Beyond religious categories: Understanding differences between Muslims and non-Muslims in accepting parenting styles involving physical discipline

IF 3.2 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Conrad Ziller, Teresa Hummler
{"title":"Beyond religious categories: Understanding differences between Muslims and non-Muslims in accepting parenting styles involving physical discipline","authors":"Conrad Ziller,&nbsp;Teresa Hummler","doi":"10.1016/j.ssresearch.2025.103221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Public discourse on immigrant integration often refers to cultural differences between immigrants and members of receiving societies, particularly immigrants from predominantly Islamic countries. This study employs a survey experiment in Germany that presents respondents with two different parenting styles, one involving physical discipline while the other one does not. We investigate differences in the acceptance of these parenting styles between Muslim and non-Muslim respondents. Muslim religious affiliation is conceptualized as a proxy for relevant explanatory mechanisms underlying group differences in attitudes toward corporal punishment. By incorporating socioeconomic, cultural, social, and political characteristics as mechanism-related explanations, we find that differences in traditional values, social trust, and internal political efficacy largely account for greater acceptance of corporal punishment among Muslim respondents. The results underline the critical relevance of integration processes and their potential for fostering the social cohesion of immigrant-receiving societies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48338,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Research","volume":"131 ","pages":"Article 103221"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X25000821","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Public discourse on immigrant integration often refers to cultural differences between immigrants and members of receiving societies, particularly immigrants from predominantly Islamic countries. This study employs a survey experiment in Germany that presents respondents with two different parenting styles, one involving physical discipline while the other one does not. We investigate differences in the acceptance of these parenting styles between Muslim and non-Muslim respondents. Muslim religious affiliation is conceptualized as a proxy for relevant explanatory mechanisms underlying group differences in attitudes toward corporal punishment. By incorporating socioeconomic, cultural, social, and political characteristics as mechanism-related explanations, we find that differences in traditional values, social trust, and internal political efficacy largely account for greater acceptance of corporal punishment among Muslim respondents. The results underline the critical relevance of integration processes and their potential for fostering the social cohesion of immigrant-receiving societies.
超越宗教范畴:了解穆斯林和非穆斯林在接受包括体罚在内的养育方式方面的差异
关于移民融合的公共话语通常指的是移民和接收社会成员之间的文化差异,特别是来自主要伊斯兰国家的移民。这项研究采用了德国的一项调查实验,向受访者展示了两种不同的养育方式,一种涉及体罚,另一种不涉及体罚。我们调查了穆斯林和非穆斯林受访者对这些养育方式的接受程度的差异。穆斯林宗教信仰被概念化为群体对体罚态度差异的相关解释机制的代理。通过将社会经济、文化、社会和政治特征作为机制相关的解释,我们发现传统价值观、社会信任和内部政治效能的差异在很大程度上解释了穆斯林受访者对体罚的更大接受程度。研究结果强调了融合进程的重要相关性及其促进接收移民社会社会凝聚力的潜力。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
65 days
期刊介绍: Social Science Research publishes papers devoted to quantitative social science research and methodology. The journal features articles that illustrate the use of quantitative methods in the empirical solution of substantive problems, and emphasizes those concerned with issues or methods that cut across traditional disciplinary lines. Special attention is given to methods that have been used by only one particular social science discipline, but that may have application to a broader range of areas.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信