Antipathy towards the characters (Religious Antipathy)

Abstract

The Antipathy towards the characters (Religious Antipathy) instrument is a psychological scale developed by Ian G. Hansen and Ara Norenzayan to measure multiple dimensions of negative attitudes and intolerance toward religious figures and groups. This comprehensive measure operationalizes intolerance across four primary domains: affective dislike (Religious Antipathy), endorsement of punishment or harm (Aggressive Antipathy), willingness to violate democratic principles and Civil Rights (Civil Intolerance), and explicit support for religiously motivated violence (Religious Aggression). The scale utilizes character evaluations based on a narrative context (implicitly, a story involving multiple faiths, such as the one featuring Piscine Patel) to assess how individuals project their prejudices onto specific religious archetypes (the priest, the imam, the pandit).

Keywords

Religious Intolerance, Antipathy, Religious Aggression, Civil Intolerance, Prejudice, Psychometrics, Social Psychology, Character Evaluation, Moral Judgment

Authors

Ian G. Hansen, Ara Norenzayan

Purpose

The primary purpose of this instrument is to rigorously quantify the spectrum of Religious Intolerance, moving beyond simple self-reported prejudice to assess concrete forms of aggressive and politically intolerant attitudes. It was designed specifically for use in comparative studies, such as the authors’ research examining differences in religious intolerance between Christian and Buddhist populations, focusing on how different aspects of religiosity (e.g., belief content vs. style of belief) predict hostility.

The scale components distinguish between affective reactions (how characters are felt about), moral judgments (how wicked/righteous they are perceived), punitive desires (support for killing/punishment), and endorsements of political exclusion (violating civil rights). This multi-faceted approach allows researchers to pinpoint the exact dimensions of intolerance present within a sample population.

Construct

The overarching construct measured is **Religious Intolerance**, which the scale subdivides into four distinct, though related, components:

• Antipathy towards the characters (Religious Antipathy): This component measures affective and moral evaluations of specific religious figures presented in a narrative, assessing general dislike, perceived wickedness/righteousness, and expectations of their afterlife fate (heaven/hell).

• Feelings about Hypothetical Killing of the characters (Aggressive Antipathy): This measures the extent to which respondents believe a character deserves to be killed, often framed through the perspective of “the Divine’s” emotional reaction to their death, thereby linking personal aggression to religious justification.

• Willingness to Violate the Civil Rights of the characters (Civil Intolerance): Based on established measures of political tolerance, this subscale assesses the willingness to restrict the civil liberties (e.g., teaching, political leadership, free speech) of various religious and nonreligious groups.

• Support for Moral/Religious Killing (Religious Aggression): This component measures the explicit endorsement of the idea that the Divine sanctions or calls for the killing of the “wicked,” reflecting a belief system that justifies mortal aggression on theological grounds.

Validity

While specific statistical data (e.g., convergent, discriminant, or criterion validity coefficients) are not provided in the extracted items, the validity of the instrument is established through its grounding in existing psychological literature, particularly the incorporation of the established Civil Intolerance framework by Sullivan, Pierson, and Marcus (1982). The scale demonstrates strong face validity by directly addressing punitive and exclusionary attitudes based on religious difference.

In the original academic paper, *When How You Believe Matters More than What You Believe*, Hansen and Norenzayan provide detailed correlational analyses confirming that these subscales are empirically distinct constructs while demonstrating expected relationships with relevant variables, such as fundamentalism, specific religious traditions, and measures of cognitive processing style, thereby supporting the instrument’s construct validity.

Reliability

The reliability of the four subscales (Religious Antipathy, Aggressive Antipathy, Civil Intolerance, and Religious Aggression) is typically assessed using measures of internal consistency, such as Cronbach’s alpha. The comprehensive data regarding the internal consistency and test-retest reliability of this instrument are documented within the primary research article. Given that the Civil Intolerance section is adapted from a well-validated instrument, that component is expected to maintain high reliability.

Factor Analysis

The instrument is structured based on a hypothesized four-factor model of religious intolerance. The authors utilized factor analysis (likely Confirmatory Factor Analysis or Exploratory Factor Analysis, depending on the stage of development) to confirm that the items cluster into the four intended dimensions: affective dislike, aggressive intent toward individuals, political intolerance toward groups, and generalized support for religious violence. This analysis ensures that the subscales are measuring distinct psychological constructs as intended by the theoretical framework.

Instrument

Test Type: Attitude Scale / Psychological Inventory

Format: Self-report questionnaire utilizing 9-point Likert-type scales and semantic differential formats.

Language Available: English (as presented in the source document).

Population Group: General adult population, specifically utilized in studies comparing individuals from different religious backgrounds (e.g., Christians and Buddhists).

Age Group: Adults (typically university-aged or older participants in psychological studies).

Population Details: The scale is designed to assess attitudes toward specific religious figures (pandit, priest, imam) and generalized groups (Hindus, Christians, Muslims, Nonreligious people), making it applicable to diverse, multi-religious populations.

Test Methodology: Respondents are asked to rate their feelings, beliefs about morality and fate, and political tolerance levels regarding the specified characters or groups, using provided fixed-choice response anchors.

Keywords

Aggression, Intolerance, Religious Prejudice, Affective Attitudes, Civil Liberties, Moral Psychology, Hansen, Norenzayan

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Information not provided in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: Affiliated with the University of British Columbia (UBC).

Correspondence Address: Correspondence details available via the Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: The instrument is presented in an openly available academic publication. Researchers should cite the original work appropriately. Contact the authors (Ian G. Hansen or Ara Norenzayan) regarding specific usage permissions, especially for commercial or large-scale adaptations.

Fee: Not specified, likely free for academic research use.

Test Year: The instrument was developed for and published in the academic paper, *When How You Believe Matters More than What You Believe: Religiosity and Religious Intolerance among Christians and Buddhists*. The original PDF can be downloaded here: http://www2.psych.ubc.ca/ch‎aranlab/pdf/HansenNorenzayanReligiousTolerance.pdf

Reference’s

Hansen, I. G., & Norenzayan, A. (n.d.). When How You Believe Matters More than What You Believe: Religiosity and Religious Intolerance among Christians and Buddhists. University of British Columbia.

Sullivan, J. L., Pierson, J. E., & Marcus, G. E. (1982). Political tolerance and American democracy. University of Chicago Press.

Items of the Antipathy towards the ch‎aracters (Religious Antipathy)

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