This is one of an occasional series of posts on black Americans and religion.
In recent years, a number of Pew Research Center surveys have shown that Millennials in the United States – young adults born between 1981 and 1996 – are generally less religious than older Americans, based on our core measures of religious commitment. This holds true for black people, in that black Millennials tend to be less religious than older blacks. That said, black Millennials are considerably more religious than others in their generation, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis.
About six-in-ten black Millennials (61%) say they pray at least daily, a significantly higher share than the 39% of nonblack Millennials saying this. And while 38% of black Millennials say they attend religious services at least weekly, just a quarter (25%) of other Millennials do this, according to the analysis based on data from the Center’s 2014 Religious Landscape Study.
In fact, nearly two-thirds (64%) of black Millennials are highly religious on a four-item scale of religious commitment – which includes belief in God and self-described importance of religion, in addition to prayer and worship attendance – compared with 39% of nonblack Millennials.
At the same time, black Millennials are substantially less religious than older black adults by these measures. They are less likely than older black adults to say they pray at least daily, that they attend religious services at least weekly, and that religion is very important to them.
These patterns generally hold on several – but not all – of the other religious beliefs and practices measured by the survey. For example, the 61% of black Millennials who say they feel a deep sense of spiritual peace and well-being at least weekly is significantly lower than the 72% of older black people who say this, but higher than the 50% of nonblack Millennials. Black Millennials also are more likely to regularly read scripture outside of religious services than are others in their generation, and less likely than older black people to do so.
In other instances, the patterns are more mixed. While black Millennials are more likely to believe in heaven than are nonblack Millennials, they are no less likely than older blacks to hold this belief. And respondents in all of these groups are about equally likely to say they feel a deep sense of wonder about the universe.
Read the other posts in this series:
Americans’ views of the new tariffs between the United States and some of its trading partners tilt more negative than positive, a new Pew Research Center survey finds.
Overall, nearly half (49%) of U.S. adults say increased tariffs between the U.S. and its trading partners will be bad for the country. A smaller share (40%) say the tariffs will be good for the U.S., while 11% say they don’t know how the tariffs will affect the country.
The debate over trade has registered widely with the public: 82% say they have heard either a lot (48%) or a little (34%) about the Trump administration’s decision to increase tariffs on goods from a number of countries – including China and Canada – and the tariffs those countries have placed on U.S. goods in response.
The survey, conducted July 11-15 among 1,007 adults, finds that attitudes toward the tariffs are deeply polarized. About seven-in-ten (73%) Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say increased tariffs between the U.S. and its trading partners will be a good thing for the country. Roughly the same share of Democrats and Democratic leaners (77%) say the increased tariffs will be a bad thing for the U.S.
Nationalist populism has become a major force in European politics. But while such populism has long been thought to have its roots in economic anxiety, a new analysis of Pew Research Center survey data suggests there are additional factors at play.
Those who have a favorable opinion of populist parties in Germany and Sweden, for example, are only slightly less likely than those with unfavorable views to be upbeat about the economy. Roughly three-quarters (77%) of those who have a favorable opinion of the populist Alternative for Germany party (AfD) say their country’s economic situation is good; that compares with 87% among other Germans. Similarly, three-quarters of those with a positive view of the populist Sweden Democrats party say their country’s economic situation is good, compared with 91% among other Swedes.
In other countries, populist party backers stand out less on the economy. In Italy, for instance, only 15% of the populist Northern League’s supporters give the Italian economy a thumbs-up, roughly on par with the 18% of others in the Italian public who also hold a downbeat view.
Nostalgia may be a better predictor of populist sentiments. Roughly six-in-ten French adults with a positive view of the populist National Front (62%) say life in France is worse today for people like them than it was 50 years ago. Only about four-in-ten (41%) of the rest of the French population share that perspective. In Germany, 44% of AfD supporters say life today is worse than 50 years ago; that compares with just 16% of other Germans. Those with populist sympathies in Sweden and the Netherlands similarly lament the passing of better times in the past.
The European Union’s unemployment rate has dropped to its lowest point in almost a decade, though joblessness still varies widely among the 28 countries that make up the bloc, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from Eurostat, Europe’s statistical agency.
The EU unemployment rate was 7.1% in the first quarter of 2018, the most recent quarter for which data for all countries are available. That was nearly on par with the 6.8% rate recorded in the first quarter of 2008, before the European financial crisis began. Europe’s unemployment rate reached a recent high of 11% in the first and second quarters of 2013. The steady decline since then reflects steady economic improvement in many EU countries.
Europe’s overall unemployment rate fluctuated during the EU financial crisis, which spanned two recessions. Unemployment steadily increased as economic output fell during the first recession, which lasted from the second quarter of 2008 to the second quarter of 2009. Unemployment then continued to increase while output stayed flat through the second recession, which lasted from the fourth quarter of 2011 to the first quarter of 2013. Although output grew in the roughly two years between the recessions, unemployment still trended up during this period.
After the 2016 presidential election, Facebook users began using the “angry” button much more often when reacting to posts created by members of Congress.
Between Feb. 24, 2016 – when Facebook first gave its users the option of clicking on the “angry” reaction, as well as the emotional reactions “love,” “sad,” “haha” and “wow” – and Election Day, the congressional Facebook audience used the “angry” button in response to lawmakers’ posts a total of 3.6 million times. But during the same amount of time following the election, that number increased more than threefold, to nearly 14 million. The trend toward using the “angry” reaction continued during the last three months of 2017.
Use of the “love” reaction also increased after Election Day, but at a slower rate. Users reacted to congressional posts with the “love” button 7 million times in the period before the election, a figure that rose to about 12 million in the period afterward. While “love” was the most popular new reaction before the election, “angry” became the most popular afterward.
To arrive at these figures, Pew Research Center analyzed all Facebook posts created by members of Congress on or after Feb. 24, 2016, and extending through July 24, 2017 – a total of 360,173 individual posts.
Four decades after the birth of Louise Brown, the first “test-tube baby” conceived via in vitro fertilization (IVF), 33% of American adults report that they or someone they know has used some type of fertility treatment in order to try to have a baby, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.
The share of people who say they have undergone a fertility treatment or know someone who has varies markedly by education and income. About four-in-ten (43%) of those with a bachelor’s degree have had some exposure to fertility treatment – either through their own experience or that of someone they know – and the share rises to 56% among those with a postgraduate degree. About half (48%) of people with family incomes of $75,000 or more also have been exposed to fertility treatment. (The survey did not specify what type of treatment.)
Whites are more likely than blacks or Hispanics to report that they have undergone a fertility treatment or know someone who has (37% vs. 22% and 26%, respectively), and women are more likely than men to say the same (36% vs. 30%).
Looking only at women nearing the end of their childbearing years, 9% report that they have ever personally undergone a fertility treatment or had a spouse or partner do so, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of National Center for Health Statistics data. (An additional 5% of these women report that they or their partner sought medical advice or testing regarding fertility, but did not undergo any additional treatments.)
Mobile devices have become one of the most common ways Americans get news, outpacing desktop or laptop computers. Roughly six-in-ten U.S. adults (58%) often get news on a mobile device, 19 percentage points higher than the 39% who often get news on a desktop or laptop computer, according to a Pew Research Center survey.
The share of Americans who often get news on a mobile device is nearly triple the 21% who did so in 2013. At the same time, the portion of Americans who often get news on a desktop has remained relatively stable, with 39% of adults often getting news on a desktop or laptop computer, up just 4 percentage points from 2013.
The portion of adults who ever get news on a computer – as opposed to often get news – is about the same as those who ever do so on a mobile device – 88% of Americans ever get news on a mobile device and 84% ever get news on a computer. Overall, 96% of U.S. adults get news online – i.e., ever get news on either a mobile device or computer.
Donald Trump has successfully appointed more federal appeals court judges so far in his presidency than Barack Obama and George W. Bush combined had appointed at the same point in theirs, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the Federal Judicial Center. And with his nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, Trump soon could install his second justice on the nation’s highest court, too.
But while Trump has already left a considerable imprint on the nation’s higher federal courts, he trails Obama, Bush and other recent presidents in the number of lower-court judges he has appointed to date.
As of July 12, Trump has successfully appointed 43 judges, including one Supreme Court justice (Neil Gorsuch), 22 appeals court judges and 20 district judges. Dozens of other court nominees are awaiting votes in the Senate, including two more appeals court judges who could be confirmed this week.
While a few of Trump’s predecessors going back to Jimmy Carter had also appointed a Supreme Court justice by July 12 of their second year in office, none had appointed close to as many appeals court members – the powerful judges who sit just below the Supreme Court level. (Kavanaugh is currently a federal appeals court judge, just as eight of the nine current Supreme Court members were before they became justices.)
Obama and Bush had each appointed nine appeals court judges at this point in their presidencies, while Bill Clinton had appointed 11. George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan came closest to matching Trump’s total with 15 and 14 confirmed appeals court judges, respectively. Carter had appointed 10.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin will meet next week in Finland for their first bilateral summit (though they have met in less formal settings on other occasions). Issues on the table could include the NATO military alliance, U.S. sanctions against Russia, the conflict in Syria and the status of Ukraine. Ahead of the summit, here are key findings about Trump and Putin – and the countries they lead – from Pew Research Center surveys.
1Most Americans (68%) express an unfavorable opinion of Putin, but Russians have a relatively positive view of Trump. Just 16% of Americans saw Putin favorably, according to a survey conducted in early 2018, before Putin’s re-election. A quarter of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents (25%) said they had a favorable view of Putin, compared with just 9% of Democrats and Democratic leaners. These views have changed little since last year.
For their part, Russian views of both the United States and its president improved dramatically last year compared with the end of the Obama administration, according to a spring 2017 survey. Trump received a higher confidence rating (53%) in Russia than either of his two predecessors ever did. And U.S. favorability more than doubled among Russians between the end of the Obama era (15%) and last year (41%).
Topics: Non-U.S. Political Leaders, Bilateral Relations, Global Balance of Power, International Threats and Allies, Foreign Affairs and Policy, International Governments and Institutions, Donald Trump
Income inequality – the gap in incomes between the rich and poor – has increased steadily in the United States since the 1970s. By one measure, the gap between Americans at the top and the bottom of the income ladder increased 27% from 1970 to 2016. However, the rise in inequality within America’s racial and ethnic communities varies strikingly from one group to another, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of government data.
In this analysis, which draws on data from the American Community Survey and U.S. decennial censuses, income inequality is measured using the 90/10 ratio – the income of those at the high end (90th percentile) of the income distribution relative to the income of those at the low end (10th percentile). “Income” refers to the resources available to a person based on the income of their household, whether the person had personal earnings or not. Thus, people’s incomes are represented by their household’s income adjusted for household size. (See the report methodology for details.)
Here are five key findings from the report:
1Income inequality in the U.S. is now greatest among Asians. In 2016, the latest year for which data are available, Asians near the top of their income distribution (the 90th percentile) had incomes 10.7 times greater than the incomes of Asians near the bottom of their income distribution (the 10th percentile). The 90/10 ratio among Asians was notably greater than among blacks (9.8), whites (7.8) and Hispanics (7.8).
2Income inequality among Asians in the U.S. nearly doubled from 1970 to 2016. The top-to-bottom income ratio among Asians increased 77% from 1970 to 2016, a far greater increase than among whites (24%), Hispanics (15%) or blacks (7%). As a result, Asians displaced blacks as the most economically divided racial or ethnic group in the U.S. In 1970, income inequality among Asians was roughly on par with whites and Hispanics and significantly less pronounced than it was among blacks. The Asian experience with inequality reflects the fact that the incomes of Asians near the top increased about nine times faster than the incomes of Asians near the bottom from 1970 to 2016, 96% compared with 11%. These were the greatest and the smallest increases in incomes at the two rungs of the ladder among the racial and ethnic groups analyzed. Read More →