Dimensions of Religious Ideology

Abstract

The Dimensions of Religious Ideology scale, developed by Putney and Middleton in 1961, is a seminal instrument in the study of psychological and sociological aspects of religion. It was designed to move beyond simple measures of religious attendance or affiliation by identifying and quantifying distinct components of an individual’s religious belief system. The scale originally proposed four primary dimensions: orthodoxy, fanaticism, importance, and ambivalence. This multi-dimensional approach allows researchers to analyze how deeply held beliefs interact with social behavior and political attitudes, making it a foundational tool for understanding the complexity of religious ideology.

Keywords

Religious ideology, orthodoxy, fanaticism, importance, ambivalence, Putney and Middleton, social psychology, religiosity, belief systems, Likert scale.

Authors

S. Putney, R. Middleton.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Dimensions of Religious Ideology scale is to provide a standardized, quantifiable method for assessing variations in how individuals conceptualize and internalize their religious beliefs. The authors sought to differentiate between mere adherence to religious dogma and the intensity or behavioral consequences of those beliefs. By isolating dimensions such as fanaticism and importance, the scale aims to predict social and political outcomes that traditional single-factor religious measures might miss.

Furthermore, the scale was instrumental in sociological research during the early 1960s to explore the correlations between specific religious orientations and broader social dynamics and normative standards, as evidenced in subsequent research by the authors.

Construct

The scale measures four distinct, hypothesized dimensions of religious ideology:

• Orthodoxy: This dimension measures adherence to traditional, fundamental tenets of religious doctrine, such as belief in a physical Hell, the existence of the Devil, life after death, and a Divine plan. High scores indicate strong agreement with orthodox, traditional theological concepts.
• Fanaticism: This dimension assesses the intensity of belief combined with a perceived duty or urgency to proselytize or enlighten others about one’s own religious views. It reflects a willingness to engage in potentially unpleasant social situations for the sake of religious conversion or correction.
• Importance: This measures the centrality of religious beliefs within an individual’s overall philosophy of life and self-concept. It assesses the extent to which religious ideas influence views in other areas of life and shape personal goals.
• Ambivalence: This unique single-item dimension captures the internal conflict or simultaneous acceptance and rejection of religious belief, acknowledging that an individual may hold two opposing viewpoints regarding faith, even if one is dominant.

Validity

While specific psychometric validation data, such as detailed concurrent or predictive validity coefficients, are not included in the original excerpt, the scale’s initial validation rested on its ability to correlate with known social and behavioral variables relevant to religious commitment. The original 1961 study by Putney and Middleton focused heavily on the relationship between these measured dimensions and various sociological correlates.

The face validity of the scale is strong, as the items clearly reflect the conceptual definitions of the four dimensions. Subsequent research, including work documented in “Measures of Political Attitudes” by Robinson and Shaver (1969), has utilized this instrument, suggesting its continued utility and acceptance as a measure of distinct facets of religiosity in social science research.

Reliability

Specific internal consistency measures, such as Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients for each subscale, were not detailed in the provided source material. However, scales designed for academic sociological research, particularly those published in reputable journals like Social Forces, typically meet acceptable standards of internal consistency and test-retest reliability upon development.

Researchers utilizing the Dimensions of Religious Ideology scale in subsequent studies are generally expected to report the reliability statistics relevant to their specific population samples, confirming the stability and consistency of the Orthodoxy, Fanaticism, and Importance subscales across diverse contexts.

Factor Analysis

The scale is inherently structured based on a hypothesized four-factor model: orthodoxy, fanaticism, importance, and ambivalence. The initial development likely involved exploratory factor analysis (EFA) or similar statistical techniques to confirm that the items loaded distinctly onto these proposed dimensions, justifying the separation of concepts like belief adherence (orthodoxy) from behavioral intensity (fanaticism).

The clarity of the item groupings (six items each for the first three dimensions) suggests a clean factor structure was identified in the original 1961 study, supporting the construct validity of the instrument as a measure of multiple, non-redundant aspects of an individual’s religious framework.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire / Psychometric scale

Format: 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strong disagreement) to 7 (strong agreement). Includes reverse-scored items.

Language Available: English (Original development)

Population Group: General population; typically used in college student samples for sociological research.

Age Group: Adolescents and Adults (Typically 18+)

Population Details: Originally validated on samples relevant to the socio-psychological studies conducted by the authors, likely US college students or community members in the early 1960s.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate their level of agreement or disagreement with 19 statements (6 for Orthodoxy, 6 for Fanaticism, 6 for Importance, and 1 for Ambivalence) using the defined 7-point scale.

Keywords

Religious attitudes, psychological measurement, Putney, Middleton, social psychology, theological belief, fanaticism, belief importance, survey instrument.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Scale predates ORCID system)

Affiliation Email addresses: Information not available for 1961 publication

Correspondence Address: Refer to original publication in Social Forces, 1961.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1961

Permissions & Fee: The scale items are widely cited in academic literature, particularly in collections like “Measures of Political Attitudes.” The scale is generally considered to be in the public domain for non-commercial academic research purposes, though citation of the original Putney & Middleton (1961) work is mandatory. The original PDF source document detailing the instrument can be downloaded here: Measures of social psychological attitudes.

Reference’s

1. Putney, S. and Middleton, R. (1961). Dimensions and correlates of religious ideologies. Social Forces, 39(4), 285-290.
2. Middleton, R. and Putney, S. (1962) Religion, normative standards, and behavior. Sociometry, 25(2), pp. 141-52.
3. Robinson, John P., Shaver, Phillip R. (1969). Measures of Political Attitudes. Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan. Ann Arbor, Michigan.
4. Perryman, Mandy., Barnard, Marie., Terrell, Kassie. (2018). Counselor and Social Worker Perceptions of Sexual Minorities Related to Religiosity and Political Ideology. Social Work Values and Ethics, 15(1), 4-12.
5. Summers, Alicia., Hayward, R. David and Miller, Monica K.(2010). Death Qualification as Systematic Exclusion of Jurors With Certain Religious and Other characteristics. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(12), 3218–3234.

Items of the Dimensions of Religious Ideology

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

• Orthodoxy Scale
1. I believe that there is a physical Hell where men are punished after death for the sins of their lives.
2. I believe there is a supernatural being, the Devil, who continually tries to lead men into sin.
3. To me the most important work of the church is the saving of souls.
4. I believe that there is a life after death.
5. I believe there is a Divine plan and purpose for every living person and thing.
6. The only benefit one receives from prayer is psychological.*
• Fanaticism Scale
1. I have a duty to help those who are confused about religion.
2. Even though it may create some unpleasant situations, it is important to help people become enlightened about religion.
3. There is no point In arguing about religion, because there is little chance of changing other people’s minds.*
4. It doesn’t really matter what an individual believes about religion as long as he is happy with it.*
5. I believe the world would really be a better place if more people held the views about religion which I hold.
6. I believe the world’s problems are seriously aggravated by the fact that so many people are misguided about religion.
• Importance Scale
1. My ideas about religion are one of the most important parts of my philosophy of life.
2. I find that my ideas on religion have a considerable influence on my views in other areas.
3. Believing as I do about religion is very important to being the kind of person I want to be.
4. If my ideas about religion were different, I believe that my way of life would be very different.
5. Religion is a subject in which I am not particularly interested.*
6. I very often think about matters relating to religion.
• Ambivalence Scale

The fourth dimension, ambivalence, called for a Likert-type rating of the statement: “Although one is stronger than the other, there is part of me which believes in religion and part of me which does no.”