Doctrinal Faith and Religious Orientations in Right-Wing Authoritarianism: A Pilot Study of American and Korean Protestant College Students
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Previous work on religiosity and authoritarianism offers several testable hypotheses that have yet to be further assessed in a cross-cultural setting. This article examined the influences that religious orientations and doctrinal faith exercise on the development of authoritarianism, using data sets from Korea and the United States. For both Korean and American Christians, the pattern of intrinsic religion's impact boosts social conservatism and authoritarian submission/aggression, while extrinsic religion expands reverence for authority figures but diminishes the degree of endorsement of social conservatism. Quest and orthodox religiosity inconsistent across the two comparison groups. For the Americans, quest religiosity obstructs the advance of authoritarianism, but it has little to do with Koreans' adoption of authoritarian submission/aggression. Doctrinal faith was mostly recognized as having no impact on authoritarianism, although it has a weak positive linkage with the growth of social conservatism among Korean Christians. This finding implies that the impact of quest and orthodox religiosity in Asian countries is not consistent with their influences in the United States. Conventional wisdom derived from Altemeyer and Hunsberger (1992) denotes that right-wing authoritarianism (hereafter authoritarianism) positively relates to Christian fundamentalism and doctrinal orthodoxy, yet correlates inversely with existential quest religiosity. That is, the Christianity of authoritarians typically has high levels of orthodox faith and personal devotion, coupled with strong elements of fundamentalist perspective and reluctancy to doubt its beliefs (Altemeyer, 1988; Hunsberger, 1995). In a similar vein, Leak and Randall (1995) inspected conven- tional religiosity and religious maturity along with authoritarian attitude. Conventional reli- giosity was positively connected with authoritar- ianism, while mature religiousness was negatively linked with authoritarianism. Central to Leak and Randall's concept of mature reli- giosity were active questioning and self-reflec- tive attitudes. The role of existential reasoning was deemed essential to mature religiousness. Similarly, Rubinstein (1995) conducted a study with Israeli students, trying to replicate Altemey- er' s study about religiosity and authoritarianism after dividing his samples into secular, tradition- al, orthodox, or ultraorthodox Jews. Orthodox and ultraorthodox respondents acquired the highest authoritarianism scores, followed by those with traditional beliefs. This anay of research has led a couple of scholars to test whether a similar phenomenon exists for those affiliated with Islam in Canada, Ghana, and Indonesia. The linkage between authoritarianism and fundamentalism, according to Hunsberger (1996; Hunsberger, Owusu, & Duck, 1999) was consistently positive in direction, but the magnitude of connection somewhat varied across Canada and Ghana. In Canada, the conelation for Muslims was slightly weaker than the conelations for Christians, but the pattern of disparity was turned around when applied to Ghana where Muslims reported a much stronger relationship than Christians between authoritarianism and fundamentalism. More germane to the present study, Ji and Ibrahim (2007) examined the relationship between authoritarianism and religious orientations in Indonesian Islam. The results rather inconsistent with those from parallel Christian studies in North America. In Indonesia, Muslim doctrinal orthodoxy promotes social conservatism but has little to do with authoritarian submission and aggression. Moreover, the doctrinal beliefs that relate to God, the Koran, and the prophet bear adverse effects on the development of social conservatism. In addition, the Muslim data failed to support the popular view that intrinsic and existential quest religiosity play direct roles in increasing social conservatism. Taken together, empirical research on the question of religiosity and authoritarianism has produced some varying results between Muslim and North American Christian populations. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».