Risk preference theory argues that the gender gap in religiosity is caused by greater female risk aversion. Although widely debated, risk preference theory has been inadequately tested. Our study tests the theory directly with phenotypic and genetic risk preferences in three dimensions-general, impulsive, and sensation-seeking risk. Moreover, we examine whether the effect of different dimension of risk preference on the gender gap varies across different dimensions of religiosity. We find that general and impulsive risk preferences do not explain gender differences in religiosity, whereas sensation-seeking risk preference makes the gender gap in self-assessed religiousness and church attendance insignificant, but not belief in God, prayer, or importance of religion. Genetic risk preferences do not remove any of the gender gaps in religiosity, suggesting that the causal order is not from risk preference to religiosity. Evidence suggests that risk preferences are not a strong predictor for gender differences in religiosity.

中文翻译：

---

为什么女性比男性更有宗教信仰？风险偏好和遗传风险倾向能解释性别差距吗？

风险偏好理论认为，宗教信仰中的性别差距是由更大的女性风险厌恶引起的。尽管存在广泛争论，但风险偏好理论并未得到充分检验。我们的研究直接用三个维度的表型和遗传风险偏好测试了该理论——一般风险、冲动风险和寻求感觉风险。此外，我们检查了风险偏好的不同维度对性别差距的影响是否在宗教信仰的不同维度上有所不同。我们发现一般和冲动的风险偏好并不能解释宗教信仰的性别差异，而寻求感觉的风险偏好使自我评估的宗教信仰和教堂出席率的性别差异变得微不足道，但不能解释对上帝、祈祷或宗教重要性的信仰。遗传风险偏好不会消除宗教信仰中的任何性别差距，表明因果顺序不是从风险偏好到宗教信仰。有证据表明，风险偏好并不是宗教信仰性别差异的有力预测因素。