Araştırma Makalesi

Religiosity Profiles Across 63 Countries and Türkiye’s Boundary Position: World Values Survey Wave 7

Sayı: 32 20 Ekim 2026
PDF İndir
EN TR

Religiosity Profiles Across 63 Countries and Türkiye’s Boundary Position: World Values Survey Wave 7

Öz

This study develops a data-driven country-level typology of religiosity from the World Values Survey (WVS) Wave 7 cross-national dataset (2017–2022, V6.0) and situates Türkiye within it. Comparative psychology of religion has largely represented cross-national religious variation through dimensional models such as the Inglehart–Welzel cultural map; partitional schemes that assign countries to mutually exclusive profile groups remain less developed. The question here is whether the global religious landscape reduces to a small number of coherent country profiles and how those profiles track other social attitudes. The WVS-7 V6.0 dataset contains 97,220 respondents across 66 countries and territories. Fourteen indicators covering belief, practice, salience, religious authority claims, and institutional participation were aggregated to country means, and after listwise exclusion of Egypt, Iraq, and Kyrgyzstan, the K-means analysis used 63 countries and territories. Principal component analysis yielded a dominant religiosity continuum accounting for 76.9% of the variance and a separate institutional component accounting for 8.7% (KMO = .905; Bartlett χ²(91) = 1536.65, p < .001). Clustering recovered three profiles: low religiosity (n = 16), moderate or mixed religiosity (n = 26), and high religiosity (n = 21), with a pooled partition R² of .70 and a Calinski–Harabasz analog of 70.13. Stability diagnostics mark the limits of the partition rather than confirming it. Average silhouette width favors the two-cluster solution (.456 against .352), Jaccard recovery under bootstrap resampling stays below the conventional threshold (.570 at k = 3), and the Hopkins statistic is .614. Country assignments, by contrast, are stable: countries keep their cluster in 95.4% of subsamples on average and 52 of the 63 exceed the .90 mark. The typology is therefore presented as an interpretively productive partition of a dominant continuum, not as a recovery of natural kinds. Sensitivity tests point the same way: removing institutional membership leaves the partition intact (adjusted Rand index = 1.00), while removing three belief items moves twelve countries (ARI = .51). Five of seven external measures differentiate the clusters in the expected directions, and mean Human Development Index values run .883, .809, and .682 from low to high religiosity (η² = .47), correlating with the first component at −.72. Türkiye belongs to the high-religiosity cluster but sits near its edge: fifth from the bottom on the first component, lowest in the cluster on religious organization membership (z = −1.25), highest in the cluster on human development (.842), and among the countries that move to the moderate cluster when the belief items are dropped. In the Türkiye subsample, belief in God is flat across cohorts (94.7% to 95.7%) while religious self-identification falls from 76.6% among respondents aged 45 and over to 66.8% among those aged 18 to 29. Attendance at religious services further separates men and women by 47.6 points, whereas the other thirteen indicators differ by less than one point, indicating that the item reflects the structure of congregational obligation rather than the intensity of devotion.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kaynakça

  1. Abu-Raiya, Hisham et al. “Religiousness-Happiness Links in Türkiye and Jordan: The Role of Gratitude and Envy”. BMC Psychology 14 (2026), 989. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-026-04895-7
  2. Adamczyk, Amy. Cross-National Public Opinion about Homosexuality: Examining Attitudes across the Globe. Oakland: University of California Press, 2017. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/j.ctt1jd947w
  3. Allison, Leigh et al. “Religiosity, Neutrality, Fairness, Skepticism, and Societal Tranquility: A Data Science Analysis of the World Values Survey”. PLOS ONE 16/1 (2021), e0245231. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245231
  4. Allport, Gordon W. - Ross, J. Michael. “Personal Religious Orientation and Prejudice”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 5/4 (1967), 432-443. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.5.4.432
  5. Benk, Serkan et al. “Confidence in Government and Attitudes toward Bribery: A Country-Cluster Analysis of Demographic and Religiosity Perspectives”. Religions 8/1 (2017), 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel8010008
  6. Berger, Peter L. (ed.). The Desecularization of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999.
  7. Berger, Peter L. The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967.
  8. Berggren, Niclas - Bjørnskov, Christian. “Is the Importance of Religion in Daily Life Related to Social Trust? Cross-Country and Cross-State Comparisons”. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 80/3 (2011), 459-480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2011.05.002

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

İngilizce

Konular

Dini Araştırmalar (Diğer)

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yayımlanma Tarihi

20 Ekim 2026

Gönderilme Tarihi

16 Mayıs 2026

Kabul Tarihi

17 Ağustos 2026

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2026 Sayı: 32

Kaynak Göster

APA
Çinici, M. (2026). Religiosity Profiles Across 63 Countries and Türkiye’s Boundary Position: World Values Survey Wave 7. Rize İlahiyat Dergisi, 32, 35-55. https://doi.org/10.32950/rid.1953067
AMA
1.Çinici M. Religiosity Profiles Across 63 Countries and Türkiye’s Boundary Position: World Values Survey Wave 7. Rize İlahiyat Dergisi. 2026;(32):35-55. doi:10.32950/rid.1953067
Chicago
Çinici, Murat. 2026. “Religiosity Profiles Across 63 Countries and Türkiye’s Boundary Position: World Values Survey Wave 7”. Rize İlahiyat Dergisi, sy 32: 35-55. https://doi.org/10.32950/rid.1953067.
EndNote
Çinici M (01 Ekim 2026) Religiosity Profiles Across 63 Countries and Türkiye’s Boundary Position: World Values Survey Wave 7. Rize İlahiyat Dergisi 32 35–55.
IEEE
[1]M. Çinici, “Religiosity Profiles Across 63 Countries and Türkiye’s Boundary Position: World Values Survey Wave 7”, Rize İlahiyat Dergisi, sy 32, ss. 35–55, Eki. 2026, doi: 10.32950/rid.1953067.
ISNAD
Çinici, Murat. “Religiosity Profiles Across 63 Countries and Türkiye’s Boundary Position: World Values Survey Wave 7”. Rize İlahiyat Dergisi. 32 (01 Ekim 2026): 35-55. https://doi.org/10.32950/rid.1953067.
JAMA
1.Çinici M. Religiosity Profiles Across 63 Countries and Türkiye’s Boundary Position: World Values Survey Wave 7. Rize İlahiyat Dergisi. 2026;:35–55.
MLA
Çinici, Murat. “Religiosity Profiles Across 63 Countries and Türkiye’s Boundary Position: World Values Survey Wave 7”. Rize İlahiyat Dergisi, sy 32, Ekim 2026, ss. 35-55, doi:10.32950/rid.1953067.
Vancouver
1.Murat Çinici. Religiosity Profiles Across 63 Countries and Türkiye’s Boundary Position: World Values Survey Wave 7. Rize İlahiyat Dergisi. 01 Ekim 2026;(32):35-5. doi:10.32950/rid.1953067