QUEST Scale

Abstract

The Quest Scale measures the religious orientation defined by an ongoing, complex search for meaning. Although earlier versions existed, notably the six-item "Interactional" Scale (Batson, 1976), criticisms concerning its low internal consistency (reliability hovering around .45 to .50) led to the development of the definitive 12-item Quest Scale by Batson and Schoenrade (1991b). This 12-item instrument was specifically designed to improve the psychometric properties of the construct while maintaining the core conceptualization of quest as an open-ended, complex engagement with religious and existential concerns. The scale assesses three distinct but interrelated facets of this orientation.

Keywords

Religious Quest, Quest Scale, Religious orientation, Batson, Schoenrade, Religious Doubt, Openness to Change, Existentialism, Psychometrics

Authors

C. Daniel Batson, Patricia Schoenrade

Purpose

The primary purpose of the 12-item Quest Scale is to provide a reliable and valid measure of the religious orientation known as "Quest." This orientation represents an individual’s commitment to grappling with profound existential questions and religious issues without prematurely reducing their inherent complexity. It is fundamentally a measure of the dynamic, self-critical, and changing nature of an individual’s spiritual stance, rather than a fixed belief system.

The scale was specifically constructed to address reliability shortcomings found in earlier, shorter versions, thereby supporting substantive research into how the quest orientation relates to other psychological and social variables, such as prejudice and prosocial motivation.

Construct

The Quest construct, as operationalized by the 12-item scale, assesses an approach to religion characterized by intellectual honesty and a willingness to confront uncertainty. Batson and Schoenrade (1991b) conceptualized the construct as comprising three distinct, though correlated, aspects:

• Readiness to face existential questions without reducing their complexity: This involves acknowledging the ambiguity inherent in ultimate life questions.
• Self-criticism and perceptions of religious doubts as positive: This reflects valuing doubt and uncertainty as integral, constructive elements of the religious experience.
• Openness to change: This measures the expectation that one’s religious convictions will evolve and change over time in response to life experiences and personal growth.

Although the items are clustered according to these three aspects (four items per cluster), Batson and Schoenrade expressed reservations regarding the use of these clusters as formal subscales. The scale is typically used to yield a single, continuous score representing the overall quest orientation. This orientation is conceptually distinct from the traditional Intrinsic and Extrinsic dimensions of religious orientation, which focus on the internalization or utility of religion, respectively.

Validity

Support for the validity of the 12-item Quest Scale is substantial, especially when considering its high correlation (r ≥ .85) with the earlier, more researched 6-item Interactional Scale. The scale successfully measures a construct distinct from both the Extrinsic and Intrinsic religious orientations, as originally proposed by Allport and Ross (1967).

Furthermore, research by Burris, Jackson, Tarpley, and Smith (1996) provided critical evidence supporting the construct’s specificity. They demonstrated that quest is not merely a measure of secularity, agnosticism, liberalism, or anti-orthodox sentiment. Individuals who identified their religious preference as "personal religion" scored higher on the Quest Scale than did atheists, agnostics, or liberal Protestants. This finding supports the view that the quest orientation reflects an active, individuated commitment to "hammering out his or her stance on religious questions, refusing to be dominated by the religious institutions of society" (Batson et al., 1993, p. 167). The quest orientation has also been found to correlate with variables suggesting an individuated social stance, such as reactance, social criticism, and need for uniqueness.

Reliability

The development of the 12-item Quest Scale was largely motivated by the need to improve the reliability of the previous 6-item Interactional Scale, which suffered from low internal consistency, with the true Cronbach’s alpha typically estimated around .45 or .50. The 12-item scale demonstrated significantly improved, and more adequate, reliability.

Batson and Schoenrade (1991b) reported internal consistency estimates (measured by Cronbach’s alpha) of .75 and .81 across their two validation samples. Subsequent research by Burris et al. (1996) reported a comparable range of .71 to .81 across four samples. Additionally, Burris and Tarpley (cited in press at the time of the source document) reported a two-week test-retest reliability coefficient of .79 for the 12-item scale in a sample of 61 undergraduates, a favorable comparison to the .63 reported for the 6-item version.

Factor Analysis

The theoretical foundation for the Quest Scale lies within Batson’s (1976) three-dimensional model of religious orientation, which posits Quest alongside Means and End dimensions. In addition to calculating a raw Quest Scale score (the mean of the 12 items), researchers often compute a Quest component score based on a principal-components analysis.

The component score is derived using statistical procedures outlined by Batson (1976) and Batson et al. (1993). However, the Quest component is defined almost exclusively by the Quest Scale items. Batson and Schoenrade (1991b) reported very high loadings (up to .97) for the scale on the Quest component in their samples, meaning the raw Quest Scale score and the statistically derived Quest component score are considered virtually interchangeable in practice. Deriving the component scores requires a degree of statistical sophistication, whereas scoring the scale itself is straightforward.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-Report Questionnaire (Psychological Scale)

Format: 12 Likert-scale items, typically using a 9-point response format (1 = strongly disagree to 9 = strongly agree).

Language Available: English (Original)

Population Group: Nonsectarian, suitable for individuals interested in religion or existential issues.

Age Group: Older adolescents and adults. The existential nature of the items may limit comprehensibility in younger populations, though no definitive lower age limit has been established.

Population Details: Initial standardization samples included Christian-background undergraduates at the University of Kansas who expressed at least moderate interest in religion (N ≈ 400 total).

Test Methodology: Scores are reported as the overall item mean (range 1-9), rather than a total sum. Items 7 and 11 are reverse scored. Scoring can be continuous, either at the subscale level (with caution) or for the scale as a whole.

Keywords

Psychology of Religion, Religious Doubt, Existential Search, C. Daniel Batson, Test-Retest Reliability, Religious Orientation, Internal Consistency, Quantitative Measurement

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source content.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source content.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1991 (12-item version)

Permissions/Fee: The scale is widely published in academic literature and available in public domain resources for research use. The original PDF can be downloaded here: http://www.fetzer.org/sites/default/files/images/resources/attachment/2012-10-19/MultidimensionalBooklet.pdf

Location of Original Publication: Batson, C. D., & Schoenrade, P. (1991). Measuring religion as quest: 2. Reliability concerns. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 30, 430-447.

Reference’s

• Allport, G. W. (1950). The individual and his religion. New York: MacMillan.
• Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 432-443.
• Altemeyer, B. & Hunsberger, B. (1992). Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice. International Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 2, 113-133.
• Batson, C. D. (1976). Religion as prosocial: Agent or double-agent? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 15, 29-45.
• Batson, C. D., & Burris, C. T. (1994). Personal religion: Depressant or stimulant of prejudice and discrimination? In M. P. Zanna & J. M. Olson (Eds.), The seventh Ontario symposium on personality and social psychology: The psychology of prejudice (pp. 149-169). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Batson, C. D., Oleson, K. C., Weeks, J. L., Healy, S. P., Reeves, P. J., Jennings, P., & Brown, T. (1989). Religious prosocial motivation: Is it altruistic or egoistic? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 873-884.
• Batson, C. D., & Raynor-Prince, L. (1983). Religious orientation and complexity of thought about existential concerns. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 22, 38-50.
• Batson, C. D., & Schoenrade, P. (1991a). Measuring religion as quest: I. Validity concerns. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 30, 416-429.
• Batson, C. D., & Schoenrade, P. (1991b). Measuring religion as quest: 2. Reliability concerns. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 30, 430-447.
• Batson, C. D., Schoenrade, P., & Ventis, W. L. (1993). Religion and the individual: A social-psychological perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Batson, C. D., & Ventis, W. L. (1982). The religious experience: A social-psychological perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Batson, C. D., & Ventis, W. L. (1985). Misconception of quest: A reply to Hood and Morris. Review of Religious Research, 26, 398-407.
• Burris, C. T. (1994). Curvilinearity and religious types: A second look at intrinsic, extrinsic, and quest relations. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 4, 245-260.
• Burris, C. T. (1997, June). Religious orientation and social identity: Towards a theoretical integration. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the Canadian Psychological Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
• Burris, C. T., Jackson, L. M., Tarpley, W. R., & Smith, G. (1996). Religion as quest: The self-directed pursuit of meaning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1068-1076.
• Burris, C. T., & Tarpley, W. R. (1998). Religion as being: Preliminary validation of the Immanence Scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 32, 55-79.
• Donahue, M. J. (1985). Intrinsic and extrinsic religiousness: Review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 400-419.
• Hood, R. W., Jr., & Morris, R. J. (1985). Conceptualization of quest: A critical rejoinder to Batson. Review of Religious Research, 26, 391-397.
• Kojetin, B. A., McIntosh, D. N., Bridges, R. A., & Spilka, B. (1987). Quest: Constructive search or religious conflict? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 26, 111-115.
• McFarland, S. G. (1989). Religious orientation and the targets of discrimination. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 28, 324-336.
• McFarland, S. G., & Warren, J. C., Jr. (1992). Religious orientation and selective exposure among fundamentalist Christians. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 31, 163-174.
• Paloutzian, R. F. (1983). Invitation to the psychology of religion. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
• Watson, P. J., Morris, R. J., & Hood, R. W., Jr. (1989). Interactional factor correlations with means and end religiousness. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 28, 337-347.
• Wulff, D. M. (1997). Psychology of religion: Classic and contemporary. New York: Wiley.

Items of the QUEST SCALE

Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the items by using the following scale:

1 = Strongly Disagree to 9 = Strongly Agree

Readiness to face existential questions without reducing their complexity

1. I was not very interested in religion until I began to ask questions about the meaning and purpose of my life.
2. I have been driven to ask religious questions out of a growing awareness of the tensions in my world and in my relation to my world.
3. My life experiences have led me to rethink my religious convictions.
4. God wasn’t very important for me until I began to ask questions about the meaning of my own life.

Self-criticism and perception of religious doubt as positive

5. It might be said that I value my religious doubts and uncertainties.
6. For me, doubting is an important part of what it means to be religious.
7. I find religious doubts upsetting. (Reverse Scored)
8. Questions are far more central to my religious experience than are answers.

Openness to change

9. As I grow and change, I expect my religion also to grow and change.
10. I am constantly questioning my religious beliefs.
11. I do not expect my religious convictions to change in the next few years. (Reverse Scored)
12. There are many religious issues on which my views are still changing.

Items 7 and 11 are reverse scored. Scoring can be at the subscale level or as a whole. Scoring is kept continuous.