With Religious Schema Scales in the West, Truth of Texts and Teachings correlates negatively with the commitment to interreligious dialogue recorded by Xenosophia. This measure of fundamentalism also predicts problematic religious and psychosocial functioning. The present project examined Religious Schema Scales in university students and Islamic seminarians in the Muslim cultural context of Iran. Truth of Texts and Teachings correlated positively rather than negatively with Xenosophia and predicted religious and psychological adjustment. The adaptive implications of Truth of Texts and Teachings were especially evident in Islamic seminarians. These results supplemented previous Religious Schema data from India and Malaysia in suggesting that fundamentalism may have more positive implications outside the West. Cross-cultural differences in fundamentalism more generally support arguments of an Ideological Surround Model that the incommensurability of religious and other social rationalities requires careful research attention.
AltemeyerB., & HunsbergerB. (1992). Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 2, 113–133.
2.
CostelloC. G., & ComreyA. L. (1967). Scales for measuring depression and anxiety. The Journal of Psychology, 66, 303–313.
3.
DavisM. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 113–126.
4.
DoverH.MinerM., & DowsonM. (2007). The nature and structure of Muslim religious reflection. Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 2, 189–210.
5.
GhorbaniN.WatsonP. J.ChenZ., & DoverH. (2013). Varieties of openness in Tehran and Qom: Psychological and religious parallels of faith and intellect oriented Islamic religious reflection. Mental Health, Religion, & Culture, 16, 123–137.
6.
GhorbaniN.WatsonP. J., & HargisM. B. (2008). Integrative self-knowledge: Correlations and incremental validity of a cross-cultural measure developed in Iran and the United States. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied.142, 395–412.
7.
GhorbaniN.WatsonP. J., & KhanZ. (2007). Theoretical, empirical, and potential ideological dimensions of using Western conceptualizations to measure Muslim religious commitments. Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 2, 113–131.
8.
GhorbaniN.WatsonP. J.SaeediZ.ChenZ., & SilverC. F. (2012). Religious problem-solving and the complexity of religious rationality within an Iranian Muslim ideological surround. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 51, 656–675.
9.
GhorbaniN.WatsonP. J.TavakoliF., & ChenZ. J. (2016). Self-control within a Muslim ideological surround: Empirical translation schemes and the adjustment of Muslim seminarians in Iran. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 27, 68–93.
10.
GhorbaniN.WatsonP. J.ZarehiJ., & ShamohammadiK. (2010). Muslim extrinsic cultural religious orientation and identity: Relationships with social and personal adjustment in Iran. Journal of Beliefs and Values, 31, 15–28.
11.
GorsuchR. L., & McPhersonS. E. (1989). Intrinsic/extrinsic measurement: I/E revised and single-item scales. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 28, 348–354.
12.
KambleS. V.WatsonP. J.MarigoudarS., & ChenZ. (2014). Varieties of openness and religious commitment in India: Relationships of attitudes toward Hinduism, Hindu religious reflection, and religious schema. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 36, 172–198.
13.
KhatamiM. (2001). Dialogue among civilizations: A paradigm for peace.Johannesburg: University of Pretoria.
14.
MacIntyreA. (1988). Whose justice? Which rationality?Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
15.
NietzscheF. (1967). On the genealogy of morals. In KaufmannW. (Ed.), On the genealogy of morals and ecce homo (pp. 13–163). New York: Random House. (Original work published in 1887)
16.
SisemoreT. (2016). The psychology of religion and spirituality.Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
17.
StreibH.HoodR. W.Jr., & KleinC. (2010). The Religious Schema Scale: Construction and initial validation of a quantitative measure for religious styles. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 20, 151–172.
18.
StreibH., & KleinC. (2014). Religious styles predict interreligious prejudice: A study of German adolescents with the Religious Schema Scale. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 24, 151–163.
19.
TaylorC. (2007). A secular age.Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press.
20.
TangneyJ. P.BaumeisterR. F., & BooneA. L. (2004). High self-control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 72, 271–322.
21.
TekkeM.WatsonP. J.İsmailN. A., & ChenZ. J. (2015). Muslim religious openness and ilm: Relationships with Islamic religious reflection, religious schema, and religious commitments in Malaysia. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 37, 295–320.
22.
WatsonP. J. (1993). Apologetics and ethnocentrism: Psychology and religion within an ideological surround. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 3, 1–20.
23.
WatsonP. J. (2006). Friends of the truth, violence, and the ideological surround: Social science as meetings for clearness. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 28, 123–132.
24.
WatsonP. J. (2011). Whose psychology? Which rationality? Christian psychology within an ideological surround after postmodernism. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 30, 307–316.
25.
WatsonP. J.ChenZ.GhorbaniN., & VartanianM. (2015). Religious openness hypothesis: I. Religious reflection, schemas, and orientations within religious fundamentalist and biblical foundationalist ideological surrounds. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 34, 99–113.
26.
WatsonP. J.ChenZ., & HoodR. W.Jr. (2011). Biblical foundationalism and religious reflection: Polarization of faith and intellect oriented epistemologies within a Christian ideological surround. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 39, 111–121.
27.
WatsonP. J.ChenZ., & MorrisR. J. (2014). Varieties of quest and the religious openness hypothesis within religious fundamentalist and biblical foundationalist ideological surrounds. Religions, 5, 1–20.
28.
WatsonP. J.GhorbaniN.VartanianM., & ChenZ. (2015). Religious openness hypothesis: II. Religious reflection and orientations, mystical experience, and psychological openness of Christians in Iran. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 34, 114–124.
29.
WatsonP. J.ChenZ.MorrisR. J., & StephensonE. (2015). Religious Openness Hypothesis: III. Defense against secularism within fundamentalist and biblical foundationalist ideological surrounds. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 34, 125–140.
30.
WatsonP. J.SawyersP.MorrisR. J.CarpenterM.JimenezR. S.JonasK. A., & RobinsonD. L. (2003). Reanalysis within a Christian ideological surround: Relationships of intrinsic religious orientation with fundamentalism and right-wing authoritarianism. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 31, 315–328.
