Religion in neoliberal times: The global spread of marketization, implications for religion, and future research directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marketization is a profound force transforming societies, including how people relate to and practice religion. Drawing from a synthesis of interdisciplinary studies, we approach marketization as a megatrend, explicating how its global spread beyond the advanced economies of the United States and Western Europe is leading to significant changes in religion and its marketplace articulations. We identify four specific ways in which marketization’s global spread influences religion: detraditionalization, re-publicization, dedifferentiation, and deterritorialization. We map these four areas of influence at the intersection of religion and consumption. In so doing, we identify several under-theorized areas in consumer research and offer six future research directions: (1) new non-institutional stages of religious performance, (2) transhumanism as a new religion, (3) new religious authorities, (4) transnational networks of religious service movements, (5) prosperity religion in non-Western and non-Christian contexts, and (6) resistance to marketization. We advance marketing theory by drawing attention to the megatrend of globalizing marketization that we argue should inform the future of the study of religion in consumer research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".