I love this, thank you. I always tick ‘other’ because though Quakers are Christian, along with other Christian sects, it’s all a bit misleading to say ‘Christian’ or ‘Protestant’. Fascinating considering where this data sits at the intersection of sectarianism/politics and tribal identity. Thank you.
But thank you for providing a post for your minority of readers who love reading about details of survey design and analysis.
Also, this is why, as a Christian who is taught to love her stats-analyzing neighbor, I always check one of the boxes on a survey, not invent my own open-ended answer even when there is an open-ended answer box provided. Do unto others, right?
I’ve found all of this to be so true (and difficult) when talking to students! We can set analytical terms on the table, and my students can identify what they mean. But this doesn’t mean that they will even identify themselves as being described by these terms!
I recall an observation from, I think Scott Alexander, that in his experience if you include a "None of the Above" option on your survey, something like ~10% of people will always pick it, no matter how exhaustive your options are. Some people just need to be different.
If you ask: "How many legs do you have? Two, fewer than two, more than two, or None of the Above?"
you should expect something like 10% of your sample to choose "None of the Above."
I thought the "Something Else" would be a cover for Chinese traditional religion, African traditional religion, and other folk and animistic religions in the world. I didn't realize that it would be "Christian, I don't like the word Protestant". Facepalm.
Well, it has been 500 years since the Reformation, which is when the term "Protestant" originated. And I would suspect that a lot of people today, especially the less-educated ones, are not that expert on history--and even less on the matter of religious history. How many of these people really know much about the origins of the Lutherans and the various Reformed groups? Add in that we are also seeing the decline of many traditional denominations and the rise of non-denominational groups, and even the house church movement...maybe the term "Protestant" is drifting into obsolescence. The Roman Catholic church is still around, but it does not have the power and influence it had before 1500, even in Europe, much less the rest of the world. In the 1500s and after, they were "protesting" against the Popes--but now?
I'm reminded of the King of the Hill episode in which Bobby is believed to be a Buddhist lama, to which his father tells him he cannot be one since "we're Methodist!" but cannot explain to Bobby what Methodism is. Also, my impression as a non-American is that many American evangelical Protestants define themselves as only "Christian", as in, they believe they are the restoration of some primitive church before it was corrupted, with I suppose the Catholic church being the prime example of this corruption. I guess that makes them quite literally Protestant, but they may view the word Protestant as offensive.
But also, yes, what does the category "Protestant" include? It certainly includes the different groups that arose as part of the Protestant reformation, but these traditional denominations are becoming less and less popular. Are the Christian denominations that were born in the 19th century in the US, like Adventists and Pentecostists, Protestant? They arose from a Protestant milieu, but in a very different context from the reformation.
This makes me think of how Penn Jillette from Penn & Teller talked about how earlier in their career, they were regularly mocking the kind of popular magic at the time (protestant? magic). Now when they look around, their kind of magic is much closer to the standard than the cape and wand stuff in the 80's that they were mocking. What happens when the assumption that plain ice cream is vanilla ice cream instead of just milk flavored? Vanilla is the Protestant ice cream flavor.
I don't have any great theological insights to add, but if you like reading about the pain and suffering of free response texts to surveys, check out XKCD's color survey:
I wonder to what extent this is ignorance of Protestantism vs. people disliking the term Protestant? Seems like evangelicals/non-denoms might associate the term with mainline Protestantism, and so not want to identify with it even if it's factually accurate. Plus there are some legitimate ambiguous cases in that list there; I wouldn't call UUs Protestant, having briefly attended a UU church. If Latter-Day Saints aren't Protestant it feels a bit odd to lump in JWs, Anabaptists, etc. also. As a Quaker attender I'm not even sure what the correct answer would be for me, Quakers have Protestant heritage but at this point FGC at least is very different from the Protestant churches.
"pennecoastal" is an interesting eggcorn. Also "non domination" for non-denominational? Props to somebody for confessing "I'm just a Christian (I don't know the difference between all those branches)". Also "misotheist" should not be being lumped in with Protestantism, it's new to me but it means something like antitheist/anti-religion atheist, not a misspelling of Methodist. "Christian but how Olive Garden is Italian" is a good one. So is "yes". Can't figure out what "vhbn" or "turmeric and" or "SATIFIED!" or "polyanmerous" or "Okja" are getting at (sanctified? polyamorous?). "Manchester United" is listed, so are "going to the beach" and "BREXIT" and "hispanic" and "LGBQT" and "shrimp".
I know what Protestant means and have always attended mainline Protestant churches (though only with intermittent regularity). With that in mind, I have often described myself as a Christian Skeptic. But perhaps I should have chosen Protestant Skeptic as the more accurate descriptor.
I have always had lots of doubts about many of the proclaimed core beliefs of Christianity, but I do recognize its strong potential to support social cohesiveness and aid to the less fortunate and oppressed.
I’m a nerd for charismatic history. I noticed how many responses are Pentecostal or Pentecostal coded, “Holy Ghost filled believer!”
While Pentecostal is obviously Protestant, it is a distinct branch of Protestantism seen as the weird uncle of the Christian family. I can see why many charismatics do not see themselves as Protestant, but “something else.”
From the perspective of someone who's favorite part of grad school was badgering Stata, is to ask whether The Category Was Made for Man or Man Made for the Category.
Or in other words, "do I have categories that I would expect to reflect meaningful differences in the responses *of the survey takers*, or categories that reflect differences between categories, but *probably don't impact the survey responders much*. I would expect say, Quakers, UUs, and Mennonites to look different in survey responses, and in different ways that should have policy implications. While there are very important differences between say, the Amish and Mennonites I wouldn't necessarily expect them to look that different on survey responses, so I'd be okay with having a "Plain people" category to lump them all into. Yes, that's not ideal, and it
I think the real answer we can all agree with, however, is Nationscape should start with "Christian"
and then provide 300 different check boxes and a freetext field to really capture the variety or responses available. That would generate the best data!
I did find some favorites:
"Christian wow you list muslin but not Christian"
"Christian without all the fire and brimstone hooplah"
Yes, I belong to the First Church of No Hooplah 🤦🏻♂️ I can see why this is so frustrating for data people!
Church of No Hoopla Eastern Region or Church of No Hooplah Great Lakes Region?
“Most of you aren’t interested in 2,000 words on question-ordering effects” - I am totally hot for this content
There probably some subcategories to be gathered from the dataset. I couldn’t get through all but from what is saw, I liked:
“Quacker”
“My higher power is Jesus”
“Christian Witch”
“christian but probably would piss off a preecher if talk about it”
“Christian (why is this not an option?)”
“Christadelphian”
“bible thumper”
“Zoroastrian witch”
“Connecting with my higher self spiritual I'm gonna get out of this matrix”
“Woke AF”
“I F**k Monkeys and Ducks”
Couldn’t get past the last one
"“I F**k Monkeys and Ducks”"
Ask Not for Whom the Lizardman Respondeth; He Resondeth to Thee
https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/
I love this, thank you. I always tick ‘other’ because though Quakers are Christian, along with other Christian sects, it’s all a bit misleading to say ‘Christian’ or ‘Protestant’. Fascinating considering where this data sits at the intersection of sectarianism/politics and tribal identity. Thank you.
But thank you for providing a post for your minority of readers who love reading about details of survey design and analysis.
Also, this is why, as a Christian who is taught to love her stats-analyzing neighbor, I always check one of the boxes on a survey, not invent my own open-ended answer even when there is an open-ended answer box provided. Do unto others, right?
Great piece!
I’ve found all of this to be so true (and difficult) when talking to students! We can set analytical terms on the table, and my students can identify what they mean. But this doesn’t mean that they will even identify themselves as being described by these terms!
I recall an observation from, I think Scott Alexander, that in his experience if you include a "None of the Above" option on your survey, something like ~10% of people will always pick it, no matter how exhaustive your options are. Some people just need to be different.
If you ask: "How many legs do you have? Two, fewer than two, more than two, or None of the Above?"
you should expect something like 10% of your sample to choose "None of the Above."
I thought the "Something Else" would be a cover for Chinese traditional religion, African traditional religion, and other folk and animistic religions in the world. I didn't realize that it would be "Christian, I don't like the word Protestant". Facepalm.
Well, it has been 500 years since the Reformation, which is when the term "Protestant" originated. And I would suspect that a lot of people today, especially the less-educated ones, are not that expert on history--and even less on the matter of religious history. How many of these people really know much about the origins of the Lutherans and the various Reformed groups? Add in that we are also seeing the decline of many traditional denominations and the rise of non-denominational groups, and even the house church movement...maybe the term "Protestant" is drifting into obsolescence. The Roman Catholic church is still around, but it does not have the power and influence it had before 1500, even in Europe, much less the rest of the world. In the 1500s and after, they were "protesting" against the Popes--but now?
I'm reminded of the King of the Hill episode in which Bobby is believed to be a Buddhist lama, to which his father tells him he cannot be one since "we're Methodist!" but cannot explain to Bobby what Methodism is. Also, my impression as a non-American is that many American evangelical Protestants define themselves as only "Christian", as in, they believe they are the restoration of some primitive church before it was corrupted, with I suppose the Catholic church being the prime example of this corruption. I guess that makes them quite literally Protestant, but they may view the word Protestant as offensive.
But also, yes, what does the category "Protestant" include? It certainly includes the different groups that arose as part of the Protestant reformation, but these traditional denominations are becoming less and less popular. Are the Christian denominations that were born in the 19th century in the US, like Adventists and Pentecostists, Protestant? They arose from a Protestant milieu, but in a very different context from the reformation.
Anyone who quotes King of Hill is just fine in my book!
This makes me think of how Penn Jillette from Penn & Teller talked about how earlier in their career, they were regularly mocking the kind of popular magic at the time (protestant? magic). Now when they look around, their kind of magic is much closer to the standard than the cape and wand stuff in the 80's that they were mocking. What happens when the assumption that plain ice cream is vanilla ice cream instead of just milk flavored? Vanilla is the Protestant ice cream flavor.
I don't have any great theological insights to add, but if you like reading about the pain and suffering of free response texts to surveys, check out XKCD's color survey:
https://blog.xkcd.com/2010/05/03/color-survey-results/
I wonder to what extent this is ignorance of Protestantism vs. people disliking the term Protestant? Seems like evangelicals/non-denoms might associate the term with mainline Protestantism, and so not want to identify with it even if it's factually accurate. Plus there are some legitimate ambiguous cases in that list there; I wouldn't call UUs Protestant, having briefly attended a UU church. If Latter-Day Saints aren't Protestant it feels a bit odd to lump in JWs, Anabaptists, etc. also. As a Quaker attender I'm not even sure what the correct answer would be for me, Quakers have Protestant heritage but at this point FGC at least is very different from the Protestant churches.
"pennecoastal" is an interesting eggcorn. Also "non domination" for non-denominational? Props to somebody for confessing "I'm just a Christian (I don't know the difference between all those branches)". Also "misotheist" should not be being lumped in with Protestantism, it's new to me but it means something like antitheist/anti-religion atheist, not a misspelling of Methodist. "Christian but how Olive Garden is Italian" is a good one. So is "yes". Can't figure out what "vhbn" or "turmeric and" or "SATIFIED!" or "polyanmerous" or "Okja" are getting at (sanctified? polyamorous?). "Manchester United" is listed, so are "going to the beach" and "BREXIT" and "hispanic" and "LGBQT" and "shrimp".
I know what Protestant means and have always attended mainline Protestant churches (though only with intermittent regularity). With that in mind, I have often described myself as a Christian Skeptic. But perhaps I should have chosen Protestant Skeptic as the more accurate descriptor.
I have always had lots of doubts about many of the proclaimed core beliefs of Christianity, but I do recognize its strong potential to support social cohesiveness and aid to the less fortunate and oppressed.
“Pinacostle” 😂
I’m a nerd for charismatic history. I noticed how many responses are Pentecostal or Pentecostal coded, “Holy Ghost filled believer!”
While Pentecostal is obviously Protestant, it is a distinct branch of Protestantism seen as the weird uncle of the Christian family. I can see why many charismatics do not see themselves as Protestant, but “something else.”
From the perspective of someone who's favorite part of grad school was badgering Stata, is to ask whether The Category Was Made for Man or Man Made for the Category.
Or in other words, "do I have categories that I would expect to reflect meaningful differences in the responses *of the survey takers*, or categories that reflect differences between categories, but *probably don't impact the survey responders much*. I would expect say, Quakers, UUs, and Mennonites to look different in survey responses, and in different ways that should have policy implications. While there are very important differences between say, the Amish and Mennonites I wouldn't necessarily expect them to look that different on survey responses, so I'd be okay with having a "Plain people" category to lump them all into. Yes, that's not ideal, and it
I think the real answer we can all agree with, however, is Nationscape should start with "Christian"
and then provide 300 different check boxes and a freetext field to really capture the variety or responses available. That would generate the best data!
Yoga and ayahuasca are not religions.