Differences in Value Systems of Persons with Varying Religious Orientations

Tate, Eugene; Miller, Gerald R.

doi:10.2307/1384781

Cited by 48 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the questionnaire appears to have contained a large number of items on liberal social issues, we can speculate that it may have produced some reactivity among the highly religious but probably politically conservative respondents (McMaster, 1971). In other research with Rokeach's value scale the results were consistent with the general conclusions of this review (Tate and Miller, 1971;Rokeach, 1973). theological belief, or activity was the definition of religiosity, and whether the measure of prejudice was an ethnocentrism, antisemitism, or antiblack scale.…”

Section: Region Time Period Type Of Respondent and Object Of Prejudicesupporting

confidence: 90%

Christian Faith and Ethnic Prejudice: A Review and Interpretation of Research

Gorsuch¹,

Aleshire²

1974

Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Wiley and Society for the Scientific Study of Religion are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.

show abstract

Section: Region Time Period Type Of Respondent and Object Of Prejudicesupporting

confidence: 90%

Christian Faith and Ethnic Prejudice: A Review and Interpretation of Research

Gorsuch¹,

Aleshire²

1974

Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, religiosity is often treated as a unidimensional, homogeneous characteristic within or between religious denominations. Moreover, even the rare studies using classical multidimensional approaches toward religiosity (e.g., Tate & Miller, 1971, using the intrinsic-extrinsic religiosity measures of Allport & Ross, 1967) can be questioned because these approaches have been recently criticized on both psychometric and conceptual grounds (see Hood, Spilka, Hunsberger, & Gorsuch, 1996;Kirkpatrick & Hood, 1990). The second shortcoming has to do with Rokeach's (1973) value approach.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tell Me What You Believe and I'll Tell You What You Want: Empirical Evidence for Discriminating Value Patterns of Five Types of Religiosity

Fontaine¹,

Luyten²,

Corveleyn³

2000

International Journal for the Psychology of Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moreover, the study of value-religion connections has a long research tradition, particularly tied to the Rokeach Values Survey (e.g., Addleman, 1988;Lau, 1989;Paloutzian, 1981;Rokeach, 1969aRokeach, , 1969bTate & Miller, 1971). Moreover, the study of value-religion connections has a long research tradition, particularly tied to the Rokeach Values Survey (e.g., Addleman, 1988;Lau, 1989;Paloutzian, 1981;Rokeach, 1969aRokeach, , 1969bTate & Miller, 1971).…”

Section: Religion Behavior and Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Religious Identity: An Autophotographic Study

Dollinger¹

2001

International Journal for the Psychology of Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article uses the method of autophotography to study religious identity. University students (N = 511) completed photographic essays in response to the question, "who are you?" Religious sentiments were coded in 28% of these photo essays, including identifications by social groups or affiliations, as well as more personal identities illustrated by sacred objects, activities, and places. The religion photo code was found to have moderate validity, established via correlations with questionnaire and daily log measures of religiosity. Criterion validities were slightly stronger for women than men and strongest for those 30 or more years of age. In support of construct validity, the religion photo code correlated positively with prosocial and negatively with substance-use behaviors in a behavior checklist. Presence of religious photos also correlated with a number of items in Schwartz's (1992) modification of the Rokeach Values Survey, notably with lesser endorsement of the cluster of hedonistic values (e.g., pleasure) as well as stimulation values (e.g., an exciting life) and greater endorsement of benevolence values (e.g., forgiving) as well as the individual values of devout and a spiritual life. Supplementary results suggest that single-item measures (e.g., frequency of prayer or church attendance) have considerable validity. I conclude that laypersons, like researchers, construe religious identity in many different ways, ranging from the social to the personal, and that such identities have meaningful correlates. I suggest that the autophotographic method may be most useful in qualitative studies of religiosity.

show abstract

Differences in Value Systems of Persons with Varying Religious Orientations

Cited by 48 publications

References 0 publications

Christian Faith and Ethnic Prejudice: A Review and Interpretation of Research

Christian Faith and Ethnic Prejudice: A Review and Interpretation of Research

Tell Me What You Believe and I'll Tell You What You Want: Empirical Evidence for Discriminating Value Patterns of Five Types of Religiosity

Religious Identity: An Autophotographic Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About