Exploring Christians’ Explicit Attachment to God Representations: The Development of a Template for Assessing Attachment to God Experiences

2009 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 245-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Therese Proctor ◽  
Maureen Miner ◽  
Loyola McLean ◽  
Stuart Devenish ◽  
Bagher Ghobary Bonab
2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther S. Tung ◽  
Elizabeth G. Ruffing ◽  
David R. Paine ◽  
Peter J. Jankowski ◽  
Steven J. Sandage

2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-291
Author(s):  
Henk P Stulp ◽  
Jurrijn Koelen ◽  
Gerrit G Glas ◽  
Liesbeth Eurelings-Bontekoe

In the context of theistic religions, God representations are an important factor in explaining associations between religion/spirituality and well-being/mental health. Although the limitations of self-report measures of God representations are widely acknowledged, well-validated implicit measures are still unavailable. Therefore, we developed an implicit Attachment to God measure, the Apperception Test God Representations (ATGR). In this study, we examined reliability and validity of an experimental scale based on attachment theory. Seventy-one nonclinical and 74 clinical respondents told stories about 15 cards with images of people. The composite Attachment to God scale is based on scores on two scales that measure dimensions of Attachment to God: God as Safe Haven and God as Secure Base. God as Safe Haven scores are based on two subscales: Asking Support and Receiving Support from God. Several combinations of scores on these latter subscales are used to assess Anxious and Avoidant attachment to God. A final scale, Percentage Secure Base, measures primary appraisal of situations as nonthreatening. Intraclass correlation coefficients showed that the composite Attachment to God scale could be scored reliably. Associations of scores on the ATGR scales and on the explicit Attachment to God Inventory with scores on implicitly and explicitly measured distress partly confirmed the validity of the ATGR scales by demonstrating expected patterns of associations. Avoidant attachment to God seemed to be assessed more validly with the implicit than with the explicit scale. Patients scored more insecure on the composite Attachment to God scale and three subscales than nonpatients.


2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Njus ◽  
Cynthia M. H. Bane ◽  
Laura Delikowski

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth E. Seebach ◽  
Elizabeth Niedbala ◽  
Ashley Walz ◽  
Maija Rannikko ◽  
Christine Meeds

2021 ◽  
pp. 009164712199240
Author(s):  
Noah S. Love ◽  
Cassidy A. Merlo ◽  
M. Elizabeth Lewis Hall ◽  
Peter C. Hill

The present study examined attachment to God and quest as potential moderators of the relationship between religious doubt and mental health. A sample of Christian participants ( N = 235) completed a survey which included measures of attachment to God, quest, religious doubt, and mental health. As hypothesized, attachment to God and quest significantly moderated an individual’s experience of religious doubt. Low avoidant attachment to God (i.e., a more secure attachment) was associated with a more negative relationship between cognitive religious doubt and positive mental health than high avoidant attachment. In contrast, low avoidant attachment to God also ameliorated the positive relationship between affective religious doubt and mental health problems. Low anxious attachment was associated with a stronger negative relationship between both measures of religious doubt (i.e., cognitive and affective) and positive mental health. In addition, high soft quest weakened all four of the relationships between measures of religious doubt and mental health. High hard quest ameliorated the positive relationship between both measures of religious doubt and mental health problems. These results indicate that an individual’s attachment to God and the way an individual is oriented toward religion each play a role in the mental health outcomes associated with religious doubt.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document