Test of hypothesis

This is Q9 in the data set, which asks: “Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you can’t be too careful in dealing with people?”

TABLE 1 FREQUENCY COUNT OF MUTUAL SOCIAL TRUST

RATING Number Percentage*

Most people can be trusted 433 28

Can’t be too careful 901 59

Other/Depends 150 10

Don’t know 26 2

Refused 6 1

TOTAL 1,516 100%

* Percentages have been rounded up and the total should be 100%

Religious participation is a combination of two questions for both Christians and Muslims. If not Muslim, Question 40 asks: “Aside from weddings and funerals how often do you attend religious services… more than once a week, once a week, once or twice a month, a few times a year, seldom, or never?” While question 41, which asks if Muslim: “On the average, how often do you attend the mosque or Islamic centre for salah and Jum’ah Prayer?”

69

TABLE 2 A CASE SUMMARY OF MST, RELIGREC (RELIGION-CHRISTIAN OR MUSLIM) AND RELIGIOUS PARTICIPATION OF BOTH RELIGIONS

Case Processing Summary Cases

Valid Missing Total

N Percent N Percent N Percent

MST *

RELIGrec 1516 91.9% 134 8.1% 1650 100.0%

MST * RP 1516 91.9% 134 8.1% 1650 100.0%

TABLE 3 A CROSS TABULATION OF MUTUAL SOCIAL TRUST AND RELIGION

MST * RELIGrec Cross tabulation Count

RELIGrec % Total

Christian Muslim Ancestral, tribal, animist,

or other

traditional African religion

Other/Don't know/Refused

MST

Most people can be trusted 203 227 1 2 29 433

Can't be too careful 416 475 9 1 59 901

Other/Depends

(VOLUNTEERED) 51 93 3 3 10 150

Don't know 7 18 1 0 1.6 26

Refused 1 5 0 0 .4 6

Total 678 818 14 6 1516

TABLE 4 A CROSS TABULATION OF MUTUAL SOCIAL TRUST AND RELIGIOUS PARTICIPATION

MST * RP Cross tabulation Count

RP % Total

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 8.00 9.00

MST

Most people can be trusted 302 72 12 10 15 14 7 1 29 433

Can't be too careful 592 192 33 21 31 19 9 4 59 901

Other/Depends

(VOLUNTEERED) 97 33 6 5 3 2 4 0 10 150

Don't know 19 3 0 2 0 0 2 0 1.6 26

Refused 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 .4 6

Total 1014 301 51 38 49 35 23 5 1516

The null hypothesis is accepted; there is a significant statistical association between religious participation, service attendance and fostering mutual social trust that leads to the promotion of the human dignity of the religious “other”. The practical significance is something else entirely as the constant crisis in Nigeria displays it is only an ideal situation that respondents have indicated based on societal expectations. In the Nigerian context, one could see an overlap of the two major theories of trust adopted in the theoretical framework. One theory is that specialized trust is based on reciprocity and knowledge of others. The second theory is that generalized trust is not based on reciprocity, which may be developed through early childhood personality formed and view of life which some may also regard as well-being.

Uslaner sees this as optimism and having a sense of control over one’s life. However, research has also shown that group dynamics are very strong with regards to the construction of identities because of the cultural values of the people in the Nigerian context.

Looking at the data based on whether people generally can be trusted or you can’t be too careful dealing with people, the way Muslims in the Nigerian context responded shows a high value of ‘don’t know’.

Invariably, the issue or subject of trust among the religious other becomes a very valid point responsible for how people of both religions treat one another, which is directly related to the promotion of human dignity. This kind of data is showing the reader that interreligious dialogue will be minimal in this context. One could deduce that there exists an almost balanced divide between associating Christians with

71

tolerance in the Nigerian context. If Muslims do not associate tolerance with Christians in Nigeria, then the issue of having a platform for dialogue or interreligious dialogue is slim. One may begin to wonder if the Golden Rule exists at all in this religious context at all. If you will do to others as you will want them to do to you, and you do not associate tolerance with the ‘religious other’, then a complex set of relationships that can grow sour begins to form and develop into what may be beyond the control of what religious participation can achieve.

In essence, increased religious participation may lead to mutual social trust. Once unpleasant experiences exist in the subconscious of religious participants while their identities are being formed, then it may become even more challenging to promote human dignity. This in turn affects how people of different religions see one another, especially Muslims and Christians in the Nigerian situation. On the side of how Christians have reacted to the same question of whether most people of other religions can be trusted or they can’t be too careful with trusting people of other religions, the respondents were more precise and opinionated about how they have constructed their ideas about Muslims. However, they still do have a high number of respondents who do not associate tolerance with Muslims at all. There were no extreme responses for undecided respondents. This pattern reflects more subjectivity than objectivity. Invariable opinions are being formed, based on perceived knowledge of the ‘religious other’. The issue of generalized trust, which does not depend on reciprocity, seems to be far off. The range of responses is highly scattered when it comes to describing ones view of generally trusting people who have different religious values than themselves. How Christians have also responded shows a wide range of almost equally divided patterns of opinions. On the surface, this may seem as if the Muslims are judged negatively but it also reflects the kind of spiritual, social and theological space in which both Christians and Muslims co-exist in the Nigerian context.

There exists a positive relation between mutual social trust and religious participation. Based on the data set, one may arrive at this conclusion but as it was mentioned in chapter one of this thesis, some aspects of social science cannot be measured. However, research by Wuthnow (2005), Dreyer, (2011), Wepener

& Cilliers (2011) and Pieterse (2011) points to the fact that religious participation, especially when it involves voluntary community services among the ‘religious other’ builds trust. If this kind of religious participation would be encouraged in the Nigerian context, then the likelihood of experiencing a positive mutual social trust is high. In the Nigerian situation, a complex interaction of trust and religious participation (group dimension) exists, which is supposed to reinforce or promote the human dignity of the ‘religious other’. In the Nigerian context, there is more bonding capital than bridging capital as people participate in lived religions. They engage their “tool kit” of culture to develop evolving patterns of

bridging capital. The Muslims and Christians in Nigeria have developed a high bonding capital among people of the same religion but less of bridging capital.

To control for other possible determining variables such as the type of religious participation or denominational affiliation, a Christian or a Muslim thinks and behaves differently on the issue of trust, or if age or gender makes a different contribution to how religious participation may lead to mutual social trust and the promotion of human dignity.