The document discusses different methods for measuring religiosity in sociological research. It describes direct and indirect methods. Direct methods involve directly asking about religiosity, while indirect methods use research instruments to indirectly measure religiosity. It provides details on several indirect methods, including organizational religiosity, individual religiosity, and their direct and indirect effects. While acknowledging limitations, the document argues indirect methods are better as they utilize explicit studies to fully capture the multi-dimensional nature of religiosity.

1. Essay 1: generally good content; but some issues with content
as noted and some writing issues
Essay 2: good content, but writing issues in several places
Essay 3: good content, but lots of writing issues
Religion and Society
1. What is the “sociological perspective” and how does it
impact the way we study religion? How is it different from non-
social scientific (philosophical, theological) approaches to the
study of religion? From other social scientific (psychological,
anthropological) approaches?
The sociological perspective is a way of looking at religion that
focuses on the human especially social aspects of religious
belief and practice. It has two characteristics that separate it
from non-scientific approaches to religion. It is empirical and
objective. Sociologists usually try as much as possible to base
their interpretations on empirical evidence. “They verify their
images and explanations of social reality by experimental or

2. experienced evidence. The objectivity in the sense that they do
not attempt to evaluate accept or reject the content of religious
beliefs .In the sociological perspective there is no religion that
is superior to the other. One religion is not superior to another.
Indeed the perspective does not presume the merits of religious
over non-religious approaches. But if a religion has ideas on
these subjects, it examines them and tries to understand them.
There are two central sociological perspectives which are:
substantative and functional. Substantative tries to establish
what religion is. It attempts to establish categories of religious
content that qualify as religion and other categories specific as
non-religion. Functional describes what religion does. It
emphasizes what religion does for individual and social group.
Accordingly religion is defined by the social functions it fulfills
in the society
It emphasizes on the provision of meaning because the
establishing of shared meaning is an essentially social event.
The sociological perspective impacts on the way we study
religion in various ways. The aspects of the sociological
perspective on religion may create elude a bad feeling to
students who find their cherished beliefs and practices
dispassionately treated as object of study as stipulated in
(http://fasnafan.tripod.com/religion.pdf).Normal human beings
due to their nature tend to feel bad when they find their religion
becoming the subject of discussion and study. They feel that
those people are abusing and disregarding their religion. It may
be disturbing to have one’s own religion treated as comparable
to other religions and not as superior or uniquely true.maybe
maybe not---you need proof to make this claim--not just ideas
Also true, but awkward writingwhat the sociologist and the
believer hold about a certain religion may be contradicting.
What is central to the sociologist may be irrelevant and
uninteresting to the religious believer. Hence,the sociologist
does not disprove what the believers have and vice versa.
The sociological perspective does not have the key quality of
faith which the believer uses to accept certain beliefs and

3. meanings. It implies that people belong to religious groups for
reason other than true value of the belief system.
This limits the study of religion by virtue of lacking one
important dimension of religion. Important dimensions of
religion are not being accessible to sociological perspective.
This makes us not to be able to evaluate and understand the
dimensions which are not accessible when religion is studying
using…we study religion using this perspective. Also the
causality that believers attribute to supernatural sources, the
less their interpretation cannot be reconciled with sociological
perspectives. By the fact that most people who study religion
are believers they may find it difficult to agree with the
sociological perspective which does not go in line with what
they believe in hence lack of motivation in the study of religion.
Anthropology is the study of humanity. It has its origins in the
natural sciences, the humanities and the social sciences.
Anthropology is tied to sources of religion in that the
anthropological study of religion challenges traditional
categories and assumptions, arguing that too many of them
reflect ethnocentric perspectives long discarded in
contemporary anthropology.
Sociology is the study of the society. Sociology is related to
sources of religion in the sense that it considers gender which is
part of sociology. In the past few years the notion of power in
the sociology of religion has shown signs of emerging from an
eclipse which began to place in the 1960s. The notion of power
is related to sociology and is becoming apparent in everyday
practice of religion in most western countries and in
sociologists interpretations of that practice.
Psychology is the study of the mind. Religion remains a potent
force in the lives of many. If not most “That religion is closely
related to pivotal periods in life should not be starting.
Hardship, suffering and conflict have been centers of concern
for the major religions of the world” (Pargament, 1984)
“Thus, religions of the world have a deep appreciation for the
often painful nature of human condition. Psychological offers

4. important insights into the footprints left by religion.
Anthropology is the study of humanity. It has its origins in the
natural sciences, the humanities and the social sciences.
Anthropology is tied to sources of religion in that the
anthropological study of religion challenges traditional
categories and assumptions, arguing that too many of them
reflect ethnocentric perspectives long discarded in
contemporary anthropology.
2. What is religion and where does it come from? Discuss the
relative merits of theories proposed by Durkheim, Marx, and the
Rational Choice theorists
From the dawn of civilization, religion had played a major role
in the individual and collective behavior of human society. On
one hand, religion had promoted the songs of peace and
harmony, and on the other hand, religion had been responsible
for many atrocious wars. Being a pivotal part of human life,
religion is a very popular topic among researchers, thinkers and
philosophers. Many a theory had been proposed by various
intellectuals worldwide about the origin and requirement of
religion.
Karl Marx is one of the most influential people of the 19th 8th
century. He had been both idolized and criticized for his
theories all over the world. According to Marx, “Religion … is
the opium of the people (Die Religion … ist das Opium des
Volkes)” (Karl Marx and “Religion is the Opium of the People”,
2012) According to the theory of Marx, social oppressions and
inequality had created the myth of religion, and common people
try to find their salvation by using it as a shield to avoid reality.
(Thompson, 2011) Marx had described about religion in the
following manner, he said it is the "sigh of the oppressed
creature in a hostile world, the heart of a heartless world and

5. the soul of soulless conditions." (Marx, 1844) This particular
description is critical to religion as well as it is critical to the
human nature.
Emile Durkheim was a French thinker; he tried to view religion
as, “a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred
things,” According to him, the concept of religion only emerges
when the society tries to create an extraordinary spiritual world
out of the ordinary. (Coser, 1977) Durkheim was interested in
studying the transformation, where an ordinary
person/thing/ritual becomes a part of the extraordinary spiritual
world. According to his theory, religion is not a thing that the
society had knowingly created. But it is a mere reflection of the
society. Thus, according to Coser, the commemoration of
religion (i.e. engaging in various festivals and activities) is
basically the celebration of the societal bonding, “…This power
so transcends their own existence that they have to give it
sacred significance in order to visualize it.” (Coser, 1977)
The Rational Choice tTheory is mainly an economic concept,
but it is widely used to explain various social phenomena.
Rational choice theory mainly states that any individual or
society will go for that particular option which will ensure
maximum gain and minimum loss. (Young, 1997) Rational
Choice theory tells us that the concept of religion is created by
society to achieve the necessary compensation. The society will
try to engage the concept of divinity and supernatural to achieve
a desired result, which could not be achieved by any other
means. (Young, 1997)
The three theories try in their own unique way to explain the
origin of religion. It is one common point that knowingly or
unknowingly the society as a collective had created the concept
of religion. Marx is certainly right that individuals often try to
seek shelter on the beliefs of religion to assure them that
everything will be all right at the end of the day by some divine
intervention. The theory proposed by Durkheim and the rational
choice theory rightly explains the interrelation between religion
and society where a lot of economic/political/social decisions of

6. a state/country is determined by the dictation or under the
disguise of religion.
4. Why is religiosity difficult to measure? What are some of the
ways in which sociologists measure religiosity and which do
you feel is most accurate? Make sure to offer support for your
position.
A major problem faced by all scientists is trying to measure
concepts that have no clear ruler to measure them and also
tangible in that they can be counted literary, claimed Scheilte,
(1996). The challenge is faced when trying to measure how
‘religious’ an individual is. Religiosity is no tangible therefore
it is difficult to measure. For instance a person who believes in
God may not attend religious services. The question we are left
to ask is how religious are they? Religion is a multi-
dimensional concept consisting of behaviors, experiences,
beliefs and social or cultural tradition. Religiosity is measured
by two methods: direct and indirect. In the direct method the
researcher follows the standardized procedure of directly asking
the respondent to indicate degree of religiousness. The
importance of religion in one's day-to-day life and feeling
towards religion are the two main questions in this respect. In
such questions the researcher sensitizes the respondent to the
religious area and asks for a direct answer pertaining thereto.
The other is the indirect method of getting at religiosity is to
utilize a research instrument which permits the respondent
voluntarily to produce his own measure. One such instrument is
the "Twenty Statements Test”( a long-standing psychological
and social psychological "test" for use in regards to one's "sense
of self") . It should be emphasized that neither of these two
techniques for eliciting information is "naturally" and
absolutely superior to the other. The specific kind of
information sought is the determinant of which is more usable.
This research has at least provided enough evidence to indicate

7. the desirability of further research on the association between
"public" and "private" religiosity, or between direct and indirect
methods of measuring religiosity.To be more explicit it was
broken down into these categories;
Direct Effect of Organizational Religiosity on Outcomes .This
set of conceptual models hypothesizes that aspects of
organizational religiosity, including doctrine, practices and
beliefs, have direct positive effects on outcomes by encouraging
the practice of healthy behaviors (Hill, Ellison, Burdette, &
Musick, 2006). Under this framework, the fact that an
individual ascribes to a certain set of religious beliefs or
adheres to religious doctrine and practices may directly
influence behavior. In practice, the empirical literature
generally tests these hypotheses using religious denomination
and affiliation as measures of organizational religiosity.
Direct Effect of Individual Religiosity on Outcomes .This set of
conceptual models hypothesizes that the way an individual
practices religion in daily life may directly affect outcomes.
Under this framework, religious practices, such as prayer,
holidays or rituals, directly influence outcomes. An example
would be an individual who finds emotional and/or physical
healing through prayer.
Indirect (or Mediating) Effect of Individual Religiosity on
Outcomes .Mediator vawkwardariables help answer “why” a
particular relationship exists between an explanatory and an
outcome variable (Baron & Kenny, 1986). These models
hypothesize that certain aspects of individual religiosity
influence outcomes indirectly. In other words, the relationship
between individual religiosity and outcomes is mediated by
another factor (or set of factors). In these models, religiosity is
hypothesized to produce a change in a mediating factor, which,
in turn, influences behavior. For example, practicing prayer and
meditation at the individual level and salience of religious
beliefs in people’s lives can offer positive psychological
benefits, such as greater self-esteem, more hope and optimism,

8. greater willingness to change, more positive coping, and higher
self-control (McCullough & Willoughby, 2009). These positive
benefits are hypothesized to lead to positive behaviors.
Mediators can be specifically religious or generalized. For
example, prayer can improve coping skills by offering
generalized psychological benefits (e.g., the meditative nature
of prayer offers a strategy for managing stress) or through
specifically religious channels (e.g., through prayer a person
turns his or her problems over to a higher power, thus
decreasing perceived levels of stress). Prayer could also lead to
negative coping if there is overreliance on religion to resolve
every problem (Paragament, 2008).
Indirect (or Mediating) Effect of Organizational Religiosity on
Outcomes .In these models, organizational religiosity is
hypothesized to offer social benefits and/or to influence norms
and values in ways that positively affect behavior. Under this
framework, organizational religiosity indirectly affects
outcomes through connections to institutions that provide
emergency assistance and counseling; social networks that can
help during crises or life changes; peers that help reinforce
healthy behaviors and social norms; connections to higher status
circles; and educational activities, such as youth groups or bible
study.
In addition to these pathways, organizational religiosity can
influence outcomes through religiously specific pathways. For
example, involvement with a religious community can provide a
meaning system that “imbues family relationships with
spiritual, enduring significance that includes divine
accountability for the discharge of parental obligations”
(Bartkowski 2008, p. 19). In this way, organizational religiosity
is hypothesized to indirectly influence outcomes through a
family’s “meaning system”; in this case, the pathway is
religiously specific.
Like I mentioned early, that neither of these two techniques for
eliciting information is naturally and absolutely superior to the
other.Hence, I cannot take side I cannoty take side on any of

9. these medthods.
Class .M 1995, Ordered Universes: Approaches to the
Anthropology of Religion, 1995, West Vita Press.
Demerath N, J and Straight. K, 1992.Religion, Politics and
State: Cross Cultural Observations Cambridge: Cambridge
University press.
http://fasnafan.tripod.com/religion.pdf
International Journal of Middle East studies, 2006 38.360-393
Lee .R.L.M and Ackeman S.E, 1997 Sacred Tensions,
Columbia: University of South Carolina Press
Antoun R.T (2006) Negotiating state and Society in Jordan.
Oxford: Oxford University Press
Amoateng, A., & Bahr, S. (1986). Religion, family, and
adolescent drug abuse. Sociological Perspective, 29, 53-76.
Bachman, J., Johnston, L., & O'Malley, P. (2001). Monitoring
the future: Questionnaire responses from the nation's high
school seniors: 2000. Ann Arbor, MI: Univ. of Michigan.
Bao, W. N., Whitebeck, L. B., Hoyt, D. R., & Conger, R. D.
(1999). Perceived parental acceptance as a moderator of
religious transmission among adolescent boys and girls. Journal
of Marriage and the Family, 61, 362-374.
Bearman, P., & Bruckner, H. (2001). Promising the future:
Virginity pledges and first intercourse. American Journal of
Sociology, 4, 233-239.
Becker, P., & Dinhgra, P. (2001). Religious involvement and
volunteering: implications for civil society. Sociology of
Religion, 62, 315-335.
Indirect method involves using a research to measure the

10. religiosity.Indirect method is better because it utilizes explicit
studies and bringing out all the facts about the subject of study.
For instance, Talcott Parsons (“Social Structure and
Personality”, 1970), for example, has argued that, while
religious institutions no-longer have a direct influence over
things like education and politics, their indirect influence is
still relatively strong (in terms of such things as norms, values,
moral guidelines for behavior and so
forth).Thus, in the past, because the Church was so intimately
involved in political life, it tended to neglect its overtly
religious role. Aldous Huxley ( “The Devils of Loudun”,1952)
for example, argues that, on an institutional level, the Church
does not seem to have been well-respected (mainly because of
their corruption, greed, cruelty and sexual misconduct). Huxley
also suggests that the relationship between the Church and the
State in France was one that reflected an uneasy power balance.
That is, the government actually encouraged religious
corruption, greed and sexual misconduct as a means of limiting
the power of the Church.Parsons argues that modern religious
institutions, having been stripped of their political function, are
forced to address themselves to a far greater extent to spiritual
matters. In “Social Structure and Personality”, Parsons’ basic
argument involves a similar form of reasoning about the role of
religion as he applied to the family in industrial societies. Thus:
As societies industrialise, they become increasingly
differentiated - that is, different institutions arise to cater for
changing structural needs (the education of the masses, for
example, is so essential to modern industrial production that it
can nolonger be left in the hands of the Church, voluntary
organisations and worthy individuals). In this respect, the
Church as an institution becomes more specialised in its
functions. An important aspect of this increasing specialisation
is that the Church’s role becomes less overtly political and more
ideological in form - rather than through direct involvement in
the affairs of the State, religious institutions exert influence
through the norms and values they put forward.

11. Direct method does not use research.In the direct method the
researcher follows the standardized procedure of directly asking
the respondent to indicate degree of religiousness. The
importance of religion in one's day-to-day life and feeling
towards religion are the two main questions in this respect. In
such questions the researcher sensitizes the respondent to the
religious area and asks for a direct answer pertaining thereto
References
Class .M 1995, Ordered Universes: Approaches to the
Anthropology of Religion, 1995, West Vita Press.
Demerath N, J and Straight. K, 1992.Religion, Politics and
State: Cross Cultural Observations Cambridge: Cambridge
University press.
http://fasnafan.tripod.com/religion.pdf
International Journal of Middle East studies, 2006 38.360-393
Lee .R.L.M and Ackeman S.E, 1997 Sacred Tensions,
Columbia: University of South Carolina Press
Antoun R.T (2006) Negotiating state and Society in Jordan.
Oxford: Oxford University Press
The association of Religion Data Archives.
Winter (1999) Sociology of Religion, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.