Intrinsic Religious Motivation Scale

Abstract

The Intrinsic Religious Motivation Scale (IRMS), developed by Dean R. Hoge (1972), is a 10-item instrument designed to measure the underlying motivation for religious engagement rather than specific behaviors or beliefs. The scale utilizes a Likert-like format and is conceptually derived from the motivational dimension of the Allport and Ross (1967) Religious Orientation Scale. The IRMS taps into the dimension known as “ultimate versus instrumental” religiosity, distinguishing between intrinsically motivated faith (seven items) and extrinsically motivated faith (three items). Hoge assumed these two orientations anchor opposite ends of a single dimension, aiming for a unidimensional scale to provide conceptual clarity for researchers studying religiousness and its relationship with other social factors, such as prejudice.

Keywords

Religious Motivation, Intrinsic Faith, Extrinsic Faith, Religious Orientation, Unidimensional Scale, Hoge Scale, Religiousness, Psychological Assessment

Authors

Dean R. Hoge

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Intrinsic Religious Motivation Scale is to quantify different ways individuals are religious by measuring the internal motivation driving their religious activity. The instrument was intentionally designed to avoid items related to specific religious behaviors or beliefs, which allows for broader applicability across diverse religious groups, despite its initial development within the Christian tradition.

Hoge (1972) sought to limit the instrument to measuring only the motivational aspect of religiosity, striving to create a unidimensional scale. This clarity was intended to enhance social scientists’ ability to study the relationship between religious commitment and various factors, including complex phenomena like prejudice, without confounding motivational constructs with behavioral or theological adherence.

Construct

The scale measures the construct of Religious Motivation, specifically focusing on the intrinsic-extrinsic dichotomy as applied to faith. This dichotomy is rooted in the work of Allport and Ross (1967), who defined intrinsic orientation as faith that is internalized and serves as the master motive in life, and extrinsic orientation as faith used instrumentally for personal gain, social acceptance, or comfort.

The IRMS measures this construct along a single dimension, where intrinsic faith and extrinsic faith are treated as polar opposites. The instrument includes seven items reflecting intrinsic motivation (e.g., faith involving all of life) and three items reflecting extrinsic motivation (e.g., religion being less important than other things in life). This structure contrasts with alternative models that treat intrinsic and extrinsic orientations as two separate, orthogonal dimensions.

Validity

Initial evidence for the validity of the IRMS was established through criterion validity based on ministerial judgments. Participants in the original study were nominated by local pastors who identified them as having either an intrinsic or extrinsic religious orientation. The final 10-item version of the scale showed a correlation of 0.59 with these ministerial judgments.

Further validation was provided through convergent validity measures. The IRMS demonstrated strong positive correlations (ranging from 0.71 to 0.87) with the intrinsic subscales of the Allport and Ross (1967) and Feagin (1964) scales. While these high correlations are partly explained by shared items across the instruments, they confirm that the IRMS measures a similar motivational construct.

Construct validity was supported by subsequent research, such as the study by Benson et al. (1980), which investigated intrapersonal factors affecting nonspontaneous helping behavior. This research found that intrinsicness, as measured by Hoge’s scale, was a significant positive predictor of self-reported hours spent in helping categories (e.g., volunteer work, solicitations for charities).

Reliability

The reliability of the full 10-item scale was reported by Hoge (1972) using the Kuder-Richardson Formula 20, yielding a high reliability coefficient of 0.90 after reversing the extrinsic items. The item-to-item correlations within the scale ranged from a low of 0.13 to a high of 0.72, suggesting a strong internal consistency across the items.

Additional reliability data was provided by Hoge and Carroll (1978), who utilized a shortened, six-item version of the IRMS in a survey of members of suburban Protestant churches. For this shortened version, the internal consistency was measured using Cronbach’s alpha, which was reported as 0.84, confirming that the scale maintains adequate reliability even when truncated for specific research contexts.

Factor Analysis

The scale was developed with the explicit goal of achieving unidimensionality. In selecting the final items for the instrument, Hoge ensured that they loaded onto a single factor, distinguishing the IRMS from similar instruments that might yield multiple factors or treat intrinsic and extrinsic motivation as separate dimensions.

The final structure consists of seven intrinsic items and three extrinsic items, all contributing to the measurement of the single intrinsic-extrinsic dimension. This structural choice reflects Hoge’s theoretical assumption that intrinsic and extrinsic religious faith represent opposite poles of the same motivational spectrum.

Instrument

Test Type: Psychological Scale / Self-Report Questionnaire

Format: 10 items using a Likert-like format (4 response options)

Language Available: English (Original)

Population Group: General population, primarily studied in Christian (Protestant) contexts but designed to be applicable across various religious traditions.

Age Group: Adults (Parishioners and College Students in initial studies)

Population Details: Initial studies involved participants nominated by local pastors based on intrinsic or extrinsic religious orientation descriptions. Subsequent studies included students at a liberal arts college and members of suburban Protestant churches.

Test Methodology: The scale uses four response options ranging from “strongly agree” (1) to “strongly disagree” (4). For scoring the overall intrinsic score, the three extrinsic items are reverse-scored, and all ten items are summed. A low overall score indicates high intrinsicness, while a high score indicates high extrinsicness. Alternative scoring strategies involve reporting intrinsic and extrinsic subscales separately.

Keywords

Intrinsicness, Extrinsicness, Religious Commitment, Psychometrics, Dean Hoge, Religious Psychology, Social Science, Response Bias

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not specified in source content.

Correspondence Address: Not specified in source content.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale was published in 1972 by Dean R. Hoge. The most useful source for scale items and administration suggestions is the original journal article. The instrument is straightforward, short, and avoids sectarian language, making it practical for researchers concerned about participant fatigue effects.

The original article by Hoge (1972) is: Hoge, D. R. (1972). A validated intrinsic religious motivation scale. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 11, 369-376.

Reference’s

Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 447-457.

Benson, P. L., Dehority, J., Garman, L., Hanson, E., Hochschwender, M., Lebold, C., Rohr, R., & Sullivan, J. (1980). Interpersonal correlates of nonspontaneous helping behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 110, 87-95.

Feagin, J. R. (1964). Prejudice and religious types: A focused study of southern fundamentalists. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 4, 3-13.

Hathaway, W. L., & Pargament, K. I. (1990). Intrinsic religiousness, religious coping, and psychosocial competence: A covariance structure analysis. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 29(4), 423-441.

Hoge, D. R. (1972). A validated intrinsic religious motivation scale. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 11, 369-376.

Hoge, D. R., & Carroll, J. W. (1978). Determinants of commitment and participation in suburban Protestant churches. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 17, 107-127.

Hunt, R. A., & King, M. (1971). The intrinsic-extrinsic concept: A review and evaluation. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 10, 339-356.

Pargament, K. I., Ensing, D. S., Falgout, K., Olsen, H., Reilly, B., Vanhaitsma, K., & Warren, R. (1990). God help me: 1. Religious coping efforts as predictors of the outcomes to significant negative life events. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 793-824.

Sapp, G. L., & Jones, L. (1986). Religious orientation and moral judgment. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 25, 208-214.

Spilka, B. (1977). Utilitarianism and personal faith. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 5, 226-233.

Items of the Intrinsic Religious Motiva­tion Scale

Please use the following scale to indicate your response to each statement listed below:

• 1 = strongly disagree
• 2 = moderately disagree
• 3 = moderately agree
• 4 = strongly agree

1. My faith involves all of my life. (Intrinsic)
2. One should seek God’s guidance when making every important decision. (Intrinsic}
3. In my life I experience the presence of the Divine. (Intrinsic) I
4. My faith sometimes restricts my actions. (Intrinsic)
5. Nothing is as important to me as serving God as best I know how. (Intrinsic)
6. I try hard to carry my religion over into all my other dealings in life. (Intrinsic)
7. My religious beliefs are what really lie behind my whole approach to life. (Intrinsic)
8. It doesn’t matter so much what I believe as long as I lead a moral life. (Extrinsic)
9. Although I am a religious person, I refuse to let religious considerations influence my everyday affairs. (Extrinsic)
10. Although I believe in my religion, I feel there are many more important things in life. (Extrinsic)