This is really cool, well done. I have a follow-up question. I saw in the report that Devout Traditionalists answer 77% “very happy” while the next highest is around half that (35% or something?). Is the magnitude of the difference really that large? I don’t have reason to doubt that there is an effect, but an effect magnitude that big is worth double checking. It’s very interesting if true and I would love to see follow-up on that. Thanks again for all your work on this.
Here is the numbers from the harmonized dataset. In 2024, I confirmed 77% was correct for DT and the next highest was IB at 36%.
In the harmonized dataset (n=1810):
%Very happy/Very satisfied with life
DT(n=943) - 67%
AB(n=548) - 23%
CM(n=271) - 31%
IB(n=48) - 38%
Consistently across the three waves, the DT are often twice as likely to report "Very happy" or "Very satisfied" with personal life than other groups. This trend is also consistent across other similar measures... satisfaction with family life "Very satisfied" and personal health "Excellent."
I wonder if there would be a balanced way to view this (subjective happiness) element with a data-gathering instrument that attempts to compensate for confirmation bias.
Devout adherents to any packaged belief system—ideologues— have strong motivations to self-identify as happy with their choices whether they truly are or not.
This is not only limited to LDS but it is also not limited to organized religion.
Political ideologies breed the same kinds of declared fulfillment.
Amazing to see the stark difference in happiness, health, and well-being between Devout and the rest. I would not have expected that. Sorry for posting three comments, but there is so much here to think about!
Alex, I assume since the CES instrument was all self-reported, the results are already leveled for any tendencies to mis-represent behaviors used to classify each participant (into one of the categories).
It would be fascinating to know if there is an honesty delta among or between respondents.
For example…are those who answer questions about their attendance, prayer, scripture study more or less likely (than say cultural population) to tell the truth?
Why does the article use "Mormon" when the organization and most active members are asking for media outlets and scholars to use the correct name of the church or the term LDS?
Fascinating report. Most of my questions from your substack piece were answered in the full report. I was surprised to see that the youngest cohort occupies the largest percentage of Devout Traditionalists. As you say, perhaps due to the age of recently returned missionaries. Culturally, they are also the busiest with young family concerns and the church is a support for that stage of life.
As a non-member, formerly living in a fairly high-density Mormon neighborhood in Meridian, Idaho, I felt it would have been beneficial to my family, if Church members would have expressed more doubt about supernatural aspects of their doctrine. I believe such doubt would make the Church more welcoming to outsiders. Not sure if this would be good for the Church, but it seems like it would be good for increasing membership. Is there anyway that members can become open to the idea that the doctrine isn’t all literal truth; rather it has many metaphorical aspects? Thoughts?
I wonder how this data could be interpreted as a metric of religious "health". I think its reductive to act as if only the "Devout" count towards a healthy religion and that their loss of dominance represents a decline in faith, but still, what that doesn't say is what then does represent a healthy religion. Is social adaptation a sign of a healthy church or watered-down decline? Is staunch devoutness healthy or a harbinger of irrelevance? Will this global church go the way of Catholicism (global hierarchy but wildly varying religious expressions and even beliefs)? Is that an inevitability, suggesting that the concept of a cohesive "global church" is impossible? There's always another question.
I like this comment. Yeah I see what you mean. I definitely am not trying to define what a healthy religion is or saying LDS is not a healthy religion. In fact, I think it definitely falls on the "healthy" side from a growth perspective compared to other religions in the US. The thesis of the report is just that LDS identity is changing from what it was and its probably helpful to be aware of that.
Fascinating throughout! Nicely done. You address the sample size question nicely, and I’m glad you plowed ahead despite limited numbers to get this typology (which totally passes the smell test, by the way). But it would be nice if you could include N= comments in the main report for some of the smaller subgroups so we can have a better idea what kind of numbers we are dealing with.
Ya this is fair. As a rule of thumb, each wave has around ~600-700 LDS identifiers and in the caption of each chart I tell you which waves I reference, so a little math and you have the sample size. This would be nice to have though. If I have time, I may go through and update it.
This is really cool, well done. I have a follow-up question. I saw in the report that Devout Traditionalists answer 77% “very happy” while the next highest is around half that (35% or something?). Is the magnitude of the difference really that large? I don’t have reason to doubt that there is an effect, but an effect magnitude that big is worth double checking. It’s very interesting if true and I would love to see follow-up on that. Thanks again for all your work on this.
Here is the numbers from the harmonized dataset. In 2024, I confirmed 77% was correct for DT and the next highest was IB at 36%.
In the harmonized dataset (n=1810):
%Very happy/Very satisfied with life
DT(n=943) - 67%
AB(n=548) - 23%
CM(n=271) - 31%
IB(n=48) - 38%
Consistently across the three waves, the DT are often twice as likely to report "Very happy" or "Very satisfied" with personal life than other groups. This trend is also consistent across other similar measures... satisfaction with family life "Very satisfied" and personal health "Excellent."
Wow. That is a massive difference. Crazy! Thanks so much for verifying.
I wonder if there would be a balanced way to view this (subjective happiness) element with a data-gathering instrument that attempts to compensate for confirmation bias.
Devout adherents to any packaged belief system—ideologues— have strong motivations to self-identify as happy with their choices whether they truly are or not.
This is not only limited to LDS but it is also not limited to organized religion.
Political ideologies breed the same kinds of declared fulfillment.
Now THIS is podracing!! I'm excited to see more from this report in the future!
I agree wonderful analysis! These are some things I wish the church would release themselves, but I understand why they wouldn’t.
Keep up the great research!
Great analysis! Looking forward to hearing more about it
To over-simplify a little, there seem to be three key wedge issues in your data.
- LGBTQ (non-)acceptance divides Devout from the rest
- Abortion (non-)acceptance divides Devout and Adaptive from Cultural and In-Between
- (Non-)sure belief in God divides In-Betweeners from the rest.
I like this take. I would also add in religious practice as a huge divider from Devout Adaptive and Cultural Inbetween
Amazing to see the stark difference in happiness, health, and well-being between Devout and the rest. I would not have expected that. Sorry for posting three comments, but there is so much here to think about!
Don't worry about. Love hearing your thoughts!
Alex, I assume since the CES instrument was all self-reported, the results are already leveled for any tendencies to mis-represent behaviors used to classify each participant (into one of the categories).
It would be fascinating to know if there is an honesty delta among or between respondents.
For example…are those who answer questions about their attendance, prayer, scripture study more or less likely (than say cultural population) to tell the truth?
Difficult to parse but fascinating to see!
Why does the article use "Mormon" when the organization and most active members are asking for media outlets and scholars to use the correct name of the church or the term LDS?
Fascinating report. Most of my questions from your substack piece were answered in the full report. I was surprised to see that the youngest cohort occupies the largest percentage of Devout Traditionalists. As you say, perhaps due to the age of recently returned missionaries. Culturally, they are also the busiest with young family concerns and the church is a support for that stage of life.
Kind of always been true. Celestials, Terrestrials, Telestials, and Outers…
As a non-member, formerly living in a fairly high-density Mormon neighborhood in Meridian, Idaho, I felt it would have been beneficial to my family, if Church members would have expressed more doubt about supernatural aspects of their doctrine. I believe such doubt would make the Church more welcoming to outsiders. Not sure if this would be good for the Church, but it seems like it would be good for increasing membership. Is there anyway that members can become open to the idea that the doctrine isn’t all literal truth; rather it has many metaphorical aspects? Thoughts?
I wonder how this data could be interpreted as a metric of religious "health". I think its reductive to act as if only the "Devout" count towards a healthy religion and that their loss of dominance represents a decline in faith, but still, what that doesn't say is what then does represent a healthy religion. Is social adaptation a sign of a healthy church or watered-down decline? Is staunch devoutness healthy or a harbinger of irrelevance? Will this global church go the way of Catholicism (global hierarchy but wildly varying religious expressions and even beliefs)? Is that an inevitability, suggesting that the concept of a cohesive "global church" is impossible? There's always another question.
I like this comment. Yeah I see what you mean. I definitely am not trying to define what a healthy religion is or saying LDS is not a healthy religion. In fact, I think it definitely falls on the "healthy" side from a growth perspective compared to other religions in the US. The thesis of the report is just that LDS identity is changing from what it was and its probably helpful to be aware of that.
Fascinating throughout! Nicely done. You address the sample size question nicely, and I’m glad you plowed ahead despite limited numbers to get this typology (which totally passes the smell test, by the way). But it would be nice if you could include N= comments in the main report for some of the smaller subgroups so we can have a better idea what kind of numbers we are dealing with.
Ya this is fair. As a rule of thumb, each wave has around ~600-700 LDS identifiers and in the caption of each chart I tell you which waves I reference, so a little math and you have the sample size. This would be nice to have though. If I have time, I may go through and update it.