Items were generated to explore the factorial structure of a construct of fundamentalism worded appropriately for Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Results suggested three underlying dimensions: (a) External versus Internal Authority, (b) Fixed versus Malleable Religion, and (c) Worldly Rejection versus Worldly Affirmation. The three dimensions indicate that religious fundamentalism is a personal orientation that asserts a supra-human locus of moral authority, context unbound truth, and the appreciation of the sacred over the worldly components of experience. The 15-item, 3-dimension solution was evaluated across Mexican (n = 455) and American (n = 449) samples. Fit indexes point out the viability of the new inventory across these two samples henceforward referred to as the Multi-Dimensional Fundamentalism Inventory (MDFI). Additional validity tests supported that the new inventory was negatively correlated with participants’ integrative complexity in a religious domain–specific way.
AltemeyerB. (1996). The authoritarian spectre.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2.
AltemeyerB. & HunsbergerB. (1992). Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 2, 113–133.
3.
AltemeyerB. & HunsbergerB. (2004). A revised religious fundamentalism scale: The short and sweet of it. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 14(1), 47–54.
4.
Baker-BrownG.BallardE. J.BluckS.de VriesB.SuedfeldP. & TetlockP. E. (1992). The conceptual/integrative complexity scoring manual. In SmithC. P.AtkinsonJ. W.McClellandD. C. & VeroffJ. (Eds.), Motivation and Personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis, pp. 401–418. New York: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BatsonC. D.DentonD. M. & VollmeckeJ. (2008). Quest religion, anti-fundamentalism, and limited versus universal compassion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 47, 135–145.
6.
BatsonC. D. & SchoenradeP. (1991). Measuring religion as quest: 2. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 30, 430–447.
7.
BatsonC. D.SchoenradeP. & VentisW. L. (1993). Religion and the individual: A social psychological perspective.New York: Oxford University Press.
8.
BondM. H. (1988). Finding universal dimensions of individual variation in multicultural studies of values: The Rokeach and Chinese value surveys. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 1009–1015.
9.
CheekJ. M. & TroppL. R. (1994). The aspects of identity questionnaire: History and bibliography. Unpublished manuscript.
10.
ConwayL. G.IIIDoddsD.TowgoodK. H.McClureS. & OlsonJ. (2011). The biological roots of complex thinking: Are heritable attitudes more complex?Journal of Personality, 79, 101–134.
11.
ConwayL. G.IIIGornickL. J.BurfiendC.MandellaP.KuenzliA.HouckS. C. & FullteronD. T. (in press). Does simple rhetoric win elections? An integrative complexity analysis of U.S. presidential campaigns. Political Psychology.
12.
ConwayL. G.IIISchallerM.TweedR. G. & HallettD. (2001). The complexity of thinking across cultures: Interactions between culture and situational context. Social Cognition, 19, 230–253.
13.
ConwayL. G.IIISuedfeldP. & ClementsS. M. (2003). Beyond the American reaction: Integrative complexity of Middle Eastern leaders during the 9/11 crisis. Psicologia Politica, 27, 93–103.
14.
ConwayL. G.IIISuedfeldP. & TetlockP. E. (2001). Integrative complexity and political decisions that lead to war or peace. In ChristieD. J.WagnerR. V. & WinterD. (Eds.), Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology for the 21st century, pp. 66–75. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
15.
ConwayL. G.III.ThoemmesF.AllisonA. M.Hands TowgoodK.WagnerM. J.DaveyK. … ConwayK. R. (2008). Two ways to be complex and why they matter: Implications for attitude strength and lying. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1029–1044.
16.
FarhJ.-L.CannellaA. A. & LeeC. (2006). Approaches to scale development in Chinese management research. Management and Organization Review, 2(3), 301–318.
17.
FreebergA. L. & SteinC. H. (1996). Felt obligation towards parents in Mexican-American and Anglo-American young adults. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 13, 457–471.
18.
GibsonH. M. & FrancisL. J. (1996). Measuring Christian fundamentalist belief among 11-15 year old adolescents in Scotland. In FrancisL. J. & CampbellW. S. (Eds.), Research in religious education, pp. 249–255. Leominster, UK: Fowler Wright.
19.
HoferJ.ChasiotisA.FriedlemeierW.BuschH. & CamposD. (2005). The measurement of implicit motives in three cultures: Power and affiliation in Cameroon, Costa Rica, and Germany. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 689–716.
20.
HofstedeG. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values.Beverly Hills: Sage.
21.
GorsuchR. L. & SmithC. S. (1983). Attributions of responsibility to God: An interaction of religious beliefs and outcomes. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 22, 340–352.
22.
HillP. C. & HoodR. W. (1999). Measures of religiosity.Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press.
23.
HoggM. A. (2004). Uncertainty and extremism: Identification with high entitativity groups under conditions of uncertainty. In YzerbytV.JuddC. M. and CorneilleO. (Eds.), The Psychology of Group Perception: Contributions to the Study of Homogeneity, Entitativity, and Essentialism, pp. 401–418. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
24.
HoodR. W.HillP. C. & WilliamsonW. P. (2005). The psychology of religious fundamentalism.New York: Guilford Press.
25.
HunsbergerB. (1996). Religious fundamentalism, right-wing authoritarianism, and hostility toward homosexuals in non-Christian religious groups. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 6, 39–49.
26.
LihtJ. (2000). The observance of the Jewish laws of family purity and marital satisfaction. (Unpublished master's thesis). California State University, Sacramento, CA.
27.
LihtJ.SuedfeldP. & KrawczykA. L. (2005). Integrative complexity in face-to-face negotiations between the Chiapas guerrillas and the Mexican Government. Political Psychology, 26, 543–552.
28.
MardonesJ. M. (Ed.). (1999). Diez palabras clave sobre fundamentalismos.Estella, Navarra: Verbo Divino.
29.
MartyM. E. & ApplebyR. S. (Eds.). (1991). Fundamentalisms observed.Chicago: University of Chicago.
30.
MartyM. E. & ApplebyR. S. (Eds.). (1994). Accounting for fundamentalisms.Chicago: University of Chicago.
31.
MartyM. E. & ApplebyR. S. (Eds.). (1995). Fundamentalisms comprehended.Chicago: University of Chicago.
32.
McFarlandS. G. & WarrenJ. C. (1992). Religious orientation and selective exposure among fundamentalist Christians. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 31, 163–174.
PancerS. M.JacksonL. M.HunsbergerB.PrattM. W. & LeaJ. (1995). Religious orthodoxy and the complexity of thought about religious and nonreligious issues. Journal of Personality, 63, 213–232.
35.
RayJohn J. (1973). Conservatism, authoritarianism and related variables: A review and empirical study. In WilsonG. D. (Ed.), The Psychology of Conservatism, pp. 17–35. London: Academic Press.
36.
RobinsonJ. P. & ShaverP. R. (1973). Measures of social psychological attitudes.Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
37.
SmithA. G.SuedfeldP.ConwayL. G.III & WinterD. G. (2008). The language of violence: Distinguishing terrorist from non-terrorist groups using thematic content analysis. Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict, 1, 142–163.
38.
StarkR. & FinkeR. (2000). Acts of faith: Explaining the human side of religion.Berkley and Los Angeles: University of California.
39.
SteigerJ. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245–251.
40.
SuedfeldP.TetlockP. E. & StreufertS. (1992). Conceptual/integrative complexity. In SmithC. P. (Ed.), Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis, pp. 393–400. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41.
ThoemmesF. & ConwayL. G.III. (2007). Integrative complexity of 41 U.S. presidents. Political Psychology, 28, 193–226.
42.
ThompsonM. M.NaccaratoM. E. & ParkerK. E. (1992). Measuring cognitive needs: The development and validation of the Personal Need for Structure (PNS) and Personal Fear of Invalidity (PFI) measures. Unpublished manuscript, University of Waterloo, Canada.
43.
WallisR. (1984). Ideology, authority, and the development of cultic movements. Social Research, 41, 299–327.
44.
WigginsJ. S. (1966). Substantive dimensions of self-report in the MMPI item pool. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80, (22, whole no. 630).
45.
WilliamsonW. P.HoodR. W.Jr.AhmadA.SadiqM. & HillP. C. (2010). The Intratextual Fundamentalism Scale: Cross-cultural application, validity evidence, and relationship with religious orientation and the Big 5 factor markers. Mental Health, Religion, and Culture, 13, 721–747.
