Special Issue "Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS)"

A special issue of Religions (ISSN 2077-1444). This special issue belongs to the section "Religions and Psychology/ Social Sciences".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 December 2020.

Special Issue Editor

Prof. Dr. Stefan Huber
Website
Guest Editor
Institut für Empirische Religionsforschung, Universität Bern, Länggassstrasse 51, 3012 Bern, Switzerland

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS) has been applied in 436 studies in 54 countries in the context of various religions (i.e., Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism), as well as secular societies (e.g., the former GDR). The scale is widely used in the framework of various disciplines (i.e., psychology, sociology, religious studies, and educational science). The CRS was a part of three waves of the international Religion Monitor in the years 2007, 2012, and 2016, with representative samples in 23 countries in Europe, Asia, North and South America, and Australia.

The purpose/goal of the Special Issue is: First, to provide an overview on applications of the CRS in different cultural, religious, and theoretical contexts; second, to stimulate advanced empirical research designs with the scale; and third, to introduce discussions about promising modifications and developments of it. Finally, but just as importantly, the Special Issue aims to connect and foster collaborations within the worldwide community of researchers who work with the CRS.

Particularly welcomed are high-quality papers with a focus on:

  • Studies with the use of CRS in the context of Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and secularity;
  • Studies that focus on the particularities of the group of highly religious people as identified by the CRS;
  • Studies that report interactions between the theoretical concept of centrality of religiosity and the content of religiosity;
  • Studies discussing the multidimensional structure of religiosity;
  • Meta-analyses about the validity and characteristics of the translated versions of the CRS, as well as its interactions with cultural contexts.

Prof. Dr. Stefan Huber
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Religions is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1000 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Centrality of religiosity
  • highly religious people
  • interaction between centrality and content of religiosity
  • multidimensional structure of religiosity

Published Papers (13 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Open AccessArticle
Influence of Family Violence on the Marital Quality in Pakistani Muslims: Role of Personal Factors
Religions 2020, 11(9), 470; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11090470 - 15 Sep 2020
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the role of self-compassion and religiosity in marital quality among married Pakistani Muslims in abusive or violent relationships. The study aimed at exploring religion and self-kindness as protective factors that could save and strengthen marital [...] Read more.
The purpose of this study was to examine the role of self-compassion and religiosity in marital quality among married Pakistani Muslims in abusive or violent relationships. The study aimed at exploring religion and self-kindness as protective factors that could save and strengthen marital relationships despite family violence. Four standardized scales, Family Violence Scale, Self-Compassion Questionnaire, Centrality of Religiosity Questionnaire and Marital Quality Questionnaire were used for data collection from married Muslims of Punjab (N = 600). Analysis was carried out with PROCESS macro for SPSS which revealed that religiosity moderated between family violence and marital quality and buffered its negative effects. Furthermore, self-compassion mediated family violence and marital quality influencing its quality. These findings would benefit researchers, and other practitioners who work with married adults helping them work out their abusive differences improving marital quality of life. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
The Guilt Phenomenon. An Analysis of Emotions Towards God in Highly Religious Adolescents and Young Adults
Religions 2020, 11(8), 420; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11080420 - 14 Aug 2020
Abstract
In his model of religiosity, Huber postulates a “qualitative leap” between the groups of the “religious” and the “highly religious”. Correspondingly, the data from the Empirica Youth Survey 2018 underline that the topic of guilt and forgiveness is in itself only really present [...] Read more.
In his model of religiosity, Huber postulates a “qualitative leap” between the groups of the “religious” and the “highly religious”. Correspondingly, the data from the Empirica Youth Survey 2018 underline that the topic of guilt and forgiveness is in itself only really present in the “highly religious”. Thus, this article aims to provide a detailed analysis of the relation between emotions towards God and the centrality of religiosity. One of the results of the exploratory factor analysis concludes that emotions towards God comprise three aspects within Protestant “highly religious” adolescents and young adults: a factor for positive emotions, one for negative emotions, and a third for emotions of guilt, release and fear. In this article, we focus on the factor that drives the experience of guilt (and release and fear) and conclude that it is a phenomenon only found within the “highly religious” and not the “religious” Protestant adolescents and young adults. We explicitly incorporate the journal’s main foci in two regards: First, we focus on the particularities of the group of “highly religious” people as identified by the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS) along with the interactions between the theoretical concept of centrality of religiosity and the content of religiosity. Secondly, we briefly compare “highly religious” with “religious” adolescents and young adults. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Open AccessArticle
Centrality of Religiosity as a Predictor of Work Orientation Styles and Work Engagement: A Moderating Role of Gender
Religions 2020, 11(8), 387; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11080387 - 28 Jul 2020
Abstract
Previous research links religiosity/spirituality with a wide variety of organizational functions and practices, and, in particular, with management processes and leadership practices. Building on Huber’s concept of the centrality of religiosity, we propose that religiosity can also affect career choice and development—in particular, [...] Read more.
Previous research links religiosity/spirituality with a wide variety of organizational functions and practices, and, in particular, with management processes and leadership practices. Building on Huber’s concept of the centrality of religiosity, we propose that religiosity can also affect career choice and development—in particular, work orientation styles and work engagement. We also suggest that these relationships can be moderated by gender. The hypotheses were tested on a sample of 219 adult employees (Mage = 37.7, SDage = 9.2) in a cross-sectional study. Findings provide support the religiosity–career orientation style link and the moderating function of gender in the relationship of the centrality of religiosity with work orientation styles and work engagement. Specifically, the higher the centrality of religiosity, the stronger the calling orientation among women and the higher the job orientation among men. The higher the centrality of religiosity, the stronger the vigor, dedication and absorption among women and the lower the vigor, dedication and absorption among men. Our study supports the claim that being religious is related to the acceptance of traditional worldviews on gender roles at work. However, religiosity is a source of motivation to engage at work for women, whereas for men, high religiosity can reduce engagement in work. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Validation of the Chinese Version of the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS): Teacher Perspectives
Religions 2020, 11(5), 266; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11050266 - 25 May 2020
Abstract
This study applied the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS) to the context of Hong Kong as a part of China with the focus on a specific target group of teachers in primary and secondary schools. For the validation of the scale in the [...] Read more.
This study applied the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS) to the context of Hong Kong as a part of China with the focus on a specific target group of teachers in primary and secondary schools. For the validation of the scale in the Hong Kong context, the version of CRSi-20 was tested with data collected from local teachers (N = 671). For the validation of the scale, six versions were tested (CRSi-20, CRS-15, CRSi-14, CRS-10, CRSi-7, and CRS-5). Confirmatory Factor Analysis demonstrated that the single-factor solution of five items (CRS-5) had better fit indices than the seven-item version (CRSi-7), which, in turn, was better than CRS-15 with a five-factor solution (Intellect, Ideology, Private Practice, Public Practice, and Religious Experience). The other three versions encountered a problem with high correlations between factors. Multiple-indicators multiple-causes (MIMIC) analysis was used to test the effect of covariates on the established factor structure for CRS-5, CRSi-7, and CRS-15. The results indicated that gender and religious belief are significant predictors of the centrality of religiosity scores for CRS-5, CRSi-7, and CRS-15. In addition, age was a positive predictor for public practice, and teachers’ education level was positively related to private practice for CRS-15. Implications regarding understanding for the existing literature are discussed. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Show Figures

Figure A1

Open AccessArticle
Centrality of Religiosity as a Resource for Therapy Outcome?
Religions 2020, 11(4), 155; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11040155 - 27 Mar 2020
Abstract
The present intervention study tested the following hypothesis: the influence of one’s personal religious construct system is more intense and broader on therapy outcome if it stays central within the personality or becomes more central throughout psychotherapeutic in-treatment. The clinic concept included standard [...] Read more.
The present intervention study tested the following hypothesis: the influence of one’s personal religious construct system is more intense and broader on therapy outcome if it stays central within the personality or becomes more central throughout psychotherapeutic in-treatment. The clinic concept included standard psychotherapy and religious contents. In a pre–post design, participants (N = 208) completed measures of centrality of religiosity and mental health. The hypothesis was tested by treating centrality of religiosity as a categorical variable with reference to a typological distinction. The results indicate that therapy outcome is statistically significantly higher for the groups in which the religious construct system stayed or became more central throughout psychotherapeutic treatment in comparison to the groups with a subordinate position of the religious construct system. These results suggest that the importance and intensity of an individual’s religiosity can play an important role in answering the question of whether religiosity is a resource for improved therapy outcome. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Open AccessArticle
The Relevance of the Centrality and Content of Religiosity for Explaining Islamophobia in Switzerland
Religions 2020, 11(3), 129; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11030129 - 14 Mar 2020
Cited by 3
Abstract
Research on Islamophobia in Switzerland, and on the role of religiosity in relation to Islamophobia, is in its infancy. Against this background, we analyzed data from an online survey conducted in Switzerland on “Xenosophia and Xenophobia in and between Abrahamic religions”. The results [...] Read more.
Research on Islamophobia in Switzerland, and on the role of religiosity in relation to Islamophobia, is in its infancy. Against this background, we analyzed data from an online survey conducted in Switzerland on “Xenosophia and Xenophobia in and between Abrahamic religions”. The results of a multivariate analysis revealed that, besides right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and political orientation, indicators related to religion play a crucial role. We found that the greater the role of religion, and the more central it is for the individual, the more likely it is that the individual has a positive view of Islam. We claim that a person’s level of religiosity is accompanied by her adoption of religious values, such as neighbourliness and tolerance, and that the more religious individuals are, the more likely they are occupied with different religions, which leads to tolerance as long as it is not accompanied by a fundamentalist religious orientation. Also relevant is that the preference for the state to have a secularized relationship with religion is accompanied by a fear of Islam. We propose that studies on Islamophobia, as well as on other prejudices, should use differentiated measures for religiosity; the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS) turned out to be a reliable instrument of measurement in this regard. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Centrality of Religiosity Scale in Polish Research: A Curvilinear Mechanism that Explains the Categories of Centrality of Religiosity
Religions 2020, 11(2), 64; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11020064 - 29 Jan 2020
Cited by 1
Abstract
The centrality of religiosity scale (CRS) is a measure of the importance of religious constructs in personality. The Polish CRS has been applied in more than 40 published studies on the psychology of religion, with over 18,000 total participants. However, no comprehensive overview [...] Read more.
The centrality of religiosity scale (CRS) is a measure of the importance of religious constructs in personality. The Polish CRS has been applied in more than 40 published studies on the psychology of religion, with over 18,000 total participants. However, no comprehensive overview on the Polish CRS is available. This paper shows how using the CRS sheds light on different patterns in which religion integrates with other psychological variables. It consists of three parts: first, we introduce the Polish adaptation of the CRS; second, we present the review of the research using the Polish CRS; and finally, we provide research results that suggest a curvilinear mechanism for explaining the categories of the centrality of religiosity. Three measures were applied to the research: the CRS, emotions toward God scale, and content of prayer scale-revised. The results indicated that there is a curvilinear relationship between centrality of religiosity and emotions toward God, prayer types, and styles of request prayer (excluding passive request prayer). We determined the changepoints at which the relationship between the centrality of religiosity and the religious contents changes. This finding allowed us to provide empirical confirmation of Huber’s thesis (2003) that there is a different way of operating low, medium, and high scores in centrality, namely marginal, subordinated, and central religiosity. The study also broadens our understanding of each of these types of religiosity. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Validation of the Short Forms of the Centrality of Religiosity Scale in Georgia
Religions 2020, 11(2), 57; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11020057 - 22 Jan 2020
Cited by 1
Abstract
This study presents the validation of the short forms of Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS) in Georgia. This country offers a unique Christian orthodox context with a long-lasting religious tradition and strong affiliation to churches. Translated short forms were administered in the years [...] Read more.
This study presents the validation of the short forms of Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS) in Georgia. This country offers a unique Christian orthodox context with a long-lasting religious tradition and strong affiliation to churches. Translated short forms were administered in the years 2012 (CRS-5) and 2018 (CRSi-7). Participants reported on ideological, intellectual, and experiential aspects of their faith and their private and public religious practice in face-to-face interviews. The collected data was subject to reliability analyses. Scale invariance over time was tested with the CRS-5, whereas the CRSi-7 was examined for model goodness, with one factor—Centrality of Religiosity—with a confirmatory factor analysis. Derived statistical coefficients from large stratified random populational samples (2012: N = 2238 and 2018: N = 1906) show good to acceptable Cronbach’s α s ( α = 0.73 and α = 0.67). The composite scores’ means and standard deviations contour norm values for further investigations in social sciences related to religiosity in Georgia. The results of the confirmatory factor analyses show that the Centrality of Religiosity manifests a stable factor, adequately explaining different dimensions of faith life. The high reliability of the CRS-5 over time leads to the conclusion of consistent measurement characteristics and thus, its suitability for longitudinal analysis. The CRSi-7 has a comparable model fit to the CRS-5 providing an alternative for interreligious contexts if needed. Aspects of assessment and analysis are discussed and reasons for the application of the longer version of the CRS are provided in the end. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Centrality of Religiosity, Attitude towards Christianity and Post-Critical Belief: Comparing Three Measures of Religiosity
Religions 2020, 11(1), 46; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11010046 - 17 Jan 2020
Abstract
The Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS), the Francis Scale of Attitude towards Christianity (FAC) and the Post-Critical Belief Scale (PCB) are three prominent measures of religiosity. Comparing the three measures on theoretical grounds, one may assume that high religiosity (CRS) is linked to [...] Read more.
The Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS), the Francis Scale of Attitude towards Christianity (FAC) and the Post-Critical Belief Scale (PCB) are three prominent measures of religiosity. Comparing the three measures on theoretical grounds, one may assume that high religiosity (CRS) is linked to both a strong attitude towards Christianity (FAC) and to orthodoxy (PCB), while no religiosity (CRS) may be associated with both a low expressed attitude towards Christianity (FAC) and external critique (PCB). This paper examines that assumption on the basis of a convenience sample of N = 4.396 participants that filled in an online questionnaire (age: M = 47; SD = 15.90; 47% females; denomination: 1226 Roman-Catholics, 2369 Protestants, and 801 participants that have left the Roman Catholic or Protestant church). Factor analysis supports the one-dimensional structure of CRS and FAC. Exploratory factor analysis reconstructs the two-dimensional structure of PCB. There is a very high positive correlation between CRS and FAC (r = 0.92), indicating that CRS and FAC measure the same issue within a Christian context. Moreover, CRS and external critique of PCB correlate heavily negatively (r = −0.83). Finally, there is a very moderate negative correlation between CRS and relativism (r = −0.26). Multiple regression analysis reveals that both factors predict much of CRS (R2 = 0.75) or FAC (R2 = 0.83), while age and gender are of minor impact. Region, education, and income do not predict the outcome of CRS or FAC at all. This result will be discussed. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
How to Measure Baha’i Religiosity: The CRSi-20 for Baha’is as a First Reliable and Valid Measurement
Religions 2020, 11(1), 29; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11010029 - 06 Jan 2020
Cited by 1
Abstract
The concepts and measurements in psychology of religion often adhere to its Judeo-Christian roots, which causes problems when measuring non-Christian religiosity. In this paper, two successive studies are presented. The first study applied Huber’s CRS-15, while the second study used the CRSi-20. Both [...] Read more.
The concepts and measurements in psychology of religion often adhere to its Judeo-Christian roots, which causes problems when measuring non-Christian religiosity. In this paper, two successive studies are presented. The first study applied Huber’s CRS-15, while the second study used the CRSi-20. Both samples consisted of believers of the non-Christian, Abrahamic Baha’i religion in Germany. In the first study, in which N = 472 participated (MAge = 43.22, SDAge = 15.59, 60.0% female), the reliability and validity issues related to items of public practice and experience of the CRS-15 were uncovered. After modifying the content of these items and adding the five additional items of the interreligious CRSi-20, which was tested among N = 324 participants (MAge = 47.12, SDAge = 17.06, 59.6% female) in a second study, most reliability issues were solved. Confirmatory factor analyses revealed that the CRSi-20 model describes the data appropriately with adequate fit indices. Therefore, the CRSi-20 for Baha’is offers the first reliable and valid measurements of Baha’i religiosity, being at the same time capable of taking the emic perspective fully into account while maintaining the possibility of cross-religious comparisons. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Open AccessArticle
Multidimensionality of Spirituality: A Qualitative Study among Secular Individuals
Religions 2019, 10(11), 613; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel10110613 - 06 Nov 2019
Cited by 2
Abstract
This study examines the multidimensionality of spirituality by comparing the applicability of two models—the five-dimensional model of religiosity by Huber that we have extended with a sixth dimension of ethics and the three-dimensional spirituality model by Bucher. This qualitative study applied a semi-structured [...] Read more.
This study examines the multidimensionality of spirituality by comparing the applicability of two models—the five-dimensional model of religiosity by Huber that we have extended with a sixth dimension of ethics and the three-dimensional spirituality model by Bucher. This qualitative study applied a semi-structured interview guideline of spirituality to a stratified sample of N = 48 secular individuals in Switzerland. To test these two models, frequency, valence, and contingency analysis of Mayring’s qualitative content analysis were used. It could be shown that Bucher’s three-dimensional model covers only about half of the spirituality codes in the interviews; it is especially applicable for implicit and salient spiritual aspects in general, as well as for spiritual experience in specific. In contrast, the extended six-dimensional model by Huber could be applied to almost all of the spirituality-relevant codes. Therefore, in principle, the scope of this six-dimensional model can be expanded to spirituality. The results are discussed in the context of future development of a multidimensional spirituality scale that is based on Huber’s Centrality of Religiosity by extending the religiosity concept to spirituality without mutually excluding these concepts from each other. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Brazilian Validation of Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS-10BR and CRS-5BR)
Religions 2019, 10(9), 508; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel10090508 - 30 Aug 2019
Cited by 6
Abstract
The centrality of religiosity scale (CRS), available in three versions (with 5, 10 and 15 items), is a measuring instrument that identifies the central importance of religiosity in the psychological construction and in the behavior of an individual. According to the literature, five [...] Read more.
The centrality of religiosity scale (CRS), available in three versions (with 5, 10 and 15 items), is a measuring instrument that identifies the central importance of religiosity in the psychological construction and in the behavior of an individual. According to the literature, five components together express the centrality of religion in life: Public practice, private practice, ideological, intellectual, and religious experience. These components are the ground on which religious constructs are formed and activated. For the validation of the scale in the Brazilian cultural context, two versions were tested (CRS-10BR and CRS-5BR) with data collected from a general population (N = 687). Exploratory Factor Analysis (N = 334) resulted in a five-factor solution congruent to CRS-10BR. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (N = 353) demonstrated that a five-factor solution (Intellect, Ideology, Private Practice, Public Practice and Religious Experience) indicated better fit indexes than the single-factor solution of five items (CRS-5BR). Thus, CRS-10BR is recommended to capture CRS full construct. However, the CRS-5BR version can be considered suitable for use in the Brazilian population when the context is demanding simpler and faster data collection. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Open AccessArticle
Centrality of Religiosity, Schizotypy, and Human Values: The Impact of Religious Affiliation
Religions 2019, 10(5), 297; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel10050297 - 28 Apr 2019
Cited by 1
Abstract
Previous research has established a reliable link between religiosity and schizotypy as well as schizophrenia. However, past research mainly measured religiosity as a one-dimensional construct. In the present research (N = 189), we aimed to get a better understanding of the religiosity–schizotypy link [...] Read more.
Previous research has established a reliable link between religiosity and schizotypy as well as schizophrenia. However, past research mainly measured religiosity as a one-dimensional construct. In the present research (N = 189), we aimed to get a better understanding of the religiosity–schizotypy link by measuring religiosity using Huber’s five-dimensional model of Centrality of Religiosity, while also testing for curvilinear relations and potential moderators. We found negative small-to-medium-sized correlations between all five dimensions of religiosity and the schizotypy dimension of impulsive nonconformity, but no reliable associations with the other three dimensions of schizotypy: unusual experiences, cognitive disorganization, and introverted anhedonia. Some of these associations were moderated by religious affiliation: Religiosity and schizotypy correlated positively among non-members, but negatively among members of religious communities, suggesting that affiliation has a positive impact on the well-being of religious people. In line with Huber’s predictions, we found a reversed U-shape association between the religious dimension of private religious practice and schizotypy. Unexpectedly, however, conformity and tradition values did not moderate the relations between religiosity and schizotypy. We discuss our findings in terms of person–environment fit, the prevention hypothesis of the schizotypy-religiosity link, and offer implications for mental health practitioners. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research with the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop