No worries. 
Those quotes were meant to be part of a longer post I didn’t have time to finish, which actually would have been more appropriate in the other thread.
Lamest - fight - ever.
Better to fit in? I remember reading a prison blog, and the writer claimed to be a Hindu just because that was the only way he could get vegetarian food. IIRC he was atheist/non-religious. Also, I’ve heard that the kosher food in some prisons is higher quality, so some claim to be Jewish (some probably have halal, too). Yes, there are Nazis in prison, but race takes more fluid meanings in prison.
Steken,
Here’s another article that may be of interest to you. Atheists are a varied bunch, just like believers are, and traits vary depending on the sub-group.
It’s also possible that atheists tend to come from classes that tend to go to prison less regardless. I think atheists are overrepresented in the upper-middle class, for instance. (I think it’s one of those “when you’re starving you don’t have time to sit around pondering the nature of God” type things).
I googled “atheist regression” site:*.edu and received only 2 useful hits: they were studies from 2009 and 2011: the former was a Senior Thesis in Economics. That in itself is interesting. I didn’t access a real index of sociological research though. I predict that we will have a better grasp on this subject in 10 years.
“Regression” is a statistical technique used to control for confounding factors. Like age, education and income for example.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: “Divine Intuition: Cognitive Style Influences Belief in God” (2011) by Shenhav, A., Rand, D. G., & Greene, J. D. of Harvard U. Abstract: Some have argued that belief in God is intuitive, a natural (by-)product of the human mind given its cognitive structure and social context. If this is true, the extent to which one believes in God may be influenced by one’s more general tendency to rely on intuition versus reflection. Three studies support this hypothesis, linking intuitive cognitive style to belief in God. Study 1 showed that individual differences in cognitive style predict belief in God. Participants completed the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT; Frederick, 2005), which employs math problems that, although easily solvable, have intuitively compelling incorrect answers. Participants who gave more intuitive answers on the CRT reported stronger belief in God. This effect was not mediated by education level, income, political orientation, or other demographic variables. Study 2 showed that the correlation between CRT scores and belief in God also holds when cognitive ability (IQ) and aspects of personality were controlled. Moreover, both studies demonstrated that intuitive CRT responses predicted the degree to which individuals reported having strengthened their belief in God since childhood, but not their familial religiosity during childhood, suggesting a causal relationship between cognitive style and change in belief over time. Study 3 revealed such a causal relationship over the short term: Experimentally inducing a mindset that favors intuition over reflection increases self-reported belief in God. The authors show a statistically significant result, but frankly I thought the magnitudes of the effects discussed were modest. I wish I found more discussion of effect size (as opposed to significance) on my brief skim.
The other paper was The Role of Religiosity and Spirituality in Juvenile Delinquency by Robyn Mapp: Senior Thesis in Economics, The College of New Jersey Spring 2009. Nice work Robyn! I skipped to the tables.
After controlling for various factors religious affiliation is significantly related to lowered marijuana use, but insignificantly related to arrests, heavy crime, light crime and cocaine usage. So: Ho hum. But wait! “Attendance of religious services” is significantly related to fewer arrests, less heavy crime, and less light crime at the 10% level of confidence - borderline. It does discourage pot use, like the other variable.
But wait again! Frequency of Extracurricular Activities also has a similar pattern, with the effects on arrests stronger. So make sure your kids stay busy.
I can’t get to the complete of this article either but this summary suggests that it might answer your question fairly directly.
Emphasis mine.
True, but that’s overly simple! It’s used for many reasons.
You can use a program like G*Power to estimate it. Honestly, I skimmed the results and guessed on the analyses, so I can’t promise I selected the right parameters. E.g. for the first F test, between subjects ANOVA (I said I skimmed!) 1-β = .82, N = 882, I get an “f” of 0.096. I’m not familiar with that, but a look on their website suggests it is the square root of Cohen’s ƒ[sup]2[/sup]. That’s under the small size criterion of 0.10. Again, I can’t promise that’s right, I can’t read in depth right now. It would be better with mean difference and SD for something besides age.