Journal of Religion and Health, Vol. 20, No. 1, Spring 1981
A Developmental Perspective on Religious Orientation Dimensions Richard D. Kahoe and Mary Jo Meadow A B S T R A C T . L.B. Brown's model of religious faith posits two bipolar religious orientations (intrinsic-extrinsic and autonomy-observance) that represent a two-dimensional space in which a religious believer can be located. This paper proposes a developmental sequence within Brown's model. The psychometric tradition of religious orientations is combined with a developmental tradition. The developmental process is consistent with models by A. Maslow, L. Kohlberg, J. Fowler, and J. Loevinger. Religious faith typically springs from extrinsic motivations. Most religious adherents achieve the next level, "observance," or identification with a religious community and its creeds. Some progress to intrinsic religiousness, and fewer attain religious autonomy.
L.B. Brown proposed a two-dimensional model of religious faith, based empirically on sentence-completion data from 319 Australian college students? One dimension was the intrinsic-extrinsic dichotomy developed by Gordon AUport. The other dimension contrasted an "outward" orientation toward religious institutions with an "inward" orientation toward individual judgment. Brown measured the poles of the latter dichotomy with two four-item scales. 2 In Brown's model the two bipolar dimensions intersect at approximately right angles, forming a two-dimensional space within which a religious believer might be localized {see Figure 1). The intrinsic and extrinsic variables have been widely and productively used in psychology of religion research? The institutional and individual variables have been less popular, perhaps because of duf~ious reliability of Brown's measures. Subsequently Fleck has noted that the consensual pole of Allen and Spflka's committed-consensual dichotomy is distinct from Allport's extrinsic construct and has strongly institutional implications.' Batson has proposed a dimension called "religion as quest" that is distinctively individualistic. 5 Meadow's factor analysis of a large pool of religious attitude items also produced factors that strongly carry the institutional and individual connotations, e
Richard D. Kahoe, Ph.D., is Staff Psychologist at Christian Haven Homes and President of manna forty, inc., Wheatfield, Indiana. Mary Jo Meadow, Ph.D., is Associate Professor of Psychology and Director of Clinical Training at Mankato State University. 0022-4197/81/1300-0008500.95
8
9 1981Institutes of Religionand Health
Richard D. Kahoe and Mary Jo Meadow
9
We have factor-analyzed selected items from Meadow's inventory to refine and measure the two bipolar dimensions and the constituent separate poles representing Brown's model. We call the institutional and individual variables observance and autonomy respectivelyY The present paper proposes and defends a developmental sequence for the four religious orientations. Brown commented on the weakness of his study in that it did not show how persons might be characterized at any point in their religious development,s Subsequent research and theory in developmental psychology and the psychology of religion provide expectations of likely movement within the two-dimensional space of Brown's model. We shall describe that sequence, present supporting evidence from various theoretical perspectives, and discuss several implications of our developmental schema.
The developmental sequence Extrinsic religiousness. Although religion has elements of habit, by virtue of its being taught and practiced, we consider its psychologically more significant manifestations to have strong dynamic or motivational bases. Numerous fears and anxieties--physical, social, psychological, existential--motivate religious beliefs and practices. Initially people seek religion primarily as a palliative, as an ego defense. Protoreligion, in the life of the individual and perhaps for humankind, is extrinsically motivated. Without threats, deficits, or anxieties to motivate a person, religion will be merely habitual or not practiced at all. For some people religion remains on a self-serving or extrinsic basis. This is the essence of "foxhole religion" that does not result in any consistent life changes after the precipitating crisis is past. Basic religion can spring spontaneously from primitive elements of a person's cognitive store under stress or in mystical states. More commonly, some organized religious systems serve as its midwife, sometimes creating guilt or other anxieties to precipitate the birth pangs of religious faith. Observance religiousness. Under the influence of a religious system or institution, most religious persons move from a predominantly extrinsic orientation toward an institutional or observance orientation. In the space defined by Brown's model {Figure 1}, religious faith, having sprung from extrinsic motivations on the left, moves counterclockwise to observance. Whether a local congregation, a denominational bureaucracy, or a dogma or doctrinal system, all religious institutions attempt to perpetuate themselves by inspiring observance in believers. Given the extrinsic origins of religion, much content of any given religion is directed toward individual needs at the same time that loyalty to the institution is cultivated. An active church social group dissipates a new convert's this-worldly loneliness and also provides an attachment to the church. A teaching about an afterlife of bliss soothes existential anxieties over the threat of nonexistence and gives support to the system that espouses such a promise. The movement from extrinsic to observance religion is a gradual one, and a believer may be at any point on the lower-left quadrant as this developmental
10
Journal of Religion and Health
(Religion as Quest) (Individualism) Autonomy
Extrinsic (Defensive)/ (Self-serving)~
~
in_trinfi2 (Committed) (Self giving)
"true believer"
Observance (Institutionalization) (Consensual) - - ~
direction of development
Figure 1. Hypothesized process of development within Religious Orientation Dimensions.
movement occurs. When believers affiliate with a religious group, give observance to its rituals, and conform to its doctrinal beliefs or world view, they necessarily turn from purely self-serving extrinsic religion. So far we have treated rather indiscriminately two different aspects of institutional or observance religion--social or affiliative activities and conformity to a doctrinal or belief system. The strength of either may be influenced by both the psychological characteristics of the individual and the emphases of the religious institution. It may also be affected by the individual's stage of religious development. The social aspect seems to be more primitive psychologically and to reach its peak prior to that of the belief aspect. For example, social gratifications figure prominently in operational definitions of extrinsic religious orientation, and they appear to have relatively little intrinsic potential. The extrinsic or ego-defensive functions of belief systems have also been stressed by several psychologists? But although the religious beliefs of many people surely serve extrinsic functions, Rokeach noted that belief systems also have a coping function--"a cognitive framework to know and to understand. ''l~ Likewise there are intrinsic implications of religious dogmas.
Richard D. Kahoe and M a r y Jo Meadow
11
One characteristic of intrinsically religious persons, as Allport described them, is that they internalize and live by the belief system of their faith. A number of studies report such an adherence to doctrines by the intrinsically religious, leading Batson to call the intrinsically religious "true believers. ''1' For such a person, though, the religious doctrines do not appear necessarily to be held in a rigid manner; several studies have found intrinsic religious orientation and Rokeach's dogmatism scale to be uncorrelated. 12 Intrinsic religiousness. As we have suggested, religious observance involves a partial turning away from the egocentric religion of primitive faith, and subscribing to a religious belief system may become an intrinsic or self-actualizing exercise. Virtually all of the higher religions advocate a turning away from self, to a self-giving devotion to religious causes and ideals. Developmentally, intrinsic religion follows and grows out of a religion of observance, although many religious persons fail to achieve any substantial degree of intrinsic faith. While some religious leaders or congregations may fall to advocate intrinsic religiousness as consistently as others, certain individual differences also militate against development of an intrinsic religious orientation. A general disposition toward intrinsic motivation may be a precondition to intrinsic religiousness. Among freshman students at a denominational college, the correlation between intrinsic religion and general intrinsic motivation was about as high as possible, given the reliabilities of the two measures. 13 A m o n g mainstream Christian groups, most of those believers who develop an intrinsic orientation seem also to maintain a strong observance orientation. T h i s is one implication of t h e " true believer" identification of intrinsically religious persons. Measures of the two religious orientations among college student populations, however, have produced equivocal findings. For a state university sample intrinsic religion and observance correlated .48 (significant beyond the .001 level), but for a Baptist college sample the correlation was .04. If the intrinsically religious Baptist students were not necessarily buying "observance," though, neither had they reached a consensus on its contrast--rellgious autonomy. Their correlation between the intrinsic and autonomy orientations was -.34, about the same as for the university sample. ~4 Autonomous religiousness. In the developmental sequence we consider a progression toward autonomy or individualized religion to be the step beyond an internalized, intrinsic faith. However, as not all believers reach the intrinsic level, so even fewer attain a primarily autonomous orientation. Whereas the higher religions typically advocate intrinsic religion, a thoroughly autonomous faith tends to be antagonistic to the interests of organized religion--to the extent that the latter emphasizes conventional rule-oriented morality and caters to personal needs for cognitive structure and external control. There are cases, no doubt, in which an institution advocates a high degree of individual freedom in the believer's religious beliefs and practices. But it is usually a personal disposition that leads an occasional believer to the level of religious autonomy, despite institutional discouragement. What personal factors are likely to promote religious autonomy? Probably any that generally aid critical and independent thinking: greater abstract
12
Journal of Religion and Health
intelligence and higher education, particularly in reflective disciplines such as philosophy and abstract science. However, even given these factors, a tendency to isolate religious experience from other areas of thinking works against the development of religious autonomy. Needs for social support from a traditional religious group or the security of an encapsulated creed militate against autonomy--or engender conflict, where strong personal factors promote autonomy.
Theoretical support The developmental schema just sketched seems to possess an intuitive validity. To that extent, it may be because of its convergence with a number of other developmental theories. Gordon AUport. Allport asserted that individual religious faith and practice are extrinsic in their origins. In his The Individual and His Religion, mature religion was characterized as "derivative yet dynamic. ''1~ By this Allport meant that religion comes to be motivated by its own drives {"intrinsically" in his later terminology}, but its original motive forces were organic needs and the need for security {"extrinsic" motivations}. Abraham Maslow. Although Maslow's need hierarchy is not a developmental sequence, it connotes a temporal sequence by which needs may be expressed. It is congruent with our developmental schema based on Brown's model of religious dimensions. Maslow's lowest level needs are the physiological and safety needs that motivate extrinsic religion. Next in the hierarchy are love and belongingness, which parallel the social phase of observance, not far removed from extrinsic needs. Self-esteem, Maslow's next need, has two bases. The first and more primitive basis has social origins--others' positive evaluations of oneself--and is related to observance. The more advanced and stable basis for self-esteem is one's perception of her or his own responsible conduct, with strongly intrinsic implications. The highest level in Maslow's early scheme--self-actualization'implies the most advanced levels of intrinsic religion, beyond internalization of a given faith, reaching toward autonomy. Later Maslow proposed a higher level of needs that he called "meta-needs"--values that transcend actualization of any individual.le The religion of autonomy is typically based on such higher universals, which conventional religious systems often reflect but imperfectly. Table 1 summarizes the relationships of Maslow's and other models to our schema of personal religous development. Lawrence Kohlberg. Kohiberg's stages of moral judgment also parallel our model of religiousness. His preconventional stages 1 and 2 emphasize punishment and reward, with a self-serving orientation characteristic of extrinsic religion. Stage 2 begins to acknowledge the needs of other people, but in a pragmatic sense of reciprocity. Stage 3 is more explicitly social, seeking to please others in what Kohlberg calls the "good-boy/nice-girl" orientation. This, of course, is equivalent to the social aspect of our observance religion. The emphasis in stage 4 is on authority and fixed rules. Again, there is a strik-
Richard D. Kahoe and Mary Jo Meadow
13
Ta ble 1 Summary o f R e l a t i o n s h i p s of Other Models to R e l i g i o u s Development Schema Brown/Kahoe/Meadow
Maslow
Kohlberg
Fowler
Loevinger
Integrated Autonomy
Meta-needs
Universal ethical principles
Universalizing faith Autonomous
Self-actualization
Intrinsic
Self-esteem (self)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Social contract, procedural rules
Paradoxicalconsolidative faith
Law and order, _ _ authority
Individuativereflexive faith
Self-esteem (other
Synthetic-conventional faith
Observance
Conscientious
_ ............
Conformist
Interpersonal r e l a tions: good-boy/ n i c e girl Love and belonging
Hedonistic Extrinsic
Physiological and safety needs
Punishment and obedience
Mythic-literal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . faith Self-protective Intuitive-projective faith Undifferentiated faith
Impulsive
ing parallel to religious dogma--the latter part of our observance orientation, bridging into the conscientiousness of intrinsic religion. In Kohlberg's stage 5 social-contract orientation, the individual is primarily concerned with meeting contractual obligations--those that are inherent in being a member of any social order and also ad hoc agreements among individuals. This sense of duty, obligation, and personal responsibility has strikingly intrinsic overtones. The stage 6 orientation toward comprehensive ethical principles recalls both Maslow's meta-needs and the universal principles that support an autonomous or individualistic religious system. 17 James Fowler. Fowler's stages of religious faith development stress more cognitive aspects of religiousness. His undifferentiated faith (stage 0) and intuitive-projective {1) stages correspond in sequence to extrinsic beginnings of religion. Both schemata agree on an essentially egocentric frame of reference at the initial levels. The traditions of mythic-literal faith {2) imply a community and lead into the observance level of our model. Fowler's stage 3, synthetic-conventional faith, even more strongly stresses adoption of a conventional belief system. It more closely represents Kohlberg's stage 4 (rule and authority) and the belief component of our observance stage. Individuative-reflexive faith (4) is a stage of conflict and transition that reflects the intrinsically religious "true believer" {who still has a strong component of observance). Faith is made personal--not "internalized" in the sense of fully adopting an intact belief system. Yet Fowler indicates a need for a compatible faith group in this stage, continuing elements of an observance
14
Journal of Religion and Health
orientation. Paradoxical-consolidative faith (stage 5) represents a fully developed intrinsic orientation, and universalizing faith (6) is the height of autonomy. The emphasis at this highest level is not just on the individual's autonomy from a religious institution but on the acceptance of other persons from any faith tradition and at any of the stages of faith development. 18 Jane Loevinger. Some aspects of Loevinger's model of ego development are relevant to our religious development schema. The extrinsic origins of religion correspond to her early impulsive and self-protective stages, which include an opportunistic hedonism with an expedient morality. Other people are viewed as sources of supply or as competitors, and the individual is preoccupied with personal desires and having advantage over others. The key feature of Loevinger's next stage (conformist) is that one has come to identify personal welfare with that of a group. Group-accepted rules are obeyed, and disapproval is a potent sanction. The world view is conceptually simple, with stereotyped understandings of morality and appropriate interpersonal behavior. This corresponds to the observance level in our model. Loevinger sees the individual moving next through a stage of self-awaren e s s - w i t h increasing internalization--to the conscientious stage, which closely resembles intrinsic religiousness. The conscientious individual has an internMized morality, judges according to the consequences of behavior, and recognizes exceptions to rules. Such persons are more concerned with personally defined goals than with group approval, and they experience more self-dissatisfaction than at any other stage. Loevinger's highest stages--autonomous and integrated--are equivalent to religious autonomy. I n t e r p e r s o n a l relations cease to be controlling; the autonomy of others is respected; and individual differences are valued rather than seen as threats. There is great tolerance for ambiguity, good capacity for coping with internal conflict, and a broad and objective perspective on life. 19 None of the theories we have reviewed makes any pretense of absolute verity, though taken together they are based on a substantial body of empirical data. On the whole, the congruencies provide strong support for the developmental sequence we have proposed within our two-dimensional model. Actually we do not pose our schema as a new theory of religious development. Our more modest intent is to depict an intriguing model that appears to have substantial generality within the psychometric tradition in the psychology of religion. Then we have shown how contemporary thought on religious development can be projected onto that model. The congruencies partly reflect the prevailing agreement among developmental theories.
Other considerations Generality. We have not made the appropriate observations in all faith communities to support our claim that the developmental sequence applies to all higher religions. J u s t to take one item that happens to be at hand, though, we note an otherwise unidentified Yogic quotation:
Richard D. Kahoe and M a r y ..ToMeadow
15
At first it is DISCIPLINE--you do it because someone you believe in tells you it is good for you, so you do it and try to experience that it is truly good for you and he was right. Next it is PRACTICE--you have experienced how good it feels and how good it is for you; you believe in it and want it to work for you, to improve you all over, so you do it willingly, of your own accord. Then it becomes WORSHIP. You no longer care about it as being good for you; you go beyond that, and it is done as a loving worhsip to the One who dwells within and makes it possible. The sequence from discipline (extrinsic, self-serving acts) to practice (habitual observance) to worship {an unselfish act of intrinsic religion) depicts threefourths of our developmental model. We claim universality for our schema to provoke the research that could invalidate it, if for no other reason. We have already suggested that localized expressions of a religious faith--one religious leader, a congregation or fellowship--may differentially emphasize or neglect any of the four polar points or other portions of the twodimensional model. Such vagaries will surely affect the development of disciples or members subject to such influences--either to retard development or to accelerate to or through certain levels. While growth may stop at any point on the developmental continuum, though, we could expect that no level may be bypassed. Description versus prescription. By positing a sequence of development, we necessarily imply that a later orientation is more "mature" than an earlier one. However, we hesitate to make a value judgment or to be prescriptive and say that every person should strive to attain each higher level. For one person in one situation, any given level might be the highest he or she can expect to attain. We say this, not that development be neglected, but that individual differences might be accepted--that those who attain higher levels might not disparage those who linger in the valleys and on the plains of religious experience. If pressed for a prescription, we might say that believers should be encouraged toward the intrinsic semicircle, but only those who are willing to pay the price should press toward the pole of autonomy. Relations among levels. We avoid characterizing the levels of our schema as "stages," with the implication that religious experience functions uniquely at each step. We prefer to see religious development as a continuum, with psychc~ metrically identifiable and "characteristic" orientations along the way. Our depiction of the developmental schema may imply that the different religious orientations are mixed only in the quadrants between two adjacent poles of Brown's model. In a way that is not easily depicted in two dimensions, we believe that each new level encompasses all earlier steps. Perhaps the metaphor of an upward spiral, above and through the two-dimensional space, would be apt. One implication of the flat model is that the move toward autonomy is back toward self-centered concerns. While autonomy is probably not so selfdenying as intrinsic religiousness, its self-reference is different from that of primitive extrinsic faith. Plucking grain on the Sabbath, by Christ's disciples, was only superficially extrinsic. Transmuted and refined by the developmental process, it became an expression of religious autonomy.
16
Journal of Religion and Health
We could borrow phrases that Kohlberg used to describe his increasingly higher stages of moral judgment: "more differentiated, more integrated, and more general or universal. ''2~ Less developed individuals tend to be rather undifferentiated in their thinking, so that among such groups "polar opposites" like intrinsic and extrinsic orientations tend to have positive or low negative correlations. This tendency produces what Allport and Ross called the "indiscriminately p r o r e l i g i o u s . ''21 In groups such as seminary students, with supposedly more mature religiousness, intrinsic and extrinsic orientations have higher negative correlations, z2 Increasing integration is suggested by Brown's observation that "the really committed religious person might be difficult to place on these dimensions, primarily because there will be facets of his functioning that lie in each of the quadrants. ''23 The consolidation and universalism of Fowler's higher stages convey this same flavor. Autonomously religious persons, to take the highest level for illustration, are able to recognize and accept extrinsic and observance religious needs in themselves and in others and to experience intrinsic religious gratifications, while plotting their own paths toward universal principles. Relations to personality. We expect the developmental levels we have outlined to be interdependent with a religious person's general personality development, especially in cognitive stages, moral judgment, ego development, motivational style, and socialization. The most regular progression might be observed in a child reared in a religious tradition or experiencing a religious conversion prior to adolescence. Late adolescent or adult converts, with higher levels of ego development and moral judgment, presumably would experience the extrinsic and observance levels of religous growth in turn, but they would develop more rapidly toward orientations congruent with the rest of their personalities and cognitive styles. Research directions. Since religious development is complex and progresses at different rates in different persons, its study especially focuses on individuals, or is "idiographic." Much recent fruitful work in the psychology of religion, on the other hand, has employed psychometric measures of religious dimensions, using a "nomothetic" approach. The present article represents a merger of these two traditions and is intended to stimulate research at the promising boundary between the two methodologies. An immediate research problem is to test the propositions of this developmental schema and the assumptions related to it. The methodologies must of necessity be more complex than those of purely nomothetic research, since development is assumed to have notable idiosyncracies overlying the predicted regularities. Longitudinal and quasi-longitudinal methods are typically called for. These include the use of case studies, autobiographies, and psychohistorical materials--using content analysis or other judgmental methods to define operationally the religious orientation dimensions. Conventional psychometric measures of the dimensions, or modifications of them, might be used in formal retrospective studies and--for the patient researcher--longterm longitudinal research. Within the framework of this schema we should be able better to identify and verify the various social {institutional) and personal
Richard D. Kahoe and Mary Jo Meadow
17
(psychological) variables that influence the complexity of individual religious patterns.
References 1. Brown, L.B., "Classifications of Religious Orientation," J. Scientific Study of Religion, 1964, 4, 91-99. 2. . . . "A Study of Religious Belief," British J. Psychology, 1962, 53, 259-272. 3. E.g., Allport, G.W., and Ross, J.M., "Personal Religious Orientation and Prejudice," J. Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 5, 432-443; Hoge, D.R., "A Validated Intrinsic Religious Motivation Scale," J. Scientific Study of Religion, 1972, 11, 369-376. 4. Fleck, J.R., "Dimensions of Personal Religion: A Dichotomy or Trichotomy?" In Donaldson, W.J., Jr., ed., Research in Mental Health and Religious Behavior. Atlanta, Psychological Studies Institute, 1976. See also Allen, R.O., and Spilka, B., "Committed and Consensual Religion: A Specification of Religious Prejudice Relationships," J. Scientific Study of Religion, 1967, 6, 191-206. 5. Batson, C.D., "Religion as Prosocial: Agent or Double Agent?" loc. ci~, 1976, 15, 29-45. 6. Meadow, M.J., "The Structure of Religious Attitudes: A Factor Analytic Study," Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1976. 7. Kahoe, R.D., and Meadow, M.J., "Religious Orientation Dimensions: Individual and Institutional Interrelations." Paper read at the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion, Chicago, October, 1977. 8. Brown, "Classifications of Religious Orientation," op. cir. 9. E.g., Rokeach, M., The Open and Closed Mind. New York, Basic Books, 1960; Wilson, G.D., The Psychology of Conservatism. New York, Academic Press, 1973. 10. Rokeach, op. cir., p. 67. 11. Batson, op. cia; Kahoe and Meadow, op. cir.; Kahoe, R.D., "The Psychology and Theology of Sexism," J. Psychology and Theology, 1974, 2, 284-290. 12. Kahoe, R.D., "Personality and Achievement Correlates of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Religious Orientations," J. Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 812-818; Kahoe, R.D., and Dunn, R.F., "The Fear of Death and Religious Attitudes and Behavior," J. Scientific Study of Religion, 1975, 14, 379-382; Thompson, A., "Openmindedness and Indiscriminate Antireligious Orientation," loc. cir., 1974, 13, 471-477. 13. Kaheo, "Personality and Achievement Correlates of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Religious Orientations," op. cir. 14. Kahoe and Meadow, op. cia 15. Allport, G.W., The Individual and His Religion. New York, Macmillan, 1950, p. 71. 16. Maslow, A., "A Theory of Human Motivation," Psychological Review, 1943, 56[ 370-396; __, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. New York, Viking, 1971. 17. Kohlberg, L., "The Child as a Moral Philosopher," Psychology Today, September, 1968, 25-30. 18. See Berryman, J.W., ed., Life Maps: Conversations on the Journey of Faith, Waco, Texas, Word Books, 1977. 19. Loevinger, J., "The Meaning and Measurement of Ego Development," American Psychologist, 1966, 21, 195-206; _ _ , E g o Developrnen~ San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 1976. 20. Kohlberg, op. cir. 21. Allport and Ross, op. ci~ 22. E.g., Batson, op. ci~ 23. Brown, "Classifications of Religious Orientation," op. cia, p. 96.
A Developmental Perspective on Religious Orientation Dimensions Richard D. Kahoe and Mary Jo Meadow A B S T R A C T . L.B. Brown's model of religious faith posits two bipolar religious orientations (intrinsic-extrinsic and autonomy-observance) that represent a two-dimensional space in which a religious believer can be located. This paper proposes a developmental sequence within Brown's model. The psychometric tradition of religious orientations is combined with a developmental tradition. The developmental process is consistent with models by A. Maslow, L. Kohlberg, J. Fowler, and J. Loevinger. Religious faith typically springs from extrinsic motivations. Most religious adherents achieve the next level, "observance," or identification with a religious community and its creeds. Some progress to intrinsic religiousness, and fewer attain religious autonomy.
L.B. Brown proposed a two-dimensional model of religious faith, based empirically on sentence-completion data from 319 Australian college students? One dimension was the intrinsic-extrinsic dichotomy developed by Gordon AUport. The other dimension contrasted an "outward" orientation toward religious institutions with an "inward" orientation toward individual judgment. Brown measured the poles of the latter dichotomy with two four-item scales. 2 In Brown's model the two bipolar dimensions intersect at approximately right angles, forming a two-dimensional space within which a religious believer might be localized {see Figure 1). The intrinsic and extrinsic variables have been widely and productively used in psychology of religion research? The institutional and individual variables have been less popular, perhaps because of duf~ious reliability of Brown's measures. Subsequently Fleck has noted that the consensual pole of Allen and Spflka's committed-consensual dichotomy is distinct from Allport's extrinsic construct and has strongly institutional implications.' Batson has proposed a dimension called "religion as quest" that is distinctively individualistic. 5 Meadow's factor analysis of a large pool of religious attitude items also produced factors that strongly carry the institutional and individual connotations, e
Richard D. Kahoe, Ph.D., is Staff Psychologist at Christian Haven Homes and President of manna forty, inc., Wheatfield, Indiana. Mary Jo Meadow, Ph.D., is Associate Professor of Psychology and Director of Clinical Training at Mankato State University. 0022-4197/81/1300-0008500.95
8
9 1981Institutes of Religionand Health
Richard D. Kahoe and Mary Jo Meadow
9
We have factor-analyzed selected items from Meadow's inventory to refine and measure the two bipolar dimensions and the constituent separate poles representing Brown's model. We call the institutional and individual variables observance and autonomy respectivelyY The present paper proposes and defends a developmental sequence for the four religious orientations. Brown commented on the weakness of his study in that it did not show how persons might be characterized at any point in their religious development,s Subsequent research and theory in developmental psychology and the psychology of religion provide expectations of likely movement within the two-dimensional space of Brown's model. We shall describe that sequence, present supporting evidence from various theoretical perspectives, and discuss several implications of our developmental schema.
The developmental sequence Extrinsic religiousness. Although religion has elements of habit, by virtue of its being taught and practiced, we consider its psychologically more significant manifestations to have strong dynamic or motivational bases. Numerous fears and anxieties--physical, social, psychological, existential--motivate religious beliefs and practices. Initially people seek religion primarily as a palliative, as an ego defense. Protoreligion, in the life of the individual and perhaps for humankind, is extrinsically motivated. Without threats, deficits, or anxieties to motivate a person, religion will be merely habitual or not practiced at all. For some people religion remains on a self-serving or extrinsic basis. This is the essence of "foxhole religion" that does not result in any consistent life changes after the precipitating crisis is past. Basic religion can spring spontaneously from primitive elements of a person's cognitive store under stress or in mystical states. More commonly, some organized religious systems serve as its midwife, sometimes creating guilt or other anxieties to precipitate the birth pangs of religious faith. Observance religiousness. Under the influence of a religious system or institution, most religious persons move from a predominantly extrinsic orientation toward an institutional or observance orientation. In the space defined by Brown's model {Figure 1}, religious faith, having sprung from extrinsic motivations on the left, moves counterclockwise to observance. Whether a local congregation, a denominational bureaucracy, or a dogma or doctrinal system, all religious institutions attempt to perpetuate themselves by inspiring observance in believers. Given the extrinsic origins of religion, much content of any given religion is directed toward individual needs at the same time that loyalty to the institution is cultivated. An active church social group dissipates a new convert's this-worldly loneliness and also provides an attachment to the church. A teaching about an afterlife of bliss soothes existential anxieties over the threat of nonexistence and gives support to the system that espouses such a promise. The movement from extrinsic to observance religion is a gradual one, and a believer may be at any point on the lower-left quadrant as this developmental
10
Journal of Religion and Health
(Religion as Quest) (Individualism) Autonomy
Extrinsic (Defensive)/ (Self-serving)~
~
in_trinfi2 (Committed) (Self giving)
"true believer"
Observance (Institutionalization) (Consensual) - - ~
direction of development
Figure 1. Hypothesized process of development within Religious Orientation Dimensions.
movement occurs. When believers affiliate with a religious group, give observance to its rituals, and conform to its doctrinal beliefs or world view, they necessarily turn from purely self-serving extrinsic religion. So far we have treated rather indiscriminately two different aspects of institutional or observance religion--social or affiliative activities and conformity to a doctrinal or belief system. The strength of either may be influenced by both the psychological characteristics of the individual and the emphases of the religious institution. It may also be affected by the individual's stage of religious development. The social aspect seems to be more primitive psychologically and to reach its peak prior to that of the belief aspect. For example, social gratifications figure prominently in operational definitions of extrinsic religious orientation, and they appear to have relatively little intrinsic potential. The extrinsic or ego-defensive functions of belief systems have also been stressed by several psychologists? But although the religious beliefs of many people surely serve extrinsic functions, Rokeach noted that belief systems also have a coping function--"a cognitive framework to know and to understand. ''l~ Likewise there are intrinsic implications of religious dogmas.
Richard D. Kahoe and M a r y Jo Meadow
11
One characteristic of intrinsically religious persons, as Allport described them, is that they internalize and live by the belief system of their faith. A number of studies report such an adherence to doctrines by the intrinsically religious, leading Batson to call the intrinsically religious "true believers. ''1' For such a person, though, the religious doctrines do not appear necessarily to be held in a rigid manner; several studies have found intrinsic religious orientation and Rokeach's dogmatism scale to be uncorrelated. 12 Intrinsic religiousness. As we have suggested, religious observance involves a partial turning away from the egocentric religion of primitive faith, and subscribing to a religious belief system may become an intrinsic or self-actualizing exercise. Virtually all of the higher religions advocate a turning away from self, to a self-giving devotion to religious causes and ideals. Developmentally, intrinsic religion follows and grows out of a religion of observance, although many religious persons fail to achieve any substantial degree of intrinsic faith. While some religious leaders or congregations may fall to advocate intrinsic religiousness as consistently as others, certain individual differences also militate against development of an intrinsic religious orientation. A general disposition toward intrinsic motivation may be a precondition to intrinsic religiousness. Among freshman students at a denominational college, the correlation between intrinsic religion and general intrinsic motivation was about as high as possible, given the reliabilities of the two measures. 13 A m o n g mainstream Christian groups, most of those believers who develop an intrinsic orientation seem also to maintain a strong observance orientation. T h i s is one implication of t h e " true believer" identification of intrinsically religious persons. Measures of the two religious orientations among college student populations, however, have produced equivocal findings. For a state university sample intrinsic religion and observance correlated .48 (significant beyond the .001 level), but for a Baptist college sample the correlation was .04. If the intrinsically religious Baptist students were not necessarily buying "observance," though, neither had they reached a consensus on its contrast--rellgious autonomy. Their correlation between the intrinsic and autonomy orientations was -.34, about the same as for the university sample. ~4 Autonomous religiousness. In the developmental sequence we consider a progression toward autonomy or individualized religion to be the step beyond an internalized, intrinsic faith. However, as not all believers reach the intrinsic level, so even fewer attain a primarily autonomous orientation. Whereas the higher religions typically advocate intrinsic religion, a thoroughly autonomous faith tends to be antagonistic to the interests of organized religion--to the extent that the latter emphasizes conventional rule-oriented morality and caters to personal needs for cognitive structure and external control. There are cases, no doubt, in which an institution advocates a high degree of individual freedom in the believer's religious beliefs and practices. But it is usually a personal disposition that leads an occasional believer to the level of religious autonomy, despite institutional discouragement. What personal factors are likely to promote religious autonomy? Probably any that generally aid critical and independent thinking: greater abstract
12
Journal of Religion and Health
intelligence and higher education, particularly in reflective disciplines such as philosophy and abstract science. However, even given these factors, a tendency to isolate religious experience from other areas of thinking works against the development of religious autonomy. Needs for social support from a traditional religious group or the security of an encapsulated creed militate against autonomy--or engender conflict, where strong personal factors promote autonomy.
Theoretical support The developmental schema just sketched seems to possess an intuitive validity. To that extent, it may be because of its convergence with a number of other developmental theories. Gordon AUport. Allport asserted that individual religious faith and practice are extrinsic in their origins. In his The Individual and His Religion, mature religion was characterized as "derivative yet dynamic. ''1~ By this Allport meant that religion comes to be motivated by its own drives {"intrinsically" in his later terminology}, but its original motive forces were organic needs and the need for security {"extrinsic" motivations}. Abraham Maslow. Although Maslow's need hierarchy is not a developmental sequence, it connotes a temporal sequence by which needs may be expressed. It is congruent with our developmental schema based on Brown's model of religious dimensions. Maslow's lowest level needs are the physiological and safety needs that motivate extrinsic religion. Next in the hierarchy are love and belongingness, which parallel the social phase of observance, not far removed from extrinsic needs. Self-esteem, Maslow's next need, has two bases. The first and more primitive basis has social origins--others' positive evaluations of oneself--and is related to observance. The more advanced and stable basis for self-esteem is one's perception of her or his own responsible conduct, with strongly intrinsic implications. The highest level in Maslow's early scheme--self-actualization'implies the most advanced levels of intrinsic religion, beyond internalization of a given faith, reaching toward autonomy. Later Maslow proposed a higher level of needs that he called "meta-needs"--values that transcend actualization of any individual.le The religion of autonomy is typically based on such higher universals, which conventional religious systems often reflect but imperfectly. Table 1 summarizes the relationships of Maslow's and other models to our schema of personal religous development. Lawrence Kohlberg. Kohiberg's stages of moral judgment also parallel our model of religiousness. His preconventional stages 1 and 2 emphasize punishment and reward, with a self-serving orientation characteristic of extrinsic religion. Stage 2 begins to acknowledge the needs of other people, but in a pragmatic sense of reciprocity. Stage 3 is more explicitly social, seeking to please others in what Kohlberg calls the "good-boy/nice-girl" orientation. This, of course, is equivalent to the social aspect of our observance religion. The emphasis in stage 4 is on authority and fixed rules. Again, there is a strik-
Richard D. Kahoe and Mary Jo Meadow
13
Ta ble 1 Summary o f R e l a t i o n s h i p s of Other Models to R e l i g i o u s Development Schema Brown/Kahoe/Meadow
Maslow
Kohlberg
Fowler
Loevinger
Integrated Autonomy
Meta-needs
Universal ethical principles
Universalizing faith Autonomous
Self-actualization
Intrinsic
Self-esteem (self)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Social contract, procedural rules
Paradoxicalconsolidative faith
Law and order, _ _ authority
Individuativereflexive faith
Self-esteem (other
Synthetic-conventional faith
Observance
Conscientious
_ ............
Conformist
Interpersonal r e l a tions: good-boy/ n i c e girl Love and belonging
Hedonistic Extrinsic
Physiological and safety needs
Punishment and obedience
Mythic-literal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . faith Self-protective Intuitive-projective faith Undifferentiated faith
Impulsive
ing parallel to religious dogma--the latter part of our observance orientation, bridging into the conscientiousness of intrinsic religion. In Kohlberg's stage 5 social-contract orientation, the individual is primarily concerned with meeting contractual obligations--those that are inherent in being a member of any social order and also ad hoc agreements among individuals. This sense of duty, obligation, and personal responsibility has strikingly intrinsic overtones. The stage 6 orientation toward comprehensive ethical principles recalls both Maslow's meta-needs and the universal principles that support an autonomous or individualistic religious system. 17 James Fowler. Fowler's stages of religious faith development stress more cognitive aspects of religiousness. His undifferentiated faith (stage 0) and intuitive-projective {1) stages correspond in sequence to extrinsic beginnings of religion. Both schemata agree on an essentially egocentric frame of reference at the initial levels. The traditions of mythic-literal faith {2) imply a community and lead into the observance level of our model. Fowler's stage 3, synthetic-conventional faith, even more strongly stresses adoption of a conventional belief system. It more closely represents Kohlberg's stage 4 (rule and authority) and the belief component of our observance stage. Individuative-reflexive faith (4) is a stage of conflict and transition that reflects the intrinsically religious "true believer" {who still has a strong component of observance). Faith is made personal--not "internalized" in the sense of fully adopting an intact belief system. Yet Fowler indicates a need for a compatible faith group in this stage, continuing elements of an observance
14
Journal of Religion and Health
orientation. Paradoxical-consolidative faith (stage 5) represents a fully developed intrinsic orientation, and universalizing faith (6) is the height of autonomy. The emphasis at this highest level is not just on the individual's autonomy from a religious institution but on the acceptance of other persons from any faith tradition and at any of the stages of faith development. 18 Jane Loevinger. Some aspects of Loevinger's model of ego development are relevant to our religious development schema. The extrinsic origins of religion correspond to her early impulsive and self-protective stages, which include an opportunistic hedonism with an expedient morality. Other people are viewed as sources of supply or as competitors, and the individual is preoccupied with personal desires and having advantage over others. The key feature of Loevinger's next stage (conformist) is that one has come to identify personal welfare with that of a group. Group-accepted rules are obeyed, and disapproval is a potent sanction. The world view is conceptually simple, with stereotyped understandings of morality and appropriate interpersonal behavior. This corresponds to the observance level in our model. Loevinger sees the individual moving next through a stage of self-awaren e s s - w i t h increasing internalization--to the conscientious stage, which closely resembles intrinsic religiousness. The conscientious individual has an internMized morality, judges according to the consequences of behavior, and recognizes exceptions to rules. Such persons are more concerned with personally defined goals than with group approval, and they experience more self-dissatisfaction than at any other stage. Loevinger's highest stages--autonomous and integrated--are equivalent to religious autonomy. I n t e r p e r s o n a l relations cease to be controlling; the autonomy of others is respected; and individual differences are valued rather than seen as threats. There is great tolerance for ambiguity, good capacity for coping with internal conflict, and a broad and objective perspective on life. 19 None of the theories we have reviewed makes any pretense of absolute verity, though taken together they are based on a substantial body of empirical data. On the whole, the congruencies provide strong support for the developmental sequence we have proposed within our two-dimensional model. Actually we do not pose our schema as a new theory of religious development. Our more modest intent is to depict an intriguing model that appears to have substantial generality within the psychometric tradition in the psychology of religion. Then we have shown how contemporary thought on religious development can be projected onto that model. The congruencies partly reflect the prevailing agreement among developmental theories.
Other considerations Generality. We have not made the appropriate observations in all faith communities to support our claim that the developmental sequence applies to all higher religions. J u s t to take one item that happens to be at hand, though, we note an otherwise unidentified Yogic quotation:
Richard D. Kahoe and M a r y ..ToMeadow
15
At first it is DISCIPLINE--you do it because someone you believe in tells you it is good for you, so you do it and try to experience that it is truly good for you and he was right. Next it is PRACTICE--you have experienced how good it feels and how good it is for you; you believe in it and want it to work for you, to improve you all over, so you do it willingly, of your own accord. Then it becomes WORSHIP. You no longer care about it as being good for you; you go beyond that, and it is done as a loving worhsip to the One who dwells within and makes it possible. The sequence from discipline (extrinsic, self-serving acts) to practice (habitual observance) to worship {an unselfish act of intrinsic religion) depicts threefourths of our developmental model. We claim universality for our schema to provoke the research that could invalidate it, if for no other reason. We have already suggested that localized expressions of a religious faith--one religious leader, a congregation or fellowship--may differentially emphasize or neglect any of the four polar points or other portions of the twodimensional model. Such vagaries will surely affect the development of disciples or members subject to such influences--either to retard development or to accelerate to or through certain levels. While growth may stop at any point on the developmental continuum, though, we could expect that no level may be bypassed. Description versus prescription. By positing a sequence of development, we necessarily imply that a later orientation is more "mature" than an earlier one. However, we hesitate to make a value judgment or to be prescriptive and say that every person should strive to attain each higher level. For one person in one situation, any given level might be the highest he or she can expect to attain. We say this, not that development be neglected, but that individual differences might be accepted--that those who attain higher levels might not disparage those who linger in the valleys and on the plains of religious experience. If pressed for a prescription, we might say that believers should be encouraged toward the intrinsic semicircle, but only those who are willing to pay the price should press toward the pole of autonomy. Relations among levels. We avoid characterizing the levels of our schema as "stages," with the implication that religious experience functions uniquely at each step. We prefer to see religious development as a continuum, with psychc~ metrically identifiable and "characteristic" orientations along the way. Our depiction of the developmental schema may imply that the different religious orientations are mixed only in the quadrants between two adjacent poles of Brown's model. In a way that is not easily depicted in two dimensions, we believe that each new level encompasses all earlier steps. Perhaps the metaphor of an upward spiral, above and through the two-dimensional space, would be apt. One implication of the flat model is that the move toward autonomy is back toward self-centered concerns. While autonomy is probably not so selfdenying as intrinsic religiousness, its self-reference is different from that of primitive extrinsic faith. Plucking grain on the Sabbath, by Christ's disciples, was only superficially extrinsic. Transmuted and refined by the developmental process, it became an expression of religious autonomy.
16
Journal of Religion and Health
We could borrow phrases that Kohlberg used to describe his increasingly higher stages of moral judgment: "more differentiated, more integrated, and more general or universal. ''2~ Less developed individuals tend to be rather undifferentiated in their thinking, so that among such groups "polar opposites" like intrinsic and extrinsic orientations tend to have positive or low negative correlations. This tendency produces what Allport and Ross called the "indiscriminately p r o r e l i g i o u s . ''21 In groups such as seminary students, with supposedly more mature religiousness, intrinsic and extrinsic orientations have higher negative correlations, z2 Increasing integration is suggested by Brown's observation that "the really committed religious person might be difficult to place on these dimensions, primarily because there will be facets of his functioning that lie in each of the quadrants. ''23 The consolidation and universalism of Fowler's higher stages convey this same flavor. Autonomously religious persons, to take the highest level for illustration, are able to recognize and accept extrinsic and observance religious needs in themselves and in others and to experience intrinsic religious gratifications, while plotting their own paths toward universal principles. Relations to personality. We expect the developmental levels we have outlined to be interdependent with a religious person's general personality development, especially in cognitive stages, moral judgment, ego development, motivational style, and socialization. The most regular progression might be observed in a child reared in a religious tradition or experiencing a religious conversion prior to adolescence. Late adolescent or adult converts, with higher levels of ego development and moral judgment, presumably would experience the extrinsic and observance levels of religous growth in turn, but they would develop more rapidly toward orientations congruent with the rest of their personalities and cognitive styles. Research directions. Since religious development is complex and progresses at different rates in different persons, its study especially focuses on individuals, or is "idiographic." Much recent fruitful work in the psychology of religion, on the other hand, has employed psychometric measures of religious dimensions, using a "nomothetic" approach. The present article represents a merger of these two traditions and is intended to stimulate research at the promising boundary between the two methodologies. An immediate research problem is to test the propositions of this developmental schema and the assumptions related to it. The methodologies must of necessity be more complex than those of purely nomothetic research, since development is assumed to have notable idiosyncracies overlying the predicted regularities. Longitudinal and quasi-longitudinal methods are typically called for. These include the use of case studies, autobiographies, and psychohistorical materials--using content analysis or other judgmental methods to define operationally the religious orientation dimensions. Conventional psychometric measures of the dimensions, or modifications of them, might be used in formal retrospective studies and--for the patient researcher--longterm longitudinal research. Within the framework of this schema we should be able better to identify and verify the various social {institutional) and personal
Richard D. Kahoe and Mary Jo Meadow
17
(psychological) variables that influence the complexity of individual religious patterns.
References 1. Brown, L.B., "Classifications of Religious Orientation," J. Scientific Study of Religion, 1964, 4, 91-99. 2. . . . "A Study of Religious Belief," British J. Psychology, 1962, 53, 259-272. 3. E.g., Allport, G.W., and Ross, J.M., "Personal Religious Orientation and Prejudice," J. Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 5, 432-443; Hoge, D.R., "A Validated Intrinsic Religious Motivation Scale," J. Scientific Study of Religion, 1972, 11, 369-376. 4. Fleck, J.R., "Dimensions of Personal Religion: A Dichotomy or Trichotomy?" In Donaldson, W.J., Jr., ed., Research in Mental Health and Religious Behavior. Atlanta, Psychological Studies Institute, 1976. See also Allen, R.O., and Spilka, B., "Committed and Consensual Religion: A Specification of Religious Prejudice Relationships," J. Scientific Study of Religion, 1967, 6, 191-206. 5. Batson, C.D., "Religion as Prosocial: Agent or Double Agent?" loc. ci~, 1976, 15, 29-45. 6. Meadow, M.J., "The Structure of Religious Attitudes: A Factor Analytic Study," Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1976. 7. Kahoe, R.D., and Meadow, M.J., "Religious Orientation Dimensions: Individual and Institutional Interrelations." Paper read at the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion, Chicago, October, 1977. 8. Brown, "Classifications of Religious Orientation," op. cir. 9. E.g., Rokeach, M., The Open and Closed Mind. New York, Basic Books, 1960; Wilson, G.D., The Psychology of Conservatism. New York, Academic Press, 1973. 10. Rokeach, op. cir., p. 67. 11. Batson, op. cia; Kahoe and Meadow, op. cir.; Kahoe, R.D., "The Psychology and Theology of Sexism," J. Psychology and Theology, 1974, 2, 284-290. 12. Kahoe, R.D., "Personality and Achievement Correlates of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Religious Orientations," J. Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 812-818; Kahoe, R.D., and Dunn, R.F., "The Fear of Death and Religious Attitudes and Behavior," J. Scientific Study of Religion, 1975, 14, 379-382; Thompson, A., "Openmindedness and Indiscriminate Antireligious Orientation," loc. cir., 1974, 13, 471-477. 13. Kaheo, "Personality and Achievement Correlates of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Religious Orientations," op. cir. 14. Kahoe and Meadow, op. cia 15. Allport, G.W., The Individual and His Religion. New York, Macmillan, 1950, p. 71. 16. Maslow, A., "A Theory of Human Motivation," Psychological Review, 1943, 56[ 370-396; __, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. New York, Viking, 1971. 17. Kohlberg, L., "The Child as a Moral Philosopher," Psychology Today, September, 1968, 25-30. 18. See Berryman, J.W., ed., Life Maps: Conversations on the Journey of Faith, Waco, Texas, Word Books, 1977. 19. Loevinger, J., "The Meaning and Measurement of Ego Development," American Psychologist, 1966, 21, 195-206; _ _ , E g o Developrnen~ San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 1976. 20. Kohlberg, op. cir. 21. Allport and Ross, op. ci~ 22. E.g., Batson, op. ci~ 23. Brown, "Classifications of Religious Orientation," op. cia, p. 96.
