Revised Religious Fundamentalism Scale (RRF)

Abstract

The Revised Religious Fundamentalism Scale (RRF) is a widely utilized psychometric instrument developed by Altemeyer and Hunsberger (2004) designed to measure the extent to which an individual believes that there is one true religion whose teachings are based on absolute, intrinsic, and infallible truth. The RRF is a condensed, 12-item version of the original scale, intended to efficiently capture religious fundamentalism as a singular, unified psychological construct, irrespective of the specific religious tradition (e.g., Christian, Muslim, Jewish). It assesses the belief that religious doctrines provide a complete and unfailing guide to life and salvation, setting it apart from other measures that focus on specific behaviors or adherence to rituals.

Keywords

Religious Fundamentalism, RRF, Altemeyer, Hunsberger, Psychology of Religion, Belief Systems, Religious Attitudes, Unidimensional Scale, Psychometrics, Authoritarianism.

Authors

Altemeyer, B., Hunsberger, B.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Revised Religious Fundamentalism Scale (RRF) is to provide researchers with a brief, highly reliable, and valid tool for assessing the psychological dimension of religious fundamentalism. It aims to differentiate fundamentalism, defined as a cognitive stance toward religious truth, from mere religiosity or orthodox adherence.

The revision, published in 2004, sought to shorten the original scale (often 20 items or more) while maintaining its strong psychometric properties, making it more practical for use in large survey batteries where minimizing participant fatigue is crucial. The scale focuses on core beliefs regarding the absolute authority of scripture and the necessity of belonging to the “one fundamentally true religion.”

Construct

The RRF measures religious fundamentalism, which is conceptualized by Altemeyer and Hunsberger not as a specific set of theological beliefs, but rather as the belief that one’s religion offers the complete, bedrock message from God. This construct is characterized by three key components:

• The belief that a particular set of religious teachings contains the fundamental, intrinsic, and infallible truth about humanity and the deity.

• The belief that this basic truth must be followed exactly and completely.

• The belief that those who follow this truth possess a special relationship with the deity and are uniquely righteous compared to those who do not.

This conceptualization emphasizes the rigidity, certainty, and exclusivity inherent in the fundamentalist mindset, which has been shown to correlate strongly with measures of prejudice and Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA).

Validity

The RRF demonstrates robust construct and concurrent validity, largely replicating the findings of the original scale.

• Construct Validity: Factor analyses consistently support the intended unidimensional structure, confirming that the RRF measures a single, coherent psychological construct of religious certainty and exclusivity.

• Concurrent Validity: Scores on the RRF show strong positive correlations with related constructs such as Authoritarianism, ethnocentrism, and various forms of prejudice (e.g., against homosexuals, racial minorities), aligning with the theoretical foundation linking fundamentalism to closed-mindedness and hostility toward out-groups.

• Discriminant Validity: The scale demonstrates discriminant validity by showing weaker correlations with general measures of general religiosity or spirituality that do not emphasize exclusive truth claims.

Reliability

The RRF is known for its excellent internal consistency, demonstrating high reliability across diverse samples, particularly among university students and adult populations in Western countries.

Studies utilizing the RRF typically report Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from .90 to .94, indicating that the 12 items reliably measure the same underlying construct. This high level of internal consistency ensures that the scale provides a stable and accurate measure of an individual’s fundamentalist orientation. This strong reliability is a key advantage of the revised, shorter version.

Factor Analysis

The development and validation of the RRF rely heavily on factor analytic techniques, specifically principal components analysis. The results consistently support a single-factor solution.

This unidimensionality is central to the authors’ theoretical approach, confirming that religious fundamentalism, as measured by the RRF, operates as a singular, overarching psychological characteristic rather than a collection of disparate religious beliefs. The items load strongly onto this single factor, reinforcing the scale’s focus on the belief in exclusive, immutable religious truth.

Instrument

Test Type: Psychological Self-Report Inventory

Format: 12 items utilizing a 9-point bipolar Likert Scale.

Language Available: English (Original), translations may exist but are not specified in the primary source material.

Population Group: General population, widely used across various religious affiliations (or none).

Age Group: Adolescents and Adults (typically 18 years and older).

Population Details: Primarily used in North American and Western European samples in studies concerning social psychology and the Psychology of Religion.

Test Methodology: Participants respond to 12 statements using a scale ranging from –4 (very strongly disagree) to +4 (very strongly agree), with 0 representing neutrality. Scores are typically transformed to a 1 to 9 scale for calculation (–4 = 1; +4 = 9). Certain items (inferred to be 2, 4, 7, 9, 10, 12 based on content) are reverse-coded to prevent response bias. Total scores are calculated by summing the responses, resulting in a continuous measure of fundamentalism.

Keywords

Fundamentalism Measurement, RRF, Unidimensionality, Prejudice, Dogmatism, Religious Orthodoxy, Authoritarianism, Altemeyer, Certainty.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Information not provided in source material)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Information not provided in source material)

Correspondence Address: N/A (Information not provided in source material)

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The RRF was published in its revised format in 2004. As a widely published academic scale, it is generally available for non-commercial, academic research purposes without a fee, though users should always cite the original 2004 article by Altemeyer and Hunsberger. The scale items are found in various academic publications, including the thesis by Hester (2012) titled “Religious Anti-Gay Messages’ Effect on Attitudes toward Sexual and Religious Groups,” which is available online.

Reference’s

• Altemeyer, B., & Hunsberger, B. (2004). A Revised Religious Fundamentalism Scale: The short and sweet of it. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 14, 47-54.

• Altemeyer, B. & Hunsberger, B. (1992). Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest and prejudice. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 2, 113-133.

• Hester, Neil. (2012). Religious Anti-Gay Messages’ Effect on Attitudes toward Sexual and Religious Groups. Texas Tech University. The instrument can be found on page 36. The source can be accessed here: https://repositories.tdl.org/ttu-ir/handle/2346/45412

Items of the Revised Religious Fundamentalism Scale (RRF)

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

The RRF consists of 12 items scored on a 9-point Likert Scale (–4 = very strongly disagree to +4 = very strongly agree). Items marked with an asterisk (*) are typically reverse-coded.

1. God has given humanity, a complete unfailing guide to happiness and salvation, which must be totally followed.

2. No single book of religious teachings contains all the intrinsic, fundamental truths about life.*

3. The basic cause of evil in this world is Satan, who is still constantly and ferociously fighting against God.

4. It is more important to be a good person than to believe in God and the right religion.*

5. There is a particular set of religious teachings in this world that are so true, you can’t go any “deeper” because they are the basic, bedrock message God has given humanity.

6. When you get right down to it, there are basically two kinds of people in the world: the righteous who will be rewarded by God; and the rest who will not.

7. Scriptures may contain general truths, but they should NOT be considered completely, literally true from beginning to end.*

8. To lead the best, most meaningful life, one must belong to the one, fundamentally true religion.

9. “Satan” is just the name people give to their own bad impulses. There is really no such thing as a diabolical “Prince of Darkness” who tempts us.*

10. Whenever science and sacred scripture conflict, science is probably right.*

11. The fundamentals of God’s religion should never be tampered with, or compromised with others’ beliefs.

12. All of the religions in the world have flaws and wrong teachings. There is no perfectly true and right religion.*