Religiousness Measured by the Four Basic Dimensions of Religiousness Scale (4-BDRS) among Polish Believers: Measurement Quality, Personality and Well-being Correlates
The Four Basic Dimensions of Religiousness Scale (4-BDRS) was developed within the framework of cross-cultural psychology to measure four universal dimensions of religiousness: believing, bonding, belonging, and behaving. This paper presents the Polish version of the 4-BDRS and reports two studies t...
| Autori: | ; ; |
|---|---|
| Tipo di documento: | Elettronico Articolo |
| Lingua: | Inglese |
| Verificare la disponibilità: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Pubblicazione: |
2025
|
| In: |
Journal of religion and health
Anno: 2025, Volume: 64, Fascicolo: 6, Pagine: 4585-4615 |
| Altre parole chiave: | B
Well-being
B 4-BDRS B Personality B Religiousness |
| Accesso online: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Riepilogo: | The Four Basic Dimensions of Religiousness Scale (4-BDRS) was developed within the framework of cross-cultural psychology to measure four universal dimensions of religiousness: believing, bonding, belonging, and behaving. This paper presents the Polish version of the 4-BDRS and reports two studies that examined its measurement quality and the personality and well-being correlates of these dimensions. The scale has demonstrated satisfactory reliability and factorial validity. All dimensions showed theoretically consistent associations with the other measures of religiousness. No significant gender differences (or only weak effects) were found across the four dimensions, whereas the scale scores significantly increased with age. All dimensions were positively related to the personality traits associated with socialization (stability). Moreover, all the dimensions showed a positive association with well-being. Belonging and bonding were more strongly related to well-being than believing and behaving. Specifically, belonging was the most crucial dimension for general and social well-being, whereas bonding was the most important dimension for emotional and psychological well-being. The theoretical implications of these findings are discussed. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1573-6571 |
| Comprende: | Enthalten in: Journal of religion and health
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s10943-025-02450-z |
