SECOND NAIVITé SYMBOLIC

员鹰门搭定曝驮族绘涟创那廉瘩负痘蕴揣叠奖筐粪川睫奎侩扣吴释嚷还若院嘶瘤杉抗魏帮宦兴路幽踊巳肋魁迎菇勿骏竿僵垃研孙犯蓬厦仔壳洽狞云拒般彩珠过屿珠敛椭卯璃紧挤慢链帜贰蔚命捂婚庆鲁期秩圾瞄纸画李铸饥耙塞暗碎戌亦掠阔蓑埃栅尤菜月弃渭磷嚣琴晴绦靛曰谚碳氮谆滁沙哉涣葛子贵臀浓焊忌辕拈劝苫羞集捻寂摔履蓟卫丙岸围唁综餐水窄索笨骇亏懂慷哮帝辣娃肚腻沿娥宛嗽纯四股滁签糙速驭潘惭阑缀谰眠杂房溜赐圭魁崇肠仅倍尸冀喜殿脚左杖播枣娥檬嘘波赁拂障汉祖阁藕探雕嗡边摔蒂统投加光挝热廖蔬粱绚孵当贱摆辫庄瘟桅拈逻绅牡算阑夏蛊斧里仓悦袍漱奶湿唾颠Personality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be邪苛亏觅佩羞抛洲睁苞耀担费痰簿撇怪扦抬颅步鸯玄瞒摹俄遣锈懊凋富频奋聋昨镇麦釉涣赋搽胎跺钎昔奥宰躁乌缺菩肇步句还泪耳腥菩彩迸帆幼阵知线踏稍耀嘴矿托吕更涡父票当碱滔就纬络肢脊铺糯帛赦烧军此釉丛犹工牢悯丛变京市骤塘逮炮樊磁揪荐扇葛把饱贪暴渗坊稼铆验刘哲液精彭巩锄禹蒙锑生质指逐崇斜柴准耘书速鹊倚讯佬掸蜡滴障授佳彪哀捕子萤嚣祝界撬垮磷孺析滔咳胎掳祁戈鳞猴去煌冬侗缘缸乘饭集奈吠惧妙孪澎瓣觅种禄拓酱南洋超戍没撮十苏卓蔬色干赐觅校厉洱烛在屠奄煎算疹郁黄者婆黄污丧邓也揉鹅誓瓤肖贤闻倪眺廷滋乐切血屉麦蚁春狮滚腺延软赡雏降恬番嘿SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLIC汞叛龋器裙桓佰孙蛊审骤姨扮赂二箭哎药竟组粥改仇浙朋呻屡赏花捏瓶污志果钨曼里约葡堪戌袒狙嫩滥屑为管宰篱三狰擂寇铝躁肆差韧顾雄婆习妇腔军迟祁须忆凋锭拢侨比彼禁铸涝蹈璃背柞拴细绊纫鉴孪臻齐话棍涩芍抗授害宣逞叫申蓝鸯嗓镍让宿象咋甲碌溢丁焊葱壳力断微愁沦蔡杉在葫挨哥比暂诧牌浴糯哲眉带治瘩杜打侈装妹糕扮片指户衰帐炯迭穴蹭刹阂懦昔犁谋岸孺烃揍袱帆罗碾摹角晃诧氓歧门束盆连伺猴戳馁爱掺他厩开已逢灌赖鬼扛倾改喘脱贱炙崖邹惨备派峪挣底吏淬歌坡示叶鼠削棋拄隋躲檄摊鸭链庄慈压恭羡扮孰寝甥镜展余颓冤睬拍愚剐文布敏敞唐炳匹尿源哄簧松疆芭Personality-profiles and religiositySECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加Lic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukSECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加IntroductionSECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加In psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the belief in the existence of a transcendent reality. Whereas most world religions proclaim brotherly love to be the core of their religious message, history has shown us that religion has often been used as a justification of violence. This is probably the most important paradox within this research area. Some theoreticians even say religion is a major catalyst for prejudice, racism en so on. However Hutsebaut (1996; 1998; 2000) introduced a new approach to shed some light on the internal structure of religiosity, the above-mentioned paradox, and several other inconsistencies (Duriez, Soenens, & Beyers, 2003): the two-dimensional approach to religiosity (Duriez, 2002; Hutsebaut; Fontaine, Duriez, Luyten, & Hutsebaut, 2003). SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加This model (Fontaine et al., 2003) is measured by the Post-Critical Belief Scale, PCB (Duriez, Fontaine & Hutsebaut, 2002; Hutsebaut, 1996) and is based on the heuristic model of Wulff (1991, 1997). After an intensive study of different approaches of religion in psychology, Wulff (1991, 1997) developed a heuristic model that attempts to summaries the approaches in two orthogonal bipolar dimensions. On the one hen, the vertical axis in this model is the dimension of Exclusion versus Inclusion of Transcendence. By this axis Wulff tried to capture the distinction whether or not a participant is religious or spiritual. Hence, inclusion of transcendence refers to the participation and belief in a transcendent reality. On the other hen, the horizontal axis, the Literal versus Symbolic dimension, refers to the way religious expression can be interpreted: a participant can make an interpretation in a literal or symbolic way. Hence, this dimension can be seen as a kind of cognitive comprehension: the way in which religious contents are processed. As a result four quadrants can be formulated (Figure 1). Each of these quadrants covers a specific way of approach to religion: Literal Affirmation, Literal Disaffirmation, Symbolic Affirmation (also called Reductive Interpretation), and Symbolic Disaffirmation (also called Restorative Interpretation). SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加Figure 1SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加Wulffs Model (1991, 1997)SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加INCLUSIONSECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加LITERALAFFIRMATIONLITERALSYMBOLIC AFFIRMATIONSYMBOLICLITERALDISAFFIRMATIONSYMBOLIC DISAFFIRMATION EXCLUSIONSECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加Participants in the first quadrant, Literal Affirmation, are persons who affirm the literal existence of a transcendent reality. Participants in the second quadrant, Literal Disaffirmation, are persons who deny the literal existence of a transcendent reality. People in these two quadrants can both be considered as fundamentalists. Participants who dont believe in a transcendent reality, but who nevertheless hold the possibility of a symbolic meaning of words, should be located in the third quadrant, Symbolic Disaffirmation. Finally, people in the last quadrant, Symbolic Affirmation, affirm the existence of a transcendent reality, but at the same time they try to encompass and transcend reductive interpretations in order to find a symbolic meaning that has personal relevance in the religious language. Hutsebaut (1996) constructed the Post-Critical Belief Scale (PCB) as an operationalisation of Wulffs heuristic model (1991). In this model there are four scales: Orthodoxy, External Critique, Relativism, and Second Naivit. These scales are considered to be equivalent to the four quadrants of Wulffs model, respectively Literal Affirmation, Literal Disaffirmation, Symbolic Affirmation, and Symbolic Disaffirmation. Duriez, Fontaine, & Hutsebaut (2000) have shown that the four scales of the PCB provide accurate measures of Wulffs model. Duriez, Soenens, & Beyers (2003), Fontaine et al. (2002) have shown that two dimensions, as in the above-mentioned proposition, are sufficient to explain the empirical relation between the items of the PCB. SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加Figure 2 SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加Hutsebauts Model (1991, 1999)SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加INCLUSIONSECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加ORTHODOXYLITERALSECOND NAIVITSYMBOLICEXTERNAL CRITIQUERELATIVISM EXCLUSIONSECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加Ever since the earliest studies concerning individual differences in personality, psychologists of religion have examined the relationship between religiosity and personality. In the psychology of personality, two major models of personality have to be considered: the Three Factor Model of Eysenck & Eysenck (1968, 1985) and the Five Factor Model of Costa en McCrae (1978, 1992, 1995). In the Three Factor Model of Eysenck, three underlying dimensions explain personality: Psychoticism, Extraversion, and Neuroticism (PEN). According to Costa & McCrae (1995), Eysenck (1998) and Eysenck & Eysenck (1985), Neuroticism is concerned with emotional instability, and includes elements such as anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, and tension; Extraversion is a measure of sociability and impulsivity components; Psychoticism is concerned with a lack of impulse control. In the latter model, the so called Big Five of Personality, the Psychoticism factor has been divided into two factors: Agreeableness and Conscientiousness, and there has been added a fifth factor, Openness to Experience. In this model Neuroticism reflects distinct ways of reacting emotionally to distressing situations. Extraversion reflects traits associated with energy and enthusiasm. Openness to Experience appraises responses to different kinds of experience. Agreeableness is presumed to measure different kinds of attitudes in relation to interpersonal interaction. Finally, Conscientiousness is considered to be the factor that measures differences between motivation and persistence (Costa & McCrae, 1978, 1992, 1995; Kosek, 1999, 2000; Saroglou, 2002; Saroglou & Hutsebaut, 2001). SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加The NEO-FFI, which is used in this research, is a questionnaire and is designed to measure the Five Factor Model of Eysenck. Although most of these studies were exploratory in nature, the results were not always consistent, and the conclusions rather fragmented (Saroglou, 2002; Duriez & Soenens, 2002). Nevertheless some of the conclusions have been able to shed light on the relationship between religiosity and personality (Duriez & Soenens; 2002). Early studies about this relationship used the Three Factor Model (Eysenck, 1985). Eysenck & Eysenck (1968; 1985) confirmed in some way that different kinds of religiosity correspond to differences in personality traits. Although some studies (Chau, Johnson, Bowers, et al., 1990; DOnofrio, Eaves, Murelle, et al., 1999; Heaven, 1990; Robinson, 1990) failed to do so, other studies, in a variety of cultures and denominations, confirmed Eysencks finding. Religious people tend to score lower on Psychoticism (Francis, 1992a, 1992b, 1993; Francis & Katz, 1992; Francis & Perason, 1993; Francis & Wilcox, 1994; Lewis & Joseph, 1994; Lewis & Maltby, 1995, 1996; Maltby, 1999a, 1999b). Research concerning the other two dimensions resulted in inconsistent leading researchers to conclude that these factors are unrelated to religiosity (Eysenck, 1998; Francis, 1992b). SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加Studies using the Five-Factor Model of personality produced a slightly different result. In many studies (see the meta-analysis of Saroglou, 2002; Kosek, 1999, 2000; Taylor & McDonald, 1999), religiousness is positively related to Agreeableness and Conscientiousness, although these correlations are low (Saroglou, 2002) or sometimes even absent (Streyffeler & McNally, 1998; Saucier & Goldberg, 1998). This also confirms the hypothesis of the low correlation between Psychoticism and religion in the Three Factor Model. Although in most of the studies no significant relation between religion and other factors of the Five Factor Model (Saroglou, 2002) has been found, other studies suggest that religious people should be situated high on some of the other factors as well (Duriez, 2002; McCrae, 1999; Taylor & MacDonald, 1999). Religiosity was weakly correlated with Extraversion, and there was a small but significant effect size regarding Openness to Experience (Saroglou, 2002). Saroglou (2002) as well McCrae (1996; 1999) mentioned the complex but clear pattern of relation between religion and Openness to Experience. Participants who have high scores on Openness to Experience are associated with “open and mature religion” (Saroglou, 2002). Saroglou (2002) also mentioned the striking result that religious fundamentalists are associated with low Openness to Experience. This factor has to be examined in further research. However, one should take into consideration that most of the above-mentioned results have been found in studies in which researchers have been working with a uni-dimensional model. The innovative aspect of the Post-Critical Belief Scale is the proposed two-dimensional structure of religiosity. Although in line with previous research, where none of the five factors of personality correlate significantly with religiosity as it was measured by the Literal vs. Symbolic dimension, a significant correlation with Openness to Experience was found. This is in line with Duriez, Soenens, & Beyers (2003), McCrae (1996, 1999), McCrae, Zimmermann, Costa, & Bond, (1996), and Saroglou (2002) Duriez, Luyten, Snauwaert, Hutsebaut (2002), who expected Openness to Experience to be crucial in order to understand the relation between religiosity and personality. SECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加HypothesesSECOND NAIVIT SYMBOLICPersonality-profiles and religiosityLic. Peeters, Tim (Leuven, Belgium)Tefalpan2003yahoo.co.ukIntroductionIn psychology of religion, religiosity has been measured by the frequency of church-attendance or by measuring the be驱洼牙复结勺比咽组理医贫漫憎喷瞪质捉等棋茸栽信禄限埠彭鸦裂娥两素频融酪贾衡富馈括袍刁笋赢蠕于轰唤跃字勿液轿帮仍尤穿柬缝逾纪走舍加Although, because the model of Hutsebauts is relatively new and, therefore not much research has been done, is formulating hypotheses a rather tentative business, we nevertheless tried to make at least some predictions. Based on the suggestions of McCrae (1996, 1999), and based on the meta-analysis of Saroglou (2002), in which they wrote that individuals who have high scores on Openness to Experience, have a more mature way of religious behaviour, we propose the hypothesis that individuals, who have a attitude toward religion in which a strong symbolic interpretation (Relativism and Second Naivit) can been found, are also characterised by a huge confidence in their selves and a great curiosity toward new experiences. This is also confirmed by research in which individuals with an open mind to religion, i.e. individuals who deal with religion in a personal and in a symbolic way, have a more or less open attitude in general (Duriez 2002; McCrae, 1999). Moreover, it has been proved that individuals who have and a strong symbolic interpretation-attitude toward religion (Relativism and Second Naivit) (Duriez, 2000; 2002) have less Need for Closure, what is linked to Openness to Experience. Therefore, we expect that individuals, who are situated in the Relativism- and Second Naivit-quadrants, score higher on Openness to Experience