Experimentation in Psychology of Religion

Psychology of Religion and the true experiment: Experimental design or the true experiment: True experiments are also called experimental designs like the ones we did at school about chemistry or physics. For example, we might want to see what happens to sodium when we expose it to air and compare this with when it is exposed to water. The variable manipulated by the experimenter is called independent variable (IV), that is its value is not dependent upon the other variables being investigated. The other variable in such an experiment is called the dependent variable (DV). It is called thus because it is assumed to be dependent upon the value of the IV. Indeed, the purpose of the experiment is to establish or dismiss such dependence. Manipulated IV; random allocation of participants to groups; analysis by comparison between groups. Feasibility of the true experiment in psychology of religion: True experiments are the best method of showing cause and effect relationships, revealing the inadequacies of bad theory, and test good theories (falsification principle). Attempts to increase a persons religious intensity, to reduce sin, guilt, and selfindulgence are worthy goals. Moreover, true experiments do not require that the experimenter withhold religious treatments, but he compares current methods with what he expects will be better methods, using randomized methods. Areas of psychology of religion where a true experiment may be applied: religious education as an area where a number of situations conducive to

true experiments occur. There are times in religious education when a particular program is so popular that not everyone can be accommodated at once. Or, the recent emphasis on growth within many religious groups has resulted in the formation of new churches or religious bodies. Such new units also are fertile ground for true experiments. Aspects related to religion which can be investigated under the true experiment: Religious practices related to money as a means of behaving in life; religious adherences related to congregational matters; religious beliefs associated with personal religious practices; religiosity and religious isolation; religiousness and the issue of communication; aspects of religious regression and the issue of conformity to religious norms. Quasi-experimental designs in psychology of religion: Indirect manipulation of variables or quasi-experimental designs: Pseudo-manipulation of IV; non-random allocation of participants; analysis by comparison between groups. Quasiexperimental designs permit the researcher to capitalize on much of the theory-testing potential of experiments, second, because they are contrasted with the experimental ideal, the researcher is continually reminded of their inferential limitations. Contributions of quasi-experimentation to psychology of religion: A quasi-experimental approach highlights several potentially valuable, but at present rarely used research designs. For example, there is a time-series design, in which measures are taken at a number of points in time prior to as well as following some naturally-occurring manipulation. Such a design could be used to examine the relationship between religious activities (revivals, summer camps, festivals, catechetical school, worship, etc.) and

either psychological antecedents or behavioural consequences. A time-series design can be effective in both general theory testing and specific program evaluation, especially if one can collect timeseries data both on individuals who do not experience the activity in question and on individuals who do. Quasi-experimental technique of the pretest-posttest nonequivalent comparison group design: In this design, pre and post manipulation measures are taken on non-comparable groups. For example, there was conducted a study by Batson (1975), in which junior high females on a church retreat divided themselves into two groups, believers in Jesus as the Son of God and non believers. After an initial questionnaire measure of intensity of religious belief, everyone read a contrived news story that revealed that Christianity was a hoax. While not all participants believed the article was true, about one-third indicated they did. Consistent with Festingers (1957) theory of cognitive dissonance those believers who indicated they accepted the article as true actually expressed more intense religious belief on a subsequent questionnaire. An increase was not observed for other groups. Ethical issues in conducting experiments in psychology of religion: Ethical and practical feasibility of experimentation in psychology of religion: First there has to be sufficient time to design and set up the study and sufficient opportunity for the study about to be carried out to show its effectiveness in relation to the dependent and independent variable(s) concerned. Second, the participants taken part in the study should be fully informed of what is going on. Especially, in experiments regarding psychology of religion, there may be numbers of participants withdrawing from the experiments for reasons not willing to reveal. This must be

accepted by the experimenter, so the participant to be given the pace to opt out without the slightest impression that his/her withdrawal be afterwards discussed. Third, participants should feel free to express themselves in relation to the experiment conducted, so no misapprehension about the nature of the experiment be left unanswered. Formal briefing and debriefing should be followed: The experimenter should overall and beforehand inform his/her participants what is going to be asked/questioned/measured on the course of the experiment. Participants should know precisely the nature of the experiment; they should be asked to submit the consent provided, as well as to feel free to express any query might left unclear. After the experiment has taken place, participants should be thanked for their cooperation and participation. They also should be again explained what took place in that study, should be asked about any other question during the course of their participation, whereas, finally, to become clear once again that the data selected will be employed for reasons of the study, will be kept anonymity and confidentiality and there will not revealed to any third party. Protection of the participants: Participants will be protected during the experiment. No experiment exhibiting participants to any harm will be conducted, and this would be become clear to participants before the actual experiment takes place. Also, if any medical measure or samples are to be taken during the experiments, such as blood and saliva samples, will be made clear they will be not be used against the participants; any action taken against the participants is against the law and forces any

experiment to an end, by simultaneously destroying any data collected so far. Prominent measures and questionnaires in Psychology of Religion: The Allport-Ross Religious Orientation Scale: (Wulff, p. 233). Intrinsic and Extrinsic items. Intrinsic: I try hard to carry my religion over into all my other dealings in life. Extrinsic: What religion offers me most is comfort when sorrows and misfortune strike. Batsons twelve-item quest scale: Complexity: I was not very interested in religion until I began to ask questions about the meaning and purpose of my life. Doubt: It might be said that I value my religious doubts and uncertainties. Tentativeness: As I grow and change, I expect my religion also to grow and change. The California F(orms) Scale and the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale: California F Scale: Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues children should learn. Rokeach Dogmatism Scale: Most people just dont know whats good for them.