Validation of the Chinese Version of the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS): Teacher Perspectives

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.

How to Measure Baha’i Religiosity: The CRSi-20 for Baha’is as a First Reliable and Valid Measurement

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.

Belief in God: Why People Believe, and Why They Don’t

Belief in a god or gods is a central feature in the lives of billions of people and a topic of perennial interest within psychology. However, research over the past half decade has achieved a new level of understanding regarding both the ultimate and proximate causes of belief in God. Ultimate causes—the evolutionary influences on a trait—shed light on the adaptive value of belief in God and the reasons why a tendency toward this belief exists in humans. Proximate causes—the immediate influences on the expression of a trait—explain variation and changes in belief. We review this research and discuss remaining barriers to a fuller understanding of belief in God.