Religious Switching: Preference Development, Maintenance, and Change MATTHEW T. LOVELAND Up to one-third of Americans switch religions at some time during their lives. What are the predictors of this religious mobility? This article addresses this question using a modified rational choice framework to explain the development, maintenance, and change of religious preferences. Although classical rational choice theory assumes that preferences are stable, this article suggests that preferences are variable and that social interaction works to maintain or change an individual’s preferred religious choice. A cultural theory of preference formation is applied to allow for the social constraint rational choice theory often ignores. Findings suggest that childhood socialization does not cement religious preference, that formally joining a church while growing up acts to stabilize preferences, that lapsing in practice increases the likelihood of switching, and that “distinctive” denominations generate religious preferences that reduce individual switching. INTRODUCTION Although most people remain adherents of one religious faith throughout their lifetime, nearly one-third of U.S. adults have switched religions at least once (Roof 1989). In this article, I ask the following question: Why do people switch 1 their religious identification? I draw on recent rational choice literature and on earlier work on this question. Rational choice theorists have developed a more contextualized conception of the actor, and recent work has embedded switchers in a social network. The task is not complete, however, and I use Wildavsky’s (1987, 1994) work in cultural theory to demonstrate that individuals’ preferences are dependent on decisions they make. REVIEW OF RESEARCH Studies of religious switching are greatly influenced by Stark and Glock’s 1968 book Ameri- can Piety: The Nature of Religious Commitment, in which they argue that the tendency of religious switchers is to move from theologically conservative to theologically liberal denominations in search of the higher social status liberal denominations confer on members. This proposition has been questioned in the literature. Kelley argued nearly the opposite in Why Conservative Churches are Growing (1972), theorizing that stricter churches better serve the individual’s quest for mean- ing and for this reason would grow while more liberal churches would decline. Iannaccone (1994) argues that strict churches will be more likely to grow because they are capable of offering more benefits to members than are churches that cultivate less commitment. While strict churches retain members, liberal churches will not. According to these analysts, it is attitudes toward doctrinal strictness that cause individuals to switch religions. Some propose that focusing on the ideological nature of religion is too simple and that de- nominational switching occurs with little reference to a denomination’s position on a liberal to conservative spectrum (Mueller 1971). Roof and Hadaway (1979) found much diversity in re- ligious switching, including shifts of the upwardly mobile to high-status churches, and others out of religion all together. They introduced a mainline-fringe institutional typology to concep- tualize the nature of religious mobility. A church’s position relative to the culture at large is key to determining the mainline or fringe status. “Particularly important are the moral beliefs Matthew T. Loveland, University of Notre Dame, Department of Sociology, 810 Flanner Hall, Notre Dame, IN 46556. E-mail: loveland.1@nd.edu Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 42:1 (2003) 147–157