156 Darren Sherkat
life course influences children’s participation (Acock 1984; Acock and Bengtson 1980;
Willits and Crider 1989). Some, like Myers (1996), mix indicators of religious beliefs and
participation to construct measures of religiosity. While this strategy yields common
conclusions, it does not allow for an assessment of the relationship between religious
understandings or preferences and religious participation.
Studies also have shown how solidarity among parents and feelings of closeness be-
tween parents and children influence the socialization process. First, researchers have
demonstrated that when parents have divergent religious affiliations, children are less
likely to develop religious affiliations common to their parents, and are more likely to
switch their religious affiliations or become apostates (Sandomirsky and Wilson 1990;
Sherkat 1991b). Second, the presence of parental discord in the family has been shown
to lower religiosity, particularly for male children (Nelsen 1981). Youths who report
feeling close to their parents are less likely to defect from their parents’ religious affilia-
tion (Sherkat and Wilson 1995). Each of these findings suggests the operation of social
influences on choices. When parents have different religious values or affiliations, then
they place competing pressures on children’s (and each other’s) religious attachments.
Feelings of closeness will also motivate participation out of sympathy for the feelings
of parents. Emotional attachment also may be linked to preference development, since
strong emotive ties may lead to preferences for interactions and understandings (Collins
1993). Future studies will certainly need to further develop connections between affec-
tive ties and both preference development and religious choices.
Following the lead of studies in developmental aging (e.g., Bengtson 1975; Bengtson
and Black 1973; Bengtson and Kuypers 1971; Bengtson and Troll, 1978; Hagestad 1982;
Rossi and Rossi 1990), a few scholars have pondered how socialization influences be-
tween parents and children may be reciprocal (Thomas and Cornwall 1990). Glass et al.
(1986) drew on exchange theory to explain how dependencies and developmental stake
may lead children to influence their parents’ values, particularly later in the life course,
when parents may be more dependent on children for critical cues and information.
Glass et al. (1986) find reciprocal influences between parents and children across the
life course, and I have shown reciprocal influences between parents and children in
religious beliefs and religious participation (Sherkat 1991a). Using longitudinal data
from the Youth Parent Socialization Panel Study, which interviewed parents and chil-
dren at three points over eighteen years of the life course, I found that parent-child
reciprocal influences are relatively constant over the life course for religious choices –
measured in terms of religious participation. Importantly, the magnitude of the recip-
rocal influences between parents and children exceeds the degree of influence of other
factors such as educational attainment, family of procreation dynamics (e.g., marriage,
divorce, and childrearing), and denominational influences. Looking at religious beliefs,
operationalized by beliefs in biblical orthodoxy, I found a clear developmental trajec-
tory of parent-child, child-parent influence. Parents have more influence on children’s
beliefs early in the life course (before adulthood), while children then influence their
parents as young adults. However, as the offspring reach their thirties, parents once
again become more influential.
My findings are based entirely on a U.S. sample at a particular period (1965–82),
which may have given more credibility to young adults as sources of valid information
regarding the interpretation of the Bible as the word of God – which was the indicator
of religious beliefs. What clearly happened in my case is that young adult baby boomers