The Relationship between Core Self-Evaluations, Views of God, and Intrinsic/Extrinsic Religious Motivation

Core self-evaluations refer to a higher-order construct that subsumes four well-established traits in the personality literature: self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, (low) neuroticism, and (internal) locus of control. Studies that have examined the relationship between various measures of religi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inPsychological reports Vol. 116; no. 2; pp. 647 - 662
Main Authors Smither, James W., Walker, Alan G.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.04.2015
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Core self-evaluations refer to a higher-order construct that subsumes four well-established traits in the personality literature: self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, (low) neuroticism, and (internal) locus of control. Studies that have examined the relationship between various measures of religiosity and individual components of core self-evaluations show no clear pattern of relationships. The absence of a clear pattern may be due to the failure of most previous studies in this area to use theory to guide research. Therefore, theories related to core self-evaluations, religious motivation, and views of God were used to develop and test four hypotheses. 220 adults completed measures of four religious attitudes (intrinsic religious motivation, extrinsic religious motivation, viewing God as loving, and viewing God as punitive), general religiosity, and core self-evaluations, separated by 6 weeks (with the order of measures counterbalanced). Multivariate multiple regression, controlling for general religiosity, showed that core self-evaluations were positively related to viewing God as loving, negatively related to viewing God as punitive, and negatively related to extrinsic religious motivation. The hypothesis that core self-evaluations would be positively related to intrinsic religious motivation was not supported.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0033-2941
1558-691X
DOI:10.2466/17.07.PR0.116k24w2