An Examination of the Relationship Between Religiosity
and the
Social Self-Efficacy of an Individual
Senior Thesis Research by
| ABSTRACT | METHODS | DISCUSSION |
| INTRODUCTION | RESULTS | REFERENCES |
Several studies have been conducted that have investigated various aspects of religiosity, specifically extrinsic and intrinsic religiosity. Other studies have focused on the effect religion has on various aspects of the personality. These studies have suggested that indeed religion does impact the personality characteristics of individuals. One aspect of the personality that has been investigated to some degree in this manner is the concept of social self-efficacy. A review of the literature has suggested that perhaps there is a relationship between these aspects of religiosity and social self-efficacy. Participants in this study were administered two self-report measures. The first measure known as the 20-item Age Universal I-E Scale, was employed in order to discover both the intrinsic as well as the extrinsic religiosity of the participants. The second measure that was given to the participants was a 31-item social self-efficacy scale, developed by Matsushima and Shiomi (2002). The hypothesis that those individual who scored highly on the religiosity measure would also score highly on the self-efficacy measure was not supported from the data collected. No significant interactions or correlations were discovered upon examination of the participants’ responses. The data suggest that perhaps a relationship does exist between these variables, however appropriate measures should be taken in order to determine the exact direction and strength of a possible correlation.
Key Words: extrinsic religiosity, intrinsic religiosity, social self-efficacy, self-report
In 1967 Allport and Ross
established a Religious Orientation Scale that measured religiosity of
individuals. Central to this questionnaire was the aspect of intrinsic
and extrinsic subscales pertaining to the particular subject. Prior
to this measurement device, religiosity was defined purely on the merit
of the church attendance of a person. This point of view began to
weaken however due to the realization that there were various other reasons
for persons to attend church. These reasons included socialization
or social pressure, or the desire to be a member of a group. There
began to be a distinguishing factor, therefore that was represented by
two different religiosity measurements. These new measurements were
classified as “good” religious orientation and “bad” religious orientation
(Allport & Ross, 1967). Allport and Ross (1967) defined “good”
orientation as an intrinsic belief in God as well as religion, while the
“bad” religious orientation was explained as an extrinsic orientation where
the person considered religion as a means to various social as well as
personal ends.
To be religious is defined
as “Relating or devoted to the divine or that which is held to be of ultimate
importance” (Merriam Webster, 590). In the following study however
there will be several dimensions of religiosity that will be considered.
Yamane (1999) directed a study that was interested in testing whether or
not there is a connection between legislators’ faith and the contact they
involve themselves in with religious groups (Yamane, 1999). The important
aspect behind this study was the measurement of religion; more specifically
the different components pertaining to religiosity. Under the definition
of personal religiosity there were three sub-categories. They included
church attendance, prayer and self-reported “importance of religion”.
While these concepts may prove to be of great importance in the measurement
of religiosity, there are a number of other studies that divide religiosity
into more specific categories.
In a related study Granqvist
(2000) assessed religiosity and the personal characteristics that are involved
by examining the concept of religiosity to an even greater degree.
The purpose of this assessment was to determine the relationship between
religiosity, attachment behavior and relationship status of individuals.
The sample for this particular study consisted of 156 students attending
Uppsala University, Sweden. The measurement tool consisted of a questionnaire
that explored sub-topics central to the study. Religiosity was separated
into four different aspects. The first was religious activity, followed
by individual relationship with God, emotional based religiosity and finally
religious change in the individuals’ life (Granqvist, 2000). While
the results of this study could very well be examined, the object at this
point is to examine the varying measurements of religiosity that are explained
to the subjects. There is one last inventory that is important in
the study of religion and the sub-scales that are involved.
Hall and Edwards (2002) developed
an inventory that has become valuable in the studying of religiosity as
well as the various sub-divisions that this wide-ranging subject can be
broken into (Hall & Edwards, 2002). In this case, religiosity
is divided into two primary areas: quality of relationship with God, and
awareness of God. This inventory, while divided into less main dimensions
than the others, has been employed with great effectiveness in the recent
measure of religiosity among all members of the population. The preceding
studies show that indeed religiosity can be separated into multiple dimensions,
however for the purpose of this study, religiosity will be defined under
the constructs of extrinsic and intrinsic religiosity.
Extrinsic religiosity refers to the external display of religious behavior,
such as church attendance and reading of religious materials while intrinsic
religiosity can be defined as the internal value that an individual places
on religion.
Some research conducted
recently was concerned with exploring the attachment to God construct.
This research, while relevant holds important information with regard to
the defining principles behind religiosity (Sim, 2003). The design
for the experiment was comprised of four aspects regarding the attachment
to God construct, these included: considering God as a safe haven, God
as a secure base for exploration, seeking/maintaining proximity to God
and responding to separation from God. The population for the study
was students in Singapore, ages 17-24. This measure was examined
in terms of internal properties and displayed reliable item and scale characteristics.
Results of the study indicated that God attachment was individual to the
student, and was separate from religious belief and practice. It
was also interesting to note that attachment to God was found to be distinguished
from attachment to the students’ mother and father. The results of
this study were of interest due to comparison to findings in various other
studies that positively correlated religiosity to the thoughts and beliefs
of the parents of a student. Recognizing that religiosity and attachment
are separate in their definitions, it is interesting that one’s attachment
to God is considered to be of such separate nature from the practices of
the parents of the individual. Also of interest are the varying degrees
that attachment styles were separated by the researcher, an important concept
in the development of a scale of religiosity.
A related study Iisager
(1949) was interested in the concept of religious attitudes and thoughts.
Specifically, the researcher conducted an analysis of questionnaires that
were completed by 35 men and 41 women. The study was interested in
the factors influencing the formation as well as the change of political
and religious attitudes. The volunteers were Danish college students
ranging in age from 17-22. Iisager (1949) analyzed the development
of these individuals’ political and religious concept and discovered important
results. The participants in the study included 35 men and 41 women
who were administered questionnaires regarding development of political
and religious attitudes. The research found that women were more
likely than men to reason with regards to their religious attitudes; he
also found that women’s religious attitudes were not as weak as those of
men. The most significant aspect however, was concerned with the
issue that women were found to have been influenced more by their parents
in both the political and religious avenues of their lives than had men.
Ratings of women on questions regarding religiousness displayed higher
scores than the ratings of men on the same measures. Men in the study
were found to have been affected less by the thoughts and attitudes of
their parents. Reason was found to have played a strong role in the
formation of women’s religious development. This research would suggest
that indeed religion is an influence in both the lives of men and women,
with the effects being felt by the female population to a greater degree.
The concept of religion
or religiosity and how it has an effect on the ideas and thoughts of an
individual, particularly adolescences is valuable. Hilliard (1959)
gathered data from responses of 220 later adolescents and discovered that
these young adults tend to abandon the principle that God rewards the good
and punishes the bad. He continued in his research to find that the
majority of adolescents, in general believe in the principle that being
religious can and should aid them in living a morally good life.
The effect that religion has on these young people is valuable construct
that has been determined as a result of Hilliard’s research.
To what extent the subjects were exposed to a religious upbringing and
how that upbringing affects the self-confidence of the individual is an
important relationship to examine.
This subject of adolescent religious beliefs and how they are
based on the family of the subject is a wide-ranging topic. Ozorak
(1989) conducted research that was concerned with examining a social-cognitive
model of change of adolescent religious beliefs. The subject pool
that was employed included 390 freshmen, juniors and seniors in high school
as well as 134 alumni. Employed in the study was a questionnaire
constructed in order to assess family demographics, religious background,
practices, beliefs, and experience, as well as existential questioning
and closeness to family and peers. Parents’ religious affiliation
as well as their religious practices’, were positively related to all aspects
of religiosity among early as well as middle adolescents. However,
in the college aged group, parents’ religious affiliation and practices
were positively correlated to practices as well as the decreased likelihood
of change in the college-age group. Ozorak (1989) also found evidence
of peer influence with regard to religious doubt and changes of faith.
One of the key aspects to this research was the finding that these adolescents,
when released from the framework of the family life tended to lose a part
of their relationships with their parents. This break from the family
dependency was made apparent by the results showing that twenty-three percent
of the total sample claimed a different religious affiliation than the
one they were raised with. The results also indicated that this family
reliance was now being replaced by the individual’s own independence, as
well as a newfound reliance on the subjects’ peer group. This seeking
of independence from parental influence can only be expected as an adolescent
grows, however it does point to some important concepts. The study
points out that young men and women are indeed influenced by religion,
specifically with respect to the upbringing to which each individual was
subjected.
This notion of individual
background continues to be examined. Crawford (1998) conducted a
study that was interested in the relationship between religious family
background and ego identity found in late adolescence. The sample
was comprised of 304 highly religious students from a Christian college.
Overall results indicated high self-reported levels of commitment and conviction
while leading very directed and purposeful lives characterized the subjects.
This commitment at times is balanced and genuinely individual, preceded
by personal search as well as introspective consideration of various commitments
that they might have. Students considered their families to be highly
religious and morally directed, organized and controlled. Crawford
(1998) also discovered that expressiveness was relatively low in these
family environments. This research supported the notion that these
students lead well-balanced lives, with high regard for their commitments.
Commitment and balance in many cases may lead to greater confidence as
well as self-efficacy. It could very well be ascertained therefore
that indeed these students, due to the religious background that they were
exposed to in their formation years indeed aids the young adults in their
social interactions.
While involved in
social interactions, almost all individuals are susceptible to embarrassment.
Embarrassment can be defined as the self-reported “…aversive state
of abashment and chagrin that is associated with unwanted social predicaments”
(Miller, 1995). It is this potential for embarrassment that in many
ways determines the social self-efficacy of an individual. While
the key causes of embarrassment are uncertain and up for debate, some theorists
imply that it results when individuals regret certain actions they have
engaged in while in front of an audience (Miller, 1995). It is important
to realize that it is the self-presentation of an individual in front of
a group that causes one to evaluate the impressions that the audience retains
concerning the individual. When the individual believes that those
involved with the social interaction have gained a poor interpretation
of the actions of the individual than embarrassment may follow. It
is the degree of this self-evaluation as well as the awareness of the actor
that determines the degree to which the individual will feel embarrassed.
In one study 310 individuals
supplied extensive self-reports of social skill, self-esteem, self-consciousness,
fear of negative evaluation as well as negative affectivity in order to
test various hypotheses (Miller, 1995). This study was concerned
with testing propositions such as the relationship between shyness and
embarrassment, as well as the theory that highly embarrassable individuals
may lack some aspect of social skills. Factor analyses and regression
showed that highly embarrassed individuals are more prone to be concerned
with the appropriateness of behavior in social settings, and are in many
circumstances more motivated to avoid rejection from others. Shyness
in this study was shown to be predicted low social-skill as well as low
social self-confidence. The concluding evidence of the study suggests
that shyness is linked to the effectiveness of social behavior, while embarrassment
is linked to the appropriateness of social behavior (Miller, 1995).
Social self-efficacy as
well as confidence is of great importance in any situation where there
is a potential audience who will approve of or disprove of certain behaviors.
It is this link between shyness and social self-efficacy that is of interest
and can be examined to a greater degree in other studies.
In another study 354
undergraduate students completed the Scale of Perceived Social Self-Efficacy.
Results show a high degree of internal reliability in that not only was
social self-efficacy related to social confidence, but was also shown to
be related to shyness (Smith, 2000). The important aspect to this
study was the correlation between social-self-efficacy and shyness, offering
substantiation to the idea that shyness is a result of a lack of social
self-confidence.
Regarding loneliness,
perceived social support, lack of social confidence and creativity, Mahon
(1999) conducted research with 35 male and 33 female 22-35 year olds who
were asked to respond to a number of surveys. These included the
Creativity Scale of the Adjective Checklist, Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale,
the Personal Resource Questionnaire Part II and the Lack of Social Self-confidence
Subscale of the Interpersonal Dependency Inventory. Results of the
research are important once again due to the establishment of the concept
that social self-confidence plays an important role in the lives of individuals
(Mahon, 1999). The study found significant inverse correlations between
loneliness and creativity and again between scores measuring lack of social
self-confidence and creativity. Also found was a significant positive
correlation between scores on measures of creativity and perceived social
support (Mahon, 1999).
While the preceding
research concerning social self-confidence is not directly related to the
question of social self-efficacy and religion, it is important to establish
that social confidence plays a significant role in the attitudes and actions
of individuals. It is also important to recall the earlier research
discussed regarding the importance of religion in the lives of individuals
and the thoughts and attitudes pertaining to the religiosity of an individual.
Earlier research has suggested a relationship between this social confidence
and religiosity, yet there is lack of specific testing between these two
variables. These concepts are of great value and importance to individuals,
and the possibility that there is a relationship between these constructs
is indeed a vital concept in the name of scientific research.
This concept of confidence
and self-efficacy continues to be a subject of research in a study conducted
by Lifshitz and Glaubman (2002). The two researchers studied religious
and secular students’ sense of self-efficacy and their attitudes toward
the inclusion of students with intellectual disability and various other
types of special needs. The subjects in the study were women between
the ages of 20 and 24. The findings in the research showed that the
religious students were more willing than non-religious students to consider
the inclusion of students with disabilities as well as having a greater
sense of self-efficacy regarding dealing with all types of disabilities.
This research does indeed help support the idea that students who have
a religious background or base will tend to display more confidence in
a social situation. The shortcoming that can be observed however,
is the fact that the entire population was female. However, this
does not negate the findings that indeed, as we have observed in previous
studies, religion does have an effect on the lives of young adults and
in many cases may increase the confidence that these people employ in a
social situation. Due to lack of specific research regarding religiosity
and social self-efficacy one is unable to ascertain just how strong of
a relationship exists between these variables. More research needs
to be conducted in order to determine the strength and direction of this
correlation.
The research that
has been discussed has two main aspects. The first is the concept
of religion, and the varying effect that this has on the lives of the persons
involved. Earlier, discussion was held pertaining to the different
sub-topics that religion holds for many people. Self-efficacy and
social confidence is an issue that needs to be examined more fully as the
two constructs are wide-ranging and important aspects to one’s life.
Some people are extremely confident, while others are not. How a
person discovers his or her own social self is a wide-ranging and highly
debated topic. Identity development is an important aspect, as is
the background of the individual. It can be predicted that the religious
background affects the social self-efficacy of an individual. A number
of articles have discussed these constructs, and the possible comparison
that is involved. However, attention may now be turned to the issue
of social confidence and what is involved in this side of the discussion.
Family background is a significant factor in the creation of the identity
of a person, and therefore relates to the religiosity of the family and
the upbringing that is involved. The family creates an environment
that ultimately has an effect on the young person for the rest of their
lives. Whether or not individuals cling to every aspect of their
upbringing or not is an interesting topic, however the development of these
persons and how this upbringing relates to their social selves as well
as religiosity is what truly should be examined.
Archer (1982) conducted
a study that was interested in the identity development of adolescents.
In this study, 80 female and 80 male participants in grades 6, 8, 10 as
and 12 responded to a questionnaire. Archer (1982) found the identity
achievement status increased significantly as the individual moved from
grade to grade. Another important aspect to this study as it relates
to the concept of religiosity was the finding that in the majority of instances
these young people found identity achievement in relation to the religious
sides of their lives. Therefore, these adolescents’ identity, as
they grew was effected to a great degree by the presence of religion, and
that indeed they found part of their personal identity achievement in this
ever important avenue in their lives.
Identity development is
an important aspect that should be examined to a greater degree.
The relationship between this development and social confidence is an important
issue to examine, as well as the relationship these concepts hold with
religiosity. One recent study that addresses this issue was conducted
by Junkin (2001). In this study Junkin (2001) was concerned with
identity development in late adolescence and the relationship it holds
with religious involvement. The sample that she employed was 206
freshmen volunteers selected from three Christian colleges in the Midwestern
United States. The findings of the study indicated low positive correlations
between achieved identity status and every religious variable of students
that had a religious background in their childhood. However, in the
group of individuals that did not have religious upbringings, and therefore
converted to the Christian faith, there were no correlations between their
identity status and the religious variables. The most significant
aspect to the study was the finding of positive correlations between intrinsic
motivation of the individual and all religious variables of the study.
This finding showed the researcher that indeed multiple religious factors
influence adolescent identity formation. This study strongly supports
the notion that identity formation is effected by religious principles
in the individuals’ upbringing as well as this person’s future.
These religious principles
are central to the determination of a correlation between religiosity and
social self-efficacy. Religious attitudes do indeed influence the
identity of an individual, and perhaps have a relationship to the confidence
that an individual displays when faced with a social situation. Due
to lack of prior research however, it is difficult to determine if indeed
this relationship exists, and if so how what the strength is of the relation.
Kress (2000) discusses valuable information with regard to these variables.
The purpose of the study
was to examine how religion and community psychology were related.
There were a number of superfluous themes that were discussed; however
the significant points remain. First, the study Kress (2000) determined
that there is a noteworthy potential for issues of spirituality as well
as religion to play a major role in how one might define themselves, as
well as having an impact on broader issues of one’s identity. Secondly
the author determined that variables that relate to religion have a positive
correlation with a number of psychosocial outcomes. Finally, Kress
(2000) finds that factors that are related to religious beliefs or observances
are found to be relevant to problem behaviors, specifically to the promotion
of healthy outcomes. This is a strong finding that not only is religion
and identity developed, but also that in fact a religiously identifiable
person has greater potential in the social context of solving a problem.
Another important
study regarding a religious person examined personality variables, self-esteem
and depression and a person’s perception of God. In this study 201
female and male participants, ages 22-60 completed the Religious Status
Inventory, the Brief Symptom Inventory and the Self-Liking, Self-Competence
Scale (Greenway, 2003). The results of the study are encouraging
indeed. The Religious Status Inventory was broken down into three
dependent variables: God Cares, God in Life and Negative Image of God.
The results for females show that Self-liking positively predicted scores
on all three God principles. For males, the studies showed a negative
prediction between self-competence and Negative Image of God, while depression
was positively predicted with the same image. Results of the study
suggest that one’s inner depiction of God may interact with their personality,
raising the belief that that how one perceives oneself may influence how
one perceives God (Greenway, 2003). While the data obtained from
this measurement are not significant, it does lend credibility to the suggestion
that there is an interaction between religiosity and personality characteristics,
in this case social confidence.
An interesting study
was conducted in order to ascertain the relationship between religiosity
and academic achievement. The participants in the study were high
school seniors who yielded 295 usable questionnaires. The questions
were taken from the Intrinsic and Extrinsic subscales of Allport’s Religious
Orientation Scale as well as the Quest subscale of Batson’s Religious Life
Inventory. The results of the questionnaires were then compared to
the individual results of the respective students’ ACT’s as well as GPA
and class rank. Using Pearson’s correlation coefficient and Spearman’s
nonparametric rank correlation test were used in order to analyze correlations.
Using an Analysis of Variance, researchers discovered that religiosity
had a significant effect on these academic areas (Williams, 2002).
Findings supported previous research that females are more religious than
men, however average group scores for women were higher in all measures
of academic accomplishment. Major patterns in the study indicated
that there was a positive relationship between intrinsic religiosity and
high academic achievement, however extrinsic religiousness was negatively
related to academic achievement. This suggests that involving oneself
in faith for practical reasons utilizes characteristics that are incompatible
with academic achievement (Williams, 2002). The mixed results of
the study show the need for further research regarding religiousness and
academia. While this study is interested in varying characteristics
of religiosity, and academic achievement, it once again suggests that continuing
research in the field of religion and it’s effect on the human psyche is
important and less explored than various other aspects of psychology.
The preceding studies have
suggested a number of valuable relationships that have been examined by
researchers and that are related to religiosity and social self-efficacy.
First, prior research has established intrinsic and extrinsic subscales
with which religiosity can be measured (Allport & Ross, 1967).
It has also been established by Iisager (1949), that religion is an influence
in both the lives of men and women. The exact strength and direction
of this relationship however was not determined. Secondly, research
by Hilliard (1959) has suggested that the majority of adolescents believe
in the principle that being religious can and should aid them in living
a morally good life. It has also been suggested that there is a relationship
between the religious background of an individual, formed in their formation
years, and the comfort of that individual in social situations (Crawford,
1998). The extent of this relationship however has not been determined.
Greenway (2003) displayed results that supported the belief that religiosity
and personality characteristics do indeed interact. While this does
not raise the issue of social self-efficacy, it does show results that
indeed personality and religiosity are related.
Lifshitz and Glaubman (2002) offered research that shows a relationship
between the religiosity of students and the self-efficacy that these individuals
display when faced with the inclusion of students with disabilities.
This research perhaps is the most significant due to the fact that it suggests
a possible relationship between religiousness and self-efficacy of individuals
even when disabilities are not involved. The entire collection of
data that has been presented offers valuable information indeed.
First, it has been established that religion can be broken into many testable
avenues, however in this case extrinsic and intrinsic religiosity will
be the constructs studied. Secondly the research has suggested a
link between religiousness and personality characteristics. Researchers
have also established a possible correlation between comfort in social
situations and higher scores of religiosity (Kress, 2000). Therefore,
the collected data has established that indeed religiousness of an individual
can be tested, as can that person’s social self-efficacy. It has
also been shown that religion does indeed relate to personality characteristics.
One area that has not been examined to such a degree however is the aspect
of religion being correlated with self-efficacy. Prior research has
not consistently studied these constructs together. Therefore it
is the purpose of this study to attempt to determine whether indeed there
is a relationship between these variables, and if so, how strong the relationship
is.
The variables that will be studied are extrinsic religiosity, intrinsic
religiosity and social self-efficacy. Specifically it is predicted
that those individuals who score highly in both extrinsic and intrinsic
religiosity will also score have high social self-efficacy scores.
It is also predicted that those individuals who have low religiosity scores
will also
have low social self-efficacy scores. Intrinsic religiosity will
be defined as the internal value that an individual places on their religion,
while extrinsic religiosity is defined as the external attitudes and actions
of a person regarding religion. Social self-efficacy is defined as
“an appraisal of how well one can execute the course of action required
to deal with a specific prospective situation and how well one can cope
with the situation” (Matsushima, Shiomi, 2003). While the existence
of this relationship has not been determined by prior research, there is
reliable data that would suggest a possible correlation as the search for
scientific knowledge and discovery continues.
Participants:
The participants in
my study will be taken from the subject pool at Saint Anselm College.
The students for the majority, will be freshmen in college, and will participate
in the study as a requirement of the psychology department. The sample
size will be at least forty participants, and will be divided as much as
possible between male and female subjects.
Procedure:
The procedure for
the study will first involve informing the participants what they must
involve themselves in, so that I may receive their informed consent.
The subjects will also be informed that they may drop out of the study
at any point in time and that they have no obligation to complete the study
if they do not wish to. I will then hand out two questionnaires
to the subjects in a quiet classroom. The subjects will be requested
to answer all questions as honest as is possible. At the conclusion
of the questionnaire I will debrief the individuals as to the nature of
the study and the results that I am hoping to fine. I will accomplish
this by means of the debriefing statement (See appendix).
Measures:
There are two self-report
measures that will be employed in this study. The first is a religious
questionnaire, measuring religiosity, while the second is a social confidence
questionnaire. The first questionnaire was employed in a study by
McCormick, Hoekman and Smith (2000), and is known as the 20-item Age Universal
I-E Scale. This measurement tool was developed by Gorsuch and Venable
(1983), and was adapted by a scale developed by Allport and Ross (1967).
The scale measures internal and external religious orientation. In
the questionnaire, there are 19 items that students respond to on a five
point Likert-type scale, with answers ranging from “strongly disagree”
to “strongly agree”. The last item “I would prefer to go to church”
contains choices including a few times a year, weekly, daily and so forth.
The Age Universal I-E Scale has been reported as containing alpha reliability
coefficients of .66 and .77, and the validity of the measure was also established.
(Gorsuch & Venable, 1983). The Australian study was employing
the scale in the examination of extrinsic and intrinsic religious orientation
and it’s relationship to a Christian based school. The administrators
of the study found no results that would suggest limitations of the questionnaire.
The social self-efficacy
of an individual will be determined by employing a 31-item scale adopted
from Matsushima and Shiomi (2002). This measure has three subscales,
including Self-confidence about Social Skill in Personal Relationship,
Trust in Friends and Trust by Friends. The validity and reliability
of this scale has been established and confirmed by Matsushima and Shiomi.
A 4-point response scale was employed with answers ranging from “very strongly
true of me” (4), to “not true at all of me” (1).
Proposed Statistics:
The statistic that
will be employed in order to determine a relationship between these variables
is the Pearson correlation coefficient. The data will be entered
into a Citrix account worktable, and the testing will occur in that program.
The results demonstrate no significant correlations on any measures between the religiosity of an individual and the increased social self-efficacy that the student would experience. Three variables were tested, including social self-efficacy, extrinsic religiosity as well as intrinsic religiosity. The scores related to the self-efficacy aspect of the study ranged from a low of 77 to a maximum score of 118. Scoring of the intrinsic religiosity factor ranged from 8 to 37, with the extrinsic score claiming a range from 20 to 42. An Alpha level of .05 was established in order to determine significance between the variables. There were no significant correlations to be found between social self-efficacy and extrinsic religiosity (r(47) = .044, p = .764). There were also no correlations found between social self-efficacy and intrinsic religiosity (r(47) = -.182, p = .210). There were also no significant correlations found between extrinsic and intrinsic religiosity (r(47) = .216, p = .137).
The results do not support
the original hypothesis that there is a positive correlation between the
intrinsic and extrinsic religiousness of an individual and that individual’s
social self-efficacy. Intrinsic religiosity was defined as the internal
value that is associated with religion for an individual, while extrinsic
religiosity is defined as the external characteristics that a person displays
regarding religion. Social self-efficacy is “an appraisal of how
well one can execute the course of action required to deal with a specific
prospective situation and how well one can cope with the situation” (Matsushima
& Shiomi, 2003). There are a number of factors involved in the
study that may have contributed to these results. It can be concluded
that in this study there are no significant correlations between the religiosity
and social self-efficacy of an individual. Several aspects of the
study that were not controlled for by the experimenter may have caused
these results.
One possible explanation
for the results was in regards to the gender of the individuals tested
in the study. The sample size of the project was 49 students at Saint
Anselm College in Manchester, New Hampshire. Out of this number of
students only 3 of those who participated were male, leaving the remaining
46 subjects female. This wide discrepancy between the sexes participating
in the experiment may have led to unstable results due to a variety of
explanations. The first, very simply is that men and women tend to
have different points of view on certain subjects, therefore anytime that
one sex is studied almost exclusively, there is reason to believe that
perhaps if males and females both participated in the experiment there
would be more variation in the results. This variation may have led
to data that is different from that information gathered. Another
aspect to the gender pool in the study is the effect that having an equal
amount of men and women might have had on the individual answers to the
surveys. It could be argued that these freshman females may have
experienced a higher state of anxiety if more males were in the room during
the testing period. If more anxiety was indeed experienced, the answers
on the self-efficacy survey may have been lower than they were in a more
comfortable environment. While this is mere speculation, there is
a strong possibility that if the sample size had equal participants of
both genders results may have differed.
The age of the participants
may have had an effect on the study as well. Out of the 49 students
examined, only three were over the age of 19, while only one was under
age 18. These results lend considerable weight to the notion that
the scores are indeed not representative of the population as a whole,
and instead examine only students in their late teens. While these
age demographics may be valuable to examine, it is impossible to determine
how much of the larger population would have similar results as were determined
by this experiment. This is due to a number of factors relating to
this age group. To begin with, the scores that were reported were
wide-ranging indeed. The minimum self-efficacy score was 77 while
the maximum was 118. With regards to extrinsic religiosity, the minimum
score was 20 while the maximum was 42. Intrinsic religiosity scores
ranged from 8 to 37. One possible explanation for the wide range
of scores is the fact that most of these subjects are only weeks into experiencing
a major life change in attending college. There could be legitimate
sources of confusion within each individual contributing to varying degrees
of confidence in the student. College is indeed a period of change
for an individual, and arguably this change is occurring in each participant
studied. This confusion could affect the answers on the surveys due
to perceived peer-pressure, bias on behalf of the experimenter as well
as internal confusion on the part of the individual.
Perhaps the participant
truly is uncertain of the degree that religiousness affects their lives
now that they have moved into a novel environment away from their family.
Conceivably the individuals may be uncertain of themselves, and in an attempt
to disassociate themselves with this confusion answer highly on the self-efficacy
survey in order to convince themselves that they are adjusting to this
new lifestyle. While these arguments are merely speculation, it is
conceivable that indeed this lifestyle change for these younger participants
has a drastic effect not only on this survey, but also on all aspects of
their personalities and lives.
There are a number
of interesting studies that have occurred that examine college adjustment
and self-efficacy. Boulter (2002) examined the relationship between
academic adjustment and self-concept in student during the first year of
college. The students were administered the Self-Perception Profile
for College Students. Results of the study show that one’s self-perception
was a significant predictor of the academic adjustment of that individual.
The results of this study are of interest due to the finding that there
is a relationship between how one views themselves and the ability of that
student to adjust to the college setting. In relation to this study,
there seems to be reliable information suggesting that these students involved
may not have adjusted completely to the college atmosphere and that this
lack of comfort may have contributed to lower self-efficacy scores.
Additional research that
lends value to this area of research was conducted by Woosley (2003), and
examined college students’ initial experiences and how they relate to degree
completion. Students in the study were given surveys including Social
Adjustment and Academic Adjustment Questions. Results of this particular
study suggest that initial social adjustment and academic adjustment are
correlated to higher possibilities of degree completion within five years.
These results are of interest because they suggest that students who have
adjusted comfortably to college life, perhaps also will have a more positive
self-concept, thus completing school in an appropriate amount of time.
In relation to this study, students who have not adjusted to college perhaps
view themselves with less confidence and thus have lesser degrees of social
self-efficacy than those students who have indeed adjusted to college life.
In keeping with the discussion
of other studies as well as adjustment to college, it is important to mention
a particular study conducted by Matsushima and Shiomi (2001). This
study involved the examination of social self-efficacy and interpersonal
stress in adolescence. The questionnaire was administered to 180
high school students, 41 of who were boys and 139 being female. These
numbers are considered to be of interest due to the similar discrepancy
in gender differences. The mean age of the high school students was
16.9, while the age for the college students in this study was 18.39.
The social self-efficacy mean score of the high school participants was
103, while the score for the college aged group was 99.59. It would
appear that by examining these results one is able to contend that perhaps
as an individual graduates high school and continues in the avenue of higher
education, their social-self-efficacy decreases slightly. This could
be accounted for due to varying factors. The college age student
no longer has the security of relating to those peers who have been familiar
to the student since childhood and perhaps now with the absence of this
comfort the college student feels less comfortable around unfamiliar students.
These differences could also be due to the novelty of arriving at an unfamiliar
school where one is not familiar with their peers, contributing to the
decay of their self-efficacy. Lastly, the high school students in
all probability are less familiar with themselves than their college counterparts,
and therefore may not understand their true emotions. The college
students on the other hand have had more experiences and therefore may
realize that they may not be as confident as they would like to consider
themselves to be. This realization is met with acceptance on behalf
of the older student, and they are not intimidated by including it in their
self-report measures. The results obtained by Matsushima and Shiomi
(2001) suggest another important factor. The authors suggest
that indeed subjects who have low self-efficacy oftentimes have more stressors
in their lives compared to people who have high social self-efficacy.
This finding is significant because it supports the argument that new college
students are facing more stressors than those students who are already
adjusted to college. Therefore if the sample size of a study incorporates
primarily freshman college students, perhaps their social self-efficacy
is low at this point in time due to the stressors they are facing.
It can now be argued that if the sample size included equal amounts of
members from each class, the results would have been more significant.
Another interesting
variable pertaining to the study was the fact that there were two different
nights on which the study was administered one week apart. The most
significant aspect to this variable is the fact that on the first night
that the surveys were completed, there also happened to be a significant
baseball game broadcasting just moments after the conclusion of the experiment.
Although this may sound trivial and insignificant, there is a strong possibility
that the students who received the self-report measures on this night may
have completed the surveys more expeditiously and therefore with less accuracy
than those students a week later. While there is no telling whether
or not the students participating in the later group quickly finished their
respective surveys, thus sacrificing on validity, it can be theorized that
those students a week before had a significant reason to finish with a
sense of urgency, therefore creating less accurate results. In keeping
with this topic, an area that was met with surprise on the part of the
researcher was the large difference between the amount of students in the
original survey group of students and those participating in the later
group. On the first night the surveys were administered, a total
of thirteen participants partook in answering the questionnaires.
During the next testing session one week later, 36 students were given
the same tests.
The confounding variable
in this situation was the possibility that those in a more intimate setting
during the first week, may have felt more comfortable answering with greater
honestly than those participants in the more intimidating, crowded setting.
The opposite could be argued as well however. This argument would
hold that those in the first group were less anonymous than those in the
later testing group. This lack of anonymity caused by association
with the initial testing group could arguably result in a higher degree
of self-consciousness, thereby affecting the results of the surveys.
Again, while there is no proof of these variables influencing the surveys,
science calls for all possibilities to be scrutinized.
One final aspect of
the study that may have contributed to the results that were found is the
possible confounding due to the religiousness of Saint Anselm College.
There is a possibility that the participants in the study did not wish
to fit into the
undefined, yet presumed role of a religious student, and therefore
answered survey questions designed to examine religiosity not entirely
truthfully. This may be due to experimenter expectancy effects, or
the ultimate desire of the students to be individualistic.
Indeed the results
of this study show no relationship between any of the variables.
A number of reasons have been identified that may have contributed to the
results of the study. These included limited gender differences in
the sample size, similarities in age of the participants, as well as possible
confounds in the testing groups. The limits of the study however
allow others to pursue knowledge in this area to a fuller degree.
As long as there is religion, the effects that this religiosity has on
the personalities of individuals can forever be theorized and studied.
This study has only scraped the overwhelming surface of religion and social
self-efficacy, as the search for scientific discovery and knowledge is
consistently pursued.
TOP
Allport, G. W., & Ross, M. 1967. Personal Religious Orientation
and Prejudice. Journal
Of Personality and
Social Psychology. 5(4), pp. 432-443.
Archer, Sally L., Child Development, Vol 53(6), Dec 1982. pp. 1551-1556.
Boulter, Lyn. (2002). Self-Concept as a Predictor of College Freshman
Academic
Adjustment.
College Student Journal, Vol 36(2), Jun 2002. pp. 234-246.
Crawford, David Wayne. Dissertation Abstracts International Section
A: Humanities &
Social Sciences, Vol
59(3-A), Sep 1998. pp. 0734.
Fresco, D.M. “The Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale: A Comparison of the
Psychometric
Properties of Self-Report
and Clinician- Administered Formats,” Psychological
Medicine, 2001. pp.
1025-1035.
Gorsuch, R. L. & Venable, G. D. (1983). Development of an “Age Universal”
I-E scale
Journal for the Scientific
Study of Religion, 22. pp. 181-187.
Granqvist, Pehr, International Journal for the Psychology of Religion,
Vol 10(2), 2000.
pp. 111-123.
Greist, J., “The Clinical Interview,” Social Phobia – Diagnosis, Assessment,
and
Treatment, The Guilford
Press, 1995, pp. 185.
Greenway, Milne & Clarke, Mental Health, Religion & Culture,
Vol 6(1), 2003.
45-58.
Grubbs, Susan & Hardin, B. et al. Issues in Mental Health Nursing,
Vol 13(2), Apr-Jun
1992. pp. 121-128.
Hall, Todd W., & Edwards, Keith J., Journal for the Scientific Study
of Religion, Vol 41
Issue 2, p 341.
Hilliard, F. H., British Journal of Educational Psychology, 29, 1959. pp. 50-59.
Hunsberger, Bruce. Pratt, Michael & Pancer, S. Mark Identity: An
International Journal
Of Theory and Research,
1(4), pp. 365-386. 2001 Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
Iisager, Holger, Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 1949. pp. 253-265.
Junkin, Michelle F., Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B:
The Sciences &
Engineering, Vol.
62(2-B), Aug 2001. pp. 1116.
Kress, Jeffrey S., Journal of Community Psychology, Vol 28(2), Mar 2000.
Special
Issue: Spirituality,
Religion and Community Psychology. Pp. 187-198.
Lifschitz, H., &Glaubman, R., Journal of Intellectual Disability
Research, Vol 46(5),
Jun 2002. pp. 405-418.
Matsushima, R., & Shiomi, K., (2003) Social Self-Efficacy and Interpersonal
Stress in
Adolescence.
Social Behavior and Personality, 31 (4), 323-332.
Mahon, Yarcheski & Yarcheski, US: Psychological Reports, Vol 84(3,
Pt 2), Jun 1999.
pp. 1246-1250.
McCormick, Hoekman & Smith. Religious Orientation and Locus
of Control in an
Australian School.
University of New South Wales.
McGrew, John. Spirituality and Health. Definitions.
Merriam Webster Dictionary, 1974. New York, N.Y.
Miller, Rowland S., Journal of Personality, Vol 63(2), Jun 1995. pp. 315-339.
Ozorak, Elizabeth W., Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,
Col 28(4), Dec. 1989.
pp. 448-463.
Sim, Tick N., Journal of Social & Personal Relationships, Vol 20(3),
Jun 2003.
pp. 373-389.
Smith, Heather M., & Betz, Nancy E., Journal of Career Assessment,
Vol 8(3), Sum
2000. pp. 283-301.
Snell, Dr. William E., Religion and the Ten Commandments. Questionnaire.
Williams, Karmen Petersen,
Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities
& Social Sciences.
Vol 63(5-A), Dec 2002. pp. 1747.
Woosley, Sherry A. How Important are the First few Weeks of College?
The long term
Effects of initial
college experiences. College Student Journal, Vol 37(2),
Jun 2003. pp.
201-207.
Yamane, David, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol 38
(4), Dec 1999.
pp. 543-550.