Does god work in mysterious ways?
A study into the role of individual religious involvement in countering uncertainty caused by unemployment
Student: Jon Mouter 6061036 Master thesis Political Science: International Relations
Thesis project: Microfoundations of Conflicts Supervisor: dr. Seiki Tanaka Second reader: dr. Said Rezaeiejan
June, 2016 University of Amsterdam Jonmouter@hotmail.com
2 Abstract:
This study examines the relationship between unemployment and individual perceived uncertainty. People who lose their job usually also lose social contacts and an important part of their social identity. However, not everyone experiences the same amount of nuisance from it. This paper elaborates on the role religious involvement plays in coping with these uncertainties. This is researched by conducting semi-structured interviews with religious and nonreligious unemployed respondents. The study finds that religious involvement provides an individual with a social group, insight in existential questions and fixed structures and
routines. These characteristics make religious groups highly suitable for uncertainty reduction by comforting individuals. It appears that the positive effects of individual religious
3 Table of content
Page number:
1. Introduction ……… 4-7
2. Literature review ……… 8
2.1 Unemployment and increasing uncertainty ……… 8-10 2.2 Social groups and uncertainty reduction ……… 10-11 2.3 Religion, secularism and individual well-being ……… 11-15
3. Research design ……… 16-18
3.1 Operationalizing spirituality ……… 18-20
4. Analysis and results ……… 21
4.1 H1: The link between unemployment and perceived uncertainty 21-23
4.2 H2: The link between unemployment and involvement in social groups 23-25 4.3 H3: Statements indicating levels of uncertainty and certainty 25-27
5. Discussion ……… 28-29
5.1 Alternative explanations ……… 29-30
6. Conclusion ……… 31-33
Bibliography ……… 34-35
Appendix ……… 36
Original interview scheme in Dutch ……… 36 Translated interview scheme in English ……… 37
4 1. Introduction
Uncertainty is prevalent in almost all aspects of life, since almost everything we do in life has to do with managing, reducing and controlling uncertainty (Hogg, 2007). We get educated to gain knowledge about the world, we get a job to obtain a secure financial position to provide for ourselves, and we read books and watch television to stay up to date with the latest trends and developments in the world. Engaging in such activities is comforting and allows us to reduce uncertainties to acceptable levels. The most important kind of uncertainty is uncertainty to the self (Hogg, 2007). Things or events which pose a potential threat to the self can make an individual uncertain, because it induces insecurities for the future. Being (or becoming) unemployed is an example of such an event (Hogg, 2007). Overall certainty is relatively low in times of economic hardship: a long lasting economic crisis increases uncertainty, as unemployment levels rise and job opportunities tend to decrease. With losing one’s employment, one usually also loses one’s income, social contacts and a degree of financial stability. The financial and social foundation of one’s existence is taken away, causing higher stress levels and inferior health compared to people who are employed (Murphy & Athanasou, 1999). These effects of unemployment have a substantial negative impact on an individual’s life satisfaction evaluation (Ellison, Gay & Glass, 1989). The mental stress caused by unemployment is a main source for individual physical and psychological health issues (Murphy & Athanasou, 1999).
McGregor et. al. (2001) state that an individual confronted with uncertainty in a particular area tries to compensate this by exercising more certainty in unrelated attitudes and identities in other areas. This is called compensatory conviction. It suggests that uncertainty to the self, like being (or becoming) unemployed, might be compensated by more certainty in unrelated fields. Literature shows that social group identification is one of the most effective ways for reducing uncertainty, as social groups provide us with a sense of belonging and security. Especially social groups with a high entitativity are suitable for reducing uncertainty (Hogg, 2007). The entitativity of a group is determined by how much a group is seen as a group from the outside. This depends on group features like the clarity of group boundaries, group homogeneity and how often a group meets. Various researches have examined the relationship between uncertainty and social identification and it is usually found that high entitativity groups are more attractive to join in times of uncertainty (Hogg, Adelman & Blagg, 2010). Religious groups generally have clear group boundaries: they tend to be uniform in beliefs and are relatively homogenous in the people out of whom they are
5 composed (Lim & Putnam, 2010). Religious groups also offer close personal networks with like-minded people. These properties make religious groups high entitative.
Religious involvement is often positively associated with quality of life and psychological well-being. Frequent church attendance proves to be a predictor for happiness and religious involvement correlates positively with length of life (Ferris, 2002), while a negative attitude towards an intrinsic religious orientation can cause feelings of anxiety and depression (Wulff, 1991). Secularism and life satisfaction are only slightly positively correlated, but only in countries with a high score on the Human Development Index (HDI). Secularism and life satisfaction correlate negatively in Low HDI countries. Secularism is sometimes positively associated with psychological well-being as well, but the effect tends to be relatively small (Li & Bond, 2010).
Current literature tends to focus on whether uncertainty and insecurities increase the chances on individual identification with social groups. It focuses, for example, on what happens to the social group identification of an individual when confronted with uncertainty (Hogg, 2007). Research usually concludes that people who face uncertainty become more active in their social group in order to compensate this environmental uncertainty with certainty derived from specific group properties (Immerzeel & Tubergen, 2013). What is the main predictor for individual differences in experienced uncertainty on a micro level remains uncovered in the current literature. It is unclear how individuals from high- and low entitative groups cope with growing uncertainty, and whether they experience uncertainty the same way. The micro foundation differences between individuals in high- and low entitative groups appear to be missing in the current literature.
To research the micro foundation differences in experienced uncertainty, it is necessary to make a distinction between objective uncertainty and subjective uncertainty. Hogg (2007) mentions this difference as a difference between knowing one is uncertain and having feelings of uncertainty. Following Hogg’s description, objective uncertainty is seen as environmental uncertainty in this research. Environmental uncertainty is an ambiguous or insecurity evoking situation an individual is in, which makes the future more difficult to predict (and thereby less certain). It enables people to know that they are uncertain and can be described as a situation in which a person is uncertain, regardless of the circumstances. Feelings of uncertainty regard how an individual perceives his or her situation. It is subject to the degree to which individuals experience their situation as uncertain or threatening. In this research this is referred to as perceived uncertainty. Being (or becoming) unemployed implies objective increased uncertainty in the sense that the source of income is lost, alongside with
6 the corresponding daily structure and social contacts. However, the amount of discomfort experienced from it might vary per person. This leads to the main question of this paper:
What explains variation in individually perceived uncertainty?
This was analyzed by conducting interviews with people who are in a situation which objectively increases uncertainty: being unemployed. Unemployment can be objectively measured and influences the well-being of an individual in multiple ways (Murphy & Athanasou, 1999). One interview group consists of people who are unemployed and religious, the other group consists of people who are unemployed and nonreligious. As briefly mentioned earlier, religious groups have higher entitativity compared to nonreligious groups (Hogg, 2007). The high entitative group therefore consists of people who consider themselves to be religious. The low entitative group consists of people who consider themselves to be nonreligious. A difference between individuals from high- and low entitative groups might be found when both groups are faced with the same uncertainty increasing situation. People from the high entitative group should be more likely to feel relatively comfortable with environmental uncertainty compared to nonreligious people. The interview questions are concerned with the way how unemployment influences respondent’s perceived uncertainty. This is operationalized with questions regarding respondents’ present work-related situation, the degree of individual spirituality, their perceived uncertainty and their evaluated life satisfaction. These concepts give an indication of whether individuals in high entitative groups experience their unemployment in a different way compared to low entitative groups.
This study found that respondents do not experience significant negative effects from their unemployment. Stress levels and other physical or psychological complaints are kept to a minimum. All respondents did experience a slight increase in uncertainty from their unemployment, but there is a difference in the way of reasoning between religious and nonreligious respondents. Religious respondents expressed certainty and trust towards god, which takes away part of their worries by putting their fate in his hands. Nonreligious respondents do not make comparable statements. This difference seems to indicate that people who are religiously involved are better able to cope with their unemployment compared to people who are not religiously involved. Religion appears to be a fairly reliable explanation for variation in individual perceived uncertainty.
7 This study provides insight in the way individuals from high- and low entitative groups differ in their perception of environmental uncertainty. A micro level comparison between individuals who are in the same uncertainty inducing situation has, to the knowledge of the researcher, not been conducted yet. It provides detailed insights in how individuals in arguably the highest entitative group (religious groups) cope with uncertainty in comparison with individuals from lower entitative groups.
The first chapter of this paper addresses the relevant literature for answering the main question. It is divided in three parts, each leading to a hypothesis: the first part explains hoe unemployment increases uncertainty. The second part elaborates on the role social groups play in reducing uncertainty for individuals. The third part considers the relationship between religious and secular values and individual well-being, and how this relates to uncertainty. The second chapter outlines the research design of this paper. It provides clarity on how the research is conducted and how concepts like spirituality are operationalized. The third chapter includes the analyses of the data and the results of the interviews. It is divided in three parts based on the three hypotheses derived from the literature. The discussion chapter poses limitations of the research and offers possible alternative explanations. The final chapter provides concluding remarks and ties the three hypotheses to the main question.
8 2. Literature review
The literature review consists of three theoretical parts, each leading up to a separate but complementary hypothesis. The main question will be answered based on the three hypotheses. Some hypotheses might already be partially confirmed in the existing literature, but all three need to be tested in this research to provide a more comprehensive insight in the relationship between religious involvement and perceived uncertainty.
The first part explains how unemployment increases individual uncertainties. Unemployment is accompanied by various social consequences, both psychological and physical, which may affect an individual’s perceived uncertainty. The second part considers one of the most effective ways in reducing uncertainty. Uncertainty can be coped with in multiple ways, but social group identification appears to be one of the most potent ways. The third part considers the relationship between religious and secular values with individual well-being. Both religious and secular values can be associated with individual well-being. Individual well-being is influenced by the amount of uncertainty that a person experiences.
2.1 Unemployment and increasing uncertainty
Not every person is constantly confronted with the same levels of uncertainty in life. With different times or stages in life come different levels of uncertainty. Buchholz et. al. (2009) argue that globalization processes influenced individual life course uncertainties over the last few decades. The intensification of (international) competition, growing worldwide network of people and companies, and growing interdependence cause an increase in economic uncertainties and unreliabilities. This reduces the predictability of our social economic world, resulting in an increase in uncertainty. These uncertainties are not evenly spread-out over society, but are channeled towards social groups in specific stages of their career (Buchholz et. al., 2009). Especially younger and elderly birth cohorts are affected. Elderly birth cohorts have to compete with younger birth cohorts. They tend to become outcompeted by cheaper laborers, especially when they are relatively unskilled. Younger birth cohorts have not yet established themselves on the labor market and experience firm competition from older cohorts. The older birth cohorts are seen as more capable and have gained a relatively steady labor position over the years. The young and elderly birth cohorts face relatively high levels of uncertainty when they become unemployed (Buchholz et. al., 2009).
Economic insecurities are based upon the position an individual holds in the market economy (Buchholz et. al., 2009). People with a steady job have a guaranteed income which constitutes a firm base. Unemployed people have limited income, which makes their future
9 more difficult to predict and therefore less certain. In this sense the unemployed face far greater economic insecurities compared to the employed. These economic insecurities can originate from individual and contextual circumstances. Contextual factors influencing economic insecurities are, for example, when the economy in a region is unfavorable or the unemployment rate is high. In these cases people are more often confronted with the negative effects of economic hardship, like the unemployment of family and friends, causing the individual to feel more insecure (Immerzeel & van Tubergen, 2013).
A substantial body of literature demonstrates that stressful life events potentially have a great impact on the subjective assessment of one’s psychological well-being (Ellisen, Gay & Glass, 1989; Murphy & Athanasou, 1999). Stressful events in life are for example illness, divorce or becoming unemployed. Such events are experienced as stressful, because they increase uncertainty for an individual (Hogg, 2007). The effects of unemployment on society and individuals are greater than purely the economic consequences (Winkelmann & Winkelmann, 1998). Unemployment imposes additional social costs or burdens on individuals, which may exceed the costs of an economy operating below its true potential. The reason these costs arise is that losing one’s source of income is usually associated with the loss of social contacts, loss of identity within society and loss of individual self-esteem. Murphy & Athanasou (1999) provide further evidence that losing one’s job has a negative impact on the psychological well-being of the average unemployed person. These non-economic effects of unemployment is what Winkelmann & Winkelmann (1998) call the “non-pecuniary costs of unemployment”.
Most research finds that unemployment correlates negatively with non-pecuniary costs, meaning that people who are unemployed experience more physical or psychological nuisance from them. There is also a strong link between unemployment and mental stress and employment and life satisfaction: unemployment raises mental stress levels whereas people who are employed have a higher average life satisfaction compared to people who are unemployed (Winkelmann & Winkelmann, 1998). This implies that people who lose their job will experience an increase in stress levels and a decrease in life satisfaction, while people who become employed after a period of unemployment experience exactly the opposite. Individual levels of stress and other experienced inconveniences therefore provide an indication of increased perceived uncertainty. Kassenboehmer & Haisken-DeNew (2009) add that the negative effects of unemployment on individuals causes it to be largely involuntary, which means unemployment is usually seen as aversive: people prefer employment over unemployment.
10 This leads up to the following hypothesis:
H1: Unemployment increases individually perceived uncertainty by taking away structure, social contacts and making the future hard to predict
2.2 Social groups and uncertainty reduction
Group dynamics and social identity determine a large portion of life. Social groups try to distinguish themselves from other groups in a positive way and individuals categorize themselves in some of them (Hogg, 2007). Understanding what drives people to identify with social groups provides insight in the motivational aspect of social identity processes. Hogg & Abrams (1993) suggest that uncertainty-reduction is the main motivator for self-categorization, since social groups structure social behavior and knowledge. Belonging to certain social groups comes with some emotional value and particular behavioral traits. These traits are experienced as either positive or negative and are attributed to members of the group, creating intergroup differences. Group characteristics and dynamics become more homogeneous and predictable by attributing traits to the group and the self, providing individuals with a sense of clarity and belonging. Disagreement with group members raises uncertainty, while conformity to group norms reduces uncertainty by increasing consensus and social structure (Hogg, 2007).
As mentioned earlier, people are particularly interested in reducing uncertainties which relate to the self (Hogg, 2007). These uncertainties are context dependent and are triggered by social conditions; aspects and events in a person’s surrounding which affect his or her perception of uncertainty, like a long-lasting economic crisis or a traumatic life event. Social groups with properties which reduce, control or protect from uncertainty are appealing in such a situation. It is more appropriate to talk about uncertainty reduction than about achieving certainty. Hogg (2007) states that there is no such thing as achieving absolute certainty, one can only feel less uncertain about things. People tend to resolve uncertainty to levels they feel comfortable with, and will first focus on reducing uncertainties related to the self.
Groups best able to reduce uncertainty are groups with a high entitativity (Hogg, 2007). The entitativity of a group is determined by specific properties, like clear group boundaries, internal homogeneity, intensity of social interaction, common goals and common faith. These properties indicate levels of interdependence and similarity and make a group high- or low-entitative. Conformity to these social structures provides a secure basis for an
11 individual, which decreases uncertainty. High-entitativity groups have clear group traits and provide strong social structure, making them better suitable for uncertainty reduction compared to low-entitativity groups. This makes high-entitativity groups attractive to people in uncertain times (Hogg, 2007).
People usually belong to a variety of social groups: they are, for example, part of a family and active as a volunteer worker at the same time. These social groups together constitute an overall social identity and sense of self (Grant & Hogg, 2012). Each of these social identities can become more or less important based on a given social context. When uncertainty in one aspect of social life increases, an individual could strive for more uncertainty reduction in other fields. McGregor et. al. (2001) state that an individual confronted with uncertainty related to the self might try to compensate this by exercising more certainty in unrelated attitudes and identities. This is what McGregor et. al. (2001, p. 473) call ‘Compensatory conviction’. Compensatory conviction predicts that people who face uncertainty in a particular domain, will compensate this by exercising more certainty in other fields. People who are unemployed are therefore likely to exercise more certainty in other areas to compensate this increased uncertainty. Exercising more certainty in an unrelated field may compensate the loss of social contacts and structure. Individuals in social groups with different entitativity, and therefore with different group characteristics, might cope differently with perceived uncertainty.
This leads up to the following hypothesis:
H2: Respondents have become more active in a social group since they became unemployed
2.3 Religion, secularism and individual well-being
All through human history different religions appear, expand, flourish and sometimes disappear (Dawkins, 2006). Their persistence is mostly due to the human curiosity about the nature of life and the possibility of an afterlife. Yu & Zeng (2014) argue that religious beliefs are one of the most important aspects in human life, because they are engaged in the existential questions of life. Uncertainty is crucial in understanding religion, since people have a need to “eliminate suffering in de face of uncertainty, especially uncertainty about
important events such as the afterlife” (Yu & Zeng, 2014, p. 425). Religion is always
strongly positively associated with uncertainty reduction in the literature. There is no evidence for a strong link between religion and increasing uncertainty.
12 Ellison, Gay & Glass (1989) separate at least three types of religious involvement which can be related to members’ subjective well-being: (1) the individual belief of personal religious experience. Personal beliefs provide a believer with a framework to interpret and make sense of the world and its ups and downs. (2) The level of participation in organized religious activities. Systematic participation in a religious community provides a recurring platform for social interaction between people who share the same values. (3) The strength of personal identification with the religious community. Not all religious communities require the same kind of personal commitment to its teachings.
Hogg, Adelman & Blagg (2010, p. 73) see religion as: “a group phenomenon
involving group norms that specify beliefs, attitudes, values, and behaviors relating to both sacred and secular aspects of life, which are integrated and imbued with meaning by an ideological framework and worldview”. This definition includes all important aspects of
religious involvement: the existence of a fixed social group with the corresponding values and a mental framework to help make sense of the world. People who consider themselves religious are people who identify themselves with such a group and adhere to the normative beliefs and practices adopted by that group. The importance of these religious beliefs vary per person; religion can play a big role in the life of one, but can be of little significance in the life of another. Most big, monotheistic religions share the characteristic that they explain the world around us (including the so called “existential questions of life”) in truths or at least provide clear guidance in how to deal with these questions. Dawkins (2006) states that the quest for answers to these questions is intrinsically uncertain. The current technologies we have at our disposal are usually not able to answer the big questions of life, if they are answerable at all. Where alternative frameworks don’t provide people with conclusive answers to the existential questions of live, most religions tend to facilitate a framework which enables people to understand the world around them with relative high certainty (Hogg, 2007). This property makes religion a suitable mechanism for uncertainty reduction.
Religious involvement is positively associated with achieving happiness, which is one of the most universally desired goals in life (Li & Bond, 2010). The subject of happiness is well researched in multiple studies to discover what variables have the biggest impact on human happiness. Happiness is a potentially important factor in this research since individual happiness is often depending on variables influenced by uncertainty, like personal health and security. People who perceive high levels of uncertainty are more likely to experience stress from it, influencing their personal well-being in multiple ways (Hogg, 2007). Most studies find a positive relation between religion and an individual’s well-being, and most studies find
13 that this relationship is substantial (Lim & Putnam, 2010; Ferris, 2002). Lim & Putnam (2010) find that the level of involvement in a religious community is of far greater influence on individual well-being compared to which particular religion one adheres to. Research by Wulff (1991, p. 248) shows that “Intrinsic religious orientation has proved to be positively
associated with life satisfaction, psychological adjustment, self-control, better personality functioning, self-esteem, and purpose-in-life, while negative association with intrinsic orientation has been found for anxiety, death anxiety, neuroticism, depression, impulsivity, etc.”. Membership of a religious group seems to increase individual well-being by providing
a comforting social environment and opportunity for spiritual development. Lim & Putnam (2010) state that individuals with close social contacts within a specific religious group are more likely to classify themselves as ‘extremely happy’. They experience a positive sense of well-being, because they hold values which are similar to those prevailing in their direct social environment (Li & Bond, 2010). Vice versa, individually held values that are substantially different from one’s direct social environment can cause diminishing subjective well-being. This could lead to feelings of alienation from one’s social group, potentially increasing levels of stress and anxiety.
Religious and secular values can be seen as opposites in various ways (Stark, 1999). Religious values tend to emphasize the importance of social conformity, family and having awe to the authority of a god. Secular values can be seen as emphasizing the opposite: they are more individually oriented without the awe to the authority of a god. Secularization has often been described as the process in which religion gradually loses importance in society and mankind will eventually ‘outgrow’ religion. Secular values like individual autonomy, fairness and self-direction can sometimes be positively associated with life satisfaction, although the association is relatively small (Li & Bond, 2010). These values provide an individual with a sense of freedom and the ability to control their lives. To assess the individual intrinsic religious orientation, each respondent is rated on a scale of spirituality. This scale is based on the respondents daily beliefs and practices, degree of participation in a community, spiritual experiences and personal religious conviction. Quantifying religiousness in this way makes it possible to compare individuals with different scores better.
Religious groups are by no means alone in fulfilling the social needs of people; as shown above both secular and religious values can be associated positively with life satisfaction. Some scholars argue that religious groups differ from secular one’s in that they offer believers with a comprehensive framework which provides existential certainty. Rules
14 how to structure life, a permanent social group with scheduled meetings and insights in the existential questions of life combined with the belief that a higher deity is watching over them (Immerzeel & Tubergen, 2013). More so than secular groups, religious groups provide a sense of meaning and purpose in life in an unpredictable world (Lim & Putnam, 2010). These features give religious groups higher levels of tolerance towards environmental uncertainty, which could make them better equipped in coping with uncertainty increasing situations like a long economic crisis or unemployment. Arguably, they constitute the social group with the highest entitativity, making religious involvement one of the main predictors in coping with environmental uncertainty. For this reason religious groups are used as an example of a high entitative group in this research. People from religious groups are compared with people who do not belong to such a group and who therefore lack the above mentioned high levels of certainty. Differences in perceived uncertainty between these two groups are probably best explained by differences in religiousness and spirituality.
This leads up to the following hypothesis:
H3: Individuals from the religious group express higher levels of certainty compared to individuals from the nonreligious group
I argue that the unique characteristics mentioned earlier provide individuals from religious groups with a constant, relatively high, level of certainty in various aspects of life. The framework that comes with religious involvement enables people to comprehend the world around them with references to supernatural ideas. Nonreligious people do not possess a similar framework with the same explanatory power. Immerzeel & van Tubergen (2013, p. 359) formulate this as: “Religious ideologies provide people with predictable rules to help
them cope with dangers and immediate problems: a supernatural force or god ensures that in the end everything will turn out well- either presently or in the possible future afterlife”. In
contrast to nonreligious people, religious people are likely to feel watched over or taken care of by a higher deity.
People in a religious community also form a close interconnected social group (Lim & Putnam, 2010). This group is usually self-contained and isolated from other social fields. People identify themselves with the group and its members and adhere to the normative beliefs and practices adopted by that group. A large part of their social contacts and social identity is derived from their religious group and does not rely on employment. It is based on shared group characteristics, faith and common beliefs (Ellison, Gay & Glass, 1989).
15 Nonreligious people generally do not have an equivalent social group. It is therefore plausible that religious people are less depending on employment for their social needs; a religious person becoming unemployed loses less social contacts compared to a nonreligious person.
16 3. Research Design
The research consists of semi-structured interviews with two groups of unemployed people. The first group includes people who adhere to a religion, the second group includes people who consider themselves to be nonreligious. Semi-structured interviews were used because it allowed the respondents to express their views in their own terms, while the data is still comparable (Galletta, 2013). The research examined individual experiences of uncertainty, making interviews the best suitable research method (Silverman, 2013). Quantitative research methods do not offer the same amount of insight in personal experiences of uncertainty compared to qualitative. The goal of this explorative research was not to provide conclusive, generalizable answers. It aimed at providing insights in how religious involvement helps people in coping with unemployment by making a comparison with nonreligious people.
Respondents were recruited by approaching religious communities and unemployment bureaus in Amsterdam. Also places where people do voluntary work a few hours per week for a small compensatory fee were visited. People without a permanent job are probably more active in these places, since people who are employed are less able to attend such activities. The unemployment bureaus and voluntary work spots were approached and asked in what way they could help with the research by facilitating respondents. A total of eleven religious communities within the city of Amsterdam were approached. All approached religious communities are affiliated with Christianity (Catholic, Protestant, etc.). Although the Christian faith might be surpassed by Islam as the largest religion in Amsterdam (Schippers & Wenneker, 2014), Christianity is historically the most influential religion in our culture today. It is also still the religion with the most adherents in the Netherlands as a whole. The recruitment of respondents proved to be difficult. The nonreligious respondents were recruited via a volunteer work spot in Amsterdam Centre, since the unemployment bureaus were unwilling to cooperate. Nine out of eleven religious communities were unwilling to cooperate. Eventually all religious respondents were recruited from two religious communities in Eastern Amsterdam. Due to time limitations to conduct the research snowball sampling was used. Respondents were recruited through persons within the approached communities who act as gatekeepers by helping to get in touch with others in the community (Biernacki & Waldorf, 1981). They provided contact information or spread information about the research to recruit more respondents.
The interview is comprised of four different themes to answer the hypotheses derived from the literature. The first section of the interview consists of questions regarding how the respondents experience their unemployment in terms of uncertainty. Unemployment
17 objectively increases uncertainty since being unemployed poses a potential danger in the future preservation of the self. It most likely impacts individual present and future financial possibilities (Winkelmann & Winkelmann, 1997). With the loss of income one loses financial security, leading to reduced freedom due to financial restrictions. Being unemployed usually entails a degree of dependability: dependability on social benefit or partners for income and dependability on the current situation on the labor market for finding a new job. People might perceive and cope with their unemployment in different ways. This theme provides insights to what degree individuals experience unemployment as an uncertain situation.
The second section of the interview consists of questions regarding the respondents spirituality. Spirituality indirectly measures respondents religiousness while not steering the conversation towards institutionalized religion, this is further elaborated on in an upcoming paragraph. Religious people could describe themselves as spiritual with references to their religious beliefs, while nonreligious people may describe themselves in spiritual terms without references to institutionalized religion. It is plausible that religious people are more likely to describe themselves as spiritual compared to nonreligious people. They are more involved in traditions and rituals within their religious community, giving spirituality a prominent role in their daily lives. This theme provides insight in how individual spirituality helps them in coping with their unemployment.
The third section of the interview consists of questions regarding the respondents social identity. Their involvement in social groups indicates a sense of belonging and purpose in life, which potentially influences the levels of uncertainty they are able to handle (Hogg, 2007). As demonstrated earlier, people who depend on employment for their social contacts have more to lose compared to people who are active in isolated social groups. These isolated groups constitute a reliable source for comfort to fall back on in difficult times. This theme provides insight in the role individual involvement in a social group plays during unemployment.
The fourth section of the interview consists of questions regarding how content they are with their lives at this moment. The more people suffer from their unemployment the less likely they are to assess themselves with a high score on life satisfaction. The degree of experienced uncertainty, spirituality and individual involvement in social groups are likely to cause differences in life satisfaction scores. This theme provides insight in whether religious and nonreligious people differ on self-assessed life satisfaction.
These four themes taken together tell us more about the relationship between unemployment, religious involvement and uncertainty. They explore whether there is a
18 difference in the perception of uncertainty between the two groups and what role their spirituality and closest social group play in it. It measures whether there is a gap between the individual objective (environmental) and the perceived uncertainty. The aim of the research is finding a difference in this gap between the two interview groups, and discover whether this can be attributed to the degree of religiousness of the individual. If religious involvement does influence the perception on uncertainty, it is (based on the literature) expected that the two groups experience uncertainty originating from their present economic insecurities differently: the religious group will experience lower levels of uncertainty, while the nonreligious group will experience higher levels of uncertainty.
All interviews are performed and transcribed in the Dutch language. All quotations and citations in this paper are translated as literally and logically as possible. Original transcriptions in Dutch, or translated into English, are available upon request.
To be able to ask the same questions to both religious people and nonreligious people the word religion or religiousness is avoided during the interviews. The term spirituality is used instead. Religion and spirituality are not the same, but are similar in many ways: both religion and spirituality concern a personal encounter with transcendence or a search for truth and meaning, both are social-psychological group phenomenon, both accommodate beliefs and values, and both are positively associated with mental well-being (Hill et. al., 2010). Spirituality and religion differ from each other in the sense that religion is commonly understood in terms of institutionalized beliefs and doctrines (Hogg, Adelman & Blagg, 2010). Spirituality tends to be defined as subjective personal experiences with the outside world, meaning that it does not necessarily involve a higher deity (although it could be) (Zinnbauer et. al., 1997).
3.1 operationalizing spirituality
As mentioned earlier, this research uses personal spiritual interpretations and private religious practice of respondents to assert levels of religiousness. Respondents are assigned a spirituality number which indicates their level of religiousness. A score of 10 represents the highest score, while a 0 represents the lowest score. The score of each respondent is assigned based on how important their religious identity and religious ritual practices (attending church, prayer, etc.) are in their daily life. How each individual respondent received a spirituality score is further discussed below.
A review of the contemporary literature on spirituality separates three categories: 1) a god oriented spirituality, which explains spirituality in terms of an individual’s relationship
19 with god and institutionalized doctrine; 2) a world oriented spirituality, which explains spirituality in terms of an individual’s position in the world; and 3) a humanistic spirituality, which explains spirituality in terms of overall human achievement and potential (Spilka, 1993, p. 57). Religiousness and the belief in a higher deity are thus always a form of (god oriented) spirituality, while spiritual feelings do not have to be a sign for religiousness. High religiousness therefore implies high spirituality, while high spirituality could go together with low religiousness. Using spirituality instead of religiousness makes the interview questions more broadly interpretable while avoiding leading questions. A religiously involved respondent is likely to interpret questions about spirituality in terms of their religious identity, whereas nonreligious respondents might interpret these questions differently. Questions regarding respondent’s spirituality indirectly measure their religiousness: the religiousness of a respondent is determined by the degree in which questions regarding spirituality are interpreted in terms of their religious views.
Respondent 1 is rated a 9 on spirituality. His answers indicate a god-oriented spirituality. He derives his worldview from the bible and expresses high confidence and trust in god. A personal relationship with god is maintained by prayer, which gives him confidence that everything will be all right in the end: “I truly believe that god is a person and I think it
is good to talk to him and discuss what happened that day”. He is actively involved in his
religious community and his religious identity plays a considerable role in his daily life. Respondent 2 is rated a 8 on spirituality. His answers indicate a god-oriented spirituality. He expresses his spiritual needs through faith, which gives him a sense of purpose: “I am spiritual in believing. I belief that there is a god and I think I would describe
myself as a Christian”. Personal spiritual development has priority over material gains and
his religious identity plays a reasonable role in his daily life.
Respondent 3 is rated a 7 on spirituality. His answers indicate a god-oriented spirituality. He sees himself as a creation of god, but does not directly communicate with him through prayer: “I am not spacey. I see myself as a spiritual human in such that I am familiar
with the Christian traditions and I see myself as a creation of god”. He does not have a
personal relationship with god, but he feels part of a whole. The cultural meaning and societal value of religion are important. He performs several roles within his religious community and his religious identity plays a reasonable role in his daily life.
Respondent 4 is rated a 8 on spirituality. His answers indicate a god-oriented spirituality. He has a firm belief in god and prays regularly: “Yes, I belief in god and I feel
20 religious community besides attending the occasional church service. His religious identity plays a reasonable role in his daily life.
Respondent 5 is rated a 2 on spirituality. Her answers indicate a more world-oriented spirituality. She beliefs that people should be fully responsible for their actions in life. She feels humble towards nature and the relationship humankind has with earth: “We always
think that we are a big deal, but on the other side we are nothing without each other and without the earth. We are a whole”. She does not identify with religious views and does not
belief in a higher deity.
Respondent 6 is rated a 3 on spirituality. Her answers indicate a more humanistic spirituality: “I consider myself to be practical and analytical, western maybe. But I am
sensitive for certain spheres, feelings of being together. Sharing beautiful but also hard moments”. She trusts in herself and her skillset. Human art forms like poetry are important to
her in her daily life. She does not identify with religious views and does not belief in a higher deity.
21 4. Analysis and results
The results are organized according to the three hypotheses: first the individually perceived uncertainties are outlined to see whether differences are observed. Second the differences in the role of social involvement in groups are elaborated on to demonstrate whether there are differences between religious and nonreligious respondents. Third the statements of experienced uncertainty or certainty are compared to demonstrate whether religious respondents tend to express more certainty in their unemployment compared to nonreligious respondents. Spirituality and religiousness are strongly linked in the interviews. All respondents who consider themselves religious received a high score on spirituality, while all respondents who consider themselves nonreligious received a low score on spirituality. In the conclusion is demonstrated whether the three hypotheses are correct. The findings are tied together and the main question of this study is answered.
4.1 H1: The link between unemployment and perceived uncertainty
This section is concerned with the way how unemployment and perceived uncertainty are related in the interviews. As mentioned in the literature review, the non-pecuniary costs of unemployment are often high, meaning that employment is more than just a source of income. It is therefore expected that respondents show signs of increased perceived uncertainty since they became unemployed.
Although the respondents don’t like being unemployed, it is notable that the amount of hindrance experienced from unemployment is low for all respondents. All respondents express a degree of difficulty in predicting their (financial) future, but they all hold a relatively positive attitude. Some respondents have experienced some trouble in the past: one respondent describes how he suffered from depression-like symptoms and mental tiredness from searching for a job which he could not find. Respondents often describe their search for a job as pointless: “Right now I do not experience my situation as disturbing, I am more
stressed about the fact that society expects me to keep looking for something that just is not there” (Respondent 2). However, all respondents state that they presently don’t suffer from
their unemployment and most show some optimism about the future:
Respondent 1: “I have confidence in my future, I don’t really worry about it. A
solution will always come one way or another, I am not stressed about it”
Respondent 2: “In the beginning I did not necessarily experience my situation as
22 Respondent 4: “I don’t know what the future will bring and I don’t think that
worrying about it will improve my situation”
“Then I started looking what something else to do, now I am at peace with it”
Respondent 5: “Sometimes you get dispirited; in the beginning you actively start
looking for a new job, but at some point you realize that you don’t even get a response. I do not experience my situation as stressful, but people develop a negative image of you. But I ignore that”
Respondent 6: “I have experience with receiving social benefit in the past, so I am
used to coping with little money”
From these statements I derive that there appears no direct observable difference in individually perceived uncertainty: there are no serious psychological or physical discomforts for both religious and nonreligious respondents. Life satisfaction scores varied between 6.5 and 9 (on a scale from 1-10), with no obvious differences between religious and nonreligious respondents. Both groups experience the loss of social contacts and structure during unemployment as inconvenient but manageable: “You could say that having a job is
stabilizing, because a job provides structure. It provides social satisfaction, that is what I miss. Especially the contact with coworkers who you say goodbye to at the end of the day”
(Respondent 3) . Having a job is not solely perceived as a source of income, but also as something through which an individual contributes to society. Various statements from both religious as nonreligious respondents confirm that the non-pecuniary costs of unemployment are experienced as more disturbing compared to the loss of income: “My status is not
attached to having a job, but the partnerships and many social contacts are” (Respondent 5).
Respondents are to a lesser extent self-sufficient after unemployment and partly dependable on social benefit or others for their income:
Respondent 3: “Well, being unemployed is lousy. I do not make my own living and am
dependable on my wife to do so, I find that embarrassing. I do have multiple societal activities, but the societal appreciation which you get around the 25th of the month with a paycheck provides a kind of stability and the notion that you are part of the community”
Respondent 5: “I also apply for lower positions because I just want to make my own
living, but also because of the structure. You need structure as a human being. Those kind of things provide the structure you need and that is healthy; to go somewhere and make a contribution”
23 While all respondents maintain a slight optimism regarding their future, they generally do feel that it is difficult for them to change the situation. They get limited reply and are often turned down when applying for jobs. All respondents have the feeling that they are outcompeted by younger generations or that they don’t get a fair chance during applications, implying that age is a substantial cause for discomfort: “In the beginning I really tried to find
a new job, but at some point you just realize that your age is an obstacle for society. Later I had to accept that I was not going to find anything else and that I had to start a new life based on other things like voluntary work” (Respondent 2). It appears that the consequences
of unemployment do not directly evoke stress or other physical inconveniences, but the loss of structure, social contacts combined with the feeling that they are unable to change their situation lightly points towards increases perceived uncertainty. This is confirmed by a statement from respondent 3, who mentions how employment provides stability and structure. Respondent 4 adds to this that: “There is a big uncertainty increasing factor in
being unemployed, which is uncomfortable”.
4.2 H2: The link between unemployment and involvement in social groups
This section is concerned with the way how unemployment and involvement in social groups are related in the interviews. As mentioned in the literature review, it is likely that respondents become more involved in social groups when they become unemployed. Social group identification provides an individual with social security and structure. It is therefore expected that the role of social groups increases after unemployment.
All respondents indicate that the role of social groups increased during their unemployment. Either existing social group involvement intensified or new social groups were joined. Notable is that the intensification of existing relations, or engaging in new ones, is not necessarily due to the respondents need for uncertainty reduction. The availability of extra free time and a search for other ways to feel socially relevant cause people to find other ways to structure their day:
Respondent 1: “My involvement has intensified in recent years due to the availability
of spare time”
Respondent 2: “Friends, and this church has become more important for me since I
am active here three days a week”
Respondent 3: “The biggest problem is that you need to find a way to stay socially
24 Respondent 4: “My best friends are my biggest support and part of them I know from
church and part from other backgrounds. But I don’t think it is a specific group, the social contacts support me”
Respondent 5: “What I find more important is that you keep active, keep developing
yourself. I do that myself by staying active. Take the opportunities you get. For example I became a member of the Humanist alliance”
Respondent 6: “Friends. They understand and accept me and I feel free to talk about
everything with them, without judgement. They have not become more involved since my unemployment”
Most religious respondents indicate that their participation in their religious community has intensified, although they do not state that the conviction of their religious beliefs intensified: “My religious activity has become sort of a replacement of my job. What is important for me
is that I am appreciated here. There are more people here who are in a similar situation, that supports me. They share the same vision and values” (Respondent 2). While their personal
conviction did not increase, the amount of time spend at their church or the role they perform in their community did change over time. They experience it as pleasant that other people from their community hold the same values and beliefs. They feel at home and at ease, which provides them with a sense of social support. It is probable that part of their group of friends are in the same community: “The church is also a social community in which I am very
active, for at least 10 hours a week I think. The church is socially involved and modest. It is very locally oriented with people from the neighborhood who do things together in trying to help each other. They are there with a purpose and I feel right at home there” (Respondent
3). As a result, it seems logical that religious people spend part of their extra spare time in their religious community. These findings are in line with Hogg’s (2007) uncertainty-identity theory.
One of the nonreligious respondents indicates that she spends her extra free time on developing herself, for example by joining a humanistic organization: “Me becoming active
at the Humanist Alliance has more to do with the availability of time” (Respondent 5). It
appears that both religious and nonreligious respondents became more active in social groups. It is plausible to assume that individual participation in these social groups will diminish once respondents become re-employed and the available time for extra activities decreases.
25 From the above we can derive that the role of social groups increased once respondents became unemployed. Whether this is caused by a personal need for structure and uncertainty reduction or simply because of the extra availability of time is unclear. Respondents indicate that they derive a sense of support and meaning from their participation in these social groups, but suggest that the search for personal social relevance could also be derived by other means. The feeling of being socially relevant could also be achieved with other activities: “They do not support me financially or in other ways. But I experience it as
supporting to be part of a community. That it is a church could be a coincidence”
(Respondent 3).
4.3 H3: Statements indicating levels of uncertainty and certainty
This section compares statements showing differences in perceived uncertainty or certainty for both religious and nonreligious respondents. As mentioned in the literature review, religious group involvement tends to provide more structure and particular high levels of certainty compared to nonreligious groups. It is therefore likely that religious respondents will show less signs of uncertainty or express more certainty compared to nonreligious respondents.
Nonreligious respondents answer questions regarding their unemployment and financial future in terms of confidence in their own abilities and personal responsibilities, expressing neither decreased uncertainty nor increased certainty. They feel like they do not need religious things in their life, but they can imagine why people feel attracted towards religious ideas.
Respondent 5: “I don’t need that. I never had that religious feeling. But what I do get
is that lots of people are scared, they have a lot of fear. I think religions can help with that. Many people derive support from it”
Respondent 6: “I trust in my skillset, if I get the chance to show what I can, I believe
that they will want to hire me”
Religious respondents frequently made statements expressing a sense of support or comfort derived from their religious identity. They show a convinced trust that god watches over them, relinquishing them from part of their ability to change or influence their future. With expressing that they do not decide their own fate (all religious respondents expressed this
26 feeling), they outsource part of the responsibility. The feeling that god’s will outweighs their own influence takes matters partially out of their hands:
Respondent 1: “I have faith that I appear where I am needed and that god will bring
me where I am needed, which gives a certain peace of mind. I trust that I will get what I can handle, and nothing more. It is a case of trust that god uses me, which means it will not be too little or too much to handle”
Respondent 2: “My religious spirit is always present in the background. For example
in a situation where most people would be annoyed, I don’t get annoyed. It gives a certain peace of mind”
“ Instead of focusing on material things you can also focus on spiritual things. They
are a different way of making life more fun”
Respondent 3: “Becoming religious, for me, meant to let go of certainties and
modestly seeking for meaning in life”
Respondent 4: “When you speak about the future, that is something I put in his hands,
I think it helps in that sense. It provides a sort of anchor for a ship. The ship moves up and down with the tides but is not adrift. It provides security”
Religious involvement apparently influences perceived uncertainty by taking away part of the worries and responsibilities from the individual. It provides them with comfort, since they feel that they are part of something bigger. Their religious identity helps them to put the puzzle of life together: “I read from the bible a lot. I immerse myself in what you can call the
Christian/clerical literature and tradition. In this way I think I caught a glimpse of how everything in the world fits together” (Respondent 3). Coincidences do not exist in their
perception of the world, providing a sense of security regarding their place in it:
Respondent 2: “This helps me in dealing with my unemployment because I know that
there is more in life than just work”
Respondent 4: When I look back upon my career there where many occasions in
which I found a job in a special way when I needed it. No one can convince me that that was purely a coincidence. This is something I draw strength from”
All the above statements demonstrate a clear difference in the way of reasoning between religious and nonreligious respondents. Religious respondents apparently possess a particular
27 mental framework to make sense of human life and a strong trust that god takes care of them if necessary. The religious approach seemingly provides them with certainty in matters where nonreligious people lack certainty. Nonreligious respondents do not have an equivalent mental framework and have to mentally cope in a different way. They appear to be depending solely on themselves, while religious respondents have the choice to put their fate in the hands of god.
Respondents 2 emphasizes that his religious involvement plays an important role in coping with his unemployment. He explains how the spiritual aspect of his religious identity adds an extra dimension to social life, boosting the notion of a bigger plan or afterlife: “I
think that when you are unemployed and religious and you receive social benefits of which you can live an acceptable life it is easier to accept. Because you think that there is more on earth than just work”. It appears that religious involvement creates a sense of existential
certainty. The thought of being part of something bigger than oneself is soothing, especially when this bigger plan is actively monitored and regulated by a higher deity. This idea creates a solid emotional foundation on which an individual can always fall back in times of hardship: “People in the Netherlands think that happiness is linked with working and having
a family with two children. The spiritual is absent in this picture. When one of the two is lost, they can easily fall in a depression. People who do have this spiritual aspect can always rely on this, they have an alternative” (Respondent 2). This foundation is what seemingly equips
religious respondents with the quality to cope with high levels of environmental uncertainty. Their perception regarding their unemployment would be different if they were nonreligious: “If I would not belief in god I think I would be more anxious” (Respondent 4).
28 5. Discussion
Although the results from this research might provide some insight in the micro foundation mechanisms in how religious involvement helps individuals in coping with unemployment, the research has some limitations.
The recruitment of respondents proved to be difficult. Approached religious communities and unemployment bureaus were mostly unwilling to cooperate. Especially nonreligious unemployed respondents were difficult to find, since they are not particularly socially organized. Due to this unexpected difficulty there were only six respondents recruited to participate in this research. This is far too little to reach theoretical saturation. The result of this thesis therefore has little empirical significance and can solely aim to spark interest in the subject and make suggestions for further research.
The disadvantage of snowball sampling was that there was no control over the sampling process, since the recruitment of respondents depended on community leaders and their personal social networks (Biernacki & Waldorf, 1981). This makes sampling bias probable, since not all members of the community got a chance to participate. In addition, it is also plausible that people who were willing to participate in the research are more happy compared to the people who do not want to participate. People who are (deeply) unhappy are more likely to withdraw from social life. It is therefore plausible that the sample consists of relatively happy people, making the sample less representative.
All recruited respondents are inhabitants of the city of Amsterdam. The demographic composition of the population is most likely different in other Dutch cities and the rural areas, making the results of this research not generalizable to other cases. All respondents were affiliated with the Christian faith, because the Christian faith has the most cultural significance in our society and is the largest religion in the Netherlands. The aim in this research was therefore to compare nonreligious respondents with respondents who are affiliated with the Christian faith. It is most likely that the results of this research will be different when other religions are included. It would be interesting to see how various religions compare with each other in reducing uncertainty. More research is needed to provide insight in the way other religions help in coping with unemployment.
The spirituality scores assigned to the respondents are subject to interpretation. There is a brief explanation why each respondent received a particular score, however, other people might disagree with these assigned scores. The score depends on the role spirituality plays in the daily lives of the respondent, the kind of relationship they have with god, their spiritual participation in groups and statements about their dedication to their beliefs. Based on these
29 aspects of spirituality the researcher scored the respondents on a scale from 1 to 10. Spirituality and religiousness did correlate strongly in the interviews: religious people scored high on spirituality, while nonreligious people scored low on spirituality.
Further research is necessary to discover the exact relationship between religious involvement and uncertainty reduction. It is important to understand how group dynamics can help individuals in coping with environmental uncertainties, since environmental uncertainty frequently occurs everywhere. Global financial crises greatly impact individuals and society as a whole. Unemployment rises and people lose job certainty, causing physical and psychological complaints to thrive in a recession. A better understanding in the way group dynamics help an individual in coping with these environmental uncertainties could help to reduce the overall burden on society by lowering individual complaints.
5.1 Alternative explanations
This thesis argues that the properties of religious groups make religious involvement one of the main predictors for whether people experience high- or low levels of uncertainty from unemployment. There are, however, explanations besides religion which could explain part of the variation in perceived uncertainty. This research makes the assumption that all unemployed people are in relatively the same uncertainty increasing situation, but there could be other circumstances influencing uncertainty which are unknown. Personal health, family events or a traumatic youth can be factors which influence perceived uncertainty in the present. It seems plausible that people who are healthy and who had a normal childhood feel more certain in the present compared to people who did not have those luxuries. This implies that people can be born in a more secure environment compared to others. It is possible that the assumption that all unemployed people are in relatively the same situation is false. It is also possible that people are financially wealthy and unemployed at the same time. Early retirement from a profitable job or inheritance could be factors causing people to be relatively rich while unemployed, which is likely to influence their feelings of uncertainty. There could be environmental differences we do not know about and which remain uncovered during this research.
The interviews revealed that age is a potential influential factor for increasing perceived uncertainty. All respondents mentioned their age as an influential factor, which is not a factor taken into account in the literature review. It could imply that the combination of unemployment with higher age particularly raises uncertainty. There could be differences in levels of uncertainty experienced due to unemployment between younger and older
