Dr. Evan Stewart

Evan Stewart is an assistant professor of sociology at University of Massachusetts Boston. His research focuses on the social forces that bring diverse groups together and break them apart, including civic engagement, religious change, and public opinion. This work has appeared in social science journals including American Sociological Review, Social Forces, Social Problems, and Sociological Theory, among other outlets. He is also an associate editor at the journal Sociology of Religion

Evan has held fellowships with the Public Religion Research Institute and the Social Science Research Council. His research has also been featured at media outlets including WBUR Boston, The Conversation, Washington Post’s Monkey Cage, and FiveThirtyEight. 

He earned a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Minnesota, where I worked as an Edelstein Fellow with the American Mosaic Project and an Interdisciplinary Doctoral Fellow with the Center for the Study of Political Psychology. He also holds an M.A. in Sociology from UMN and a B.A. in Political Theory and Social Policy from Michigan State University’s James Madison College.

Areas of Expertise:

Sociology of religion, religious disaffiliation, spirituality, public opinion research, civic engagement, political behavior

Dr. Evan Stewart

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Key Contributions

Meet Our Experts

Stay Informed with Our
Comprehensive Newsletter

Sign up for our newsletter to receive the latest insights, updates, and analysis on
secular voters directly in your inbox.

“People who identified as atheists and agnostics were more likely to vote than religiously affiliated respondents, especially in more recent elections. For example, after controlling for key demographic predictors of voting – like age, education and income – I found that atheists and agnostics were each about 30% more likely to have a validated record of voting in the 2020 election than religiously affiliated respondents.
With those same controls, people who identified their religion as simply “nothing in particular,” who are about two-thirds of the unaffiliated, were actually less likely to turn out in all four elections. In the 2020 election sample, for example, I found that around 7 in 10 agnostics and atheists had a validated voter turnout record, versus only about half of the “nothing in particulars.”

Together, these groups’ voting behaviors tend to cancel each other out. Once I controlled for other predictors of voting like age and education, “the nones” as a whole were equally likely to have a turnout record as religiously affiliated respondents.”

Read the full article here.

“Our new study, published in the journal American Sociological Review, finds that spiritual practitioners are just as likely to engage in political activities as the religious.

After we controlled for demographic factors such as age, race and gender, frequent spiritual practitioners were about 30% more likely than nonpractitioners to report doing at least one political activity in the past year. Likewise, devoted religious practitioners were also about 30% more likely to report one of these political behaviors than respondents who do not practice religion.

In other words, we found heightened political engagement among both the religious and spiritual, compared with other people.”

Read the full article here.

“Using an improved measure of validated voter turnout in four presidential election years (2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020), I find estimates of the secular voting gap are attenuated by demographic controls. More importantly, the mechanism that explains this finding is that more frequent church attendance associates with a lower probability of turnout among respondents who are unaffiliated, and results vary by voting method. These results support a theory of civic disengagement as a domain-specific process and demonstrate the substantive value of revisiting classic findings about religion and political behavior amid social change.”

See the full article here.

MAP