Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Trimble, D. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Religious Orientation Scale: Review and Meta-Analysis of Social Desirability Effects

Douglas E. Trimble

Northwestern College dtrimble{at}nwciowa.edu

Reliability and validity of scores on the Religious Orientation Scale (ROS) are reviewed with respect to social desirability. ROS measures intrinsic religiousness (I; religion as an end unto itself) and extrinsic religiousness (E; religion as a means to some end, like friendship or solace). Development of the scale is briefly traced, including the modification of the E scale to include two subscales. Scores from the I scale have good internal consistency reliability (.83), but scores from E subscales (Social and Personal) have marginal internal consistency reliability (.63 and .64, respectively). I tends to correlate with desirable variables (mental health, altruism, religious commitment), and E correlates with that which is undesirable (prejudice, nonmarital sex). Meta-analysis revealed that I correlates .15 with social desirability but that E does not. Given the religious relevancy of social desirability measures, partialing out this variance is not recommended.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 57, No. 6, 970-986 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164497057006007
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am J Mens HealthHome page
C. L. Holt, T. A. Wynn, and J. Darrington
Religious Involvement and Prostate Cancer Screening Behaviors Among Southeastern African American Men
American Journal of Men's Health, September 1, 2009; 3(3): 214 - 223.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 ScienceHome page
A. Norenzayan and A. F. Shariff
The Origin and Evolution of Religious Prosociality
Science, October 3, 2008; 322(5898): 58 - 62.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
M. J. Zickar and K. L. Ury
Developing an Interpretation of Item Parameters for Personality Items: Content Correlates of Parameter Estimates
Educational and Psychological Measurement, February 1, 2002; 62(1): 19 - 31.
[Abstract] [PDF]