Do Religious Politicians Take Risks Differently? Evidence From Pakistan

IF 2.3 1区 哲学 0 RELIGION Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion Pub Date : 2023-05-05 DOI:10.1111/jssr.12841
Vineeta Yadav
{"title":"Do Religious Politicians Take Risks Differently? Evidence From Pakistan","authors":"Vineeta Yadav","doi":"10.1111/jssr.12841","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Given popular religiosity, the presence of religious parties, and the politicization of religious issues, it is highly likely that politicians with varying levels of personal religiosity are active in politics. Yet, our knowledge of how politicians’ religiosity influences their political choices is still limited, particularly for developing countries. In this paper, I use data from a survey experiment fielded to Pakistani politicians in 2018 to study whether and how politicians’ personal religiosity influences their political risk preferences. Scholars debate whether religiosity is correlated with higher or lower risk aversion among citizens; however, no study has examined this relationship among politicians. I find that higher religiosity systematically predicts which politicians are more risk-averse and highly religious politicians’ decisions under uncertainty are inconsistent with expected utility maximization and prospect theory. These findings suggest that in contrast to existing assumptions of elite decision-making, politicians’ religiosity systematically influences their risk preferences and choices.</p>","PeriodicalId":51390,"journal":{"name":"Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion","volume":"62 2","pages":"419-438"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jssr.12841","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jssr.12841","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Given popular religiosity, the presence of religious parties, and the politicization of religious issues, it is highly likely that politicians with varying levels of personal religiosity are active in politics. Yet, our knowledge of how politicians’ religiosity influences their political choices is still limited, particularly for developing countries. In this paper, I use data from a survey experiment fielded to Pakistani politicians in 2018 to study whether and how politicians’ personal religiosity influences their political risk preferences. Scholars debate whether religiosity is correlated with higher or lower risk aversion among citizens; however, no study has examined this relationship among politicians. I find that higher religiosity systematically predicts which politicians are more risk-averse and highly religious politicians’ decisions under uncertainty are inconsistent with expected utility maximization and prospect theory. These findings suggest that in contrast to existing assumptions of elite decision-making, politicians’ religiosity systematically influences their risk preferences and choices.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宗教政客会采取不同的风险吗?来自巴基斯坦的证据
考虑到大众的宗教信仰、宗教政党的存在以及宗教问题的政治化,具有不同个人宗教信仰水平的政治家很可能活跃在政治中。然而,我们对政治家的宗教信仰如何影响他们的政治选择的了解仍然有限,特别是在发展中国家。在本文中,我使用2018年对巴基斯坦政治家进行的调查实验数据来研究政治家的个人宗教信仰是否以及如何影响他们的政治风险偏好。学者们争论宗教信仰是否与公民更高或更低的风险厌恶相关;然而,没有研究调查过政治家之间的这种关系。我发现,较高的宗教虔诚度系统地预测了哪些政治家更厌恶风险,高度宗教虔诚的政治家在不确定性下的决策与期望效用最大化和前景理论不一致。这些发现表明,与现有的精英决策假设相反,政治家的宗教信仰系统性地影响了他们的风险偏好和选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion is a multi-disciplinary journal that publishes articles, research notes, and book reviews on the social scientific study of religion. Published articles are representative of the best current theoretical and methodological treatments of religion. Substantive areas include both micro-level analysis of religious organizations, institutions, and social change. While many articles published in the journal are sociological, the journal also publishes the work of psychologists, political scientists, anthropologists, and economists.
期刊最新文献
Will Americans Vote for an Atheist? Issue Information Christian Nationalism and Violence Against Religious Minorities in the United States: A Quantitative Analysis Multidimensional Latent Religiosity Profiles and Sexual Behaviors in Late Adolescence and Emerging Adulthood RACE AND THE POWER OF SERMONS ON AMERICAN POLITICS. By R.Khari Brown, Ronald E.Brown, and James S.Jackson. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2021. xii + 167 pp. $70.00 hardcover, $54.95 ebook.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1