Pew Research Center

We asked people in 35 countries about the influence of specific religious texts on their national laws. The texts in question varied by country: For example, adults in predominantly Christian countries were asked about the influence of the Bible. And in Muslim-majority countries, they were asked about the influence of the Quran. In most middle-income countries: Majorities say the historically predominant religion’s text should have either a great deal or a fair amount of influence on the laws of their country. People are more likely to say religious texts should take precedence over the will of the people if the two conflict. Many say religious texts already have a great deal or a fair amount of influence on their country’s laws today. On the other hand, in most high-income countries: Majorities say religious texts should not shape their national laws. People are about as likely, or slightly more likely, to say that the will of the people should win out over religious texts if the two conflict. Most people say religious texts currently have little or no influence on their country’s laws. The U.S. stands out from other high-income countries both for its high percentage of people who think the Bible currently influences the country’s laws and for its high percentage who think the Bible should have that kind of influence. We asked people in 35 countries about the influence of specific religious texts on their national laws. (Tunisia was included in the 36-country survey, but the questions about the Quran were not asked there.) In each country, we selected the sacred text(s) of the historically predominant religion(s). For example, in the United States, where Christians have long made up a majority, we asked about the influence of the Bible. And, because the concept of “religious texts” is somewhat more relevant in Western religious traditions, in Buddhist-majority nations like Thailand, we asked about a comparable concept: the influence of Buddhist dharma. In Japan, Nigeria and South Korea, we asked all respondents separately about the influence of two religious texts. In Japan, we asked about Buddhist dharma and Shinto teachings. A significant portion of the population there identifies as Buddhist, yet Shinto has long been tied to national identity, and a quarter of Japanese adults say they feel a personal connection to the Shinto way of life. In Nigeria, where large shares of the population identify as either Christian or Muslim, we asked about the influence of the Bible and the Quran. In South Korea, where sizable shares identify as either Christian or Buddhist, we asked about the Bible and Buddhist dharma. Here is a list of the religious texts asked in each country: Religious text Country Bible United States, Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, UK, Australia, Philippines, South Korea, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru Quran Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Turkey, Tunisia Buddhist dharma Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Thailand Hindu teachings India Jewish scripture Israel Shinto teachings Japan How much influence should religious texts have on laws? A majority of adults in most middle-income countries surveyed believe the religious texts they were asked about should influence the laws of their country. This generally holds true despite people in different countries being asked about different texts – such as the Bible, the Quran, Buddhist dharma and Hindu teachings. In Bangladesh, Brazil, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Malaysia, the Philippines and Peru, half of adults or more say the texts they were asked about should have a great deal of influence on the laws of their country. In contrast, people in high-income countries are more likely to say religious texts should have little or no impact on their national laws. In Australia, Canada, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the UK, half or more say the Bible should have no influence at all on their laws. In the United States, around a quarter say the Bible should have a great deal of influence on the country’s laws. The U.S. also stands apart from the other high-income countries surveyed for having the highest share of adults (49%) who say a religious text should influence national laws at least a fair amount. Turkey also stands out: Of all the countries in which we asked about the Quran, Turkey has the highest share of adults saying the Islamic holy book should have no influence at all on the law (31%). Views by religion In most countries, followers of the historically predominant religion are more likely than people of other religions to say their religious text should influence the nation’s laws. For instance, 57% of Hindus in India say Hindu teachings should have great influence on India’s laws, while 26% of Indian Muslims take that position. In Israel, 19% of Jews and 5% of Muslims believe Jewish scripture should have a great deal of influence on Israeli laws. And 52% of Haredi (“ultra-Orthodox”) and Dati (“religious”) Jews say Jewish scripture should greatly influence national law, compared with just 10% of Masorti (“traditional”) Jews and 2% of Hiloni (“secular”) Jews who say this. Because Nigeria has significant shares of both Christians and Muslims, we asked about the influence of both the Bible and the Quran. Nigerian Christians are slightly more likely than Nigerian Muslims to say the Bible should have a great deal of influence on the law (44% vs. 36%), while Muslims are significantly more likely than Christians to say the Quran should have a great deal of influence (59% vs. 17%). In nearly every country with enough Christians and religiously unaffiliated adults for analysis, Christians are more likely than the unaffiliated (those who identify as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular”) to say the Bible should have a great deal of influence on the law. For example, in Brazil, 58% of Christians say this about the Bible’s influence, compared with 34% of the religiously unaffiliated. Notably, the religiously unaffiliated in most middle-income countries are more likely than the religiously affiliated in

When asked about their national leader’s connection to religion, people are generally more likely to say it is very important to have a leader of their country who stands up for people with their religious beliefs than to have a leader whose religious beliefs are the same as their own, or to have a leader who has strong religious beliefs even if they are not the same as their own. In Kenya, for instance, 62% of adults say it is very important to have a president who stands up for people with their religious beliefs. Meanwhile, 55% of Kenyans say it is very important for their president to share their religious beliefs. And 54% of Kenyans say it is very important to have a president who has strong religious beliefs, even if those beliefs differ from their own. People in middle-income countries tend to be more likely than people in high-income countries to say each of these things is very important in a national leader. Views of these qualities are tied to how people otherwise engage with religion: Those who are affiliated with a religion (such as Christianity) are consistently more likely than the religiously unaffiliated to say each trait is very important for their country’s leader to have. People who pray daily are more likely than people who pray less often to view these traits as very important. Adults who think religion helps society are more likely than those who think religion hurts society to say these religion-related traits are very important in a national leader. How important is it to have leaders who stand up for people’s religious beliefs? A median of 30% across the 35 countries where we asked this question think having a leader who stands up for people with their religious beliefs is very important. People in middle-income countries are considerably more likely to say this than people in high-income countries. For example, in Bangladesh and Indonesia, around seven-in-ten adults say it’s very important to have a prime minister or president, respectively, who stands up for people who share their beliefs. Large shares in several other South and Southeast Asian countries also say this is very important, as do about half of adults or more in the African nations surveyed. In many high-income countries, though, fewer tend to say it’s very important to have a leader who stands up for people with their religious beliefs. Only 11% of adults in France and 5% in Japan say this trait is very important in their president or prime minister, respectively. And 51% of Spanish adults say it is not at all important to have a prime minster who stands up for people with their religious beliefs. Chile, Israel and the U.S. stand out among the high-income countries surveyed. In all three, about three-in-ten adults say it is very important that their national leader stands up for people with their religious beliefs. Views by education Across many of the surveyed countries, people who have lower levels of education are more likely than those with higher levels of education to say it is very important to have a leader who stands up for people with their religious beliefs. (This difference persists even after statistically controlling for religiousness.) In Turkey, for example, 61% of adults with lower levels of education say it is very important to have a president who stands up for people with their religious beliefs. This share falls to 37% among Turkish adults who have higher levels of education. How important is it to have leaders who share people’s religious beliefs? We also asked people whether it’s important that their national leader have the same religious beliefs as they do. A 35-country median of 22% say this is very important. Adults in the 17 middle-income countries (48% median) are generally more likely than adults in the 18 high-income countries (10% median) to say having a leader who shares their religious beliefs is very important. Majorities in six middle-income countries say this, including about three-quarters of adults in Bangladesh and Indonesia. Meanwhile, in every high-income country surveyed, about a quarter of the public or less take this position. For instance, 12% of U.S. adults say it is very important to have a president who shares their religious beliefs. And in eight high-income countries, half or more say it is not at all important that their leader have the same religious beliefs they do. In Sweden, the share holding this view reaches 68%. Europeans who support right-wing populist parties are more likely than nonsupporters to say a leader having the same religious beliefs as them is very important. (For more on populist parties, refer to the Appendix.) In Germany, 17% of those who express a favorable opinion of Alternative for Germany (AfD) say this is a very important trait for their chancellor to have, while only 6% of Germans with an unfavorable view of AfD agree. As with other attitudes discussed in this chapter, adults with less education are more likely than those with higher levels of education to say it is very important that their leader have the same beliefs as they do. Views by religion Adults who are affiliated with a religion are consistently more likely than the religiously unaffiliated (those who identify as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular”) to say it is very important to have a national leader who shares their same religious beliefs. This dynamic is readily apparent in countries that have sizable populations of both Christians and religiously unaffiliated people. In Chile, for example, Christians are about three times as likely as the unaffiliated to say having a president with the same beliefs as them is very important (26% vs. 8%). In a few middle-income countries, though, religiously unaffiliated adults are more likely than the religiously affiliated in high-income countries to say this is a very important trait for their national leader to have. For instance, 33% of unaffiliated adults in middle-income South Africa say it is very important to have

Across the 36 countries surveyed, people’s views on the importance of religion to national identity vary widely. Large shares in middle-income countries say being a member of the historically predominant religion in their country is very important to truly sharing the national identity – for example, to being truly Filipino or truly Nigerian. In high-income countries, though, many instead say religion is not at all important to national identity. We asked people in 36 countries whether it’s important to be a member of a particular religion in order to “truly” share the national identity. In each country, we selected the country’s historically predominant religion(s). For example, in the United States, where Christianity has long been the majority religion, we asked about the importance of being a Christian to being truly American. And in Thailand, where the vast majority of the population is Buddhist, we asked about the importance of being a Buddhist to being truly Thai. In Japan, Nigeria and South Korea, we asked all respondents separately about two religions. In Japan, we asked about both Buddhism and Shinto. A significant portion of the population there identifies as Buddhist, yet Shinto has long been tied to national identity, and a quarter of Japanese adults say they feel a personal connection to the Shinto way of life. In Nigeria, large shares of the population identify as either Christian or Muslim, so we asked about both religions separately. In South Korea, because sizable shares identify as either Christian or Buddhist, we asked about both religions. Here is a list of the religions asked in each country: Religion Country Christianity United States, Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, UK, Australia, Philippines, South Korea, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru Islam Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Turkey, Tunisia Buddhism Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Thailand Hinduism India Judaism Israel Shinto Japan The importance of religion to a sense of national belonging varies within countries as well. People who identify with the historically predominant religion in their country are more likely than those who don’t to say that being a member of that religion is very important to national identity. People who pray daily are more likely than those who pray less frequently to say that belonging to the predominant religion is very important to sharing the national identity. Older adults are more likely than younger people to view religion as a central part of national identity. People on the ideological right tend to be more likely than those on the left to say being a follower of their country’s historically predominant religion is very important to being truly part of the nation. How important is religion to national belonging? The importance of religion to national identity varies widely across the 36 countries surveyed. As many as 86% in Tunisia say being a Muslim is very important to Tunisian identity, while as few as 3% of Swedes say the same about being a Christian in Sweden. Views vary somewhat when comparing high- and middle-income countries. Sizable majorities in many middle-income countries – including around three-quarters or more in Indonesia, the Philippines and Tunisia – consider being part of their country’s historically predominant religion very important for truly sharing the national identity. And in every middle-income country surveyed, roughly a quarter or more say this. In high-income countries, much smaller shares emphasize religion as an aspect of national identity. Israel stands out as the only high-income country where at least a third say following the predominant religion – Judaism, in this case – is a very important element of national identity. In other high-income countries, fewer than a quarter strongly agree. And in many high-income countries, roughly half or more say that being a member of the historically predominant religion is not at all important to being a true member of the nation. Of the countries where we asked about the importance of Christianity to national identity, the Philippines stands out: Nearly three-quarters say being a Christian is very important for being truly Filipino. Around two-thirds of Kenyans say the same for being truly Kenyan. In contrast, sizable majorities in Spain (71%) and Sweden (69%) say that being a Christian is not at all important for national belonging. Views are also mixed across countries where we asked about the importance Buddhism. In Thailand (61%) and Sri Lanka (56%), majorities say being a Buddhist is very important for being truly Thai and Sri Lankan. But in South Korea, only 4% take a similar position, and roughly half say that being a Buddhist is not at all important to being truly South Korean. (In South Korea, we also asked about Christianity; 14% of adults say that being a Christian is very important to being truly South Korean.) And in countries where we asked about the importance of Islam, roughly half or more say being a Muslim is a very important piece of national identity. Among Indonesian adults, eight-in-ten say being a Muslim is very important to being truly Indonesian. In India, where we asked about the importance Hinduism, 64% say being a Hindu is very important to being truly Indian. Countries with multiple historically predominant religions In Japan, Nigeria and South Korea, we asked about more than one historically predominant religion: Buddhism and Shinto in Japan, Christianity and Islam in Nigeria, and Christianity and Buddhism in South Korea. In all three countries, there are relatively small differences in the shares who say being a member of either religion is very important to national identity. In Japan and South Korea, the shares emphasizing the importance of religion are relatively small, regardless of the religion in question. For example, in Japan, 6% say that being a Buddhist is very important to being truly Japanese, while 5% say the same of being a Shinto. In Nigeria, though, substantial shares say that being a Christian (49%) is very important to being truly Nigerian and 48% say being a Muslim is very important

People around the world see various factors as contributing to economic inequality in their country: Majorities in almost every country surveyed believe all six factors we asked about lead  to economic inequality at least a fair amount. However, there are differences over whether each contributes a great deal. In 31 of 36 countries, more say that rich people having too much political influence leads to economic inequality than say this about any other factor. A median of 48% of adults say problems with their country’s education system contribute a great deal to economic inequality. Around four-in-ten say some people being born with more opportunities than others (40%) and some people working harder than others (39%) are factors that contribute a great deal. Fewer point to the impact of robots and computers doing the work previously done by humans (31%) or to discrimination against racial or ethnic minorities (29%). Rich people’s political influence A median of 60% across 36 countries say that rich people having too much political influence leads to economic inequality a great deal in their country. Majorities hold this opinion in 31 nations and in at least one country every region surveyed. The view that the political influence of the wealthy contributes to economic inequality, while common across most survey countries, is particularly widespread in Latin America. About seven-in-ten or more say this factor contributes a great deal in five of the six Latin American countries polled. Similarly large shares hold this view in Ghana, Greece, Nigeria, the Philippines and Tunisia. By comparison, only about a third of adults or fewer in Poland, Singapore, South Korea and Sweden say rich people’s political influence contributes a great deal to economic inequality in their country. Views by ideology In 10 countries, people who place themselves on the ideological left are more likely than those on the right to believe that rich people’s political influence is a major contributor to economic inequality. The ideological divide is particularly stark in Australia, where 75% of people on the left say this factor leads to economic inequality, compared with a third of those on the right. And in the U.S., 80% of liberals hold this view, compared with 48% of conservatives. Problems with the education system A median of 48% of adults across the countries surveyed think problems with their nation’s education system lead to economic inequality a great deal. Another 33% say this factor contributes a fair amount. About half or more of the public in the U.S. and several European countries (France, Germany, Greece, Italy and the UK) see this as a major contributor to economic inequality. Fewer Swedish and Polish adults say the same. Of the Asia-Pacific nations polled, concerns about the education system are strongest in Sri Lanka – one of just two countries where this is seen as the top contributing factor of the six we asked about. Across the rest of the Asia-Pacific survey countries, concerns about education are less common. In the Middle East-North Africa region, a majority of Tunisians and about half of Turks see problems with education as a major contributor to inequality. Turkey is the other survey country in which education is seen as the top factor. Across the sub-Saharan African countries polled, about half or more in Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria say education problems contribute a great deal, compared with fewer than half in South Africa. And as with other possible causes of inequality included in the survey, concerns about education are especially strong in Latin America. The share of adults who say these problems contribute a great deal to economic inequality ranges from 70% in Chile to 51% in Mexico. Views by education In 12 nations – most of which fall in the middle-income category – adults with more education are more likely than those with less education to say that problems with the education system contribute a great deal to economic inequality. For example, about two-thirds of Peruvians with more education (64%) express this view, compared with 47% of Peruvians with less education. There are sizable gaps by education in three other Latin American countries surveyed: Brazil, Colombia and Mexico (though Brazilian adults with less education are also less likely to provide a response). Views by ideology In nine countries, adults on the ideological left are more likely than those on the right to say education problems contribute a great deal to inequality in their country. Some people working harder than others A median of 40% across 36 countries believe that some people working harder than others leads to economic inequality a great deal. A median of 33% say this contributes a fair amount. In the U.S. and Canada, only a third say differences in work ethic contribute a great deal. Opinions vary significantly in Europe. A 56% majority of Italians say this is a major contributor to economic inequality, but just 15% of Swedes share this opinion. In the Asia-Pacific region, about half of adults in India and Sri Lanka see a strong connection between inequality and some people working harder than others. Across the other survey countries in the region, the share of adults who hold this view ranges from 44% in Bangladesh to 23% in Australia. In the Middle East-North Africa region, Tunisians are the most likely to say work ethic is strongly connected economic inequality: 58% hold this opinion, compared with 37% of Turks and 34% of Israelis. Ghanaians stand out among the sub-Saharan Africans surveyed. A 59% majority of adults in Ghana say some people working harder than others contributes a great deal to inequality, while fewer in Kenya, Nigeria and South Africa agree. Views by education In 12 countries, people with less education are especially likely to say that some people working harder than others contributes a great deal to economic inequality. This pattern is particularly stark in Italy, where 59% of those with less education believe this, compared with 42% of Italians with more education. Views by social class In 11 countries, people

Roughly equal shares of U.S. men and women say they’re often lonely; women are more likely to reach out to a wider network for emotional support (Maskot/Getty Images) Pew Research Center conducted this study to understand Americans’ social connections and where they turn for emotional support at a time when these topics, and the gender dynamics surrounding them, are at the forefront of national conversations. For this analysis, we surveyed 6,204 adults from Sept. 3 to 15, 2024. Most of the respondents who took part in this survey are members of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), a group of people recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses who have agreed to take surveys regularly. The survey also included an oversample of Black and Hispanic adults from the SSRS Opinion Panel, another probability-based online survey web panel recruited primarily through national, random sampling of residential addresses. Surveys were conducted either online or by telephone with a live interviewer. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other factors. Read more about the ATP’s methodology. Here are the questions used for this report, the topline and the survey methodology. References to White, Black and Asian adults include those who are not Hispanic and identify as only one race. Hispanics are of any race. All references to party affiliation include those who lean toward that party. Republicans include those who identify as Republicans and those who say they lean toward the Republican Party. Democrats include those who identify as Democrats and those who say they lean toward the Democratic Party. References to college graduates or people with a college degree comprise those with a bachelor’s degree or more education. “Some college” includes those with an associate degree and those who attended college but did not obtain a degree. “High school” refers to those who have a high school diploma or its equivalent, such as a General Educational Development (GED) certificate. “Middle income” is defined here as two-thirds to double the median annual family income for panelists on the American Trends Panel. “Lower income” falls below that range; “upper income” falls above it. As public debate and discussion over the status of men in America continues, some have raised concerns about men’s struggles with loneliness. A new Pew Research Center survey finds that, compared with women, men don’t report that they feel lonely more often or have fewer close friends. However, men do seem to turn to their networks less often for social connection and emotional support. About one-in-six Americans (16%) say they feel lonely or isolated from those around them all or most of the time – including roughly equal shares of men and women. About four-in-ten adults (38%) say they sometimes feel lonely, and 47% say they hardly ever or never do. While experiences with loneliness don’t differ much by gender, they do differ significantly by age. Adults younger than 50 are much more likely than those ages 50 and older to say they often feel lonely (22% vs. 9%). Across age groups, adults 65 and older are the most likely to say they hardly ever or never feel this way (66%). We also asked Americans where they would turn for emotional support if they needed it. Women are more likely than men to say they’d be extremely or very likely to turn to each of the following sources for this type of support: Their mother (54% of women vs. 42% of men) A friend (54% vs. 38%) Another family member who is not their parent, spouse or partner (44% vs. 26%) A mental health professional (22% vs. 16%) Men and women are about equally likely to say they have at least one close friend – and most do. But men who have close friends don’t communicate with them as often as women do. Higher shares of women than men say they send text messages, interact on social media, and talk on the phone or video chat with a close friend at least a few times a week. Related: How Americans See Men and Masculinity This nationally representative survey of 6,204 U.S. adults was conducted Sept. 3-15, 2024, using the Center’s American Trends Panel. Other important findings Emotional well-being is linked with education, income and marital status. Adults with some college or less education, those with lower incomes and those who are not married are among the most likely to say they feel lonely all or most of the time. These groups are also among the least likely to say they feel optimistic about their life. Adults younger than 50 are more likely than those ages 50 and older to say they’d be extremely or very likely to turn to a mental health professional for emotional support (24% vs. 14%). In addition, higher shares of Black (26%) and Hispanic (25%) adults say they’d be likely to do this compared with White (16%) and Asian (17%) adults. Two-thirds of Americans say all-female social groups have a positive impact on women’s well-being. This is higher than the share saying all-male groups have a positive impact on men’s well-being (56%). Americans are also more likely to say women-only groups have a positive impact on society than to say the same about all-male groups (57% vs. 43%). source

About three-quarters of U.S. adults (74%) say they would be extremely or very likely to turn to their spouse or partner if they needed emotional support. Men and women are equally likely to say they’d lean on their spouse or partner in this way. Mothers and friends are also frequent sources of support: 48% of adults point to their mother and 46% point to a friend as someone they’d be extremely or very likely to go to. Smaller shares would go to their father (28%) or to another family member (35%). There are significant gender differences when it comes to certain sources of support. By margins ranging from 12 to 18 percentage points, greater shares of women than men say they’d be extremely or very likely to turn to: Their mother (54% of women vs. 42% of men) A friend (54% vs. 38%) Another family member who is not their parent, spouse or partner (44% vs. 26%) Turning to mental health professionals and online communities Americans are less likely to say they’d turn to a mental health professional for emotional support than to say they’d turn to family or friends. About one-in-five adults (19%) say they’d be extremely or very likely to turn to a mental health professional for this type of support. Some demographic groups are more likely than others to say they’d be extremely or very likely to seek out a mental health professional: Women are more likely to say this than men (22% vs. 16%). Black (26%) and Hispanic (25%) adults are more likely to say this than White (16%) and Asian (17%) adults. Adults younger than 50 are more likely to say this than those ages 50 and older (24% vs. 14%). When it comes to seeking emotional support from online platforms or communities, relatively small shares of adults say they would be extremely or very likely to do this (5% overall). Getting emotional support today versus 20 years ago We also asked Americans how they think men and women are doing compared with 20 years ago in terms of having someone to turn to for emotional support. On balance, the public thinks men and women are doing better in this area than they were two decades ago. Some 47% of adults say men are doing a lot or somewhat better, 20% say they’re doing a lot or somewhat worse, and 32% say they’re doing neither better nor worse. There’s a similar pattern for women: 51% say they’re doing better, 14% say they’re doing worse, and 34% say neither better nor worse. Women are more likely than men to say that men are doing better these days when it comes to having someone to turn to for emotional support (51% vs. 42%). Similar shares of men (50%) and women (52%) say women are doing better compared with 20 years ago. Communicating with friends We also asked Americans about their friends and how they stay in touch with them. About eight-in-ten adults (81%) say they have at least one close friend – not counting their family members – and most (64%) have more than one close friend. About one-in-five (18%) say they don’t have any close friends. Among adults who have close friends, 74% say they connect with one at least a few times a week, whether by texting, interacting on social media, talking on the phone or video chatting, or seeing them in person.  Texting is the most common form of communication between friends. Most adults with close friends (61%) say they text one either a few times a week or daily. Sizable shares also interact with friends on social media (39%) or talk to them via phone or video chat (35%). About three-in-ten (29%) say they see a close friend in person at least a few times a week. Differences by gender and age There are large differences in how often men and women text or interact on social media with close friends. Women are more likely than men to say they communicate frequently in these ways by margins of 10 points or more. Women are also somewhat more likely than men to talk on the phone or video chat with a close friend at least a few times a week (38% vs. 32%). But men (31%) are somewhat more likely than women (28%) to say they frequently see friends in person. This gender gap is fairly consistent across adults ages 30 to 49, 50 to 64, and 65 and older. However, among those younger than 30, men and women are about equally likely to communicate with close friends in these ways. Looking just at age, adults younger than 30 are the most likely to say they text (72%) or interact on social media (60%) with a close friend at least a few times a week. Those ages 65 and older are the least likely to say they regularly use these forms of communication. source

To better understand Americans’ well-being, we asked U.S. adults how often they feel lonely or isolated from those around them and how often they feel optimistic about their lives. How often do Americans feel lonely? There are differences across demographic groups in the shares saying they feel lonely or isolated all or most of the time. The following groups are among the most likely to say they often feel this way: Adults younger than 50 Adults with some college or less education Lower-income Americans Adults who are unpartnered or living with a partner they’re not married to There is no significant difference between the shares of men and women saying they often feel lonely or isolated. This remains true across all age groups. How often do Americans feel optimistic? A majority of adults (58%) say they feel optimistic about their life all or most of the time, while 32% say they feel this way sometimes. One-in-ten say they hardly ever or never feel optimistic. As is the case with feelings of loneliness, the shares saying they often feel optimistic vary by age, education, income and marital status. For the most part, the patterns are the opposite of what we see with loneliness. These groups are among the most likely to say they feel optimistic all or most of the time: Adults ages 50 and older Adults with a bachelor’s degree or more education Upper-income adults Married adults source

We were also interested in learning how the public feels about same-gender organized social groups or places where men can gather with other men and women with other women. Majorities of U.S. adults say these groups have a positive impact on the well-being of men and women, respectively. Still, more say all-female groups have a positive impact on women’s well-being (67%) than say the same about the impact of male-only groups on men (56%). In thinking about the impact these types of groups have on society, a majority of Americans (57%) say that all-female social groups have a very or somewhat positive effect; a smaller share (43%) say the same about all-male groups. Differences by gender Men and women both see more benefits in all-female groups than in all-male groups. Among men 63% of men say all-female groups have a positive impact on women’s well-being; 57% say all-male groups have a positive impact on men’s well-being. 55% say all-female groups have a positive impact on society overall; 47% say the same about all-male groups. Among women 71% of women say all-female groups have a positive impact on women’s well-being; 56% say all-male groups have positive impact on men’s well-being. 59% say all-female groups have a positive impact on society overall; 39% say the same about all-male groups. Differences by party Republicans and Democrats have different views on the impact of same-gender social groups. By double-digit margins, larger shares of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents than Democrats and Democratic leaners say that all-male social groups have a positive impact on men’s overall well-being (63% vs. 50%) and on society (50% vs. 37%). In turn, more Democrats than Republicans say that all-female social groups benefit both women’s overall well-being (72% vs. 65%) and society (64% vs. 53%). There are some notable differences by gender within each party. Democratic women are the most likely to say that all-female groups are beneficial for women and society. For example, 76% of Democratic women say all-female groups have a positive impact on women’s overall well-being. This compares with 70% of Republican women, 67% of Democratic men and 60% of Republican men. In turn, Republican men are the most likely to say all-male groups have a positive impact on society – 54% say this, compared with 45% of Republican women, 40% of Democratic men and only 34% of Democratic women. source

La mayoría de las personas manifiestan que la influencia política de los sectores ricos tiene una gran incidencia. Este comunicado de prensa se ha traducido al español desde la versión original en inglés. Una nueva encuesta de Pew Research Center, que incluyó 36 países y se dio a conocer hoy, señala que existe una preocupación generalizada por la desigualdad económica. Cuando se indaga en los factores que originan esta inequidad, la mayoría de las personas de los países comprendidos en la encuesta señalan las zonas de intersección entre la riqueza y la política. Una mediana del 54 % de los adultos en los países encuestados manifestó que la brecha entre ricos y pobres es un problema muy grave en su país. Por otro lado, una mediana del 30 % dice que es un problema moderadamente grave. Una mediana del 60 % considera que el hecho de que las personas ricas tengan demasiada influencia política contribuye enormemente a la desigualdad económica. De los seis factores acerca de los cuales consultamos, este es el más señalado por los encuestados, y encabeza la lista en 31 de los 36 países relevados. Nuestra encuesta también detectó una profunda ansiedad, en todo el mundo, acerca del futuro económico, y un fuerte interés en que se lleve a cabo una reforma económica. Una mediana del 57 % de las personas adultas de los países encuestados espera que la posición económica futura de sus hijos, en su respectivo país, sea peor que la de sus padres, en comparación con una mediana del 34 % que manifiesta que su situación será mejor. En 15 de 31 países en los cuales se pueden consultar las tendencias, el porcentaje del público que piensa que sus hijos estarán en una situación económica más desfavorable que la de sus padres es más alta en la actualidad que en las encuestas previas a la pandemia. La idea de cambiar el sistema económico goza de un amplio apoyo en los países encuestados. En todos ellos, excepto en tres (Singapur, los Países Bajos y Suecia), las mayorías manifiestan que su sistema económico necesita cambios significativos (mediana del 52 %) o una reforma completa (mediana del 20 %). En todos los países latinoamericanos relevados, muchas personas manifiestan que los seis factores acerca de los cuales consultamos contribuyen a la desigualdad económica. La idea de que la influencia política de los sectores de mayores ingresos contribuye a la desigualdad económica es particularmente común en la región, y aproximadamente siete de cada diez o más afirman que esto ocurre en cinco de los seis países latinoamericanos incluidos en la encuesta. Y suele expresarse con fuerza el sentimiento de que las diferentes oportunidades al momento del nacimiento contribuyen a la desigualdad económica; en términos generales, la mitad o más de las personas de Argentina, Brasil, Chile y Colombia comparten esta opinión.  También existen preocupaciones acerca de la discriminación racial y étnica. Las personas adultas de Brasil son particularmente propensas a manifestar que la discriminación racial o étnica contribuye notablemente a la desigualdad económica en su país: Esta opinión es compartida por el 64 % de las personas, lo cual constituye el mayor porcentaje entre los 36 países incluidos en la encuesta. Aproximadamente la mitad o más de las personas de Colombia, Perú y Chile también sostienen que este factor influye notablemente en la desigualdad, mientras que los argentinos son los menos proclives, en toda la región, a compartir esta opinión. En general, las personas de esta región son especialmente proclives a tener interés en que se realicen cambios económicos significativos en su país. Las mayorías, en la mayor parte de los países latinoamericanos relevados, desean que se introduzcan, al menos, cambios significativos en su sistema económico. Otras conclusiones importantes del informe: Factores que se considera que contribuyen a la desigualdad económica En casi todos los países encuestados, las mayorías sostienen que los seis factores en los cuales se centró el estudio conducen a la desigualdad económica al menos en una medida considerable. No obstante, existen diferencias sobre si cada una contribuye enormemente a esa situación. Una mediana del 48 % de los adultos manifiesta que los problemas con el sistema educativo de su país contribuyen enormemente a la desigualdad económica. Sri Lanka y Turquía son los dos únicos países en los cuales esto se considera el factor con mayor incidencia entre todos los incluidos en la pregunta. Alrededor de cuatro de cada diez personas señalan que el hecho de que algunas personas nazcan con más oportunidades que otras (40 %) y que algunas personas trabajen más arduamente que otras (39 %) son factores que contribuyen enormemente a la desigualdad económica. Un grupo más reducido señala el impacto de que los robots y las computadoras hagan el trabajo que anteriormente hacían los seres humanos (31 %) o de la discriminación contra las minorías raciales o étnicas (29 %). Percepciones globales de desigualdad y discriminación En nuestra encuesta, se preguntó qué dimensión tiene el problema de los diferentes tipos de desigualdad en cada país, lo cual incluye la brecha entre ricos y pobres (una mediana del 54 % lo considera un problema muy grave), la discriminación basada en la raza o el origen étnico de una persona (34 %), la desigualdad de derechos entre mujeres y hombres (31 %), y la discriminación basada en la religión de una persona (29 %). Muchos encuestados de los países relevados también consideran que esos son problemas moderadamente graves. Muchas personas consideran que estos son problemas muy graves en su país. En 35 de 36 países, más personas lo señalan en relación con la brecha entre ricos y pobres que respecto de cualquier otra cuestión. La discriminación religiosa es un motivo de preocupación algo menor, en general, que las demás cuestiones sobre las cuales se indagó. No obstante, en cinco países (Bangladesh, Francia, India, Nigeria y Sri Lanka), la mitad o más considera que la discriminación religiosa es un problema muy grave. Las personas de países de ingresos mediostienen más probabilidades que quienes viven en países de altos ingresos de ver cada forma de desigualdad como un problema muy grave en

Across the nations we surveyed, people are generally pessimistic about the financial future of the next generation in their country. A median of 57% say children will grow up to be financially worse off than their parents, compared with a median of 34% who say they will be better off. In the high-income nations of Canada and the U.S., about three-quarters of adults believe children will be worse off. Similarly high shares are pessimistic in most of the European countries surveyed, all of which are high-income countries. About three-quarters or more in France, Greece, Italy, Spain and the UK say children will grow up to be worse off financially than their parents. Poland is the only European country where people more likely to offer an optimistic view of the next generation’s financial future: 41% of Poles say children will be better off, while 31% say they will be worse off. Another 18% of Poles volunteer that their future financial situation will be about the same. In the Asia-Pacific region, views are most negative in Australia, Japan and South Korea, where about two-thirds or more say children will be worse off than their parents. People in Malaysia and Sri Lanka are also pessimistic on this question. In the six other Asia-Pacific countries surveyed, people are more likely to say that children will be financially better off than their parents. At least seven-in-ten hold this view in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia and the Philippines. Singapore is the only high-income Asia-Pacific nation where people say children will be better off. Of the Middle East-North African countries surveyed, people in Turkey have an especially dim view of children’s financial future. About two-thirds of Turks say children in their country will be worse off than their parents. In sub-Saharan Africa, around two-thirds of adults in Kenya and South Africa also say children will be worse off than their parents. Views are divided in the Latin American countries surveyed. In Colombia and Peru, more people say children will be worse off than better off, but the reverse is true in Argentina. Views by perception of economic inequality There’s a clear relationship between people’s perceptions of economic inequality in their country and how they see the next generation’s financial future. In most countries, people who consider the gap between the rich and the poor to be a very big problem are especially pessimistic about how children will fare financially when they grow up. Likewise, dissatisfaction with the current economic situation and with the functioning of democracy are linked to the sense that children will be worse off financially than their parents in the future. Views by opinion of the governing party The belief that children will grow up to be financially worse off than their parents is also more common among people who do not support the governing party in their country. For example, in Hungary, 57% of people who do not support the governing party say children will grow up to be worse off financially than their parents. This view is shared by just 20% of Hungarians who support the governing party. (Read Appendix B for a classification of governing parties as of spring 2024.) Views by age and income In most countries, older and younger adults generally have the same outlook on children’s financial future. There are also few major differences by income level. How views of the next generation’s financial future have changed over time In 15 surveyed countries, the public’s economic outlook is worse today than before the coronavirus pandemic. For example, the share of Germans who think children will grow up to be worse off financially than their parents has increased by 19 percentage points since 2019 – from 42% then to 61% today. source