THE MYSTICISM SCALE: RESEARCH FORM D

Abstract

The Mysticism Scale: Research Form D (M Scale) is a 32-item self-report instrument designed by Ralph W. Hood, Jr. (1975) to quantify an individual’s tendency to report intense subjective experiences. These experiences are typically characterized by feelings of unity with the external world or with a state of “nothingness,” regardless of whether they are interpreted in a religious context. The scale was constructed to operationalize eight of Walter T. Stace’s (1960) nine phenomenological criteria for mystical experience. The original structure utilized eight subscales (Ego Quality, Unifying Quality, Inner Subjective Quality, Temporal/Spatial Quality, Noetic Quality, Ineffability, Positive Affect, and Religious Quality), but subsequent factor analyses have led researchers to primarily adopt a three-factor solution: Extrovertive Mysticism, Introvertive Mysticism, and Religious Interpretation.

Keywords

Mysticism, Religious Experience, Mystical Experience, Stace’s Criteria, Unity, Self-Report, Psychology of Religion, Extrovertive Mysticism, Introvertive Mysticism, R. W. Hood Jr.

Authors

Ralph W. Hood, Jr.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the M Scale is to provide an empirical assessment of an individual’s intense, subjective, non-ordinary experiences. It is specifically intended to measure the presence and strength of characteristics associated with mystical experiences, such as feelings of oneness, loss of self, and distortions of time and space. The scale allows researchers to study these phenomena independently of strict religious interpretation, although it does include a factor dedicated to religious interpretation.

Construct

The M Scale measures the construct of Reported Mystical Experience. The theoretical foundation relies heavily on the work of philosopher Walter T. Stace (1960), who outlined nine universal phenomenological criteria for mystical states. The scale incorporates items reflecting eight of these criteria, categorized into eight initial subscales:

• Ego Quality: Loss of self or self-absorption (Items 3, 4, 6, 24).
• Unifying Quality: Perception of oneness (Items 12, 19, 28, 30).
• Inner Subjective Quality: Perception of objects as animate (Items 8, 10, 29, 31).
• Temporal/Spatial Quality: Distortion or loss of time and space (Items 1, 11, 15, 27).
• Noetic Quality: Feelings of special knowledge or profound insight (Items 13, 16, 17, 26).
• Ineffability: Difficulty in articulating the experience (Items 2, 21, 23, 32).
• Positive Affect: Experience of bliss, peace, or joy (Items 5, 7, 18, 25).
• Religious Quality: Perception of sacredness or wonder (Items 9, 14, 20, 22).

The scale captures the distinction between experiences focused on external unity (extrovertive) and those focused on internal void or nothingness (introvertive), alongside the affective and interpretative components.

Validity

The M Scale demonstrates robust validity across several studies. Convergent validity is supported by findings that M Scale scores correlate positively with measures of openness to experience, traditional religious motivation, broad religious experience, absorption, and hypnotizability (Hood, 1975; Spanos & Moretti, 1988). Crucially, the scale is unrelated to measures of social desirability, suggesting that responses are not merely attempts to present oneself favorably.

Discriminant validity is evidenced by the generally weak or non-existent relationship between M Scale scores and various indices of psychopathology. For instance, Caird (1987) found no significant correlation between M Scale scores and measures of neuroticism or psychoticism, as assessed by the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. Although individuals with religiously delusional psychoticism may report similar levels of mystical experience as contemplative groups, the contemplatives reported significantly lower levels of general psychopathology compared to the psychotic group (Stifler et al., 1993). Furthermore, high scores on the M Scale have been associated with positive personality characteristics, such as creativity and tolerance (Hood et al., 1979).

Reliability

The overall reliability of the total M Scale score is considered adequate. Hood’s initial validation study (1975), based on a sample of 300 undergraduates, reported corrected item-total correlations spanning from .29 (Item #2) to .55 (Item #28). This indicates that most items contribute meaningfully to the total scale score.

For the subscales derived from the preferred three-factor solution (Hood et al., 1993), reliability coefficients were also reasonable: Alpha coefficients were .76 for the Extrovertive Mysticism scale, .69 for the Introvertive Mysticism scale, and .76 for the Religious Interpretation scale. These reliability figures support the use of the three-factor structure in subsequent research.

Factor Analysis

Although initially developed using eight subscales based on Stace’s criteria, the M Scale has been primarily analyzed using factor-analytic structures to capture the core dimensions of reported mystical experience at a more molar level.

• Two-Component Structure (Hood, 1975): The earliest established factor structure consisted of two primary components. The first component reflected the intense experience of unity, and the second component captured affectively charged, religiously interpreted insight.
• Three-Factor Solution (Caird, 1988): Caird proposed an alternative three-factor solution based on a sample of 115, which retained a general unity factor but divided the interpretation factor into distinct religious- and knowledge-based subscales.
• Three-Factor Solution (Hood, Morris, & Watson, 1993): Based on a larger sample (N = 740), this structure provided the most commonly recommended solution for ongoing research. This model distinguishes between three components:
  • Extrovertive Mysticism: Experiences of unity with the external world.
  • Introvertive Mysticism: Experiences of unity involving “nothingness” or a void.
  • Religious Interpretation: The affective and interpretive overlay given to the experience.

Hood and colleagues (1996) strongly recommended using the subscales derived from this latter three-factor solution to maintain the conceptually important distinction between introvertive and extrovertive forms of unitive experience in subsequent psychological research.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report scale / Psychometric instrument

Format: 32 items utilizing a 5-point Likert-type response format, ranging from -2 (definitely not true) to +2 (definitely true). Half of the items are reverse-worded. Respondents can use a question mark (?) for ‘cannot decide,’ which is scored as 0.

Language Available: English (Original)

Population Group: General population; validated primarily on university students and religious groups.

Age Group: Adolescents and Adults (validated on undergraduates).

Population Details: Initial validation sample (Hood, 1975) consisted of 300 predominantly Protestant undergraduates. Mean scores varied significantly across different samples, ranging from 104.9 to 132.2.

Test Methodology: Administration is typically paper-and-pencil, though oral administration with a binary (yes/no) format has been used. Scoring involves reverse scoring negative items, adding three to each item value (including the zero-scored ‘?’), and summing the scores. Total scores range from 32 to 160. The scale is designed to be nonsectarian and nonsexist, allowing for administration across diverse samples without modification.

Keywords

Psychology of Mysticism, Measurement, Psychological Scales, Religious Studies, Phenomenology, Unitive Experience, R. W. Hood, Reliability, Validity

Authors

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

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

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

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1975 (Initial Validation and Publication)

Permissions/Fee: The information regarding current permissions and fees is not provided in the source material. Researchers should contact R. W. Hood, Jr. or the relevant institution for usage rights.

Reference’s

Caird, D. (1987). Religiosity and personality: Are mystics introverted, neurotic, or psychotic? British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 345-346.

Caird, D. (1988). The structure of Hood’s mysticism scale: A factor-analytic study. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 27, 122-127.

Cowling, W. R. (1985). Relationship of mystical experience, differentiation, and creativity. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61, 451-456.

Hood, R. W., Jr. (1975). The construction and preliminary validation of a measure of reported mystical experience. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 14, 29-41.

Hood, R. W., Jr. (1977). Eliciting mystical states of consciousness with semistructured nature experiences. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 16, 155-163.

Hood, R. W., Jr., Hall, J. R., Watson, P. J., & Biderman, M. (1979). Personality correlates of the report of mystical experience. Psychological Reports, 44, 804-806.

Hood, R. W., Jr., Morris, R. J., & Watson, P. J. (1990). Quasi-experimental elicitation of the differential report of religious experiences among intrinsic and indiscriminately pro-religious types. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 29, 164-172.

Hood, R. W., Jr., Morris, R. J., & Watson, P. J. (1993). Further factor analysis of Hood’s Mysticism Scale. Psychological Reports, 73, 1176–1178.

Hood, R. W., Jr., Spilka, B., Hunsberger, B., & Gorsuch, R. (1996). The psychology of religion: An empirical approach. New York: Guilford.

Propst, L. R. (1979). Effects of personality and loss of anonymity on aggression: A reevaluation of deindividuation. Journal of Personality, 47, 531-545.

Smurthwaite, T. J., & McDonald, R. D. (1987). Examining ecological concern among persons reporting mystical experiences. Psychological Reports, 60, 591-596.

Spanos, N. P., & Moretti, P. (1988). Correlates of mystical and diabolical experiences in a sample of female university students. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 27, 105-116.

Stace, W. T. (1960). Mysticism and philosophy. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott.

Stifler, K. R., Greer, J., Sneck, W., & Dovenmuehle, R. (1993). An empirical investigation of the discriminability of reported mystical experiences among religious contemplatives, psychotic inpatients, and normal adults. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 32, 366–372.

Swartz, P., & Seginer, L. (1981). Response to body rotation and tendency to mystical experience. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 53, 683-688.

Items of the THE MYSTICISM SCALE: RESEARCH FORM D

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

Instructions: The attached booklet contains brief descriptions of a number of experiences. Some descriptions refer to phenomena that you may not have experienced. In each case note the description carefully and then place a mark in the left margin according to how much the description applies to your own experience. Write +1, +2, or -1, -2, or? depending on how you feel in each case.

• +1: This description is probably true of my own experience or experiences.
• -1: This description is probably not true of my own experience or experiences.
• +2: This description is definitely true of my own experience or experiences.
• -2: This description is definitely not true of my own experience or experiences.
• ?: I cannot decide.

Please mark each item trying to avoid if at all possible marking any item with a ?. In responding to each item, please understand that the items may be considered as applying to one experience or as applying to several different experiences. After completing the booklet, please be sure that all items have been marked-leave no items unanswered.

1. I have had an experience which was both timeless and spaceless.
2. * I have never had an experience which was incapable of being expressed in words.
3. I have had an experience in which something greater than myself seemed to absorb me.
4. I have had an experience in which everything seemed to disappear from my mind until I was conscious only of a void.
5. I have experienced profound joy.
6. * I have never had an experience in which I felt myself to be absorbed as one with all things.
7. *I have never experienced a perfectly peaceful state.
8. *I have never had an experience in which I felt as if all things were alive.
9. *I have never had an experience which seemed holy to me.
10. *I have never had an experience in which all things seemed to be aware.
11. I have had an experience in which I had no sense of time or space.
12. I have had an experience in which I realized the oneness of myself with all things.
13. I have had an experience in which a new view of reality was revealed to me.
14. * I have never experienced anything to be divine.
15. * I have never had an experience in which time and space were nonexistent.
16. *I have never experienced anything that I could call ultimate reality.
17. I have had an experience in which ultimate reality was revealed to me.
18. I have had an experience in which I felt that all was perfection at that time.
19. I have had an experience in which I felt everything in the world to be part of the same whole.
20. I have had an experience which I knew to be sacred.
21. * I have never had an experience which I was unable to express adequately through language.
22. I have had an experience which left me with a feeling of awe.
23. I have had an experience that is impossible to communicate.
24. *I have never had an experience in which my own self seemed to merge into something greater.
25. *I have never had an experience which left me with a feeling of wonder.
26. *I have never had an experience in which deeper aspects of reality were revealed to me.
27. *I have never had an experience in which time, place, and distance were meaningless.
28. *I have never had an experience in which I became aware of the unity of all things.
29. I have had an experience in which all things seemed to be conscious.
30. *I have never had an experience in which all things seemed to be unified into a single whole.
31. I have had an experience in which I felt nothing is ever really dead.
32. I have had an experience that cannot be expressed in words.

*Item is reverse scored.

Note. Items corresponding to the 2-component solution are: nos. 1-2, 4, 6, 8, 10-12, 15, 18-19, 21, 23, 24, 27-32 (intense experience of unity); and nos. 3, 5, 7, 9 ,13, 14, 16-17, 20, 22, 25, 26 (affectively charged religious revelation). Items corresponding to the three-component solution are: nos. 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 19, 24, 27-31 (extrovertive mysticism); nos. 5, 7, 9, 13-14, 16-18, 20, 22, 25, 26 (religious interpretation); and nos. 1-4, 11, 21, 23, 32 (introvertive mysticism).