less than $30,000)
• Parents (43%) are slightly more likely to be involved than non-parents (39%)

Some of the other key traits and civic attitudes of those who are involved in religious organizations and spiritual groups are listed below:

• 79% are internet users – which is not meaningfully different from the 75% of non-religiously active Americans who use the internet
• 58% of those who participate in religious groups and are on the internet use social networking sites, such as Facebook or LinkedIn, while 11% use Twitter, compared with 68% of non-religiously active American internet users who use social networking sites and 13% who use Twitter
• 65% have lived in their locality for more than 5 years, compared with 55% of non-religiously active Americans who have lived in their communities that length of time
• 53% believe other people are generally trustworthy, compared with 43% of non-religiously active Americans who think that
• 50% of the religiously-active live in the suburbs, with 30% coming from urban and 20% coming from rural areas. For the non-religious, 39% live in urban areas, 47% in the suburbs, and 14% in rural areas
• 49% say they are conservative, with 35% being Republican (53% lean Republican), compared with 30% of non-religiously active Americans who are conservative
• 45% view their community as an excellent place to live, compared with 34% of non-religiously active Americans who believe that
• 41% devote a significant number of hours per week (6 hours or more) to the organizations to which they belong, compared with 28% of non-religiously active Americans who do the same
• 38% believe that they can have a big impact on their communities, compared with 27% of non-religiously active Americans who believe that
• 26% are involved with a high number of organizations (8-28 groups) and 53% are involved with a medium number of organizations (3-7 groups) compared with 6% and 27% respectively

Table 1 shows the basic demographic composition of those who are active in religious groups in America compared with those who are not are active in such groups:

From Table 1, we see that women (43%) are more likely than men (37%) to be active in church groups. In fact, 55% of those in religious or spiritual groups are women, and 45% are men.

African-Americans (49%) are the most likely to be active in church groups, much more than their white (40%) or Hispanic (28%) counterparts. However, most of those active in religious or spiritual groups are white (70%), with 14% being black, 9% Hispanic, and 7% other.

Older Americans are the most likely to be active in church groups, with a positive correlation between age and involvement in these religious and spiritual groups.

Participation in religious or spiritual groups is highest among adults with a college education (47%) and those with the highest incomes (47% of those with household incomes of $75,000+).

Finally, parents (43%) are more likely than non-parents (39%) to be involved in a religious or spiritual group. However, perhaps counter to commonly held expectations, the difference is not statistically significant.

Locality of those active in religious or spiritual organizations

We examined where the people active in a religious or spiritual organization live.

As we noted in our earlier report, The Social Side of the Internet, those who live in rural areas (49%) were more likely than others to be involved with church and spiritual groups. However, when we look at the distribution based on involvement in these organizations, we see that at an absolute level, suburbanites outnumber urban and rural areas in religious or spiritual organizations.

We also examined the length of time a person lived in a particular location, as shown in Figure 2.

From Figure 2, we see that there is little difference among each of our categories between those active in religious or spiritual organizations and those not when a person has been in a locality from 1 to 19 years. However, those active in religious or spiritual organizations are more likely to have lived in a community for 20 years or more, while those who have lived in a community for less than a year are less likely to be active in religious or spiritual organizations.

A technology portrait of religiously active Americans

Those who are active in religious groups are just as engaged with many major technologies as those who are not active in religious groups, as shown in Table 2.

From Table 2, for all American adults (not just internet or cell phone users), we see for members of religious groups, 79% are internet users, 75% are email users, , 64% have broadband at home, 86% are cell phone users, and 60% have used text messaging on their phone.

In the social area, 9% of those in religious groups have used Twitter and 46% are users of a social networking site, such as Facebook.  

Introduction and findings

After getting the basics about those who are active in religious organizations, we examined their broad patterns of involvement in groups by looking at the number of groups that a person was active in and the number hours devoted to these groups.

The average American adult is active in 3.51 groups of the various types queried in the survey, and the average person spends 6.54 hours per week in group activities.⁶

By comparison, the average number of groups that members of religious or spiritual organizations are active in is 5.61, and those who are not involved with religious groups participate in 2.11 groups.

Exploring this involvement more, we classified people into four categories, depending on how many groups they were involved with (remember, the survey covered 28 different kinds of groups):

• High Involvement: those who participate in 8-28 groups
• Medium Involvement: those who participate in 3-7 groups
• Low Involvement: those who participate in 1-2 group(s)
• No Involvement: those who participate in 0 groups

We then compared those active in religious or spiritual organizations with those not active in such organizations, with results shown in Figure 3.

Those involved with religious groups tended towards high or medium involvement, while those who are not members of religious groups tended toward medium or low involvement. From Figure 3, we see that for those involved with religious groups, 26% have high involvement and 53% have medium involvement with several other groups.

Comparatively, only 6% of those not involved with religious groups have a high involvement. Some 43% of those not connected to religious groups have no connection to any of the other types of groups that were involved in this survey.

In addition to involvement by number of groups, we also examined engagement by number of weekly hours devoted to all groups and organizations.

To examine this aspect, we classified people into four categories:

• Heavily engaged: those who devote 6 or more hours per week
• Medium engaged: those who devote 3- 5 hours per week
• Lightly engaged: those who devote 1-2 hours per week
• Not engaged: those who devote 0 hours per week

We then compared those active in religious or spiritual organizations with those not active in such organizations, with results shown in Figure 4.

As shown in Figure 4, we found that 41% of those active in a religious or spiritual organization are highly engaged, devoting 6 or more hours per week to various organizations or groups. Additionally, another 31% are intermediately engaged, devoting 3-5 hours per week. Only 5% of these respondents devote no weekly time to their organization or groups. Those who are involved in religious groups spend an average of 7.5 hours per week in group activities compared with 5.4 hours for those not members of a religious group.

Other organizations to which religiously active Americans belong

Of the 28 groups that we surveyed, religiously active Americans are involved in greater percentages in every type of group save one (gaming groups) than their non-religious peers.

• 35% are active in sports or recreation leagues for themselves or for their children (versus 17% for the non-religious).
• 34% are active in charitable or volunteer organizations such as Habitat for Humanity or the Humane Society (versus 15% for the non-religious).
• 32% are active in consumer groups such as AAA or coupon-sharing groups (versus 18% for the non-religious).
• 30% are active in community groups or neighborhood associations (versus 11% for the non-religious).
• 30% are active in support groups for people with a particular illness or personal situation (versus 11% for the non-religious).
• 29% are active in professional or trade associations for people in their occupations (versus 14% for the non-religious).
• 23% are active in hobby groups or clubs (versus 13% for the non-religious).
• 23% are active in national or local organizations for older adults such as the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) (versus 10% for the non-religious).
• 22% are active in political parties or organizations (versus 10% for the non-religious).
• 20% are active in alumni associations (versus 10% for the non-religious).
• 20% are active in parent groups or organizations such as the PTA or local parent support groups (versus 8% for the non-religious).
• 19% are active in performance or arts groups, such as a choir, dance group, or craft guild (versus 5% for the non-religious).
• 18% are active in literary, discussion, or study groups such as book clubs (versus 6% for the non-religious).
• 16% are active in youth groups such as the Scouts, YMCA, or 4-H club (versus 5% for the non-religious).
• 14% are active in fan groups for a particular sports team or athlete (versus 8% for the non-religious).
• 12% are active in social or fraternal clubs, sororities or fraternities (versus 6% for the non-religious).
• 11% are active in veterans organizations such as the American Legion or VFW (versus 4% for the non-religious).
• 10% are active in labor unions (versus 6% for the non-religious).
• 10% are active in environmental groups (versus 6% for the non-religious).
• 9% are active in ethnic or cultural groups (versus 3% for the non-religious).
• 8% are active in sports fantasy leagues (versus 6% for the non-religious).
• 8% are active in fan groups for a particular TV show, movie, celebrity, or musical performer (versus 4% for the non-religious).
• 8% are active in travel clubs (versus 3% for the non-religious).
• 7% are active in farm organizations (versus 2% for the non-religious).
• 5% say they are active in another kind of group that was not mentioned in the Pew Internet list (versus 3% for the non-religious).
• 4% are active in fan groups for a particular brand, company, or product (versus 3% for the non-religious).

The only group for which the religiously active do not participate in greater percentages is gaming communities, where 5% of the religious are active versus 6% for the non-religious.

What motivates group membership by those in religious organizations

With this background on involvement and engagement, we were interested in what motivated these people to become active in their groups and organizations. We asked a series of questions about possible motives that might drive people to participate in organizations. The results are reported in Figure 5. It is important to note that respondents’ answers reflected their views about membership in all the groups they participate in, not just the religious groups.

The pattern is clear: Those who are religiously active are more likely than others to see that the organizations of which they are members are more personally rewarding and have greater impact, especially off-line.

Some 58% of those who are active in a religious or spiritual organization cite the conduct of at least some activities off line and in person as a major reason for joining the groups that matter to them. This was closely followed by a belief that the group can accomplish its goal (57%) and the time required for participation (56%).

In contrast, those who were not members of religious or spiritual organizations said these reasons were the most important for joining their groups: knowing existing members, keeping up with interests, and accomplishing something as part of a group that one can’t accomplish individually (all at approximately 47%).

Religion and politics

We wanted to gauge the political affiliations of those active in religious or spiritual organizations. Since such political positions can sometimes be nuanced, we explored this matter in three different ways:

• What political party they belonged to
• Whether they leaned politically toward one party or another
• Where on the political spectrum they placed themselves

Results are shown in Figure 6.

From Figure 6, we can see that 35% of those active in a religious or spiritual organization are more likely to consider themselves Republican, with slightly less percentages for both Democrat (32%) and Independent (33%). It is interesting to note the political alignment of those not active in religious or spiritual organizations, with 22% considering themselves Republican, 36% Democrat, and 42% Independent.

When also asked which party they leaned toward versus aligned with, 53% of those active in a religious or spiritual organization leaned Republican and 47% leaned Democrat. The “Leaning Republican” and “Leaning Democratic” are the sum of those who say they support that party and those who say they lean toward that party.

As for where they placed themselves on the political spectrum, 49% of those in a religious or spiritual organization considered themselves Conservative, with 33% being Moderate and 17% being Liberal.

So, these survey findings confirm to a degree the analysis by Robert Putnam and David Campbell,⁷ who have argued that religious sensibilities are an important factor leading to political polarization as religious group members skew conservative and non-religious group members trend liberal.

However, in contrast to the arguments of Putnam and Campbell, our survey found that there appears to be a substantial middle of both religious and secular moderates (33% of those who are active in religious groups). We also found notable percentages of religious liberals (17% of those who are active in religious groups) and, conversely, secular conservatives, as shown in Figure 6 (i.e., those conservatives who do not are active in any religious group).

The trust, efficacy, and community view of the religiously active

We wanted to measure how those active in religious groups view others, themselves, and their communities.

For insight into people’s sense of trust, we asked, “Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you can’t be too careful in dealing with people?” The results are shown in Figure 7.

From Figure 7, 53% of those active in a religious or spiritual organization believe that most people can be trusted, significantly higher than those not active in such organizations (43%).

On the issue of personal efficacy, we asked respondents, “Overall, how much impact do you think people like you can have in making your community a better place to live — a big impact, a moderate impact, a small impact, or no impact at all?” Results are shown in Figure 8.

From Figure 8, some 38% of those active in religious or spiritual organizations said they felt they can have a big impact; 42% said they can have a moderate impact; 27% said they have a small impact; and 3% said they felt they have no impact. The belief in having a big or moderate impact is substantially higher than those not involved in a religious organization.

We were also interested in how people view the communities in which they live (Figure 9).

As one can see from Figure 9, 45% of those active in religious or spiritual organizations have an excellent view of their community compared with 34% of those not active in these organizations, again substantially higher.

Introduction and findings

Results from the overall Pew Internet survey show that technology users are generally more likely than non-users to be involved in almost all the kinds of groups. In the survey, 76% of adults reported being internet users; 81% said they had cell phones; and 59% said they connect to the internet wirelessly either through their laptop computer or through their smart phone. Results also showed that the internet is deeply embedded in group activities and in how people create, join, participate in, and sustain groups.

To start, we note that 79% of those who are active in religious and spiritual organizations use the internet. That is not statistically different from the internet use of those who are not part of such organizations (76%).

Their view of the internet’s impact on their overall group involvement – not just their involvement with religious and spiritual organizations – is also in line with overall population averages, as pictured in Figure 10.

As shown Figure 10, 22% of those active in religious or spiritual groups reported that the internet propels them to more involvement with the groups that matter to them, with 72% saying the internet had no impact. These percentages are similar to those from respondents not active in religious or spiritual groups.

When we examined the use of social network services, however, there were some minor differences between those internet users in religious or spiritual groups versus other groups.

As shown in Figure 11, 58% of the internet users who are active in religious groups use social network sites compared with 64% for the online Americans who are not active in religious or spiritual groups. This lower usage level may be correlated with age. Older Americans tend to use social networking sites less than younger Americans⁷, and those active in religious or spiritual groups tend to be older (average age of 49 versus 43 years for those not active in religious organizations).

There was no significant difference concerning the use of Twitter among those active in religious or spiritual groups (11%) and those not (13%).

So, it appears that those active in religious or spiritual groups embrace digital technology more or less at rates similar to the overall population, once one accounts for the age difference. This is in line with other research that has examined technology usage around religion and the internet⁸, finding no significant difference.

Differences in levels of religious involvement

Since being active in a religious group can cover a range of commitment levels, we examined those who are engaged with religious organizations often (i.e., weekly), those who are less frequent attendees (i.e., monthly), and those who don’t connect at all (i.e., less often than monthly or never). Specifically, we asked “Aside from weddings and funerals, how often do you attend religious services… more than once a week, once a week, once or twice a month, a few times a year, seldom, or never?” Based on the responses to this question, we examined several key aspects based on attendance rate at religious services. Figure 12 shows a comparison based on attendance at religious services and several measures of engagement and well-being.

From Figure 12, those that attend religious services weekly are significantly more likely to have an excellent view of their community (44%) relative to those who attend monthly (32%) or do not attend at all (34%).

Those attending religious services weekly or monthly are significantly more likely to believe that they can have a major impact (35%) and that most people can be trusted (35%) relative to those who do not attend religious services (26%).

We looked at involvement level (i.e., number of groups belonged to) by attendance at religious services.

Again, we classified people into four categories, depending on how many groups they were involved with based on the 28 different kinds of groups covered in the survey:

• High Involvement: those who participate in 8-28 groups
• Medium Involvement: those who participate in 3-7 groups
• Low Involvement: those who participate in 1-2 group(s)
• No Involvement: those who participate in 0 groups

Findings are shown in Figure 13.

As shown in Figure 13, there is a definite correlation between attendance at religious services and general involvement with groups. Those that attend services either weekly or monthly are significantly more likely to be involved in a high or medium number of groups relative to those that do not attend religious services. Only 8% of those who do not attend religious services are involved in a high number of groups.

We also looked at the rates of participation in certain types of group activities by attendance at religious services, as shown in Figure 14.

From Figure 14, there is again a correlation between frequency of attendance at religious services and participation in key group activities. Those that attend religious services weekly are much more likely to attend group meetings (80%), contribute money (73%), volunteer time (73%), or take a leadership role (39%) relative to those who attend monthly church or not at all.

Findings for cell phone usage by attendance at religious services are shown in Figure 15.

From Figure 15, we see that the cell phone owners who attend religious services monthly were heavy users of their cell phone in a variety of tasks, including texting (80%), accessing the internet (51%), instant messaging (40%), and emailing (45%). Only 18% of the cell owners who attend monthly religious services did not use their cell phones for any of these tasks.

So, in terms of technology usage, those who attend religious services monthly were heavier users of cell phone services that those whose attend more frequently or less often.

For all tasks we surveyed, those with cell phones who attended weekly services were less likely to engage in such tasks, and 27% of these Americans did not use their cell phones for any of these tasks.

We also examined the use of social networking sites by those who attend religious services, with results shown in Figure 16.

In Figure 16, we see a similar pattern as cell phone usage and technology ownership with the online Americans who attend religious services monthly more likely to use Facebook (71%) and Twitter (15%) those attending weekly services (54% for Facebook ad 9% for Twitter) or those not attending any religious services (65% for Facebook and 14% for Twitter).

As noted earlier, age may be a factor in these lower usage levels for frequent church attendees.

In Table 3, we show percentages for the impact of the internet on a variety of group activities based on attendance rate at religious services.

Similar to the usage patterns of some technologies, we see that those who attend monthly religious services generally have stronger views of the internet having a major impact.

Comparison of those active in religious or spiritual organizations, those in other organizations, and those belonging to no organizations or groups

There are 25% of American’s who are active in no group or organization. So, we were interested in separating these people out, comparing those who are:

1. Active in religious or spiritual organizations
2. Active in organizations but not religious or spiritual groups
3. Not active in any organization

We examined three key aspects, (a) view of community, (b) whether others can be trusted, and (c) use of the internet.

Looking first at how respondents view their community in Figure 17, we see that there are significant differences among the three groups.

We see in Figure 17, 45% of those involved in religious or spiritual organizations have an excellent view of their community, compared with 36% of those active in groups or organizations (but not religious groups) and 30% of those active in no groups at all.

We see a similar trend in people’s view of the trustworthiness of others (Figure 18).

In Figure 18, 53% of those Americans involved in a religious or spiritual organization believe that most people can be trusted. This compares to 49% of those who are active in non-religious groups and 33% for those who are do not are active in any organization.

Summary and Implications

Given the impact of religion on many aspects of our society, we set out to examine aspects of the social ties of the religious and spiritual in American. Our results show that 40% of Americans active in a religious or spiritual organization, by far the largest percentage membership for any type of group or organization.

Americans active in these religious or spiritual organization are generally older, more educated, and with higher household incomes than those not involved in such organizations.

While there is a correlation between group involvement and positive outlook (in general, regardless whether or not the group is religiously-related), there appears to be something unique about those involved with religious or spiritual organizations. These people are active in more organizations and devote more time to these organizations than their counterparts who are not involved in religious or spiritual groups. So, demographically, these appear to be individuals that one would want to recruit or get involved in group, organizational, or community activities.

Additionally, these religious or spiritual group members are more likely to believe others are trustworthy, more likely to say they like the communities in which they live are excellent, and more likely to believe they can make a positive impact on their communities. They are also the most likely to have lived in their communities for an extended period.

Politically, about half are conservative, with the other half being moderate or liberal. So, the view proposed by some that the religious are an overwhelming conservative block is not evident in this survey, though they do trend conservative.

Concerning technology usage, those active in religious or spiritual organizations use the internet in the same percentages as the general population. More than half of the religiously active who are on the internet are users of social network sites. They own cell phones in percentages greatly than the overall population. So, it appears that members of religious organizations embrace technology like their non-religious counterparts, although there are some controlling factors such as age and income that do come into play.

Naturally, in complex situations like social interactions and involvement, it is rare that a single variable is totally responsible for explaining the nuances of an individual’s decision or course of action. However, from this analysis, involvement in church, religious, or spiritual organizations appears positively correlated with a variety of attitudes, technology usage, and behaviors, including increased trust, increased belief in impact, online and offline participation, and time commitment or groups or organizations.

Topline

The topline is available to download as a PDF here. You can also explore the questions online on the report overview page.

This report is based on the findings of a survey on Americans’ use of the Internet. The results in this report are based on data from telephone interviews conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International from November 23 to December 21, 2010, among a sample of 2,303 adults, age 18 and older.  Telephone interviews were conducted in English and Spanish by landline (1,555) and cell phone (748, including 310 without a landline phone). For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 2.3 percentage points.  For results based Internet users (n=1,811), the margin of sampling error is plus or minus 2.6 percentage points.  In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting telephone surveys may introduce some error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.

A combination of landline and cellular random digit dial (RDD) samples was used to represent all adults in the continental United States who have access to either a landline or cellular telephone. Both samples were provided by Survey Sampling International, LLC (SSI) according to PSRAI specifications.  Numbers for the landline sample were selected with probabilities in proportion to their share of listed telephone households from active blocks (area code + exchange + two-digit block number) that contained three or more residential directory listings. The cellular sample was not list-assisted, but was drawn through a systematic sampling from dedicated wireless 100-blocks and shared service 100-blocks with no directory-listed landline numbers.

New sample was released daily and was kept in the field for at least five days. The sample was released in replicates, which are representative subsamples of the larger population. This ensures that complete call procedures were followed for the entire sample.  At least 7 attempts were made to complete an interview at a sampled telephone number. The calls were staggered over times of day and days of the week to maximize the chances of making contact with a potential respondent. Each number received at least one daytime call in an attempt to find someone available. For the landline sample, interviewers asked to speak with the youngest adult male or female currently at home based on a random rotation. If no male/female was available, interviewers asked to speak with the youngest adult of the other gender. For the cellular sample, interviews were conducted with the person who answered the phone. Interviewers verified that the person was an adult and in a safe place before administering the survey. Cellular sample respondents were offered a post-paid cash incentive for their participation. All interviews completed on any given day were considered to be the final sample for that day.

Weighting is generally used in survey analysis to compensate for sample designs and patterns of non-response that might bias results. A two-stage weighting procedure was used to weight this dual-frame sample. The first-stage weight is the product of two adjustments made to the data – a Probability of Selection Adjustment (PSA) and a Phone Use Adjustment (PUA). The PSA corrects for the fact that respondents in the landline sample have different probabilities of being sampled depending on how many adults live in the household. The PUA corrects for the overlapping landline and cellular sample frames.

The second stage of weighting balances sample demographics to population parameters. The sample is balanced by form to match national population parameters for sex, age, education, race, Hispanic origin, region (U.S. Census definitions), population density, and telephone usage. The White, non-Hispanic subgroup is also balanced on age, education and region. The basic weighting parameters came from a special analysis of the Census Bureau’s 2009 Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASEC) that included all households in the continental United States. The population density parameter was derived from Census 2000 data. The cell phone usage parameter came from an analysis of the July-December 2009 National Health Interview Survey.⁹

Following is the full disposition of all sampled telephone numbers:

The disposition reports all of the sampled telephone numbers ever dialed from the original telephone number samples. The response rate estimates the fraction of all eligible respondents in the sample that were ultimately interviewed. At PSRAI it is calculated by taking the product of three component rates:

• Contact rate – the proportion of working numbers where a request for interview was made
• Cooperation rate – the proportion of contacted numbers where a consent for interview was at least initially obtained, versus those refused
• Completion rate – the proportion of initially cooperating and eligible interviews that were completed

Thus the response rate for the landline sample was 11.0 percent. The response rate for the cellular sample was 15.8 percent.