tux? It;
it zit: ..
‘

.0 .: v

 

1.. .11... I
A3329. 5 .A\tx
I u s

 

‘1!
:..:e.

3.17,: 1.9.:

, InttT:rx,
v) rsﬁ

. l.!.l.: Jvt. . noru.xl.~..:.

 

THESIS

AR|ES

\\\\\\\\i

minim

3‘1

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

Separateness and Connectedness
In the Parent-Young Adult Reiationship:
Providing a Context For Young Adult Religious Formation

presented by

Dan w. Hilcox

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph. D. degreein Counseling Psychology

    

374.?

Major professor

Date : )géq 3, [9525

MSU i: an Afﬁrmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

 

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE ll RETURN BOX to move this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES Mum on or baton date duo.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

    
 
 
 

 

 

993 f. it «.3.
‘ gﬂrhn '
nerdy:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

usu IoAn mm Adlai/Equal oppomnuy um
w

 

SEPARATENESS AND CONNECTEDNESS IN THE PARENT-YOUNG ADULT
RELATIONSHIP: PROVIDING A CONTEXT FOR

YOUNG ADULT RELIGIOUS FORMATION

By

Dan W. Wilcox

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology
and Special Education

1995

ABSTRACT

SEPARATENESS AND CONNECTEDNESS IN THE PARENT-YOUNG ADULT
RELATIONSHIP: PROVIDING A CONTEXT FOR
YOUNG ADULT RELIGIOUS FORMATION
By

Dan W. Wilcox

Previous research has shown that parent-young adult relationships that
manage to balance the maintenance of emotional connectedness with an
encouragement of healthy psychological separation foster young adult competence
and development within such domains as identity formation, ego development,
adjustment to college, and career decision making. This study adds young adult
religious formation to the growing list of developmental outcomes used to test the
efﬁcacy of this separateness/connectedness model of parent-young adult
relationships.

A total of 228 college students completed a demographic sheet, the
Conﬂictual Independence (CI) subscales from the Psychological Separation
Inventory, the Parental Attachment Questionnaire (FAQ), and the Religious
Formation Questionnaire (RFQ). The RFQ, developed and piloted for use in this
study, contains four subscales that measure the extent to which subjects perceived

themselves to be (a) making religious commitments after exploring, (b) engaged in

Dan W. Wilcox
ongoing religious exploration without making commitments, (0) making religious
commitments without exploring, and (d) viewing doubt as conducive to religious
development.

Hierarchical regressions were conducted to determine the degree to which
perceptions of separateness and connectedness in the parent-young adult
relationship were related to each of the four RFQ subscales. Results indicated that
connectedness with parents played more of a role in young adult religious formation
than did separateness from parents. With the exception of ongoing religious
exploration, the block of connectedness variables made a signiﬁcant contribution to
scores for the other three religious formation scales. Perhaps for this group of
students, connectedness with parents contributed to making religious commitments
whether in the presence or absence of exploration.

Some evidence forthe contribution of separateness was evident for students
who made commitments without exploring. The signiﬁcant ﬁndings suggested that
parent-young adult relationships that combine close mutual attachments, freedom
from excessive conﬂict, and parental restraints on young adult autonomy contributed
to making religious commitments without questioning or exploring. Some insight into
the beneﬁts and costs of this unique combination of parent-young adult relationship
characteristics was provided. The implications for counseling were discussed.

Finally, preliminary evidence for the psychometric adequacy of the RFQ was

presented.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

My deepest appreciation goes out to many individuals who have helped me
walk through this process with both eyes open. First and foremost, thanks to my
committee chairperson, John Powell, for his steadfast encouragement. Our
meetings were thetonic I required for renewed excitement and commitment. Thank
you, Fred Lopez, Ellen Strommen, and Richard Johnson, for serving on my
committee. To Fred, thanks for thoughtful feedback that always served to
strengthen my presentation; to Ellen for exciting my interest in attachment and close
relationships across the lifespan; and to Richard for coming out of retirement and
seeing me through my oral defense.

Certainly, appreciation goes out to many who have advised me around
statistical design and analysis. Joshua Bagakas at Michigan State, thank you for
helping me to launch this study. At the University of Utah, Carl Smoot and John
Kircher, thank you for your valuable and timely advice. Also at the University of
Utah, thank you, Frances Harris, for leading the research and professional
development consult and for stoking the ﬁres in my belly--you pushed me, and l

needediﬂ

I can’t forget to say thank you to Sue Cooley Miller for getting this thing typed
and for literally escorting the dissertation through its ﬁnal journey to publication and
presentation to the School of Education. I appreciate your efforts.

Finally, to my family, my sustenance, my life outside of graduate school, so
much appreciation is due to you. To my wife’s parents, Harvey and Marilyn Lerner,
thank you for your interest and support. Harvey, I’m done! TO my parents, Betty and
Wes Wilcox, your love and encouragement are invaluable. It is great to
acknowledge our close relationship at the beginning of this study. To my kids,
Hannah, David, and Emily, you have added so much to my life-| can truly say being
a dad is the only way to do graduate school. Thanks, kids.

Here is where I get stuck. I can’t possibly thank you enough, Beth, for all you
have meant to me and to this dissertation. I think back to our wedding and how we
declared before everyone that "Two are better than one because they have a good
return for their labor; For if either of them falls, the one will lift up his companion . . .
a cord of three strands is not quickly torn apart" (Ecclesiastes 429-12). Thanks for
lifting me up time and time again during this process with your love, editing, and

great ideas. I’ve got to say it, you, God, and I make a pretty decent cord. Nothing

will tear us apart!

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES ............................................... viii
Chapter
I. THE PROBLEM ....................................... 1
Purpose of the Study ................................... 3
Need for the Study .................................... 3
Overview of Theory .................................... 7
The Parent-Late Adolescent Relationship ................. 8
Religious Formation and Adolescence/Young Adulthood . . . . 25
Statement of Research Questions ....................... 33
II. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................ 36
Introduction ......................................... 36
Observations of Separateness and Connectedness in
Parenting Styles .................................... 37
The Authoritative Relationship ......................... 37
Summary ......................................... 41
Observations of Separateness and Connectedness in
Family Communication Patterns ....................... 42
The lndividuated Relationship ......................... 42
The Enabling Relationship ............................ 44
Summary ......................................... 45
Young Adult Perceptions of Separateness and Connected-
ness in Their Relationships With Parents ................. 46
Effects on Identity Status ............................. 46
Meeting the Rapprochement Challenge .................. 48
Effects on Career Exploration and Commitment Processes . . 50
Summary ........................................... 52

vi

III. METHOD ........................................... 55

Subjects ........................................... 55
Procedures ......................................... 60
Instruments ......................................... 60
Demographic Questionnaire .......................... 60
A Measure of Religious Formation ...................... 61
Measures of the Parent-Young Adult Relationship ......... 68
Design ............................................. 71
Research Hypotheses ................................. 72
Analysis of Data ..................................... 73
IV. RESULTS .......................................... 75
Sample Characteristics ................................ 75
Gender Differences ................................... 77
The Main Hypotheses ................................. 82
Dependent Variable: RFQ Exploration Ongoing ........... 82

Dependent Variable: RFQ Commitment After Exploration . . . 83
Dependent Variable: RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to Growth . . . 85
Dependent Variable: RFQ Commitment Without

Exploration ...................................... 86
Validating the Religious Formation Questionnaire (RFQ) ...... 89
V. DISCUSSION ....................................... 93
Summary of the Study ................................. 93
Review and Discussion of the Main Findings ............... 96

Review and Discussion of Post-Hoc Analyses Related to
the RFQ ......................................... 108

Limitations of the Study and Suggestions for Future

Research ........................................ 116
APPENDIX ................................................... 122
REFERENCES ................................................ 136

vii

Table

2.1

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

3.10

4.1

4.2

LIST OF TABLES

Page
Summary of Studies and Their Results ......................... 54
Age of Subjects ........................................... 56
Academic Majors of Subjects ................................. 57
Subjects’ Denominational Afﬁliations ........................... 57
Subjects’ Assessment of Their Parents’ and Their Own Interest
in Religion/Spirituality ....................................... 58
Subjects’ Assessment of Their Own and Their Parents’ Level of
Involvement in Religious Activities and Behaviors ................. 59
Subjects’ Selection of the Top Three Inﬂuences on Their
Religious/Spiritual Development .............................. 59
The Four Identity Statuses as Derived From the Presence or
Absence of Exploration and Commitment ....................... 62
Correlations Between RFQ Subscales and EIS Achievement and
EIS Moratorium ........................................... 64
Correlations Among the Six RFQ Subscales ..................... 66
Correlations Among the Four RFQ Subscales Used in the Present
Study ................................................... 66
Means and Standard Deviations of Male, Female, and Combined
Samples on Measures of Separateness, Connectedness, and
Religious Formation ........................................ 78
lntercorrelation Matrix for Variables of Interest in This
Study ................................................... 79

viii

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

Pearson Product-Moment lntercorrelation Matrix ................. 81

Summary of Hierarchical Regressions of Exploration Ongoing
Scores .................................................. 83

Summary of Hierarchical Regressions of Commitment After
Exploration Scores ......................................... 84

Summary of Hierarchical Regressions of Doubt ls Conducive to
Growth Scores ............................................ 85

Summary of Hierarchical Regressions of Commitment Without
Exploration Scores ......................................... 87

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM

Recently, the work of a growing number of scholars in personality,
developmental, and counseling psychology has afﬁrmed the experiences of families
that remain close through the transitions associated with adolescence and young
adulthood (Baumrind, 1991; Cooper, Grotevant, 8 Condon, 1983; Gilligan, 1987;
Hauser, Powers, 8 Noam, 1991; Josselson, 1980, 1988; Lopez, Watkins, Manus,
8 Huton-Shoup, 1992). These writers have demonstrated that for an adolescent or
young adult, becoming autonomous and self-directed and achieving a sense of
identity need not be accomplished at the cost of close relationships with parents. On
the contrary, relationships that balance the maintenance of emotional connection
with the encouragement of psychological separation may in fact facilitate the
negotiation of many of the developmental tasks normally associated with
adolescence and young adulthood. At least for some families, the storm and stress
traditionally associated with adolescent separation and independence seeking may
be moderated by parents and adolescents working within and sustaining family ties

(Hill 8 Holmbeck, 1986; Kenny, 1987; Montemeyor, 1986; Offer 8 Offer, 1975).

2

Studies sharing similartheoretical and conceptual underpinnings concerning
the nature of optimal parent-child relationships and the importance of both
separation and connection to young adult development have used a variety of
names to describe these relationships. Whether these parent-adolescent
relationships are called authoritative (Baumrind, 1987, 1991), enabling (Hauser et
al., 1991), or lndividuated (Grotevant 8 Cooper, 1986; Quintana 8 Lapsley, 1987),
young adult development and psychological adjustment appear to beneﬁt from
relationships that provide characteristics ofseparateness, such as self-assertion and
the expression of differences, and characteristics of connectedness, such as
respect, acceptance, responsiveness, and warmth.

Ego development, identity formation, role-taking skills, adjustment to college,
self-esteem, and career exploration and decision making head a long list of
adolescent and young adult developmental tasks and psychological adjustment
variables that are related to a parent-adolescent relationship that combines
characteristics of connectedness and separateness (Blustein, Walbridge,
Friedlander, 8 Palladino, 1991; Campbell, Adams, 8 Dobson, 1984; Grotevant 8
Cooper, 1986; Hauseretal., 1991; Kenney, 1990; Kenny 8 Donaldson, 1992; Lopez
et al., 1992; Rice, Cole, 8 Lapsley, 1990; Rice 8 WhaIey, 1994). In a longitudinal
study of adolescent and family communication styles, Hauser and his colleagues
(1991) found that adolescent ego development was strongly associated with
relationship conditions that encouraged the mutual expression of ideas, differences,

and curiosity, while communicating acceptance and empathy. In a similar program

3

of research, Grotevant, Cooper, and their associates (1985, 1986, 1988) reported
that relationships that permit the mutual exchange of differences in an atmosphere
of respect and sensitivity positively inﬂuence adolescent identity formation and skills
related to self-assessment and perspective taking.

In her longitudinal research program, Baumrind (1987, 1991) made significant
contributions to an understanding of the importance of separateness and
connectedness characteristics in the parent-adolescent relationship. According to
her work among seven different relationship types, authoritative relationships, in
which parents are highly demanding (a separateness characteristic) and highly
responsive (a characteristic of connection) are remarkably successful in generating
competence and in protecting their adolescents from dangerous risk-taking activities,

such as problem drug use.

r f h t
The researcher’s purpose in this study was to put this separateness-
connectedness model of the parent-adolescent relationship to another test. The
investigator examined whether there is a relationship between measures of
separateness and connectedness in the parent-adolescent relationship and young

adult religious formation.

NeediortheﬁtiLdv
In the variety of measures used to test the beneﬁts of separateness and

connectedness in the parent-young adult relationship, conspicuously absent are

4
measures of young adult religious maturity, religious identity formation, and religious
orientation. It is generally accepted that parents play a major role in the formation
of their children’s religious belief systems and practices and that this inﬂuence
extends into adolescence and young adulthood (Argyle 8 Beit-Hallahmi, 1975; Clark
8 Worthington, 1987; Kandel, 1986; Spilka, Hood, 8 Gorsuch, 1985). A number of
researchers have reported that young adults refer to their parents as more inﬂuential
to their religious development than either church attendance or religious education
(Spilka et al., 1985). However, when religion or religious issues are included in
studies of adolescence and young adulthood, they are often limited to subjects’
responses to items on demographic questionnaires, such as frequency of church
attendance, denominational preference, or belief in God (Meadow 8 Kahoe, 1984;
Potvin 8 Lee, 1982; Potvin 8 Sloane, 1985; Spilka et al., 1985). Even when young
adult religiosity is explored in greater detail, the measures seem to be restricted to
the content of individuals’ religious practices or religious beliefs. Investigators have
not pursued more substantive questions concerning the effects of parent-adolescent
relationship characteristics or styles on young adult religious development or a
willingness to reevaluate one’s childhood religiosity in order to make fresh
commitments to a more adult form of religious knowing (Gorsuch, 1988; Hill, 1986;
Kirkpatrick 8 Shaver, 1990).

The lack of research on adolescent‘religious development is surprising, given
the importance of religion to many adolescents and the linkage between issues such

as religious belief, religious conversion, religious identity, and the adolescent/young

5
adult years (Allport, 1950; Elkind, 1964, 1970; Erikson, 1958; Parker, 1985; Spilka

et al., 1985; Worthington, 1989). Many adolescents and young adults, like the adult
population in general, continue to identify themselves as religious (Gallup, 1989;
Gallup 8 Castelli, 1989). A recent survey of adolescents found 82% expressing a
belief in a supreme being (Heshmann, 1991). One-third of this group reported
religious experiences that had changed their lives, and 40% said they prayed every
day. A recent Gallup survey (Gallup, 1989) showed that after losing interest in
religion and spending time away from churches or synagogues as late adolescents,
young adults showed a dramatic growth in their interest in religion and were
returning to church in increasing numbers. Many young adults reported a desire to
raise their children in a home where religion is emphasized. These survey data also
suggested that adolescents and young adults base many of their moral decisions on
religious beliefs (Gallup, 1989; Hershmann, 1991). Finally, in times ofinterpersonal
stress or during episodes of depression, adolescents and young adults said they
looked to religious resources, such as prayer, meditation, and reading the Bible, for
support and guidance.

On the surface, omitting religious variables from research into adolescent
development is not unusual, what with the uneasy relationship that has long existed
between psychology and religion (Beit-Hallahmi, 1977; Spilka et al., 1985). Studies
surveying the attitudes of scientists toward religion have found that the social
sciences, and counseling and clinical psychology in particular, have turned an

unsympathetic eye toward religion and religious issues (Bergin, 1983: Ragan,

6

Malony, 8 Beit-Hallahmi, 1980). Counselors and therapists have paid a price for
ignoring or remaining antagonistic toward their clients’ religiousness. Studies have
suggested that clients with religious orientations are suspicious of secular
counselors (Genia, 1994; Worthington, 1989). The growing number of so-called
Christian or religious counselors is testimony to the distrust of secular counselors
and therapists (Worthington, 1989).

There is evidence to suggest that this state of affairs is changing
(Worthington, 1989). Articles dealing with religion and spiritual concerns are
appearing in professional journals with more frequency. In addition, according to a
recent national survey, therapists are generally more religious in orientation than
was assumed from earlier reports (Bergin 8 Jensen, 1990; Genia, 1994).
Counselors and therapists are beginning to work with clients’ religious orientations
instead of ignoring them or assuming that they are part of the client's presenting
problem.

This research represents an addition to this growing dialogue between
psychology and religion. The current status of theory and research on adolescent
and young adult development contributes to the timeliness of this inquiry. We are
prepared to ask more substantive questions concerning the inﬂuence of parents on
late adolescent and young adult religious development. Speciﬁcally, we can begin
to explore whether perceptions of separateness and connectedness in relationships
with parents make a difference in the level of religious exploration undertaken by late

adolescents and young adults.

7
MW

Crucial in providing a foundation forthis dissertation is coverage oftheorythat
highlights both the relevance of parent-young adult characteristics of separateness
and connectedness to young adult development and the salience of religious
formation to young adults. First, highlighting the importance of separateness and
connectedness to young adult development, prominent separation-individuation
theories will be presented. Margaret Mahler’s outline of the psychological birth of the
human infant foreshadows the dynamic interplay between separateness and
connectedness throughout the lifespan. Peter Blos’s second individuation process
during adolescence and young adulthood recapitulates the separateness-
connectedness themes laid down by Mahler and accents the need for a balance of
both, particularly during a crucial rapprochement subphase.

The theory chapter concludes with a discussion of the relevance that religious
formation processes have for adolescents and young adults. Although no unifying
theory exists that adequately explains the nature of adolescent and young adult
religious development, theories concerned with ego identity formation, cognitive
development, intellectual and ethical development, faith development, and
explaining mature religious orientations all allude to adolescence and young

adulthood as a period deﬁned by religious questioning, exploring, and commitment

making.

8
IhiEaLenkLaﬁAdQIESQEDIﬁeImLQnshjn

There is a growing body of theory and research emphasizing the continuing
importance of both separation and connection in the relationship with parents for late
adolescent and young adult development. This body of knowledge, much of which
integrates psychoanalytic object relations and attachment literature (Ainsworth,
Blehar, Waters, 8Wall, 1978; BIOS, 1979; Bowlby, 1988; Mahler, Pine, 8 Bergman,
1975) with family systems literature (Becvar 8 Becvar, 1988; Bowen, 1978; Carter
8 McGoldrick, 1989), is becoming a dominant paradigm in both developmental and
counseling psychology (Gelso 8 Fassinger, 1992; Josselson, 1988).

Traditional psychoanalytic theory posited that the central developmental task
of adolescence is to separate from parents in order to make independent
commitments in the adult world (Freud, 1958). Contemporary theorists grounded in
psychoanalytically based separation-individuation theories, have suggested that ties
are not severed with parents in the service of healthy psychological separation, but
together parents and young adults work within the relationship to manage a growing
sense of young adult independence while still maintaining strong emotional and
functional family ties (Blos, 1979; Josselson, 1988; Mahler et al., 1975). Joining
psychological separation at center stage in young adult development is the
importance of the attachment relationship with parents. What is emerging from this
literature is images of warm, supportive, emotionally close relationships with parents

that also encourage adolescent and young adult independence.

9

The importance of the ongoing relationship with parents to late adolescent
and young adult development ﬁnds a strong voice in the separation-individuation
theories of Margaret Mahler (Mahler et al., 1975) and Peter Blos (1979). Mahler’s
description of the separation-individuation process in infancy and Blos’s elaboration
of this process for adolescents and young adults reveal the dynamic interplay
between independence urgings and relatedness desires. For the adolescent,
separation-individuation theory addresses becoming less dependent on parents and
less subject to parental introjects, as well as changing and preserving the close
relationship with parents.

Forthe late adolescent/young adult, it is crucial to become autonomous, self-
directed, and unencumbered by excessive parental control. However, young adult
separation "does not require that relationships be obliterated. . . . Rather, separation
modiﬁes relationship" (Josselson, 1988, p. 94). It is conceivable, as one group of
researchers found with a group of college sophomores, that growing independence
from and a growing affection for parents can exist together (Pipp, Shaver, Jennings,
Lamborn, 8 Fisher, 1985). Yet, contrary to the conclusions reached by Pipp et al.,
such ﬁndings are indicative of healthy young adult development rather than signs
that separation is incomplete (Gilligan, 1987).

In terms of the inquiries made for this study, it was assumed that for many
young adults, questioning and reevaluating one’s religious traditions, examining
other forms of religious expression, and making commitments to a religious ideology

are part of asserting one’s independence from parents and becoming an adult.

10

Separation-individuation theory suggests that such experiments are often shared
with parents in order to both conﬁrm an emerging autonomy and ensure that the
close relationship continues. Separation-individuation theory explains the
simultaneous appearance of declarations of independence and desires for
acceptance from parents on the part of young adults. The developing young adult,
like the developing infant, wants assurance that separation and autonomy are not
paid for with the loss of connection.

W. Separation-individuation theory,
therefore, assumes that a balance of separateness and connectedness in the
parent-young adult relationship provides a context for the negotiation of such
developmental tasks as religious exploration. Adolescents and young adults who
are encouraged to explore ideas and environments apart from those sanctioned by
parents and who can bring these new ideas and environments home, so to speak,
are likely to perceive separateness in their relationships with parents. Adolescents
who perceive separateness in their relationships with parents will feel free to explore
new and different ideas from parents, to clarify and express these ideas, and to
adopt them as part of an emerging identity without fear of risking resentment, guilt,
and excessive anger. Such adolescents are also likely to have more positive
feelings regarding separation from parents than adolescents who may be engaging
in similar exploration activities but avoid sharing their search with parents for fear of

loss of love, approval, or affection (Rice et al., 1990).

11

Becoming one’s own person and highlighting the boundaries between self
and other, as central as this task is to adolescent development, does not occur in a
vacuum. It makes no sense, as Josselson (1988) asserted, to separate from
nothing. With its focus trained on adolescent separation, traditional theory has cast
a blind eye to the other player in the separation-individuation drama, namely, the
continuing close relationship with parents. Adolescents perceive connectedness in
their relationships with parents when, during the internal ambivalence and ambiguity
of the separation process, they can rely on the availability of the close relationship
for emotional support, afﬁrmation, and acceptance.

Attachment relationships or connection with parents may facilitate the risk-
taking involved in developing independence through providing a safe place for
emotional refueling and fortrying out new identities and feelings. Warm, accepting,
and supportive parents enable adolescents to engage in age-appropriate exploration
and to make commitments in the adult world.

In the pages to come, different studies using different measures of separation
and connection are cited to demonstrate the beneﬁts of both to young adult
adjustment and development. At this point, however, the separation-individuation
theories of Margaret Mahler and Peter Blos are presented to highlight the usefulness
of both relational characteristics in adolescent and young adult development.

Margaretmmmdmmmmm. Many theorists writing
about young adult development and the importance of separation and connection

in the family relationship are indebted to Mahler’s (1975) theory of infant separation-

12

individuation from primary caretakers (Josselson, 1988; Kroger, 1992; Marcia, 1988).
Mayler’s groundbreaking conceptualization of the ”psychological birth of the human
infant" originated from her study of severe childhood psychopathology (Greenberg
8 Mitchell, 1983). Mahler noticed that most childhood psychoses related to either
an inability to form close connections with or separate from primary caretakers.
These two extreme pathways led Mahler to conceptualize a stage-process model
of normal childhood development that addressed both the need for separation and
connection in relationships with parents. Parents in concert with their children walk
a ﬁne line between an overemphasis on separation and an overemphasis on
connection. Optimal parenting encourages toddlers to emerge with a stable concept
of a separate self and a new way to be connected to others.

Infants develop an awareness of self as distinct from primary caretakers
through a sequence of speciﬁc stages, according to Mahler. At the beginning of life,
the newborn is a closed system without the ability to differentiate self from his/her
surroundings. During this awakening phase, the newborn is concerned with the
satisfaction of its needs and ﬂuctuates between need gratiﬁcation and frustration.
At about 3 to 4 weeks of age, physiological maturation processes allow the infant to
respond to his/her external environment with greater clarity. Instead of focusing
exclusively inward, as in the awakening phase, during the symbiQtic phase the infant
begins to look to the periphery and'sees his/her caretaker. Still, at this juncture
seeing the caretaker is equivalent to seeing the self. Caretaker-infant is viewed as

a "dual unity within one common boundary" (Mahler et al., 1975, p. 44). The

13

experiences gained during this phase are important building blocks for the evolution
of one’s sense of self and other and set the stage for the four subphases of
separation-individuation to which we now turn our attention.

The differentiation, practicing, and rapprochement subphases of the
separation-individuation process richly describe the ebb and ﬂow of the growing
intrapsychic awareness of self and other and the need for a balance of separateness
and connectedness. During the diﬂerentiatiensubnhase, between 4 and 10 months
of age, the infant is "hatched," to use Mahler’s term, and begins actively exploring
the caretaker’s features as well as features of the environment that are close to the
caretaker-child orbit. With increased locomotion, the child is able to move farther
away from the primary caretakers and begin active exploration of his/her external
environment. At this stage, the child begins his/her "love affair with the world,”
ﬁnding fascination in both animate and inanimate objects. Still, during this practising
subphase. caretakers must provide a home base for the separating child to return
to for emotional refueling. For many 10- to 15-month-old babies, interest in the
caretaker as a source of ”emotional support" and connection will be more important
than practicing in the world.

At 15 to 20 months of age, during the W, the child
experiences the primary caretaker as a distinct self and is not sure he/she likes it
that way. After an exhilarating sense of omnipotence, the child feels vulnerable to
frustration and ”failure" in his/her relationship with the world. The caretaker, after all,

is not always readily available for help and refueling. What’s more, increasingly

14

complex strategies, such as the use of language, are required to get the caretaker’s
attention. When these strategies fail, as they often do, Mahler noted the emergence
of regressive behaviors such as clinginess and neediness. However, on top of these
needy expressions, the child does not give up on separation and will angrily battle
with caretakers for his/her ”rights.” As Mahler suggested, the rapprochement crisis
is characterized by often extreme ambivalence on the part of the child. “I do and do
not want it this way," the child seems to say as he/she wrestles with the fear of the
loss of the caretaker’s love, on the one hand, and fear of reengulfment with the
caretaker, on the other.

The ﬁnal achievement in Mahler’s separation-individuation process is the
phase of libidinal abject canstancy. The hallmarks of this phase are a stable concept
of the self and a stable concept of the other. The child, in Winnicott’s terms, has
developed "the capacity to be alone" through incorporating both the "good and the
bad parts" of the caretaker’s image (Greenberg 8 Mitchell, 1983). This
accomplishment, at around 3 years of age, marks the ability to integrate both
separateness and connectedness needs. The developing child, secure in the
availability of the close relationship with parents, can now engage in the
developmental tasks associated with the play and school-age environments.

Summary. Underscored in this model ofintrapsychic separation-individuation
is the need for responsive parenting in order to manage the twin calls for separation
and connection. Parents who manage to remain ﬂexible, who set limitations while

allowing exploration, and who are ﬁrm and demanding while remaining loving and

15

supportive are more likely to inﬂuence the development of competency in their
children than parents who either ignore or engulf their infants (Ainsworth et al., 1978;
Baumrind, 1981; Bowlby, 1988; Mahler et al., 1975). The same strategies and skills
in parenting are called upon during the adolescent transition and the second
separation-individuation process (Bios, 1979).

The tension between separation and connection will heighten when
adolescents must balance a need to afﬁliate with parents and peers with a need to
identify their own course in life. Asserting one’s independence from parents, while
on-task developmentally, can threaten the stability in family relationships enjoyed
during the school-age years. Exploring and developing new ideas and commitments
and taking responsibility for communicating them may go hand in hand with a
developing sense of emotional distance with parents. Students have shown that
even as young adults are happy about the independence they enjoy in family
relationships, they wish the family were closer and will often seek after parental
approval (Feldman 8 Gehring, 1988; Frank, Pirsch, 8 Wright, 1990). Like the child
involved in the separation-individ uation process described by Mahler, the developing
adolescent involved in the second-individuation process may echo, "I do and I do not
like this!"

‘ ‘ ooni ooivi .oti or. - ' .ul‘ ‘1 o no .0 t Q‘V‘ con-i.
Blos’s (1967) attempt to adapt Mahler’s scheme to adolescent/young adult growth
and development sheds light on the heightened tension between separation and

connection and the importance of the continuing relationship with parents.

16

I propose to view adolescence in its totality as the second individuation

process, the ﬁrst one having been completed toward the end of the third year

of life with the attainment of object constancy. Both periods have in common

a heightened vulnerability of personality organization. Both periods have in

common the urgency for changes in psychic structure in consonance with the

maturational forward surge. Last but not least, both periods--should they
miscarryuare followed by a speciﬁc deviant development (psychopathology)

that embodies the respective failures of individuation. (p. 163)

Although he did not refer to Mahler’s scheme directly, Blos found striking
similarities between the tentativeness of the individuating infant and that of the
adolescent/young adult separating from his/her family. What emerging from
symbiosis with the primary caretaker is to Mahler’s infant, becoming independent
from parents is to Blos’s young adult. An adolescent’s exploration of a variety of
ideological options and interpersonal styles is analogous to the infant’s exploration
of the surrounding environment. The ambivalence experienced by the adolescent
conducting these separation experiments is very much like the experience of the
infant in the rapprochement crisis, who in the middle of play looks around for his/her

mother and is either terriﬁed to ﬁnd she is not there or relieved that she is just a
crawl’s distance away.

WWW. Adolescence, in part,
is about becoming disentangled from parental control and becoming responsible for
oneself and one’s direction in life. Merging from this fusion with parental rules and
mandates and loosening ties with the internalized parents is a double-edged sword.
During the school-age years, pleasing and obeying parents is crucial to a child’s
emotional stability and self-esteem. During adolescence, however, physical and

cognitive changes along with shifting expectations and practices in the family and

17

society precipitate 3 W or a "hatching” of the adolescent

self. At this juncture, the adolescent begins to see parents from a distance and
realize they are not just roles or ﬁgures but people who are inconsistent and ﬂawed
(Youniss 8 Smollar, 1985).

Often, the developing adolescent begins to test these hypotheses through
demanding more control and power in parent-child relationships. Challenging
parental rules and regulations, debating ideological positions, and spending more
time alone or with peers is part of this practicing subphase in adolescence.

A"spirit of adolescent rebelliousness” with parents and other authorities is the
popular picture of adolescent-authority relationships that endures to this day.
However, there are differing opinions concerning the nature of parent-child conﬂict
in the young adult years (Adams 8 Gullotta, 1983; Montmeyor, 1986; Offer 8 Offer,
1975). Theorists writing from the traditional psychodynamic perspective, including
Peter Blos, have suggested that these years are punctuated by intense conﬂict with
parents (Blos, 1967; 1979; Freud, 1958). Other authors have noted that "storm and
stress” is far from the universal experience observed in families with young adult
children (Hill 8 Holmbeck, 1986; Josselson, 1980, 1988; Montmeyor, 1986; Offer8
Offer, 1975). Unlike Freud or Blos, revisionist theoreticians have suggested that
turbulent relationships, in which young adults attempt to cut themselves off from
parents, are indicative of problematic, rather than normal adjustment. These writers
have referred to peaceful relationships with parents for a signiﬁcant number of

adolescents. Conﬂicts are present but manageable and often revolve around

18

mundane issues like household chores and bedtime hours during the school week.
Evidence of increased independence or separation from parents exists, but the
emotional turmoil often associated with separation is not present in these families.

It is safe to say that whether the family experiences calm or stress,
adolescents are practicing their growing sense ofindependence in a variety of ways.
The parents’ response tothe practicing adolescent seems crucial in determining how
interpersonal conﬂicts are managed, whether they revolve around taking out the
trash or changing religious beliefs.

i..." o l‘ll‘l' n-0 ‘0‘! .‘I 0: .o‘n “l ‘9-. -_ 0| q... our-Ion.
"Rapprochement,” as Josselson (1988) noted, is a powerful term for understanding
development because it integrates movement toward separateness and concern for
connectedness. Mahler’s original deﬁnition, emphasizing the need for the child to
return to caretakers for emotional support and to obtain encouragement for
autonomy projects, isjust one aspect of the rapprochement phenomenon in human
development. Rapprochement also represents the adolescent’s desire to share with
caretakers the accomplishments gained during the individuation process, to seek
afﬁrmation and recognition for these accomplishments, and to acknowledge that
even though the relationship is obviously changing, an interest in sustaining a
closeness remains. It also highlights a growing recognition that the relationship with
parents is gradually moving toward mutuality and symmetry (Allison 8 Sabatelli,

1988; Youniss 8 Smollar, 1985). For adolescents and young adults, therefore,

19
rapprochement is the struggle with concurrent demands for independence,
emotional refueling, and renegotiating the close relationship with parents.

During the rapprochement crisis, adolescents may ﬂuctuate between strongly
asserting their independence from parents and seeking to be near parents.
Establishing psychological distance from parents is a "mixed emotional bag” for
adolescents and young adults. Separating from parents is not only linked to an
increased sense of independence but also includes feelings of insecurity and
intensiﬁed concerns over parental approval (Frank, Pirsch, 8 Wright, 1990). The
challenge to both adolescents and their parents atthisjuncture isto preserve parent-
adolescent connections while simultaneously encouraging adolescents’ movement
toward independent selfhood (Anderson 8 Sabatelli, 1990; Grotevant 8 Cooper,
1986; Josselson, 1980, 1988; Quintana 8 Lapsley, 1990).

Parents, according to one developmental theorist, need to "stay in place“ as
adolescents move from looking exclusively to them for support and afﬁrmation to
becoming sources of their own afﬁrmation; from being deﬁned by their parents to
taking responsibility for deﬁning themselves (Kegan, 1982).

It takes a special wisdom for the family of an adolescent to understand that

by remaining in place so that the adolescent can have the family there to

ignore and reject . . . [the family] is still in an important and intimate [italics

added] way involved in the child’s development. (Kegan, 1982, p. 129)

For many individuals in our society, going to college is a cultural rite of
passage marking the emergence from adolescence and the protection of home into

the freedoms and responsibilities associated with the adult world. It is often in

college that late adolescents and young adults are exposed to new ideas and

20
lifestyles, including new religious practices and beliefs, that prove to be instrumental
in identity formation. For some, adjustment to college is bound to be a stressful and
emotionally taxing process, a process that underscores the tension in the
rapprochement dialect between separation and connection.

Kenny (1987) suggested that the transition to college is ”a naturally occurring
strange situation" where the availability Of parents as a secure base is often put to
the test. The perceived availability of these connections with parents and the
awareness that a close, supportive relationship exists at home may serve to facilitate
the successful negotiation of such hallmarks of young adult independence as college
adjustment, career decision making, and perhaps exploration and commitment to a
religious orientation (Blustein et al., 1991; Kenny, 1987, 1990; Lopez et al., 1992;
Quintana 8 Lapsley, 1987; Rice et al., 1990). A breakdown in this important
relationship and a failure to meet the challenges posed by a rapprochement crisis
create their own consequences. "Whatever excitement, adventure, and joyous
emancipation may be associated with a young person’s going off to college, it is true
that it is a time of vulnerability and a high susceptibility to depression” (Kegan, 1982,
p.185)

These ”depressions" are nothing new to college residence halls or counseling
centers. They are often conceptualized as students having problems separating
from parents. But as Kegan (1982) noted:

The only problem here is the depression is terribly hard to solve through the

exercise of personal agency or independence. Without some way of

recognizing that the satisfaction of one yearning (here, for example, academic
achievement) really requires the satisfaction of the other (feeling connected

21

and supported) in order for either to feel worthwhile, the person is left to

wander around in the worst sort of lostness-the kind that does not even know

what is missing. (pp. 193-195)

Kegan suggested that the triumph of the self at this juncture, namely, the emergence
of a new independence and autonomy, is due in large part to the environments that
have conﬁrmed these strengths, namely, those close, mutual attachments with peers
and parents.

Summary. The rapprochement dialectic presents a tension between aspects
of separateness and connectedness in adolescent and young adult development.
The individual’s ability to come to terms with the demands of this dialectic is
reﬂected, in part, in the degree to which the individual is emotionally fused and
reactive to his/her parents (Bowen, 1978). This tension is managed by adolescents
and young adults who maintain a sense of communication and trust with parents
while also seeking a more differentiated relationship with them. These individuals
rely on parents for emotional support, encouragement, and advice during risky
exploration of new and unusual environments. Such reliance is adaptive rather than
being a sign of developmental weakness. It is the securely attached children,
adolescents, and young adults who are most free to explore their world (Ainsworth
etaL,1978)

The essence of the rapprochement phenomenon, according to Josselson
(1988), is the idea that an adolescent can bring new "parts" of him/herself ”home"

in order to experience some continuity between his/her new context and the old (p.

96). The rapprochement adolescent or young adult uses the close relationship with

22

parents to recognize the self he/she has been, the self that he/she is experimenting

with, and the self he/she envisions.
l‘ .' ‘ 'l‘ 0| 2] al. I‘ 00.0“] CII‘H" ‘ .
According to Blos (1967, 1979), the adolescent equivalent of selfﬂhmnstangy
or the successful accomplishment of the second individuation process occurs when
adolescents have "shed family dependencies” through the establishment of ﬁrm
boundaries between self and others. Parents are not the sole source of approval or
emotional well being for lndividuated adolescents or young adults. Exploring
attitudes or beliefs different from parents’ does not cripple lndividuated young adults
with excessive guilt or anxiety. Those who have achieved a sense of self-other
constancy in adolescence can make commitments in accordance with their emerging
differences without fear of excessive resentment or anger in relation to their parents
(Anderson 8Sabatelli, 1990; Bios, 1967, 1979; Hoffman, 1984; Kroger, 1989, 1992).
Within one’s family, successful accomplishment of the second individuation
process in adolescence includes the ability to manage an age-appropriate
separateness while in the context of the ongoing connectedness with parents
(Anderson 8 Sabatelli, 1990; Youniss 8 Smollar, 1985). Mahler et al. (1975), in
discussing infant and childhood development, suggested that the healthy outcome
of libidinal object constancy is the ability to integrate both dependence and
independence needs. The same conclusions can be drawn for development across
the lifespan: dependence in this context is acknowledging the need every human

has for relationship in order to be afﬁrmed and validated, whereas independence

23

implies a sense of self-ownership and authorship with a sense of personal
responsibility for deﬁning commitments. Josselson (1988) put it this way:
Separation-individuation, then, is not moving away from but an elaborate pas
de deuxin which the developing individual moves in such a way as to attempt
to effect the degree of autonomy that she needs within the form of
relatedness that she wishes. . . . Separation-individuation implies continued,
renewed, often strengthened, but revised connectedness. A more clearly
delineated sense of self makes new forms of relatedness possible. (p. 98)
Recent studies identifying "several distinct parent-young adult relationship
types" (Frank, Avery, 8 Laman, 1988) and outlining stages of relationship maturity
(White, Speisman, 8 Costos, 1983) provided evidence of this kind of synthesis
between connectedness and separateness in parent-young adult relationships.
According to Frank et al., young adults in W relationships with
parents are able to declare a strong sense of independence and hold viewpoints
radically different from those of their parents. However, they also described mutual,
affectively close relationships with parents. Parents were viewed as demanding and
critical, and yet the ability to empathize with and appreciate parents’ limitations and
strengths allowed competent-connected young adults to manage any conﬂicts
without their getting out of hand. According to these researchers, the competent-
connected style was related to measures of healthy young adult development,
whereas relationship styles that featured young adults who were emotionally cutoff
from parents or bound by their dependence on parents were related to less healthy
outcomes.

In their model of relationship maturity, White, Speisman, and Costos (1985,

1987) also described a similar synthesis of characteristics of connection and

24

separation in parent-young adult relationships. Integrating threads from ego, social
cognitive, and psychosocial developmental theories, White et al. identiﬁed three
levels of relationship maturity, beginning with the simplicity and concreteness of the
undifferentiated or samused level, then emphasizing conformity and convention
in the LQlechused level, and ending with the indixiﬂualedﬂnﬂemm level. At this
highest level of relationship maturity, members are both separated themselves and
are able to connect with others in "intimate, reciprocal, mutual bonds” (White et al.,
1987,p.92)

Summary. Traditional developmental theory suggests that in order to
celebrate independence, one has to sacriﬁce relationship. For such theorists. the
making of mature religious commitments would only be accomplished by distancing
oneself from parents and looking less to family ties for affection and support.
Revisionist theoreticians such as those discussed here have suggested that
separation and connection, autonomy and attachment, and independence and
dependence emerge side by side in adolescent and young adult development.
Mature religious commitments may evolve out of parent-young adult relationships
that blend elements of both separateness and connectedness.

Parents who are able to be supportive but not smothering, set limits but allow
for freedom, and value discipline but negotiate expectations with their children
demonstrate their ability to combine elements of separateness and connectedness
in their parenting style. Such parents are not only interested in being heard and

respected, they are also interested in hearing and in understanding their children.

25

Parents who are able to blend characteristics of separateness and
connectedness in their parenting practices manage to communicate and model an
expectation that family members are responsible for developing and expressing their
ideas, opinions, or positions, while making it clear through providing warmth and
acceptance that the family is a safe place to engage in such communications.

The empirical research presented in Chapter II supports the assertion that
such parent-young adult relationships foster the achievement of a mature sense of
independence and responsibility for one’s internal life, as well as a secure ego-
identity. This research sets the stage for the present investigation into the
contributions that similar parent-young adult relationships make to young adults’

religious formation.

In an examination of the literature over the last 10 years, one researcher
found little systematic research on adolescent religious development (Hill, 1986).
Another group of researchers suggested that investigations into religious
development are scarce due to the lack of theory to guide them (Kirkpatrick 8
Shaver, 1991); this criticism was also leveled at the discipline of the psychology of
religion as a whole (Spilka et al., 1985). Still, a perusal of the literature on
adolescence, religion, and intellectual and ethical development reveals some basic

assumptions concerning the nature of religious development during the adolescent

and young adult years.

26

Scholars have acknowledged that adolescence and young adulthood are
often periods of increased religious conversions, solidiﬁed religious commitments,
liberalized religious beliefs, or a turning away from religion altogether (Allport, 1950;
Clark, 1929; Elkind, 1964, 1970; Erikson, 1958, 1963, 1968; Fowler, 1981, 1984;
Meadows 8 Kahoe, 1984; Parks, 1986; Spilka et al., 1985; Ullman, 1989). Religious
exploration, the questioning of familial religious traditions, the examination of
alternative forms of religious expression, and subsequent decisions concerning the
place religion will hold in one’s adult life are processes that occur for many during
the adolescent and young adult years.

Religious exploration, like exploration into other existential issues, may occur
in response to the many physical, social, and cognitive changes noted during
adolescence and young adulthood (Erikson, 1958; Fowler, 1981; Parker, 1985). For
some, religious exploration and commitment may be due to an increased curiosity
about the meaning of family religious traditions. For others, exploring and deciding
to commit to alternative religions may occur due to profound disillusionment with
these traditions or exposure to alternative belief systems and practices. Still others
have suggested that religious exploration and commitment are part of more global
identity-formation processes that include exploration and commitment to other life
style and ideological domains (Marcia, 1966, 1980; Waterman, 1982). Erikson
(1958) suggested that religion is a "source of ideologies for those who seek

identities" (p. 22).

27

Scholars in the psychology of religion have long upheld that adolescence is
a time when many religious conversions occur (Meadows 8 Kahoe, 1984; Spilka et
al., 1985). G. Stanley Hall (1905), the ﬁrst psychologist to focus on adolescence as
a developmental stage, devoted a chapter in his book on adolescence to religious
conversions (Ullman, 1989). Starbuck (1899) conducted the ﬁrst large-scale
empirical investigation into the phenomenon of adolescent conversion. He found
that conversions occurred most frequently at age 16 for boys and at age 13 for girls.

More recent investigations have suggested that adolescence is still the age
at which religious conversions typically occur (Adams 8 Gullotta, 1983; Argyle, 1959;
Asa, 1994; Johnson, 1959; Levine, 1984). Whether conversions are sudden,
resulting from crisis or highly charged with feelings related to guilt or sin, or whether
conversions are gradual, resulting from a search for meaning and purpose or ﬁlled
with feelings related to love and forgiveness, conversions typically occur from
adolescence through young adulthood.

As early as the turn of the century, scholars attempted to explain the
phenomenon of adolescent conversions. Starbuck’s (1899) account has echoed
throughout the literature on the conversion experience in adolescence. He argued
that humans need to make meaning Of their experiences and that religion or
philosophy provides a framework for doing so. Adolescence, he suggested, is when
persons begin to look for different ideological guides outside the home. Ideologies,

such as religions, that are supported by appropriate social institutions, such as

28
churches, are often turned to by adolescents as guides for orienting, understanding,
and directing their lives.

Conversions, whether sudden or gradual, were deﬁned by one researcher as
“active and unqualiﬁed commitments to religious positions that were previously
unknown, unacceptable, or inadequately understood" (Parker, 1985, p. 48). These
words mirror the type of language used in descriptions of processes involved in
adolescent and young adult ego-identity formation (Grotevant, 1992; Marcia, 1980;
Waterman, 1982). For some religious converts, commitment to a religious position
involves similar kinds of processes that result in commitments to a career direction,
political afﬁliation, or gender identity (Bergin, 1989). These commitments come after
a time devoted to thoughtful, sometimes uneasy, exploration of oneself and one’s
environment. The resulting commitments may or may not include choices advocated
by one’s parents.

Exploration and commitment to a religious identity as well as questioning
family religious traditions may also result from the development of formal operations
in adolescence (Byrnes, 1984; Elkind, 1964, 1970; Parker, 1985). The religious
domain, as was suggested above, appeals to adolescents’ fascination with
ideological systems that offer encompassing world views. Religion afﬁrms
adolescents’ yearning for the possible and their afﬁnity for ideals, both
characteristics of formal operational thinking. The exploration of and commitment
to beliefs and values regarding the nature of truth, right versus wrong, God, and

other ultimate concerns move to center stage for many adolescents and young

29

adults. Especially at a time when answers may be in short supply compared to the
plethora of questions posed, religion offers a way for the late adolescent to make
sense of his/her place in the world.

The development of formal operations also marks a shift in the way
individuals view their religious heritages, and this may help to explain the presence
of religious exploration in adolescence and young adulthood (Elkind, 1970). Where
children ﬁnd meaning in the concrete practices associated with a church or
synagogue and in afﬁliating with speciﬁc denominations or sects, adolescents and
young adults ﬁnd meaning in the exploration and understanding of religious beliefs.
They seek to comprehend the more abstract aspects of their religious traditions and
to use these beliefs to reconcile the often paradoxical dilemmas encountered in
contemporary life.

According to one commentator on religious development, some adolescents
or young adults give up on religion because they have not developed an adult
concept of religion (Asa, 1994). Such individuals often believe that religion or
spirituality is childish when it may be their thinking about religion that remains
childish. For other adolescents and young adults, engaging in conventional religious
practices and conforming to a set of beliefs only to associate with a peer or social
group is insufﬁcient to demand personal allegiance to a particular religious tradition
(Fowler, 1981; Kohlberg, 1981).

Gains in intellectual and ethical development may also be a catalyst for

adolescent and young adult religious formation (Fowler, 1981; Kohlberg, 1981;

30

Perry, 1969). Dualistic thinking, marked by the assumption that knowledge is
absolute and in the possession of the right authorities, is transformed in part by
exposure to new and conﬂicting ideas and authorities who disagree on similar ethical
and intellectual issues. Individuals transitioning from one form of knowing to another
ﬁnd they are unable to reconcile these conﬂicting ideas by relying on authorities, and
they begin to look inward to develop their own intellectual and ethical positions.
Consequently, adolescent intellectual and ethical meaning-making becomes more
contextual and relativistic. Many adolescents and young adults, therefore, turn from
a reliance on externally validated truth to searching for truths that stand up to the test
of internal veriﬁcation.

Adolescents and young adults are often encouraged to question their own
dualistic approach to religion through exposure to diverse forms of religious belief
and practice in the young adult worlds of college orthe workplace. Instead of blindly
accepting "truth" from parents, pastors, or professors, the relativistic thinker weighs
and compares these points of view, but may have trouble committing to a position.
The paradox for the religious seeker in contemporary society is that he/she is
encouraged to question authority and to conform (Allport, 1950). Often the
relativistic thinker gets stuck in this paradox and remains an explorer--all truths are
relative, so it is impossible to take a stand.

William Perry (1969), in his charting of the intellectual and ethical
development of college students, described a way of knowing that untangles the

paradox ensnaring the relativistic thinker. This stage, which Perry called

31

commitment in relativism, underscores how young adults may make commitments
to value positions (e.g., religious/spiritual ideologies and/or practices) without
sacriﬁcing the openness and intellectual tolerance of the relativistic knower. Perry
suggested that committed relativists can take a stand, come to closure, and make
judgments while remaining open to new information and tolerant of new ideas.
Exploration, in varying degrees, is ongoing for the committed relativist. Even for a
committed person, there is a respect for doubt and questioning as paths to better or
more adequate ways of understanding and explaining one’s commitment to a
religious or spiritual path.

Theoreticians developing stage models of faith development or describing
mature religious sentiments also have suggested that religious exploration and an
acceptance of religious questioning and doubt are part of the religious experience
of adolescence and young adulthood (Allport, 1950; Batson 8 Ventis, 1982; Fowler,
1981; Parks, 1986). In describing a stage offalth that makes its appearance during
late adolescence and young adulthood, Fowler (1981) referred to ”experiences that
make it necessary for persons to objectify, examine, and make critical choices about
deﬁning elements of their identity and faith” (p. 173). What were once tacit and
unexamined convictions and beliefs must now become matters of more explicit
commitment and accountability. One becomes a young adult in faith when one

begins to take self-conscious responsibility for one’s knowing, becoming, and moral

action (Parks, 1986).

32

In his description of the mature religious sentiment, Gordon Allport (1950)
also placed a value on exploration, questioning, and doubt. The late adolescent!
young adult religious explorer discovers that the literal-minded and second-hand
faith that he previously held now needs changing. Maturity of religion requires
reﬂection, doubt, and other cognitive processes typically associated with Piaget’s
formal operations. A mature religious sentiment is the outgrowth of many
successive discriminations and reorganizations. Mature religion, according to
Allport, is a "working hypothesis" (p. 81); even though it is held tentatively and
subject to revision, it is used to make meaning of life’s tough questions.

This focus on open-minded truth seeking within religion was developed further
in the Batson and Ventis (1982) conception of religion as quest or quest faith. In
developing a measure of quest religion, Batson and Ventis drew from three
components of mature religion as interpreted from Allport (1950): "a willingness to
ask existential questions without reducing their complexity" (Batson 8 Ventis, 1982,
p. 149), willingness to doubt, and a tolerance of new and competing information that
may alter current understandings or shed light on religious questions (McFarland 8
Warren, 1992).

Whereas Batson and Ventis referred to quest religion as a mature orientation,
other researchers have found characteristics of quest faith in adolescents and young
adults who are currently exploring within other identity content domains (Fulton,
1991; Watson, Howard, Hood, 8 Morris, 1988). These researchers concluded that

quest may be an indicator of ongoing conﬂict over identity issues rather than a more

33

mature religious orientation. Research continues on the validity of quest religion
(Batson 8 Schoenrade, 1991; McFarland, 1991), but for the purposes of this study,
researchers and theoreticians seem to agree that open-minded exploring within
religion is characteristic of many adolescents and young adults.

Mm. Even though research on adolescent and young adult religious
development is sparse, connecting threads of psychosocial, ego, cognitive,
intellectual, and moral development literature underscore the relevance of religious
exploration during this part of the life span. Psychologists involved in the study of
religion agree: adolescence and young adulthood are periods when religious
conversions typically occur. It may be that religion is a guide for those who require
orientation and direction in life. Religion and spirituality provide coherent ideologies
that appeal to those who are exploring and deciding about other identity domains
such as career, politics, or gender roles. The development of formal operations may
also encourage adolescents and young adults to examine their childhood religious
traditions, to look beyond the facade of organized religion, and to examine the
deeper meanings of their religious doctrines and beliefs. Finally, psychologists
studying young adult ethical and faith development and the development of mature
religious orientations have concluded that increasing ability to tolerate ambiguity and

doubt is also a hallmark of adolescent and young adult religious formation.

t t n f r ti n
For many adolescents and young adults, "religion elaborates on what feels

profoundly true even though it is not demonstrable: it translates into signiﬁcant

34
words, images, and codes the exceeding darkness which surrounds man’s
existence, and the light which pervades it beyond all desert or comprehension"
(Erikson, 1958, p. 21). For many, the religious pilgrimage is part of the search for
identity and meaning that occupies the time and efforts of young adults in our
society. For those who embark on such a journey, religious exploration often
includes a reevaluation of family religious practices and beliefs.

For college students, religious exploration may be inﬂuenced by the kinds of
experiences encountered at school. Engaging and provocative professors and
reading material, roommates with different religious ideas, and encounters with
different cultures or ethnic groups may challenge college students to look more
closely at their previous religious commitments and practices. For these students,
many of whom are separated from their parents for the ﬁrst time, these new thoughts
and ideas may be both exciting and scary. They may have ambivalent feelings
about leaving the safe haven of the family’s religious beliefs and practices and
meeting the challenge of deﬁning an adult faith or religious orientation.

Some of these religious explorers want to bring their search home with them,
so to speak, and share with parents their changing ideas and attitudes. They may
seek to be challenged by thoughtful and caring parents who will question their
evolving beliefs. Such young adults may ﬁnd that their parents will share their own
beliefs in a way that acknowledges the growing mutuality and symmetry in the

parent-child relationship.

35

For others, bringing this information home and engaging in conversations with
parents about their changing ideas and attitudes may provoke anxiety and heated
discussion. Such individuals, desiring parental approval for the adults they are
becoming, are often too aware of the price they will pay for differing with their
parents.

Thetheory and research presented in support ofthis dissertation suggest that
a blend of characteristics of connectedness and separateness in the parent-young
adult relationship will positively inﬂuence adolescent and young adult religious
formation. Religious exploration and commitment will be positively inﬂuenced by
parent-young adult relationships that are emotionally supportive and affectively
close. The close relationship with parents becomes a context for religious
exploration and commitment when ideas, beliefs, and attitudes can be shared and
developed in an atmosphere that is free from excessive anger, guilt, retribution, and
threats of abandonment.

The following are the major research questions that were tested in this study:

1. To what extent do separateness and connectedness predict religious
formation?

2. To what extent does separateness alone predict religious formation?

3. To what extent does connectedness alone predict religious formation?

4. Does the effect of separateness and connectedness on religious

formation depend on gender?

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

lntmdumlm

This chapter contains a review of studies that have used measures of
separateness and connectedness in the parent-adolescent relationship in order to
demonstrate their effectiveness in promoting development and adjustment in
adolescents and young adults. The studies chosen for this review used different
means to assess the parent-adolescent relationship conditions-characteristics of
separateness and connectedness were either observed by researchers in parenting
styles and parent-child communication patterns or reﬂected in adolescent
perceptions of both conditions in their relationship with parents. To lay the
foundation for this study, it is important that an empirical link be established between
parent-child relationship factors and young adult developmental outcomes, whether
these factors are observed by impartial raters or perceived by adolescent or young
adult family members. In this chapter, research using parenting styles,
communication patterns, and adolescents’ perceptions of their relationship with
parents is presented.

It was also important to choose studies that used dependent measures

analogous to religious formation, the construct of interest in this dissertation.

36

37

Religious formation, as conceptualized forthis study, includes both exploration and
commitment processes. Exploration, according to an investigator of young adult
identity formation, includes attitudes and behaviors aimed at eliciting information
about oneself and/or one’s environment in order to make an important life choice
such as choosing a career direction or committing to a particular religious or spiritual
ideology (Grotevant, 1992). Studies were selected, therefore, that employed
measures of ego-identity exploration, ego development, and processes related to
career decision making.
W

Th t ri t'v ti n

Beginning in the mid-19603, Diana Baumrind began a longitudinal study of
parenting styles and their effects on children’s competence that continues to this day
(Baumrind, 1987, 1991). In many ways these studies foreshadowed the kinds of
efforts that will be reported in this dissertation. It was Baumrind’s research that
pointed to the effectiveness of parenting styles that communicated expectations and
limits while also communicating afﬁrmation and support. During this 20—year period,
she and her colleagues followed the same families, collecting data when the children
were 4, 10, and 15 years old. At each analysis point she consistently found relations
between a balance of demandingness and responsiveness in the parent-child

relationship and important indices of social and instrumental competence. Currently,

38

she is in the process of analyzing the adolescent data and has begun to publish
preliminary results (Baumrind, 1987, 1991).

Perhaps Baumrind is best known for her descriptions of the authoritative,
authoritarian, permissive, and rejecting-neglecting parenting styles. These styles are
deﬁned in terms of the presence or absence of behaviors related to demandingness
and responsiveness.

Demandingness refers to the claims parents make on children to become

integrated into the family whole, by their maturity demands, supervision,

disciplinary efforts, and willingness to confront the child who disobeys.

Responsiveness refers to the extent to which parents intentionally foster

individuality, self-regulation, and self-assertion by being attuned, supportive,

and acquiescent to children’s special needs and demands. (Baumrind, 1991,

pp. 61-62)

Autharitative parents, who combine demandingness with nurturance, are
consistently more effective than authOLitar'Lan parents, who are demanding but
unsupportive. Eernﬁssiie parents, who nurture but do not place demands on their
offspring, produce a mixed picture of adolescent competencies and deﬁcits. The
Wing parents are disengaged from their children; they avoid placing
demands on and supporting their children and are generally the least effective of the
four styles.

Without departing from the conceptual underpinnings of the previous
research, Baumrind is currently interested in how parenting styles are related to the
development of competencies associated with adolescence. Borrowing from the

theories of Bakan and others (Bakan, 1966; Greenberger, 1984), Baumrind deﬁned

optimal competence as an integration of agency orthe drive for independence, self-

39
aggrandizement, and individuality; and communion, or the need to be of service, to
belong, and be connected. Echoing the theoretical backdrop of this study, the
competent adolescent is one who seeks independence without sacriﬁcing
relationship and has come to terms with the conﬂicting demands of separation and
connection.

Speciﬁcally, Baumrind (1991) hypothesized that adolescents who actively
seek to explore ideas and engage in activities that depart from earlier, more stable
and secure courses, an aspect of agency, will come from homes of authoritative
parents. She suggested that these independence-seeking adolescents will be more
likelyto criticize and to sustain attachments to their parents if they come from homes
where “parents are both highly demanding and highly responsive, but increase the
ratio of freedom to control in order to match the developmental level of their
adolescent child" (p. 61).

The results ofthis preliminary analysis of adolescent data continue to support
the efﬁcacy of the authoritative parenting style. Adolescents in homes where
parents were not restrictive but highly demanding and challenging as well as
supportive and loving were "outstandingly competent" (Baumrind, 1991, p. 72). On
indices of competence, such as ego development, assertiveness, individuation,
optimism, creativity, and others, developmental progress was enhanced by
reciprocal, balanced, and committed caregiving and held back by authoritarian,

disengaged, and nondirective practices.

40

Interestingly, with respect to dangerous risk-taking or exploratory behavior
(such as drug use), families that were highly demanding and restrictive as well as
caring and considerate were as effective in shielding their adolescents from
dysfunctional risk-taking behaviors as were authoritative families. These nadifjenal
families, a subset of families that were classiﬁed as authoritarian in earlier studies,
often shared conventional values and were less sanctioning of adolescent
exploration outside of the families’ norms, but they still managed to maintain strong
mutual attachments. This was in contrast to more authoritarian parents, who were
as restrictive and demanding but much more intrusive or ofﬁcious in the way they
managed their households.

Whereas adolescents in traditional families were more like adolescents from
authoritative families with respect to illegal drug use, they were less competent than
their counterparts from authoritative homes. Baumrind (1991) suggested that the
traditional family’s ability to adhere to consistent management policies and sustain
enduring close relationships, characteristics they shared with authoritative families,
accounted for their adolescents’ abstaining from illegal drug use. She added,
however, that the combination of restrictiveness with the expectation that
adolescents conform and stay away from nontraditional beliefs may also have
accounted for losses in adolescents’ assertiveness and optimism as well as in
autonomy and creativity. In traditional families, where close attachments were
sustained but encouragement to explore was constrained, adolescents were also

more concerned with seeking parental approval.

41

Summary

The optimal parenting style emerging from this literature is the style that
balances separateness and connectedness in the family relationship. This style
combines the ability to adjust to and encourage the adolescent’s freedom to explore
new ideas and behaviors while not sacriﬁcing a "demanding" voice or a loving
atmosphere. Authoritative parents are able to engage with their adolescent children
in give-and-take discussions where different points of view are raised, examined,
and critiqued. Acceptance and empathy are also expressed among family members,
and through the transition there is a shared perception that the close relationship
endures.

On the other hand, adolescents who are having difﬁculty integrating aspects
of agency and communion come from homes where the parenting styles are either
overdemanding, overaccepting, or neither demanding nor accepting of their
adolescent children. Adolescents from homes where parents are uninvolved with
their children lack both parental challenge and support for the exploration of novel
life courses or ideas. Some families err on the side of maintaining family
connections while making exploration or separation from the family "risky business”
for the adolescent. Costs in adolescent development are also noted when families

are excessive in their control of and expectations for their children.

'v' t I ' n hi

Contemporary observational studies of family communication patterns are
adding to this picture of optimal parenting styles developed in the Baumrind studies
(Grotevant 8 Cooper, 1986; Cooper, Grotevant, 8 Condon, 1983; Hauser et al.,
1991; Hill 8 Holmbeck, 1986). To examine the effects of the parent-adolescent
relationship on identity exploration, self-appraisal, and perspective-taking competen-
cies, Grotevant et al. developed a model of family communication patterns that they
called the WWW. Consistent with theory presented forthis
dissertation, adolescent psychological separation from parents and attachment to
parents are not viewed as mutually exclusive but occur concurrently in individuated
family relationships. lndividuated family systems allow for an examination of
differences in a context of connectedness--”there is an interplay between individu-
ality and connectedness in relationships that have implications forthe development
of identity in individuals" (Grotevant, 1992, p. 87).

In operationalizing the individuated relationship pattern, Grotevant et al.
(1983) identiﬁed two communication variables reﬂecting individuality and two
reﬂecting connection. Communications expressing individuality included We:
ness, or one’s ability to express differences from each other, and selﬂesserjien, or
knowing one’s point of view and expressing it clearly. Communications expressing
connectedness included pefmeabilify, or the expression of openness or

responsiveness to others, and mutuaﬂty, or expressions that show sensitivity and

43

respect to others’ points of view. It was hypothesized in the investigations of
Grotevant and Cooper that adolescents who had the opportunity to observe
expressions of individuality and connectedness between parents and to express the
same with parents would have the highest scores in identity-exploration and role-
taking skill.

To measure individuality and connectedness in family relationships, Grotevant
et al. (1983) observed families engaged in a family interaction task. The task,
planning a vacation with unlimited funds, was designed to elicit differences of
opinion, and was carried out in family homes to encourage unselfconscious or
"natural" communication among family members.

Grotevant and his colleagues found that individuated relationships enhanced
adolescent competencies related to identity exploration and role-raking or cognitive
perspective-taking skills. According to Grotevant and Cooper (1986), "the families
of high scoring adolescents appeared to thrive on examining their differences but in
the context of connectedness" (p. 92). The families of low-scoring adolescents, on
the other hand, came from families who avoided disagreements and expressed high
levels of permeability or responsiveness.

Researchers also have noted gender differences in the ways that adolescent
sons and daughters use separation and connection, or in this case, individuality and
connectedness, in family relationships (Franz 8 White, 1985; Lopez et al., 1992;

White et al., 1985). In general, scholars have concluded that in relationships with

44
parents, adolescent boys use individuality characteristics whereas girls use
characteristics of connectedness in the service of development.

Gender differences were also described in this investigation. Only
relationships with fathers were predictive of identity exploration in adolescent boys.
The type of father-son communication pattern indicative of high-exploration boys
featured sons’ expressions of disagreements to their fathers, as well as sons’
making clear statements of their own ideas and suggestions. Fathers who
expressed mutuality as well as separateness (through disagreements) and made
fewer suggestions of their own seemed to inﬂuence exploration for adolescent boys.
For daughters, communications with mother and father were predictive of identity-
exploration scores. Fathers who were responsive, respectful, and sensitive to the
ideas expressed by others during the interaction task and fathers who expressed
fewer ideas overall had daughters with higher exploration ratings. Daughters who
scored lower in exploration had mothers who made more permeable
communications, such as requesting information, agreeing, and complying with

requests.

h n lin l i n hi
Hauser et al. (1991) also used a family communication task in order to identify
patterns of interaction that enhanced the ego development of family members.
Higher stages of ego development (Loevinger, 1970) capture some of the requisite
cognitive and interpersonal styles relevant to the religious exploration variable of

interest to this investigation, namely, less dogmatism, less dependence on external

45
sources for guidelines, an openness to change, and a willingness to use doubt and
paradox in the service of one’s development.

Like Grotevant and Cooper, Hauser et al. (1991) found that family
communications that encouraged the expression and exploration of different ideas
within a context of connectedness were optimal and related to higher ego-
development scores for adolescents. Enablinefelallonshies that blended aspects
of connectedness, such as empathy and acceptance, with aspects of separateness,
such as disagreements, explaining, and engaging in joint problem solving, were
related to higher ego-development scores. Low-scoring adolescents, on the other
hand, were involved in constraimnetelationships or communications with parents
that restricted or limited the expression of different ideas or points of view.
Constraining behaviors discouraged both separation and connection in family
communications through expressions of judging, detachment, indifference, and

devaluing.

Summary

The individuated relationship, enabling relationship, and authoritative
relationship all point to the importance of aspects of separateness and
connectedness in the family relationship. Adolescents are more likely to engage in
identity exploration in relationships with parents where differences are freely
expressed within the context of connectedness. Characteristics of higher stages of
ego development, such as the expression of curiosity, an openness to try out new

ideas and perspectives, a tolerance for doubt and ambiguity, as well as increased

46

cognitive complexity, are inﬂuenced by relationships where there is a mutual sharing
and challenging of perspectives in a context of support. Similarly, adolescent
competencies related to seeking independence and autonomy as well as connection
and relationship are inﬂuenced by parents who are demanding, responsive, and less

controlling with their adolescent children.

‘90] 0 ‘Czq‘l‘ al.. OII‘M‘OI‘

'Il'Bll' l' lll'llE |

0 I'AQ.

In the previous studies, family behaviors or communication patterns that
encouraged and accepted individuality in a context of shared affection or
connectedness were found to positively inﬂuence adolescent and young adult growth
and development. In the following studies, perceptions of parent-adolescent
relations rather than observed behaviors were the focus. It is important that
adolescent perceptions of separation and connection demonstrate similar results

before a study such as the present one is launched.

It I t
To test the utility of Cooper and Grotevant’s model of the parent-adolescent
relationship, Campbell et al. (1984) investigated the extent to which characteristics
of connectedness and separateness in the parent-adolescent relationship were able
to differentiate between different ego-identity statuses as deﬁned by the research of
James Marcia (1960, 1980). In his operationalization of Erikson’s ego-identity
construct, Marcia identiﬁed four identity statuses reﬂecting the presence or absence

of exploration of and commitment to a variety of ideological and interpersonal

47

content domains. Campbell et al. suggested that adolescent movement from
statuses deﬁned by the absence of exploration (diffuse and foreclosure) to statuses
characterized by the presence of exploration (moratorium and achieved) would be
encouraged by parent-adolescent relationships that balanced characteristics of
separation and connection. They hypothesized that identity-achieved adolescents,
or those who have committed to occupational, political, and religious positions after
a time of personal exploration, and moratorium adolescents, orthose who are in the
process of exploring and seek to make commitments in the same domains, would
experience more separation and connection in relationship with parents.

The results of this investigation were consistent with the studies reported in
this review. Using self-report measures of affection, communication, and
independence to operationalize separation and connection in the parent-adolescent
relationship, researchers have found that adolescents who were engaged in
searching (moratorium) or who had made identity commitments after a period of
exploration (identity-achieved) typically reported high levels of affection for parents,
as well as a greater sense of independence from parents.

This ﬁnding is in contrast to the results reported with those adolescents who
did not experience a balance of separateness and connectedness in relationships
with parents. For example, foreclosed adolescents, orthose who had made identity
commitments without engaging in exploration behaviors, experienced particularly
close relationships with their parents and also reported lower levels of

independence. Foreclosed youths, like the adolescents in Baumrind’s traditional

48
families, may be reluctant to test the comfortable stability established by strong
mutual attachments and clear and consistent family policies. Campbell et al.
suggested that such adolescents may be responding to a rapprochement crisis or
"regressive pull” by foregoing exploration and its implicit separation message for the

emotional security of the connection at home (Blos, 1967).

W

In a recent study, Quintana and Lapsley (1987) set out to demonstrate the
efﬁcacy of separateness and connectedness in meeting the demands of the
rapprochement subphase (Josselson, 1980, 1988; Mahler et al., 1975) and in
promoting identity formation. To operationalize the separation and connection
dimensions, Quintana and Lapsley employed a measure of family differentiation
(Benjamin, 1979) and an attachment to parents questionnaire (Armsden 8
Greenberg, 1987). The family differentiation measure assesses adolescents’
perceptions of how parents encourage their independence as well as how

independent they feel within the family. The attachment questionnaire measures

three relationship factors: W. W and
alieeajioe_ffom_p_afems. According to the authors, parents who encourage

independence while remaining trustworthy, accessible, and responsive are more
likely to meet the rapprochement challenge than parents who are hypercritical,
demanding of conformity, unavailable, and/or unresponsive.

First of all, the results reported in this study support the notion that separation

and connection are interrelated aspects of young adult development. Employing

49

multiple measures of parent-adolescent relationship factors and using a factor-
analytic strategy called structural equations modeling, the authors found that both
measures of separation and connection combined to form what they called a “single
separation-individuation construc ” (p. 382). Relevant to the present study, the
authors concluded that adolescents maintain a sense of communication and trust
with parents while also seeking independence from parents; they are meeting the
rapprochement challenge through the preservation of family ties in the presence of
increasing autonomy.

In addition, their test of the validity of the separation-individuation construct
revealed a strong positive relationship between the construct and measures of ego-
identity formation (Enright, Lapsley, Cullen, 8 Lallensack, 1983; Tan, Kendis, Fine,
8 Porac, 1977). Previous studies had demonstrated that separation and attachment
processes, when assessed alone, did not fully account for identity development
(Grotevant 8 Cooper, 1985; Josselson, 1980; Quintana 8 Lapsley, 1987). According
to Quintana and Lapsley, adolescent identity formation is betterfacilitated byfamilies
who are not excessively critical and do not demand conformity but encourage the
independent exploration of and commitment to new ideas. Furthermore, parents
who are available, communicative, and trustworthy are able to provide the secure
home base for adolescents who need to return home to assert their developing

independence or reconnect and refuel.

50

W
Commitmentﬂocesses

Similar ﬁndings with respect to career exploration and commitment were
reported in a recent study by Blustein et al. (1991). Like the previous authors, these
researchers were interested in the contributions of psychological separation and
attachment to young adult development. After ﬁnding that measures of
psychological separation alone were unrelated to attitudes related to career decision
making, Blustein et al. set out to test whether, together, separation and attachment
to parents would inﬂuence important dimensions ofthe career-development process
for late adolescents and young adults.

The authors used the conﬂictual independence and attitudinal independence
subscales from the Psychological Separation Inventory (Hoffman, 1984) as
measures of separateness. Forthe connectedness measures, the authors used the
mother and father subscales from the Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment
(IPPA; Armsden 8 Greenberg, 1987). The conﬂictual independence component
assesses one’s reported freedom from guilt, anxiety, mistrust, responsibility toward,
or resentment of one’s parents. The attitudinal independence subscale reﬂects to
what extent one’s attitudes, values, and beliefs differ from those of one’s parents.
The lPPA assesses three qualities of connectedness with parents: degree of mutual
trust, quality of communication, and extent of anger and alienation.

In this follow-up study, Blustein et al. were interested in the inﬂuence of
separateness and connectedness on adolescents’ perceptions of progress in their

commitment to a career choice, as well as a tendency to foreclose on the

51

commitment process. The vocational exploration and commitment construct
assesses the early exploratory phases as well as the later committed phase of
career decision making. The tendency to foreclose construct captures an overall
approach to decision making, with high scores identifying individuals who are closed,
dogmatic, and dualistic, and low scores reﬂecting individuals who are open to the
commitment process. The authors hypothesized that both progress in exploration
and commitment to a career choice, as well as a willingness to tolerate ambivalence
and engage in ongoing self-appraisal, would be related to adolescents’ perceptions
of attachment and separation in their relationship with parents.

As in the earlier study, Blustein et al. found that separation alone was not
signiﬁcant in predicting the career—choice variables. In addition, when the
researchers controlled for the separation variables, attachment alone did not account
for a signiﬁcant portion of the variance among the dependent variables. However,
the combination of parental attachment and psychological separation contributed
signiﬁcantly to the career-choice process. In other words, the effects of
psychological separation are most pronounced in conjunction with parental
attachment. Likewise, the attachment relationship with parents is most inﬂuential to
the career-choice process in conjunction with a degree of psychological separation
from parents.

Some interesting gender differences emerged in this research. Men seemed
to engage in greater career exploration and were more open to the career

commitment process when they perceived a high degree of conﬂictu al independence

52

and higher levels of attachment with fathers. However, when sons were attitudinally
independent from fathers, scores on the career commitment measure were lower.
It seems that sharing similar attitudes with fathers facilitated career decision making
as long as the relationship was conﬂictually independent and close. For adolescent
daughters, on the other hand, attitudinal independence was unrelated to the career-
choice-process variables. Also, relationships with mother and father were important
to daughters’ career development. Daughters who were free of excessive anger,
resentment, and guilt with both parents and attached to both parents were more

open to and progressed further with the career-exploration and commitment process.

Summary

An impressive body of empirical literature supports those researchers who
have claimed that parenting styles and family communication patterns that combine
characteristics of separateness and connectedness foster psychologically healthy
adolescents and young adults. In addition, adolescents’ perceptions of separation
and connection in their relationships with parents also predict various indices of
adolescent development (see Table 2.1).

Theory and research in the area of late adolescent and young adult religious
development are sparse. Among psychologists interested in religion, it is generally
accepted that religious exploration and making religious commitments are part and
parcel of becoming mature adults for many young people. Likewise, scholars have
acknowledged that parents are likely to inﬂuence the religious beliefs and practices

of their adolescent and young adult children. However, the contributions that parent-

53

adolescent relationship factors make to the religious development of adolescents
and young adults have not been studied.

Like ego identity formation or career exploration and decision-making, existing
theory and research suggest that one aspect of adolescent/young adult religious
development, religious formation, may be encouraged or inhibited by parent-young
adult relationship factors such as separateness and connectedness.

A summary of the research discussed in this chapter is presented in Table
2.1. Highlighted are the measures of separateness and connectedness, the

outcome measures, and the results.

54

 

£5

.5q 0. 5555.8 25 :2.
-5553 O. .555. $555
.5E._EEOO.5556 5... 2
95505 new O. «55550

$5005
0. 35:55:5E2EEOO
new 5.5555 5550

$5585
.co_.w2c:EEOO 5:;

50525552 52.555
50555552 530550

:8: 9.55
a 52285
683.25 .5285

 

6.5285 >5

-52 85:5 25 555.
.cmEmcooaaE 5205.

o. 5559. 253 «5.55
-5558 25 m55.m55m

855.2 >582

«558.0
.:o_.mo_c:EEoO .53.;

50:5
6555:. 5 55855585
50555552 5 «9255“.

885
>283 w 55.230

 

50555552 5 .5E

 

59.585 55 555.5 558295
O. .555. m. 555 .5. >552 5 50555 :2. 505.355 $3: 5800 a
.50 >552 5 5555.90 2. m. 552 -moEaEEoo 62.5.2 -52.. .552 .555. 255d .mEmu< ._5naEmO

«5:555:50 EmsmEmoc

25 «55555.... 5 505
:5 m o. .555. 55 .5an
-55.. 0mm 5 m5>5_ 5.5....

m5. .332. .6 5655.0.
.5955 O. .55:ch

395559935

5E5;
505.585 .>;.maEw

552 @2355 .m.5E
55552.. .9220» c5395.

:8: 8258
a £502 .595...

 

5.5555 >552 5 m5
-5. 5.55 O. .55. $555
35550 25 >.__m:2>_uc_

5.5555 >552

>.__m:.:E .>.=B5E5a

co_5mmm.:5m 655.5525

6mg

.32. 82.8 a
..5>5.O.O .5500

 

50555

.950 5505.05 O. 5.32..
.50 5552385. .55
mwmcmsucmEmc .O 5055..

9.65.59 .505
6552.. .5555.qu

 

m55>_mcoammm

mmmcmcﬁcmEmo

:8: 2:58

 

 

m._=5m

 

5555.2 .55550

mmwcbwuowccou

 

m55.m55m

 

 

5.5.5.2 52:552..

 

552385

 

.935. .55 25 55:5 5 >5EEam ”PM 2an

 

CHAPTER III

METHOD

In this chapter the subjects and the process for obtaining the data are
described, and the instruments used in the study are discussed. The design of the
study and method of analysis are presented. Finally, the hypotheses are stated in

testable form.

Subjects

A total of 228 college students (83 men, 145 women) were recruited from a
variety of college and university classes to participate in what was described as a
study on "religious development and family relationships.” Ofﬁcials from two small,
religiously afﬁliated, liberal arts colleges in western Michigan agreed to allow their
students to participate in the study. In addition, members of religious clubs and
organizations on a large university campus participated in the study. As indicated
in Table 3.1, the total sample ranged from 17 years to 53 years of age, with 77% of
the sample between the ages of 19 and 22.

Class representation was asfollows: ﬁrst-year students, 12.7%; sophomores,

22.5%; juniors, 30.3%; seniors, 25.4%; and graduate students, 8.8%.

55

56

Table 3.1: Age of subjects.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Age Frequency Percent of Sample

17-18 9 4
19 32 15

20 63 29

21 47 22

22 25 1 1

23 13 6
24-30 13 6
31-53 14 6
Missing 12 5

 

 

 

 

 

Subjects declared a variety of majors and represented schools and
departments throughout their respective institutions. Majors were grouped for the
study as follows: natural sciences, health sciences, education, social sciences/
humanities, business, and undecided. Forty percent of the subjects came from the
social science/humanities category due to their availability for this research. Table
3.2 summarizes this grouping of subjects by majors.

Subjects were chosen primarily from religiously afﬁliated colleges to ensure
the availability of respondents who had been raised in homes where religious

traditions were observed. Students were asked on a demographic questionnaire to

declare a family denomination of religious afﬁliation. Only 3 respondents out of 228
left this question unanswered. The remaining subjects declared a wide variety of
denominational afﬁliations. An authority on church history was consulted in order to

group these different denominations (F. Graham, personal communication, June 20,

57

1993). Table 3.3 summarizes the subjects’ declared denominational afﬁliations.

Table 3.2: Academic majors of subjects.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Category/Major Frequency Percent of Sample
Natural sciences 28 12
Health sciences 41 18
Education 35 15
Social Sciences/Humanities 102 40
Business 25 1 1
Undecided 7 4

 

Table 3.3: Subjects’ denominational afﬁliations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Denomination Frequency Percent of Sample
Mainline Protestant 29 13
Fundamentalist/evengelical 52 23
Christian reformed 57 25
Free Methodist 41 18
Catholic 10 4
Nondenominational 29 13
Other 7 3
. Missing 3 1

 

 

 

58
Items on a demographic questionnaire also asked subjects to assess their
own and their parents’ interest and participation in religion and religious activities.
Subjects reported their parents as either very interested or moderately interested in

religion/spirituality. Table 3.4 summarizes these results.

Table 3.4: Subjects’ assessment of their parents’ and their own interest in religion!
spirituality (percent of sample reported in each cell).

 

 

 

 

 

Level of Interest
Person
Very Low Low Moderate Very High
Mother 4.5 7.0 16.2 70.2
Father 8.0 9.4 17.5 60.5
Subject 0 4.4 25.9 69.7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Despite sharing a similar interest in religion with their parents, there seemed
to be a marked difference between subjects’ perceptions of their own and their
parents’ level of involvement in religious activities and behaviors. As shown in Table
3.5, subjects reported that their parents were actively engaged in religious behaviors
such as praying, reading religious works, and going to church or synagogue. When
asked to choose between "never or rarely," ”sometimes," and "often,” 76.8% of the
total sample reported thattheir parents often engaged in religious activities, whereas

only 49.1% said the same for themselves.

59

Table 3.5: Subjects’ assessment of their own and their parents’ level of involve-
ment in religious activities and behaviors (percent of sample reported

 

 

 

 

in each cell).
Level of Involvement
Person
Never or Rarely Sometimes Often
Parents 10.5 12.7 76.8
Subject 13.2 37.7 49.1

 

 

 

 

 

 

When asked to check from a list the top three inﬂuences on their religious]
spiritual development, 72.4% of the total sample included their parents, as indicated
in Table 3.6. The next highest inﬂuence, peers, was selected by only 48.7%. For
this sample, interpersonal inﬂuences such as parents and peers were more
inﬂuential than institutional inﬂuences, such as formal education and church
services. In addition, individuals who were in informal relationships with the
subjects, such as parents and peers, were cited as more inﬂuential than individuals
who were in functional relationships with the subjects, such as teachers and pastors.

Table 3.6: Subjects’ selection of the top three inﬂuences on their religious/spiritual
development.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Inﬂuence Frequency Percent
Parents 165 72.4
Peers 1 1 1 48.7
Education 82 36.0
Church/synagogue 73 32.0
Pastors 65 28.5
Prayer/meditation 64 28.1
Teachers 60 26.3
Mious reading 35 15.4

 

 

60
EmcedULes

Questionnaires were arranged in a test packet and given to students in a
variety of psychology, communications, history, and general education courses in
the spring of 1993. The test packet included the following items:

1. Participant consent form explaining the nature of the research and
enlisting subjects’ participation. It indicated that by voluntarily completing and
returning the questionnaires, subjects were giving their consent to participate.

2. Data Sheet.

3. Parental Attachment Questionnaire (PAQ).

4. Religious Formation Questionnaire (RFQ).

5. Psychological Separation Inventory (PSI).

Copies of materials are in the Appendix.

Students responded to the measures in class and out of class. Students who
responded outside of class returned the test packets to their professors. Directions
were the same for both groups and were included in the test packets. The use of
social science and humanities courses as sources of subjects resulted in a smaller

male than female sample.

D l . C l' .
All respondents were asked to complete a demographic information form.
Information was collected on the following: age, year in college, major, religious

and/or denominational afﬁliation, living at home or away from home, and frequency

61

of church attendance. Items were also included to gather information about both the
subject’s and the parents’ level of religious interest and activity and the major

inﬂuences on the respondent’s religious development.

A 38-item Religious Formation Questionnaire (RFQ) was developed for this
research to assess the presence of attitudes and behaviors that reﬂect a willingness
to explore and make commitments within one’s religious and/or spiritual affiliation.
The version of the RFQ used in the present study contained four subscales:
CommitmentAfter Exploration, Religious Exploration Ongoing, Commitment Without
Exploration, and Doubt Is Conducive to Growth. With the exception of the Doubt ls
Conducive to Growth subscale, the otherthree subscales roughly correspond to the
identity statuses, identity achievement, moratorium, and foreclosure, from the
identity status model developed by James Marcia (1966). In Marcia’s model, four
identitystatuses--identity achievement, diffusion, moratorium, andforeclosure--were
conceptualized in orderto describe the presence or absence of exploration of and/or
commitment to an ideological or interpersonal content area, such as occupation
(ideological) and friendship (interpersonal) (see Table 3.7).

Respondents were asked to answer each of the 38 items on a 5-point Likert

scale ranging from Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (5).

62

Table 3.7: The four identity statuses as derived from the presence or absence of
exploration and commitment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commitment Dimension
Present Absent
Present Achievement Moratorium
Exploration Dimension
Absent Foreclosure Diffusion

 

 

 

 

Individual items were either created by the researcher or taken from
preexisting measures of ego identity formation (Adams, Bennion, 8 Huh, 1989),
religious orientation (Allport 8 Ross, 1967), religious quest (Batson 8 Bentis, 1982;
Batson 8 Schoenrade, 1991a, 1991b; McFarland, 1991; McFarland 8 Warren,
1992), and religious maturity (Dudley 8 Cruise, 1990). Experts were consulted
regarding the face validity of the RFQ items. In personal meetings, writing, and
group consultations, these campus ministers, student affairs professionals,
counselors, and teachers provided clariﬁcation on the wording of some of the items
and suggested the addition or exclusion of items. Finally, items were created with
the assumption that individuals taking the assessment came to college with a
religious afﬁliation or were raised in homes where religious traditions were observed.

W. Initially, a 45-item RFQ containing six subscales was
piloted with a group of 25 college students. The six subscales highlighted different
aspects of religious exploration and commitment. For the pilot study, the RFQ

subscales were Commitment After Exploration, Exploration Ongoing/No

63

Commitment, Commitment Without Exploration, Openness to Change, Active
Questioning, and Doubt Is Conducive to Growth.

The pilot study yielded preliminary reliability data for the RFQ subscales.
Reliability was assessed by an internal consistency method. Based on item-analysis
statistics, a decision was made to drop seven items from the measure. After
deleting these items, Cronbach alphas for each of the six subscales were as follows:
.59 for Commitment After Exploration, .85 for Exploration Ongoing/No Commitment,
.68 for Commitment Without Exploration, .75 for Openness to Change, .68 for Active
Questioning, and .54 for Doubt Is Conducive to Growth. A Cronbach alpha of .72
was derived for the measure as a whole.

This pilot investigation also provided evidence supporting the construct
validity of the RFQ subscales. The same 25 students responded to the revised
version of the 64-item Extended Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status (EOM-
EIS; Bennion 8 Adams, 1986). This self-report instrument measures the extent to
which individuals are exploring within or committed to a variety of ideological and
interpersonal identity content domains. The content of ideological areas includes
assessment of occupational, philosophical, political, and religious issues.
Interpersonal content domains are friendship, dating, sex role, and recreational
pursuits. Four ego identity statuses (Marcia, 1966) are derived from the presence
or absence of exploration or commitment (Table 3.6). Raw scale scores for identity
diffusion (no exploration/no commitment), foreclosure (no exploration/commitment),

moratorium (exploration/no commitment), and achievement (exploration/

64

commitment) statuses can be assigned for an ideological, interpersonal, and/or
combined identity status.

Of interest in the pilot study were relationships between those identity
statuses that provide evidence of either previous or current exploration and
commitment, achievement and moratorium, and the different religious formation

subscales. These correlations are reported in Table 3.8.

Table 3.8: Correlations between RFQ subscales and EIS Achievement and EIS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Moratorium.
Identity Status
RFQ Subscale
Achievement Moratorium
Religious Commitment After .62" .16
Exploration
Religious Exploration/No .30 .78“
Commitment
Commitment Without -.13 -.2O
Exploration
Active Questioning .46* .67"
Openness to Change .26 .48*
Doubt ls Conducive to Growth .44” .20
*p < .05. “p < .01.

The construct validity of the RFQ subscales was partially supported in this
pilot study. As expected, signiﬁcant positive correlations were found between scale

scores on the EIS-Identity Achievement status, which measures the presence of

65

both exploration and commitment, and scores on the RFQ subscale Exploration
After Commitment. The moratorium status, which measures the presence of
identity exploration and the absence of commitment, was signiﬁcantly correlated with
those RFQ subscales that emphasized ongoing exploration, active questioning, and
openness to change. Also as expected, RFQ Commitment Without Exploration was
unrelated to either identity status. Interestingly, RFQ Doubt Is Conducive to Growth
was positively correlated with the Identity Achievement status but not the moratorium
status. This result suggests that religious doubt may be a process used by
individuals after making religious commitments. Individuals involved in ongoing
exploration such as those individuals in the moratorium status may see doubt in a
different light.

WW. After administering the RFQ to subjects (N =
228) in the present study, simple correlation coefﬁcients were computed among the
six different RFQ subscales. Table 3.9 presents these correlations.

Strong intercorrelations between RFQ Religious Exploration/No Commitment,
RFQ Openness to Change, and RFQ Active Questioning suggested that these
subscales were measuring the same phenomena. Therefore, a new subscale,
Religious Exploration Ongoing, was created by pooling items from the above three
scales.

After incorporating this change, the RFQ measure used in the present study

had four subscales: Commitment After Exploration, Religious Exploration Ongoing,

Commitment Without Exploration, and Doubt ls Conducive to Growth.

lntercorrelation matrix for the four subscales is presented in Table 3.10.

Table 3.9: Correlations among the six RFQ subscales.

An

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RFQ Subscale 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. RFQ-1 -- .42* .03 .44* .10 .24*
2. RFQ-2 -- -.20* .54* .70” -.06
3. RFQ-3 -- -.36* -.34* -.32*
4. RFQ-4 -- .48* .09
5. RFQ-5 -- .35”
6. RFQ-6 --

*p < .01.

Key: RFQ = Religious Formation Questionnaire, RFQ-1 = Commitment After
Exploration, RFQ-2 = Religious Exploration/No Commitment, RFQ-3 = Religious
Commitment/No Exploration, RFQ-4 = Active Questioning, RFQ-5 = Openness to
Change, RFQ-6 = Doubt ls Conducive to Growth.

Table 3.10: Correlations among the four RFQ subscales used in the present study.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RFQ Subscale 1 2 3 4
1. RFQ-1 -- -.26* .01 .23"
2. RFQ-2 -- -.28* .13
3. RFQ-3 —- -.33*
4. RFQ-4 --
*p < .01.

Key: RFQ = Religious Formation Questionnaire, RFQ-1 = Commitment After
Exploration, RFQ-2 = Religious Exploration Ongoing, RFQ-3 = Religious
Commitment/No Exploration, RFQ—4 = Doubt ls Conducive to Growth.

67

Cronbach alpha coefﬁcients for the four RFQ subscales were as follows: .65
for Commitment After Exploration, .79 for Religious Exploration Ongoing, .74 for
Commitment Without Exploration, and .70 for Doubt ls Conducive to Growth.

Further evidence supporting the construct validity of the current version of the
RFQ exists in the ﬁnding of predictable relationships between the four RFQ
subscales and items from the data sheet, which assessed both subjects’ and their
parents’ interest and involvement in religion and spirituality (see Table 4.2).
Signiﬁcant correlations were obtained between subjects’ self-assessment of current
interest in religion and spirituality and RFQ Commitment After Exploration (E = .38,
p < .001 ), frequency of church attendance and RFQ Commitment After Exploration
([ = .22, p < .01), and frequency of religious/spiritual activity in the home and RFQ
Commitment After Exploration ([ = .29, p < .001).

On the other hand, subjects’ current interest in spirituality, frequency of
church attendance, and frequency of religious/spiritual activity in the home were
signiﬁcantly negatively correlated with the RFQ subscale Religious Exploration
Ongoing (r = -.22, p < .001; r = -.23, p < .001, r = —.21, p < .01, respectively).

As expected, moderate positive correlations were observed between subjects’
assessment of mothers’ and fathers’ current interest in religion and spirituality,
frequency of parents’ religious/spiritual activity in the home, and the RFQ subscale
Commitment Without Exploration ([ = .22, p < .001; I = .29, p < .001; f = .29, p <

.001, respectively).

68

Interestingly, respondents’ current interest in religion and spirituality was
signiﬁcantly correlated with the RFQ subscale Doubt ls Conducive to Growth ([ =
.20, p = .002). Appreciation of doubt as a tool for further religious/spiritual growth is
also suggested by a signiﬁcant correlation between RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to
Growth and RFQ Commitment After Exploration ([ = .24, p < .001). This same
attitude toward doubt was not witnessed among those who had made commitments
without having explored; as would be expected, this subscale was negatively

correlated with RFQ Commitment Without Exploration ( = -.38, p < .001).

M f P r - n l i i
W. The Psychological Separation Inventory (Hoffman,

1984) is a 138-item self-report questionnaire developed to assess four domains of
separation from parents: functional independence, emotional independence,
attitudinal independence, and conﬂictual independence. These four aspects of
parent-adolescent independence were drawn from psychoanalytic theory that
emphasizes the importance of the adolescent/young adult becoming disentangled
from parental controls and less dependent on parents to meet their emotional,
attitudinal, and functional needs (Bios, 1967, 1979).

In this study, separateness was measured using the 50-item Conﬂictual
Independence (Cl) subscale from the Psychological Separation Inventory. The
Conﬂictual Independence subscale is a measure of an individual’s freedom from
excessive anger, guilt, resentment, and mistrust of his/her parents. In a recent

review of separation and attachment measures, Cl scores were found to be (a)

69

generally uncorrelated with the other three PSI scale scores and (b) relative to these
other scales, a more consistent and prominent predictor of (adolescent) adjustment
indices (Lopez 8 Gover, 1993; Rice et al., 1990). Respondents are asked to rate on
a 5-point Likert scale how accurately the item statement describes him/her, ranging
from not at all true for me (1) to very true for me (5). Higher Cl scores reﬂect a more
positive psychological separateness from parents. Rice et al. (1990) suggested that
adolescents with high Cl scores have more positive feelings about their separation
from parents. Lopez et al. (1992) added that higher Cl scores highlight a less
emotionally reactive parent-young adult relationship. Separate Cl scores for the
mother-young adult relationship and father-young adult relationship can be
computed as half of the items pertain to each parent. Hoffman reported internal
consistencies of .88 to .92 (Cronbach alpha), and 2-to 3-week test-retest correlation
scales ranged from .85 to .96 for both Cl-Mother and Cl-Father. Subsequent
research using the CI subscales has provided additional evidence of its reliability
and validity (Blustein et al., 1991; Lopez, 1991; Lopez et al., 1992). In the present
study, Cronbach alpha coefﬁcients for the Cl-Mother and Cl-Father scales were .93
and .92, respectively.

W. Young adults’ perception of connectedness to
parents was measured using the 55-item Parental Attachment Questionnaire (PAQ;
Kenny, 1987). The FAQ was designed speciﬁcally for use with adolescents and
young adults. Items were constructed to assess a variety of interpersonal content

areas, such as parent availability, understanding, acceptance, respect for

70

individuality, facilitation of independence, interest in interaction with parents, affect
toward parents during visits, student help-seeking behavior in times of stress, and
satisfaction with help obtained from parents.

In a subsequent study, Kenny (1990) subjected the FAQ items to a factor
analysis and, on the basis of this analysis, developed three distinct scales: Affective
Quality of Relationships, Parents as Facilitators of Independence, and Parents as
Source of Emotional Support. These scales accounted for 46% of the variance in
the total measure. Kenny stated that these factors were consistent with the
theoretical focus in the design of the questionnaire. Attachment theory (Ainsworth
et al., 1978; Bowlby, 1988; Mahler et al., 1975) suggests that there must be an
enduring emotional bond that serves as a secure base for providing emotional
support and fostering autonomy.

Items in the subscales Parents as Facilitators of Independence, Affective
Quality of the Relationship, and Parents as Sources of Emotional Support are
responded to using a 5-point Likert scale. High scores are indicative of a close
relationship with parents, the kinds of relationships adolescents turn to for support,
afﬁrmation, or emotional refueling.

Kenny reported a test-retest reliability over a two-week period to be .82 to .91
forthe three scales. Cronbach alpha coefﬁcients were .96 for Affective Quality of the
Relationship and .88 for both Parents as Facilitators of Independence and Parents
as Sources of Emotional Support. Correlations between the FAQ and social

desirability were insigniﬁcant. Subsequent research using the FAQ scales has

71

provided further evidence of its reliability and validity (Kenny, 1988; Kenny 8
Donaldson, 1991; Lopez 8 Gover, 1993). In the present study, Cronbach alpha
coefﬁcients were as follows: .96 for Affective Quality of the Relationship, .86 for
Parents as Facilitators of Independence, and .84 for Parents as Sources of

Emotional Support.

Design

This study is descriptive in nature and can be considered to be a correlational
ﬁeld study (Gelso, 1980). It is concerned with the relationship between subjects’
perceptions of current parent-young adult relationship characteristics and young
adult religious exploration. The independent variables were measures of
separateness and connectedness in the parent-young adult relationship, and the
dependent variables were scores from the Religious Formation Questionnaire.
There were no experimental manipulations and no assignment of subjects to
treatments. Scholars interested in the beneﬁts of parent-adolescent relationship
patterns to young adult development have not attempted to link such patterns with
young adult religious development. In addition, whereas empirical studies examining
the role of connectedness and separateness in adolescent and young adult
development are on the rise, there have been no attempts to look at the effects of
these parent-young adult relationship characteristics on religious development in
young adults. This correlational ﬁeld study represents an attempt to make

inferences on theoretical grounds and to test theory-driven hypotheses concerning

72
the inﬂuence of parent-young adult relationship characteristics on religious

exploration and commitment.

Reseamhﬁvpmheses

Separate research hypotheses were developed for each RFQ subscale.
Each subscale emphasizes a different quality of religious formation, and the
previous research cited in this study has suggested that different relationships with
the separateness and connectedness variables may occur. Given the suggestions
of theory (e.g., Grotevant 8 Cooper, 1988; Josselson, 1988), the most adaptive
pattern of parent-young adult relationships would be characterized by positive
perceptions of connectedness coupled with evidence of separateness from one’s
mother and father. Therefore, It was expected that students having engaged in
religious exploration or in the process of ongoing exploration will experience greater
levels of separateness from and connectedness with parents. Those students who
have made commitments after exploration will also report higher levels of
connectedness. On the other hand, previous research on identity formation (Archer,
1986; Marcia, 1980; Waterman, 1982) has suggested that students who make
religious commitments without exploring will be more connected to and less
separated from parents.

Making hypotheses about students who view doubt as conducive to growth
is more difﬁcult. Although theoreticians view doubt as a part of the religious
development process, it is unclear whether doubt is used more by those who have

made religious commitments and are exploring within those commitments or by

73
those who continue to explore without having made religious or spiritual
commitments. Making this distinction is beyond the scope of this study. However,
forthose students who consider doubt an ally in their religious/spiritual development,
theory suggests they will also report higher levels of separateness and

connectedness in their relationships with parents.

The research hypotheses associated with each RFQ subscale are listed

below:

Hypethesism: Scores on both the separateness and connectedness
variables will make signiﬁcant, positive, unique, and conjoint contributions to
RFQ Commitment After Exploration scores above and beyond the effects of
students’ age.

Hypethesis 2: Scores on both the separateness and connectedness
variables will make signiﬁcant, positive, unique, and conjoint contributions to
RFQ Exploration Ongoing scores above and beyond the effects of students’
age.

Hypethesis 3: Scores on the separateness variables will make a signiﬁcant
negative contribution to RFQ Commitment Without Exploration scores above
and beyond the effects of students’ age.

Hypothesis 4: Scores on the connectedness variables will make a signiﬁcant
positive contribution to RFQ Commitment Without Exploration scores above
and beyond the effects of students’ age and the effects of separateness.

Hypethesisjz Scores on both the separateness and connectedness
variables will make signiﬁcant, positive, unique, and conjoint contributions to
RFQ Doubt Is Conducive to Growth scores above and beyond the effects of
students’ age.

AnalisispLData
To address the preceding hypotheses, a hierarchical regression strategy was

used. In hierarchical regression, the researcher chooses the order in which the

74

independent variables are entered into the regression equation. The order of entry
is chosen before the analysis of data and is based on some theoretical rationale. In
the present study, such a regression allowed a test ofwhetherthe separateness and
connectedness variables made separate and/or conjoint contributions to young adult
religious formation. Speciﬁcally, with the full sample (N = 214), excluding those 14
individuals who indicated that they were more than 30 years old, separate
regressions predicting each of the four RFQ scale scores were computed. In
constructing the model, students’ age was controlled for because age was
signiﬁcantly correlated with each of the dependent variables and uncorrelated with
the relationship measures. Next, scores on the CI-Mother and Cl-Father scales, the
separateness variable, were entered in a block. After the separateness measures,
scores from the connectedness variable, PAQ Affective Quality of Attachment, PAQ
Parental Role in Providing Emotional Support, and PAQ Parental Fostering of
Autonomy, were also entered as a block. Finally, in line with previous research
which suggested that gender moderates the relative contributions of separateness
and connectedness to psychological growth, the same regression models were run
for men and women only if gender differences were noted in the pattern of

interrelationships among predictor and criterion variables.

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS

This chapter is divided into three sections. The ﬁrst section provides sample
characteristics, as well as an examination of the main measures used in this study.
The second section is devoted to the hypotheses associated with each Religious
Formation Questionnaire (RF Q) subscale and presents the results of the regression
analyses. The rest of the chapter provides results related to the measure developed

speciﬁcally for this study, the RFQ.

S l Cl l . I'

First, sample characteristics are presented using descriptive statistics for the
predictor and criterion measures. Next, correlation coefﬁcients between all variables
for both the male and female respondents are presented in order to highlight
patterns of interrelationships among predictor and criterion variables. Finally, gender
differences on all variables are examined using a multivariate analysis of variance
procedure.

Descriptions of the predictor variables were obtained by examining means for
the separateness (Cl) and connectedness (PAQ) scales. Means for male and

female subjects were calculated separately because of the importance of gender in

75

76

theory and research concerning these relationship characteristics in family
relationships (Gilligan, 1982; Josselson, 1988; Kenny 8 Donaldson, 1991). The
average item mean for each scale, on which the range of possible item ratings was
from 1 to 5, was used as a way of describing the respondents’ overall rating for each
scale. Scores on the connectedness scales indicated the following: (a) respondents
viewed the affective quality of their relationships with parents as positive (average
item mean on the PAQ Affective Quality of Attachment scale was 4.09 for men and
4.12 for women); (b) they viewed their parents as fostering independence (average
item mean on the PAQ Parental Fostering of Autonomy scale was 3.97 for men and
3.94 for women); and (0) they viewed their parents as emotionally supportive when
needed (average item mean on the PAQ Parental Role in Providing Emotional
Support was 3.55 for men and 3.67 for women).

Ratings on the separateness scales indicated that subjects also reported
positive psychological separation from their parents. With possible score ranges for
both Cl-Mother and CI-Father being Oto 100, respondents viewed their relationships
with their mothers (M = 82.30) and fathers (M = 85.32) as free from excessive guilt,
distrust, responsibility, anxiety, inhibition, resentment, and anger.

Ratings on the RFQ scales revealed that subjects were committed after
engaging in a period of exploration and were willing to view doubt as important to
their ongoing religious and spiritual growth. Once again, with item ratings ranging
from 1 to 5, the average item mean on RFQ Commitment After Exploration was 3.33

for men and 3.34 for women; for RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to Growth, the average

77

item mean was 3.88 for. men and 3.87 for women. For RFQ Religious Exploration
Ongoing, average item means of 3.12 for men and 3.08 for women revealed a
sample that was only moderately engaged in ongoing exploration. Finally, lower
item means of 2.30 for men and 2.31 for women on the RFQ Commitment Without
Exploration subscale suggest that respondents had not allowed parental or family
religious traditions to dictate the nature of their religious exploration and
commitments.

The means and standard deviations for male and female respondents and for
the combined sample are presented in Table 4.1.

Table 4.2 presents an lntercorrelation matrix between all the variables
considered in this study for the full sample. The intercorrelations between the
parent-young adult relationship measures were strong and suggest that they may
have been assessing similar relationship processes. Affective Quality ofAttachment
(PAQ-1), in particular, was strongly correlated with Parental Fostering of Autonomy
(PAQ-2), Parental Role in Providing Emotional Support (PAQ-3), and Conﬂictual
Independence from mother and father (Cl-M and Cl-F). However, the correlation
was not so high as to present problems of multicollinearity in subsequent analyses

(Tabachnick 8 Fidell, 1989).

GendeLDiﬂeances
Gender differences on the measures of interest were evaluated with a two-
sample multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). The data indicated that there

was no main effect for gender. Contrary to what other investigators have

78

Table 4.1: Means and standard deviations of male, female, and combined samples
on measures ofseparateness, connectedness, and religious formation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Men ([1 = 83) Women ([1 = 145) Combined (N =
Measure 228)
M SD M SD M ED

ConnectednesstEAQl
Affective Quality Of 98.16 15.75 98.88 19.41 98.64 18.14
Attachment (24 items)
Parental Fostering of 55.58 7.84 55.16 9.38 55.30 8.93
Autonomy (14 items)
Parental Role in Providing
Emotional Support (14 49.70 8.82 51.38 9.66 50.82 9.43
items)
Senatalenessﬁlll

CI-Mother (25 items) 83.17 13.30 81.58 16.90 82.30 15.74

Cl-Father (25 items) 87.71 12.30 83.23 16.82 85.32 15.77
B I' . E l' {BEG}
Commitment After 19.98 3.72 20.04 4.02 20.04 3.92
Exploration (6 items)
Religious Exploration 56.16 10.90 55.44 10.62 56.16 10.81
Ongoing (18 items)
Commitment Without 13.80 4.17 13.86 4.40 13.80 4.31
Exploration (6 items)
Doubt Is Conducive to 31.04 4.82 30.96 3.95 30.96 4.28
Growth (8 items)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Key: PAQ = Parental Attachment Questionnaire, CI = Conﬂictual Independence, RFQ = Religious
Formation Questionnaire. The possible ranges for the measures were as follows: for Affective
Quality of Attachment, 24-120; for Parental Fostering of Autonomy, 14-70; for Parental Role in
Providing Emotional Support, 14-70; for Cl-Mother, 0-100; for Cl-Father, 0-100; for Commitment After
Exploration, 6-30; for Religious Exploration Ongoing, 18-90; for Commitment Without Exploration,
6-30; and for Doubt ls Conducive to Growth, 840. Scales were scored such that higher scores
indicate more of the construct measured.

79

.0050 c. 55> m..05_n:m n 05.0 .mm< 0.55.525 n mm< .>..>..0< 5:525 9.05.3.5 u .0<dm-m .>._>..0< 52.55 .255n.
n .0<dwd 5050554. 55.5 .0 85:25.“. N 60-..... 60.9.5m. c. .55.... 0.55.0.2 .I. 51-5. 60.9.5m :. .55.... 0.52.0“. .I. .5”: 60.95m c.
.55.... 0.55.330 u 5&0 6.30.0 0. 52026250 0. 5300 n 210%. 62.80.93 502...; .5E._EE00 2.0.95”. n 205. .920ch 60.55.98
2.0.9.3. n NONE 62.05.03 5.? .5E..EE00 2.0.9.5”. u 2.05”. .550... E9“. 505.0550... 52.05600 N H.-.0 .5505. E9“. 5052.55.06.
53.05.50 n 2.0 6009.0 .m:0..0Em 02256. :. 5.0m. .m.55n. u m-0<n. .>E0.._0.:< .0 925.00“. .2552. u N-O<n. ...5E..0m..< .0 >525
52.5.? .I. 2-O<n. 6256.55530 2.0..mE5n. 2.0.9.3. n ONE 50520552.. 5205.50 u .0 5.5655530 .5E2.05..< .m.55n. n 9?. ”>3.

 

 

.28. v m:- .2o. v a: .mo. v m-

l 8.2.0 .2
52.. I- 8< .2
22. 8.- I 8.80.0 .2
2. 2.- :8. l 2.2.08 .2
2...- 2.. 22. :8. l 2.0-... .2
8.- .2.- ..2. £8. :8. I .38-“. .2
8. 2.- :8. £8. :8. 20. I. 5..-: .22
8. 2. i8. :2. £3. :8. :8. I- .50 .2
.2. .2. 22. .2. .2. 2. 2. .8. l 2105.8
2.- .2.- 8. 8 8. :8. :8. 8. :8.- l "-05 .8
8. 8.- :2~.- 2.- :8.- 8.- 2.- :8.- :8. :9..- I «-05 .2
8. :8. :8. 2o. :8. 8. 2 2. E8. 2. 8. :8.. l 2-05 .0
8. 8. 8. :2. .2. :8. :2. 2 2. 2. 2. 2 2.- 8. l “:0 .m-
2 2. 8. 8. 2. 8. :8. :2. 8. 8. 8. 2.- 8. :5. I 2.0 .v
8.- 8.- 8. :2. 8. :2. :8. 8. 8. :8. 2.. 2. 52.. $2.. I . was. .2.
22. 2. 8. 8. 8. 2. :2. 2. 2. 8.- 2.- 8. E8. E8. :5. I «-05 .N
8. 8. 2. 22. 8. :8. £8. 8. 8. .8. 2.- 8. :8. i2. :2... :8. I- 2.9:. .2

2 2 2 2 2 2 22 2 a 2. 2 0 m 2. n - 2 238.2

 

 

 

>25 0.... c. .55.... 20 5.2.2:; 52 85E 60.55.5052: ”we 0.5»

80

demonstrated with respectto connectedness, no signiﬁcantgender differences were
found on the PAQ subscales. Along all three relationship dimensions, men rated
their connectedness relationships with parents as positively as did women. The
same can be said for the measures of separateness; no signiﬁcant gender
differences were found for conﬂictual independence from either mother or father.
gradations. Simple correlation coefﬁcients between the parent-young adult
relationship measures and the religious formation variables were computed
separately for both the male and female respondents. Table 4.3 presents the
Pearson product-moment correlations and the overall pattern of interrelationships
among the predictor and criterion variables. The parent-young adult relationship
measures were strongly correlated for both women and men in this sample.
However, these correlations were not so high as to present problems of
multicollinearity in subsequent analyses (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1989).

Few gender differences were noted in the pattern of correlations between
these measures. The model-related predictors were unrelated to RFQ Commitment
After Exploration for both men and women. The separateness measure, Cl-Father,
was positively related to RFQ—Commitment Without Exploration for women. Cl-
Father was also positively correlated with RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to Growth, but
only for men. The other separateness measure, Cl—Mother, was negatively related
to RFQ Commitment Without Exploration for women only.

Both men and women evidenced signiﬁcant correlations between the

connectedness measures and religious formation scores. Both PAQ Affective

81

Quality of Attachment and PAQ Parental Role in Providing Emotional Support were
positively related to RFQ Commitment Without Exploration for men and women.

PAQ Parental Fostering of Autonomy was positively related to RFQ Doubt ls

Conducive to Growth for men but not for women.

Table 4.3: Pearson product-moment intercorrelation matrix.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Measure 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1. PAQ-1 —- .64" .79" .63“ .64“ -. 00 -. 17 .24' .15
2. PAQ-2 .70" -- .35" .60“ .51 “ .17 -.17 -.06 .33“
3. PAQ-3 .83“ .46" -- .36" .47“ -.09 .09 .32“ .15
4. Cl-M .71“ .72“ .42“ -- .52“ .07 -.23‘ .00 .06
5. Cl-F .48" .47“ .40“ .48“ —- .00 -.02 .08 .23‘
6. RFQ-1 .07 -.03 .17 -.07 .10 -- -.35“ -.00 .23'
7. RFQ-2 -.16' -.16‘ -.15 -.13 -.17' -.35" .. -.35“ -.14
7. RFQ-3 .22' .04 .31“ .04 .24" .01 -.35“ -- -.33“
9. RFQ-4 .00 .02 .05 -.06 .01 .29“ -.14 -.27“ --

 

*p < .05. "p < .001.

Note: Correlations above the diagonal are for men, and correlations below the

diagonal are for women. For men, [1 = 83, and for women, n = 145.

Key: PAQ-1 = Affective Quality of Attachment, PAQ-2 = Parental Fostering of
Autonomy, PAQ-3 = Parental Role in Providing Emotional Support, Cl-M =
Conﬂictual Independence From Mother, Cl-F = Conﬂictual Independence From

Father, RFQ-1 = Commitment After Exploration, RFQ-2 = Religious Exploration

Ongoing/No Commitment, RFQ-3 = Commitment Without Exploration, RFQ-4 =

Doubt ls Conducive to Growth.

 

82
IhiMaJﬂ—Hmhﬁﬁ

Separate hierarchical regressions for each of the RFQ subscales were run
for the full sample (N = 214). With the exception of RFQ Commitment Without
Exploration, the initial variable of entry, age, did not make a statistically signiﬁcant
contribution. After controlling forthe effects of age, the separateness variables also
failed to make statistically signiﬁcant contributions to scale scores on RFQ
Commitment After Exploration, RFQ Exploration Ongoing, RFQ Commitment
Without Exploration, and RFQ Doubt Is Conducive to Growth.

After controlling forthe effects of age and the block of separateness variables,
the connectedness variables did explain statistically signiﬁcant amounts of variance
in scores for the RFQ Commitment After Exploration, RFQ Commitment Without
Exploration, and RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to Growth scales.

The nonsigniﬁcant results for RFQ Exploration Ongoing will be presented ﬁrst.
Next, the signiﬁcant results for RFQ Commitment After Exploration, RFQ Doubt ls
Conducive to Growth, and RFQ Commitment Without Exploration will be presented.
Because moderate gender differences were observed in the pattern of relationships
between RFQ Commitment After Exploration and conﬂictual independence from
father (see Table 4.3), the regression for RFQ Commitment Without Exploration will

be presented for the full, male, and female samples.

D IIII'II'BESEI Ii 3'
The hypothesis associated with this RFQ scale predicted that scores on the

separateness and connectedness variables would make signiﬁcant, unique, and

83
conjoint contributions to Religious Exploration Ongoing/No Commitment scores after
controlling for the effects of students' age. Table 4.4 presents a summary of the
hierarchical regressions of RFQ Exploration Ongoing/No Commitment scores. For
the full sample, neither age nor the blocks of relationship variables made signiﬁcant

contributions to this RFQ subscale.

Table 4.4: Summary of hierarchical regressions of Exploration Ongoing scores.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

B 82 Change E Change B
Full Sample (N = 214)
Age .00 .00 .006 .00
Separateness .09 .01 .850
Cl-Mother -.O7
Cl-Father -.00
Connectedness .1 1 .02 1.050
PAQ-1 .24
PAQ-2 -.13
PAQ-3 -.21

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Key: CI = Conﬂictual Independence, PAQ = Parental Attachment Questionnaire,
PAQ-1 = Affective Quality of Attachment, PAQ-2 = Parental Fostering of Autonomy,
and PAQ-3 = Parental Role in Providing Emotional Support.

i | ' mitm nt

AﬁELEmIQLaliDﬂ

It was hypothesized that both the separateness and connectedness variables
would make signiﬁcant, unique, and conjoint contributions to the prediction of the
RFQ Commitment After Exploration scores above and beyond the effects of

students’ age. With regard to the full-sample regression, the initial variable of entry

84

(age) failed to make a statistically signiﬁcant contribution to the prediction of RFQ
Commitment After Exploration. As indicated in Table 4.5, the block of separateness
variables were also nonsigniﬁcant. However, the block of connectedness variables
signiﬁcantly predicted commitment after exploration, after controlling for the effects
of age and the separateness scores (82 change = .07). The connectedness
variable, PAQ-3 Parental Role in Providing Emotional Support, signiﬁcantly and

positively predicted scores on the RFQ scale (5 = .41).

Table 4.5: Summary of hierarchical regressions of Commitment After Exploration

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

scores.
Variable B [32 Change E Change B
Full Sample (N = 214)
Age .02 .00 .14 .07
Separateness .1 O .01 .87
Cl-Mother -.07
Cl-Father .04
Connectedness .26 .07 3.78””
PAQ-1 -.21
PAQ-2 -03
PAQ-3 .41
*p < .05.

Key: CI = Conﬂictual Independence, PAQ = Parental Attachment Questionnaire,
PAQ-1 = Affective Quality of Attachment, PAQ-2 = Parental Fostering of Autonomy,
and PAQ-3 = Parental Role in Providing Emotional Support.

85

Conducﬂejoﬁmmn

It was expected that scores on both the separateness and connectedness
variables would make signiﬁcant and conjoint contributions to RFQ Doubt ls
Conducive to Growth scores above and beyond the effects of age. The hierarchical
regression for the full sample is described in Table 4.6. The variable age did not
make a signiﬁcant contribution to the prediction of this RFQ subscale. The
subsequent block of separateness variables were also unsuccessful in predicting

RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to Growth.

Table 4.6: Summary of hierarchical regressions of Doubt Is Conducive to Growth

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

scores.
Variable B 82 Change E Change B
Full Sample (Kl = 214)
Age .05 .00 .53 .04
Separateness .1 1 .01 .94
Cl-Mother .01
Cl-Father .08
Connectedness .23 .05 2.75"
PAQ-1 --38
PAQ-2 .29
PAQ-3 .24
*p < .05.

Key: CI = Conflictual Independence, PAQ = Parental Attachment Questionnaire,
PAQ-1 = Affective Quality of Attachment, PAQ-2 = Parental Fostering of Autonomy,
and PAQ-3 = Parental Role in Providing Emotional Support.

86

As in the regression for RFQ Commitment After Exploration, the
connectedness block made a signiﬁcant contribution to RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to
Growth (82 change = .05). Unlike the results for RFQ Commitment After Exploration,
no single PAQ measure stood out as more predictive of this RFQ scale.

With regard to RFQ Commitment Without Exploration, it was expected that
the separateness measures would make a negative contribution to making religious
commitments without a period of exploration, whereas the block of connectedness
measures would make a positive contribution. The results partially support these
predictions (see Table 4.6).

Unlike the results observed for the previous RFQ scales, the initial variable
entry, students’ age, explained signiﬁcant variance in RFQ Commitment Without
Exploration scores (32 = .06). With regard to the full-sample regressions, the block
of separateness scores failed to signiﬁcantly predict this outcome variable. A closer
examination of the separateness subscales revealed some unexpected results—
conﬂictual independence from father signiﬁcantly and positively predicted scores on
this RFQ subscale (B = .11).

The subsequent entry of the block of connectedness scores made a notable
contribution to the overall model in the full sample (8.2 change = .08). A closer
examination of the connectedness subscales reveals that, as expected, the

subscales measuring relational closeness (PAQ-1) and parents as sources of

87

Table 4.7: Summary of hierarchical regressions of Commitment Without Exploration

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

scores.
Variable B 32 Change E Change a
Full Sample (M = 214)
Age .24 .06 12.12" -.18
Separateness .29 .02 2.56
CI-Mother -.12
Cl-Father .1 1
Connectedness .41 .08 5.98“
PAQ-1 .19
PAQ-2 -.21
PAQ-3 .23
Women (Q = 136)
Age .21 .04 5.69“ -.17
Separateness .30 .04 2.74
Cl-Mother -.12
Cl-Father .16
Connectedness .41 .07 3.58“
PAQ-1 .08
PAQ-2 -.15
PAQ-3 .31
Men ([1 = 78)
Age .31 .10 7.08“ -.22
Separateness .32 .00 .03
Cl-Mother -.1 1
Cl-Father .18
Connected ness .50 .15 3.84*
PAQ-1 .47
PAQ-2 -.30
PAQ-3 .14
*p < .05. “p < .01.

Key: CI = Conﬂictual Independence, PAQ = Parental Attachment Questionnaire,
PAQ-1 = Affective Quality of Attachment, PAQ—2 = Parental Fostering of Autonomy,
and PAQ-3 = Parental Role in Providing Emotional Support.

88

emotional support (PAQ-3) signiﬁcantly and positively predicted making religious
commitments without exploring (B = .19 and .23, respectively). On the other hand,
the connectedness subscale measuring parental fostering of autonomy (PAQ-2)
signiﬁcantly and negatively predicted RFQ Commitment Without Exploration (B =
-.21). Overall, the separateness and connectedness variables accounted for 11%
of the variance in RFQ Commitment Without Exploration scores in the combined
sample.

The separate regressions within each gender group revealed that for both
men ([32 = .25) and women (132 = .17) the full model of age plus the parent-young
adult relationship measures explained signiﬁcant variance in the RFQ Commitment
Without Exploration scale score. As expected, the connectedness variables
accounted for most of the variance in both men’s and women’s models (82 change =
.14 and .08, respectively). For both men and women, emotional support from
parents and the affective quality of the attachment accounted for substantial
contributions to the overall model (B = .61 and .39, respectively). However, men
gave a higher weight to the closeness of the relationship with parents (B = .47),
whereas women favored the emotional closeness variable (B = .31). Notable is the
relative strength of the connectedness variable, Parental Fostering of Autonomy, for
both men (B = -.21) and women (B = -.15).

Finally, there were gender-related differences in the relative contributions of
the separation component to the prediction of this RFQ subscale. For women,
conﬂictual independence from father made a signiﬁcant, positive contribution to the

overall model (B = .16) for RFQ Commitment Without Exploration. Conﬂictual

89
independence from father (B = -.18) did not make a signiﬁcant contribution to the
overall model of religious commitment without exploration for men. In addition,
although the overall block of separation variables were statistically nonsigniﬁcant for
both men and women, separateness approached signiﬁcance for women (82

change = .04, E change = 2.74, p = .06).

i i Ii ‘ i

Post-hoc analyses were conducted to consider the relationship between
demographic or subject characteristics and the RFQ subscales. One-way analyses
of variance (AN OVAs) were conducted to determine whether subjects’ scores on the
RFQ subscales differed with respect to year in school, major, and religious
denomination/afﬁliation. Scheffé follow-up comparisons also were conducted
whenever the ANOVAs were statistically signiﬁcant.

Relationships between subjects’ year in school and each of the RFQ
subscales were examined. Subjects’ year in school was divided into ﬁve levels: ﬁrst
year, sophomore, junior, senior, and graduate student. For RFQ Exploration After
Commitment, RFQ Exploration Ongoing/No Commitment, and RFQ Doubt ls
Conducive to Growth, no group differences were revealed. For RFQ Commitment
Without Exploration, the omnibus null hypothesis was rejected (E [4, 219] = 2.76, p
< .05). However, Scheffe follow-up comparisons revealed that no two groups were
signiﬁcantly different at the .05 level.

Similar analyses were conducted, with college major asthe grouping variable.
There were ﬁve groups of the major variable: natural sciences, health sciences,

education, social sciences, and humanities. For RFQ Exploration After Commitment

90

and RFQ Exploration Ongoing/No Commitment, the null hypothesis suggesting no
group differences was accepted. For RFQ Commitment Without Exploration and
RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to Growth, the omnibus null was rejected (E [4, 219] =
4.70, p < .01; E [4, 219] = 4.66, p < .01, respectively). Once again, the Scheffé
multiple-comparison procedure was run to determine signiﬁcant differences between
groups. With respect to RFQ Commitment Without Exploration, at the .05 level, the
social sciences and humanities majors scored signiﬁcantly lower than both the
natural sciences and business majors. In other words, social science and
humanities majors declared less of a tendency to make religious commitments
without exploring than did business and natural science majors. A similar group
difference was noted with the RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to Growth subscale. Social
sciences and humanities majors scored signiﬁcantly higher than business majors,
indicating more of a willingness to view doubt as an ally in their religious/spiritual
development.

Finally, ANOVAs were conducted to determine whether RFQ subscales were
related to subjects’ religious denominations/afﬁliations. The religious denomination
variable had six groups: Mainline Protestant, Fundamentalist Evangelical, Christian
Reformed, Free Methodist, Catholic, and Nondenominational. No group differences
were observed for RFQ Exploration After Commitment, RFQ Exploration
Ongoing/No Commitment, and RFQ Doubt Is Conducive to Growth. Religious
afﬁliation did not account for signiﬁcant differences among the scores for each of

these RFQ subscales. Religious afﬁliation had an inﬂuence on RFQ Commitment

 

91
Without Exploration, as the omnibus null was rejected (E [6, 218] = 2.79, p < .05).
However, no two groups were signiﬁcantly different at the .05 level.

To demonstrate further evidence for the construct validity of the current
version of the RFQ, simple correlations were computed between the four RFQ
subscales and items from the demographic questionnaire that assessed both
subjects’ and their parents’ interest and involvement in religion and spirituality. It
was expected that the more interested and involved respondents were with religion,
the more they would report religious commitments after a period of exploration. In
fact, moderate positive correlations were observed between subjects’ self-
assessment of current interest in religion and spirituality and RFQ Commitment After
Exploration ([ = .38, p < .001), frequency of church attendance and RFQ
Commitment After Exploration ([ = .23, p < .001), and frequency of subjects’
religious/spiritual activity in the home and RFQ Commitment After Exploration (1 =
.33, p < .001).

On the other hand, for students engaged in ongoing religious exploration, it
was expected that (a) their current interest in spirituality, (b) frequency of church
attendance, and (c) frequency of religious/spiritual activity in the home would be
unrelated to or negatively correlated with RFQ Religious Exploration Ongoing. In
fact, a, b, and c were signiﬁcantly negatively correlated to the RFQ subscale
Religious Exploration Ongoing (I. = -.22, Q < .001; r: = —.22, p < .001; and r = -.21, p
< .01, respectively).

It would also make sense that higher parental interest in and involvement with

religion and spirituality would be found among those respondents who reported

92

making commitments without having explored. Indeed, moderate positive
correlations were observed between subjects’ assessment of (a) mother’s and (b)
father’s current interest in religion and spirituality and (0) frequency of parents’
religious/spiritual activity in the home with the RFQ subscale Commitment Without
Exploration (r; = .22, p < .001; r = .29, p < .001; and r = .29, p < .001, respectively).
Notable are the lack of signiﬁcant correlations between the group of self-interest
measures, subjects’ interest in and involvement with religion/spirituality, frequency
of church attendance, and frequency of subjects’ religious/spiritual activity in the
home.

Respondents’ current interest in religion and spirituality and frequency of
church attendance were signiﬁcantly correlated with the RFQ subscale Doubt Is
Conducive to Growth (r = .20, p < .002 and r = .15, p < .05, respectively).
Appreciation of doubt as a tool for further religious/spiritual growth is also suggested
by a signiﬁcant correlation between RFQ Doubt Is Conducive to Growth and RFQ
Commitment After Exploration (r = .24, p < .001). However, this same attitude
toward doubt was not witnessed among those who had made commitments without
having explored. As would be expected, this subscale was negatively correlated

with RFQ Commitment Without Exploration ( = -.38, p < .001).

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION

The ﬁrst section of this chapter presents a summary of the study. Next, a
review and discussion of the major ﬁndings in this study are presented. In addition,
results associated with the RFQ are discussed, with an emphasis on presenting
evidence for the construct validity ofthis instrument. Finally, limitations of the study

and implications for future research are discussed.

Summamoﬂheﬁtm

A growing body of theory and research has made a strong case for the
beneﬁcial effects of characteristics of separateness and connectedness in the
parent-young adult relationship on a number of young adult developmental tasks and
psychological adjustment variables. This body of knowledge, much of which
integrates psychoanalytic, object relations, attachment, and family systems theory,
is becoming a dominant paradigm in understanding not only early childhood
development but development across the life span. Deﬁnitions of human growth and
development, once dominated by autonomy themes, now recognize the importance
of ongoing relationships or attachments. According to this paradigm, demands to

be both independent and to belong are experienced at full volume, especially during

93

94
times of developmental change or transition, such as late adolescence or young
aduﬂhood.

Researchers have found that parent-young adult relationships that manage
to balance the maintenance of emotional closeness and support with an
encouragement of psychological separation foster young adult competence and
development within such domains as identity formation, ego development,
adjustment to college, and career decision making. However, absent from this list
of young adult development tasks or outcomes has been a measure of young adult
religious development.

According to theorists interested in religious development through the life
span, the period of adolescence and young adulthood is often atime for reevaluating
childhood religious beliefs and practices. Research on religious development is
sparse, and studies that exist have suggested a variety of assumptions concerning
the course of religious development during adolescence and young adulthood.
Some studies have suggested that during this period individuals become less
religious than their parents or move away from their childhood religious afﬁliations
altogether (Asa, 1994; Caplovitz & Sherrow, 1977; Feldman, 1969; Hauser, 1981;
Hunsburger, 1978; Spilka, Hood, 8 Gorsuch, 1985). Other research has indicated
that adolescence is a time when religious values and beliefs are transformed but not
abandoned--individuals maintaintheir religious spiritual sentiments butfaith, religion,
and spirituality take on new and qualitatively different meanings (Allport, 1950;

Elkind, 1964; Fowler, 1981, 1984; Hill, 1986; Parker, 1985; Parks, 1986; Potvin 8

95
Lee, 1982). Finally, psychologists interested in religious development agree that
adolescence and young adulthood seem to bear witness to more religious
conversions than at other times during the life span (Spilka et al., 1985). Religion,
as Erikson (1958) suggested, provides a source of ideologies for those who seek
idenﬁﬁes.

In the present investigation of the effects of parents on young adult religious
formation, the separateness/connectedness model of the parent-young adult
relationship was put to another test. Separateness, connectedness, and religious
formation were operationalized using the Conflictual Independence (CI) subscale
from the Psychological Separation Inventory (Hoffman, 1984), the Parental
Attachment Questionnaire (PAQ) (Kenny, 1987), and the Religious Formation
Questionnaire (RFQ), which was developed forthis study. Conﬂictual Independence
measured the extent to which subjects described relationships with parents as free
of guilt, excessive anger, and resentment. The PAQ assessed subjects’ perceptions
of the quality of the emotionally close relationship with parents, the parental role in
encouraging independence, and the perception of parents as sources of emotional
suppon.

The RFQ assessed the presence of attitudes and behaviors that reﬂected
levels of exploration and commitment toward religion and spirituality. The four RFQ
subscales measured the extent to which subjects (a) made religious commitments

after exploring, (b) considered themselves involved with ongoing religious

96

exploration, (0) made commitments without engaging in a period of exploration, and
(d) viewed doubt as a positive tool in their ongoing religious development.

A sample of 228 religiously afﬁliated college students was obtained from
colleges and universities in western Michigan. These students were asked to
complete and anonymously return a data sheet, the Cl, the PAQ, and the RFQ. The
subjects were told that they were participating in a study on religious development
and family relationships.

Afterthe data were collected, a hierarchical regression strategy was used with
214 subjects to test whether the separateness and connectedness variables made
separate and/or conjoint contributions to young adult religious exploration. Fourteen
subjects were excluded from the main analyses because they indicated on the data
sheet that they were more than 30 years of age. Because gender differences were
observed in previous research using the CI and the PAQ, MANOVA was used to
determine whether there were differences in these measures of separation and
connection. In addition, the pattern of relationships between the predictor and
criterion variables was observed for men and women. If gender differences were
noted, separate regressions predicting each of the four RFQ subscales were

computed for the combined, male, and female samples.

8 i lDi . [II I!" E' l'
The highly favorable descriptions of parental relationships reported by the

college students in this study contribute to an increasing body of research

suggesting that young adults achieve independence from their family of origin

97

without sacriﬁcing an affective closeness (Blustein et al., 1991; Kenny, 1990; Kenny
8 Donaldson, 1991; Rice 8 Whaley, 1994). Close relationships with parents need
not be labeled as dependence or indicative of independence unrealized. Many of
these students described positive affect toward parents, continued to view their
parents as sources of practical and emotional support, and perceived their parents
as encouraging independence. Likewise, students acknowledged positive feelings
about separating from their parents as they reported freedom from excessive anger,
guilt, resentment, and distrust of their parents.

Unlike previous research evidence on the nature of psychological separation-
individuation in late adolescence (Gilligan, 1982; Josselson, 1988; Kenny, 1987,
1990, 1991; Lopez et al., 1992), no gender differences were noted in this study.
Contrary to evidence suggesting that women are closer to their parents than men,
the men in this study described equally positive connections with their parents as did
the women. Both men and women in this study also described similar freedom from
conﬂictual entanglements with their parents.

There were also no signiﬁcant gender differences in the way separateness
and connectedness contributed to the religious formation measures. Recent theory
on women’s psychological development assumes that, relative to men, relationship
variables contribute more to positive functioning and development. The results of
this study suggest that relationship factors are no more or no less crucial in women’s
religious development than they are in men’s. This conclusion is made tentatively,

however, due to limitations of this study that will be discussed later.

98

Previous research has provided an empirical link between parent-young adult
relationships that provide a balance of separateness and connectedness and young
adult developmental processes, including identity and career exploration, openness
to change, tolerance of ambiguity in the career decision-making process, and
willingness to doubt. Based on the results of this study, however, these same
conclusions cannot be drawn for similar processes within the religious domain.

The separate hierarchical regressions suggested that connectedness with
parents plays more of a role in young adult religious formation than separateness
from parents. After controlling for the effects of age and the block of separateness
variables, the block of connectedness variables accounted for signiﬁcant variance
in the RFQ Commitment After Exploration, RFQ Commitment Without Exploration,
and RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to Growth scale scores. On the other hand,
characteristics of separateness did not contribute to respondents’ tendency to make
religious commitments with or without a period of exploration, to report the presence
of ongoing religious exploration, or to view doubt as playing a positive role in their
religious development. The lack of signiﬁcant ﬁndings may be due to measurement
problems with the RFQ, the relative homogeneity of the sample, and other limitations
of the study that will be discussed later.

Acloser examination ofthe speciﬁc connectedness subscale scores revealed
that students’ perceptions of emotional closeness withtheir parents and their parents
as sources of emotional support were predictive of religious formation scores on

both of the scales measuring religious commitment (RFQ Commitment After

99

Exploration and RFQ Commitment Without Exploration). These ﬁndings suggest
that the secure, close relationship with parents promotes making religious or spiritual
commitments but is unrelated to religious exploration. Indeed, the absence of a
signiﬁcant relationship between connectedness measures and RFQ Religious
Exploration Ongoing would support this conclusion.

Contrary to predictions, conﬂictual independence from father made a positive
contribution to the overall model of religious commitment without exploration for the
women in this sample. Female students who reported making religious
commitments without a period of exploration also reported relationships with father
that were free of excessive anger, guilt, and/or resentment. Conﬂictual
independence from mother did not play as important a role in explaining variance in
the RFQ Commitment Without Exploration scores for either men or women. This
result runs counter to research suggesting that positive feelings about separation
from parents would allow for exploration beyond family norms and traditions before
ideological commitments are made (Blustein 8 Palladino, 1991; Hoffman, 1984).
This ﬁnding suggests that, for women, positive feelings about separation from father
contribute to adopting these norms without engaging in a period of questioning or
exploration of alternatives.

On the other hand, the close relationship with parents and the perception of
parents as providers of emotional support were signiﬁcantly and positively related

to RFQ Religious Commitment Without Exploration for the full, male, and female

100

samples. Students who made religious commitments without a period of exploration
reported feeling supported by as well as affectively close to their parents.

The relationship between subjects’ perceptions of close emotional ties to their
parents and making religious/spiritual commitments without exploring is similar to
evidence reported in the literature on adolescent and young adult identity formation.
In general, individuals who make identity commitments without exploring report close
ties to parents (Josselson, 1987, 1988; Marcia, 1980; Waterman, 1982). For
example, in a study relating identity formation and parent-young adult relationships,
Campbell et al. (1984) found that young adults who have made identity-related
commitments without engaging in a period of exploration experience particularly
close relationships with their parents. According to the authors, these young adults
may be reluctant to test the family’s comfortable stability and strong mutual
attachments. Furthermore, the authors reasoned, these students may be
responding to a rapprochement crisis or "regressive pull" by foregoing exploration
and its implicit separation message forthe emotional security of the connectedness
at home.

Contrasting with the positive contributions that were made by perceptions of
the close relationship with parents and the parental role in providing emotional
support, the PAQ subscale Parental Fostering of Autonomy was negatively related
to RFQ Religious Commitment Without Exploration (se Table 4.3) in the full, male,
and female samples. In other words, parents of young adults who have made

commitments without engaging in a period of exploration have not encouraged

101

independence and autonomy for their young adult children. Ironically, the results
associated with this connectedness subscale may aid in understanding the role that
separateness plays in the religious exploration and commitment of this particular
sample of young adults.

Attachment theory suggests that an emotionally close and supportive
relationship with parents provides a secure home base for the child’s autonomy
seeking. In a model of a secure attachment relationship, the parents are viewed as
emotionally available, understanding, tolerant of differences, and facilitating
independence. In constructing the PAQ so that the measure was true to the
attachment theories of Bowlby (1988) and Ainsworth et al. (1978), Kenny (1987,
1990) developed items that assessed both relational characteristics of closeness
and connection as well as autonomy and independence. The PAQ Parental
Fostering of Autonomy subscale, in particular, was deﬁned as parental
encouragement for exploration of ideas and opinions outside of the home. In
responding to items from this subscale, young adults reveal to what extent their
parents have provided freedom to experiment and learn things on their own. This
subscale assesses parents’ role in encouraging their children to make their own
decisions and to respect and defend these decisions even if they are in conﬂict with
their parents. Young adult responses to these items also reveal to what extent

parents are perceived to have imposed their values upon them and to have tried to

control their lives.

102

In a recent review of self-report measures of separation and connection,
Lopez and Gover (1993) suggested that the PAQ Parental Fostering of Autonomy
subscale may be more a measure of separateness than connectedness, despite its
presence on an "attachment" questionnaire. If PAQ Parental Fostering of Autonomy
is more of a separateness variable, then the ﬁnding summarized above would
suggest that a negative relationship exists between this aspect of separation from
parents and young adult religious exploration. In other words, the more students
report a tendency to have made religious commitments without exploring, the less
parents are perceived to have encouraged autonomy or independence. This
conclusion, in part, supports the original hypotheses concerning the contribution of
separateness to making religious commitments without exploring.

An interesting portrait of parent-young adult relationships emerges from this
ﬁnding: affectively close, emotionally supportive, conﬂict-free relationships in which
parents discourage exploration of norms and conventions outside of the home. A
similar proﬁle is found in the well-known longitudinal research of Baumrind (1987,
1991). In her most recent account of parenting styles during adolescence, she
added a new pattern to the familiar authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and
rejecting-neglecting styles. Once a subgroup of the larger authoritarian style
developed in her childhood studies, she called this new pattern the nonauthoritarian
directive parenting style. According to Baumrind, this traditional parenting style is
deﬁned by parents who are less sanctioning of adolescent/young adult exploration

outside of the family norms, but they also manage to maintain strong mutual

103
attachments among family members. Parents from traditional families were viewed
as restrictive by their adolescent children but also emotionally supportive. In
addition, family relationships in traditional homes manifested as little problem
behavior and a minimum of family disorganization and conﬂict as the optimal
authoritative parenting style.

At face value, the nonauthoritarian directive parenting style combines
characteristics of connectedness and separateness assessed in this study and,
more pointedly, reﬂects the type of relationship revealed in the ﬁndings associated
with the RFQ Exploration Without Commitment subscale. From these ﬁndings it can
be inferred that in this sample of religiously afﬁliated college students, there are
individuals who live in homes where parents provide clear and consistent guidelines
concerning their children’s exploratory behaviors outside of the home. These
guidelines, although perceived to be restrictive, seem to be communicated without
the emotional conﬂict or dependence experienced in homes where parents are
perceived to be both restrictive and intrusive. Mutual care and concern is also
experienced in these homes, even with parents who exercise more overt control.

It must be remembered that, by and large, the young adults responding in this
study reported positive perceptions of connectedness and separateness in their
relationships with parents. Parenting styles such as the nonauthoritarian-directive
parenting style reported in Baumrind’s studies can only be inferred—no conclusions

can be drawn concerning the extent to which this style is typical of this sample.

104
Bearing in mind this caveat, there are implications to consider for our work with
students who may be reared in these traditional or nonauthoritative directive homes.

First of all, the strengths present in these families cannot be denied. They
have managed to create close mutual attachments in an atmosphere devoid of
intense or excessive conﬂict and without sacriﬁcing a sense of family convention or
tradition. Clear guidelines and norms are communicated, and there is an
expectation that all family members will comply with these norms. Commentators
of adolescent and young adult development have suggested that in times of social
instability, families may need to assert as much control as they can provide
(Baumrind, 1987, 1991; Elkind, 1989). In addition, research has suggested that
families, such as these traditional families, are also as effective as the authoritative
styles in guarding against the dangers associated with risk-taking behaviors such as
drug and alcohol use.

In a recent study exploring the relationship between religious devoutness in
college students and emotional adjustment and psychological separation from
parents, Richards (1991) warned against automatically assuming weakness in such
family relationships. As in the present study, Richards also found his religiously
devout subjects to be somewhat psychologically dependent on their parents. Citing
the research of Rice et al. (1990), Richards claimed that no empirical link existed
between greater degrees of attitudinal, functional, and emotional dependence and
measures of psychological adjustment. Greater degrees of so—called psychological

dependence may be an asset to these college students, according to Richards. For

105
example, with respect to progress in the career development process, greater
degrees of attitudinal dependence on father appeared to be beneﬁcial for young
adult males (Blustein et al., 1991).

Recent research in identity formation in general, and women’s identity
formation in particular, has also challenged the notion that people who make identity
commitments without exploring are bound to pay for it later with an emotionally
tumultuous identity crisis. Josselson (1987), in her study of women’s identity
formation, found healthy adaptation among women who forego exploration in favor
ofthe stability and security of identiﬁcation with and commitment to family norms and
traditions. These women, according to Josselson, may have adopted a style based
on tradition and connection that was rooted in their need for security and stability.
Psychological development occurred as a result of taking in rather than repudiating
aspects of their beloved parents. What is more, Josselson’s longitudinal tracking
revealed her foreclosed subjects stayed foreclosed and were relatively healthy at
adolescence, young adulthood, and into middle age. In fact, for women and men,
what correlated most with indices of psychological health and well being was making
identity commitments, either as a result of or in the absence of exploration.

The literature also reveals some downsides to the parenting style that
discourages autonomy while maintaining close relationships and freedom from
excessive conﬂict. Compared to young adults from homes that combine close
relationships, clear expectations, conﬂictual independence, and a nurturing of

autonomy, Baumrind noted less individuation and autonomy, and more of an

 

106

external locus of control among adolescents from traditional homes. The ability to
make commitments to "courses of thought and action that depart from early, more
stable and secure patterns" (p. 61) was "somewhat lacking" in these
nonauthoritarian-directive homes. Josselson (1987) also noted that people who
have engaged in exploration are capable of "more original and individualized
choices, forging creative modes of living that are open to surprise and change” (p.
169)

Such religious or identity exploration may also be a double-edged sword for
the young adults from these traditional homes. Exploration and its vicissitudes
validates a sense of becoming an adult for some young people, but it also can feel
like giving up the security and the comfort of the attachments at home. According
to theory, becoming adult requires a deidealization of parents, where parents are
less ﬁgures or roles and more persons with strengths and weaknesses. This
deidealization process provides young adults with opportunities for the development
of greater separateness. However, this intrapsychic movement may also arouse
internal conﬂict and feelings of depression, inferiority, shame, guilt, and rage. Often
these feelings may compromise separateness gains; individuals in the midst of a
"rapprochement crisis” are often caught desiring to continue their growth project but
are fearful that carrying on may sacriﬁce the close, supportive relationship with
parents. For some young adults the sacriﬁce is too much; if growth and

development means the repudiation of crucial relationships, it hardly seems worth

it.

107

Both the traditional families described in Baumrind’s work and the relationship
pattern described here seem particularly vulnerable to this type of rapprochement
crisis. Young adults who choose to test the outer boundaries of their families’
conventions and norms put themselves and their families at risk. For traditional
families, the presence of an exploring child may cause parents to tighten the
boundaries around their child and become even more restrictive. This heightened
restrictiveness may also be accompanied by parental intrusiveness, where parents
no longer trust their child and ﬁnd themselves being more ofﬁcious and legalistic in
their attempts to control their child. The traditional family system may also view the
presence of an exploring young adult as a threat to the close mutual attachments
and conﬂict-free atmosphere in the home. When these traditions and values are
called into question by one family member, it may feel to other family members like
an attack on the family itself. Strong family processes that have worked for the
family in the past are discarded now that a member is challenging these
convenﬁons.

The challenge to counselors, educators, and others who work regularly with
such young adults and their families is complicated. Professionals must guard
against a bias toward separateness and autonomy seeking. As crucial as
developing autonomy is toward becoming adult, gains in this direction are not to be
confused with the repudiation of family ties and the close relationship with parents.
The strengths inferred from these nonauthoritarian directive families have already

been noted. On some level, these families already know what it is like to be mutually

 

108

supportive and affectively available. The challenge for the young adult explorer in
this family may be to ﬁnd a way to share this journey and maintain these close
connections. Mental health professionals may want to build on the family strengths
and encourage the existing emotional connections while building opportunities for
family members to clearly communicate emerging differences. Training in enabling
communication/listening skills such as empathy, acceptance, the willingness to take
responsibility for expressing disagreements, and joint problem-solving abilities may
help traditional families who are strained by the presence of an exploring young

adult.

"V--.0.I i0 of-ll'ooao‘i‘.‘oo ‘30.

Several post-hoc analyses underlined both strengths and weaknesses of the
RFQ. RFQ Commitment Without Exploration seemed to be the most robust of the
four subscales in terms of yielding signiﬁcant results. In addition to the results
associated with the main research questions, subjects’ year in school, academic
major, and religious denominational afﬁliation inﬂuenced scores on RFQ
Commitment Without Exploration. Of the different classes, ﬁrst- and second-year
students reported a greater tendency to have made religious commitments without
exploring, whereas juniors and seniors were less likely to have made commitments
without exploring. This result is not surprising, given that previous research has
suggested that identity develops progressively over the college years. This ﬁnding
is also in line with research on the inﬂuence of college in general on measures of

young adult religiosity (Feldman, 1969; Hunsburger, 1978).

109

Subjects’ declared academic major also correlated with a tendency to make
commitments without exploring. Students who declared themselves social science
and humanities majors were least likely to make religious commitments without
engaging in a period of exploration. Follow-up comparisons indicated that those
students majoring in business and the natural sciences were more likely to make
religious/spiritual commitments without exploring than social science and humanities
majors. This ﬁnding is in line with research evidence, which suggests that certain
ﬁelds of study were more likely to lead to a weakening of belief than others or that
a weakening of belief will lead students to study in one ﬁeld over another. Hoge and
Keeter (1976) reported more loss of religious belief in humanities and social studies
majors, with less loss in chemistry, physics, and engineering majors. In discussing
their results, however, these same researchers questioned whether stability of
religious belief was more a function of events before coming to college, such as sex-
role training, religious education, childhood church attendance, oratendency toward
dogmatism.

Subjects’ declared denominational afﬁliation was also related to whether or
not students made religious commitments without exploring. An examination of
group means suggests that those students representing the more traditional religious
denominations, such as Catholic and Mainline Protestant, were more likely to
declare religious commitments without exploring than students who were

Fundamentalist, Evangelical, Free Methodist, or nondenominational.

 

110

This result is harder to interpret due to the surprising paucity of research on
the effects of denominational afﬁliation on young adult religious development and
commitment. It is notable that the more traditional religious denominations, such as
Mainline Protestant and Catholic, use infant baptism to seal individuals as church
members and/or spiritual heirs of the promises of Christianity (i.e., salvation from sin,
eternal life in God’s Kingdom, and so on). The other religious groups emphasize the
need for an individual to make a thoughtful and autonomous decision to believe in
the claims of Christianity. Within these traditions, individuals who declare their faith
and belief are then baptized into the church. Generally, this decision comes in late
childhood or during or after the adolescent years, when individuals are believed to
be capable of understanding the implications of such a decision.

This difference may affect the way in which subjects from both groups view
the concept of religious exploration and commitment. Members of traditional
churches may assume that they were ”committed" since infancy, making exploration
unnecessary. On the other hand, members of the latter group may have been raised
in religious homes and have attended the same denomination since childhood, but
the group norm dictates that the decision to commit or have faith is left up to the
individual. For these students, it may be that a form of exploration occurs before
declaring their intention to believe in or commit to Christianity. This conclusion is
purely speculative—further research on the nature of young adult religious

development needs to address this and other issues.

 

111

Also contributing to the evidence for the validity of the RFQ Commitment
Without Exploration subscale were correlations between the subscale and students’
assessments of their own and their parents’ interest in and involvement with religion
and spirituality. Students who were likely to make commitments without exploring
also reported their parents to be interested in religion and frequently engaged in
religious and spiritual activity in the home. This ﬁnding is in line with what appears
to be the only conclusive research evidence on the religious development of young
adults, namely, the enduring effects on young adult religious development of
parental religious beliefs and practices (Potvin 8 Sloan, 1985). As suggested by the
results of this study, previous research evidence supports the conclusion that the
presence of more religiously interested and involved parents has a positive effect on
the maintenance of the religious belief and commitment of young adults.

The other RFQ subscales were not as useful in revealing relationships with
either parent-young adult relationship measures, subject demographics, or subjects’
assessment of their own and their parents’ interest in and involvement with
religion/spirituality. Still, some interesting results did occur for each subscale and
are discussed in the paragraphs that follow.

Means for the RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to Growth subscale were not
signiﬁcantly different for the various class groups or religious denominations.
However, signiﬁcant differences were noted between the various major groups.
Similar to the ﬁnding for the RFQ Commitment Without Exploration subscale,

subjects who declared themselves a social science and/or humanities major were

112

more likely to view doubt as a positive tool in their religious/spiritual development,
especially when compared to business majors. Causal direction cannot be
determined by the existing data. The results did not reveal whether students
reported more of a willingness to view doubt as an ally in their spiritual development
as a result of experiences as a social science/humanities major or whether this
tendency to embrace doubt led them to choose social science/humanities majors in
the ﬁrst place. For this sample of religiously afﬁliated young adults, one implication
seems warranted: on these college campuses, there are students who are engaged
in a process of religious development that includes a willingness to explore,
question, and grapple with knowledge and experience that may provoke doubt and
uncertainty. In addition, some programs and majors may elicit more of this process
than others. Indeed, this is probably no surprise to the teachers and other
professionals who participate in such programs. These may be the programs that
introduce diverse and opposing opinions, programs that challenge dualistic young
adult world views and develop world views that embrace both commitment to one’s
ideas, beliefs, and values, as well as tolerance of and a desire to learn from others
(Kneﬂekamp 8 Slepitza, 1978; Perry, 1969).

The construct validity of the RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to Growth subscale was
also supported by signiﬁcant associations between it and the subjects’ assessments
of their own religious interest and involvement. The more subjects are interested in
and involved with religion/spirituality, the more likely they are to look favorably upon

doubt as helpful in their religious development. The same associations were not

 

 

113

observed between subjects’ favorable view of doubt and assessments of parental
religious attitudes and behaviors.

In what appears to be a related ﬁnding, positive associations were also
observed between subjects making religious and identity commitments after
exploring and having a favorable view of doubt. Allport (1950) believed that faith is
developed in the ”workshop of doubt.” This ﬁnding also suggests that
religious/spiritual doubt is a tool for religious development. However, doubt may be
more of an ally to individuals who through previous engagement in a process of
exploration have learned to trust the religious formation process and its attendant
uncertainties and ambiguities. The commitments demonstrated in the lives of these
individuals bear witness to the efﬁcacy of the process.

Indeed, this previous exploratory period may have contributed to a tolerance
of and appreciation for doubt not found in those individuals who have either made
commitments without exploring or who are involved in ongoing exploration. Results
indicated a strong negative association between RFQ Doubt ls Conducive to Growth
and RFQ Religious Commitment Without Exploration. RFQ Religious Exploration
Ongoing was also unrelated to RFQ Doubt Is Conducive to Growth. Future research
needs to be undertaken to explore whetherthere are relationships between religious
exploration in general and a positive attitude toward doubt.

RFQ Commitment After Exploration and RFQ Religious Exploration Ongoing
were not able to differentiate between groups of classes, academic majors, or

religious denominationalafﬁliations. However, as expected, subject age was related

 

l.:_ .“lw
L

114
to subjects’ report of making religious commitments after engaging in a period of
exploration. The older the subjects, the more likely they were to have reported
making commitments after exploring. Also, RFQ Religious Commitment After
Exploration was related to subjects’ reported interest in and involvement with
religion/spirituality.

Somewhat surprising was the lack of signiﬁcant associations between RFQ
Religious Commitment After Exploration and indices of parent interest in and
involvement with religion. Previous research would suggest that parental beliefs and
attitudes would inﬂuence students who have made religious commitments after
exploring, especially among this group of students who came from religious home
environments. Perhaps for these students who had made religious commitments
after exploring, their current religious/spiritual commitments were not as guided by
childhood religious practices or what and how their parents continued to practice.
As already noted, this was not the case for the committed but unexplored students.
These students had joined with their parents and continued to practice within their
family’s religious traditions.

RFQ Religious Exploration Ongoing revealed signiﬁcant negative
relationships with assessments of subjects’ level of interest and involvement in
religion and spirituality. Once again, it is hard to interpret this ﬁnding, given the
limited information gathered for each respondent. This ﬁnding may reveal some of
the ambiguity and ambivalence reported by researchers who have described those

who are uncommitted and currently exploring among other identity-related domains

 

 

115

(Archer, 1989; Marcia, 1980; Stephen, Fraser, 8 Marcia, 1992; Waterman, 1982).
Are uncommitted but exploring students continuing to explore, but from a distance?
For these religiously afﬁliated students, is it easier to explore when one is less
interested and involved? The data did reveal that for those presently exploring,
frequency of church attendance was lower than for those who had made religious
commitments with or without a period of exploration. However, the data did not
reveal whether these exploring students were attending other religious meetings or
groups. The presence of other exploratory attitudes and behaviors, such as reading
religious/spiritual materials, engaging in informal discussions with peers, and
engaging in a regular pattern of prayer or mediation, also cannot be deduced from
the data. In short, it is beyond the scope of this study to know whether these
religiously exploring students were "trying on different hats," may have been involved
in an emotionally and cognitively chaotic religious identity crisis, or in what ways they
were involved in a religious exploration process.

It would also be helpful to know whether the lower level of student interest
and involvement among uncommitted but exploring students generalizes to identity
domains other than religion. Are students who are uncommitted and exploring with
respect to religion/spirituality also exploring and uncommitted with respect to career,
interpersonal relationships, and/or sex roles and standards of sexual behavior, or

does one or a cluster of such domains have precedence in young adult

development?

 

 

116
"'11-.01 o 1‘ .0. -.10 .90.: '01 o ._‘i‘ ‘-_ 1

Subjects forthis study were not selected randomly, so caution in generalizing
the results is necessary. Despite the presence of differences within this large group
of religiously afﬁliated young adults, all of the student respondents professed a
Christian orientation. In addition, most of the students came from small liberal arts
colleges. Finally, most of the sample came from homes where religious conventions
were observed and came to college declaring themselves religiously committed.

The study needs to be repeated with young adults from other religious faiths
and with more students who attend larger, nonreligious colleges and universities.
Further research of this kind also needs to be done with students who come to
college from homes where religion did not play such a central role in the family
system. In addition, research that identiﬁes subjects who come from homes where
religious traditions were not observed and experience a religious/spiritual conversion
after coming to college may further enlighten the role that separateness and
connectedness play in young adult religious formation.

The study was correlational in nature, so causal inferences have not been
demonstrated. Making more deﬁnitive conclusions about the effects of parent-young
adult relationships on young adult religious formation will require more longitudinal
designs. Research that assesses students before they leave home for college,
throughout their college years, and afterwards may provide the opportunity to
observe the way in which family, individual, and institutional factors contribute

uniquely and conjointly to the religious development of college students.

 

 

117

The correlational statistics reported are signiﬁcant but not particularly large.
In some of these cases, the relationships are hard to interpret and may or may not
be meaningful. For example, correlations between the RFQ subscales and
measures of subjects’ and parents’ interest in religion and spirituality, although
signiﬁcant and in the expected direction, were not that high. Further research
providing similar collaborative support is needed in order to accept the conclusions
drawn in this study.

The measures used in this study are based on self-report and need to be
interpreted with caution. This limitation extends to the measures of separation and
connection, despite their favorable psychometric properties. The report of other
family members’ perceptions of separation and connection, the use of behavioral
indices, and deﬁning and observing characteristics of separation and connection
within the family will aid in understanding the relationships among these variables
in future research.

The relationship variables (PAQ and CI) were also highly intercorrelated for
this subject group. Of concern is whether the PAQ and CI scales were measuring
more than one construct. To determine whether these relationship measures were
clustering together in a waythat highlights both a separateness and connectedness
distinction, a factor analysis was conducted on the PAQ and CI scale scores. This
post-hoc analysis revealed that a single factor explained some 65% of the variance--
a relationship factor emerged, but it remained unclear as to what this factor was

measuring. The factor analysis revealed that for this sample, scales from the Cl and

-

1+"—

118

PAQ clustered together and did not provide a clear distinction between separateness
and connectedness in the parent-young adult relationship. In the present study,
therefore, results were interpreted by observing the effects of the separate PAQ and
CI subscales. Aside from highlighting the efﬁcacy of measuring more diverse
samples, researchers using separateness and connectedness scales such as the
PAQ and CI should factor analyze these scales and determine whether
”separateness" and "connectedness” factors do emerge. If distinct and theoretically
consistent separateness and connectedness scales emerge, researchers can insert
these new variables into their regression equations.

A related issue may involve the need to ﬁnd more sensitive measures of
separation and connection for use in future studies. For this sample in particular,
where positive feelings about separation from mother and father are indicated by the
relative lack of intense emotional conﬂict, measures are needed that tap parental
encouragement of autonomy, attitudinal and ideological independence, and
exploration beyond the "stable and secure patterns" established during childhood
and adolescence.

Other investigators have operationalized characteristics of separateness and
connectedness in the parent-young adult relationship by observing interaction
samples and communication patterns. The pioneering studies of Grotevant and
Cooper (1985, 1986, 1988) and Hauser et al. (1991) are prime examples of this type
of research. Adapting these research designs would enable future researchers to

look for effects on young adult religious development of relationships where the

If“ “wag.

119

young adult child is encouraged to develop and express differing points of view in
an atmosphere of mutual respect and warmth. Behavioral measures of separation
and connection, taken in as natural a setting as possible, would also address many
of the concerns posed about the limitations of self-report measures such as those
used in this Study.

Parent-young adult relationship scores were also negatively skewed in this
data set, making it difﬁcult to obtain substantial estimates of variance in these
relationship variables. Most likely, this reduced the power of the statistical tests and
probably underestimated the magnitude of the various relationships. Once again,
this limitation highlights the wisdom of gathering data from more diverse samples.

The number of insigniﬁcant results may also be related to limitations
associated with the RFQ. It was determined that the reliability estimates for each of
the RFQ subscales were high enough to continue with this study. However, more
work needs to be done to make this a more reliable instrument. Future research
should test new items by adding them to the four subscales and resubmitting the
RF Q to new and more diverse samples. A factor analysis can be undertaken to see
whether these items cluster around the four subscales and/or hold together in a
manner consistent with current understandings of the nature of religious
development or young adult development in other domains.

At present, religious formation as deﬁned by the RFQ is too diffuse, and the
absence of ﬁndings may be associated with the ambiguity that surrounds this

construct. Future efforts at validation of the RFQ would be aided by examining the

 

120

relationships between the different RFQ subscales and assessments of decision
making, problem solving, tolerance of ambiguity, tendency to foreclose, and other
processes that relate with exploration and commitment in general. Future research
might also help to identify or differentiate between those who are “trying on different
hats" and/or involved in a religious identity crisis.

Simple but important questions about young adult religious development need
to be asked and answered before further revisions ofthe RFQ are undertaken. More
information needs to be gathered about the nature and relative importance of
religious exploration and commitment during the young adult years. Within a
religiously afﬁliated sample, young adults are likely to say they value religious
exploration and growth. Ironically, many of the religious denominational traditions
represented in this study were born out of questioning established religious norms.
It is reasonable to assume that the mandate to explore and to question, rooted in the
beginnings of many of the mainline religious denominations represented in this
study, is also familiar to the college students who participated. What is more, the
mission and purpose statements of many institutions of Christian higher education
talk liberally about the integration of faith and learning and the desire that students
grow as a result of their coming to college. These institutions were established to
nurture a sense of intellectual inquisitiveness and development within the faiths of
their students. Individuals from the religious traditions represented in this study are
familiar with and embrace such concepts as "growing in your faith" and "becoming

spiritually mature." Spiritual complacency or the attitude of religious or spiritual

 

 

121
stagnation is strongly discouraged within the ethos created by these religious
traditions, and many so-called Christian colleges intentionally address this mandate
to grow and develop spiritually.

However, such religious exploration and commitment may look different than
exploration and commitment within other identity-related domains such as career,
interpersonal relationships, or gender roles. For example, the press for making
mature religious commitments may not be as critical to college students asthe press
to make career or relationship commitments. For many young adults, religious or
spiritual "crises" may not occur as a result of going to college or entering young
adulthood. Whereas college may be the backdrop for global ”crises" in the career
or interpersonal domains, religious exploration and commitment may be affected by
other experiences or at other times. Religious identity formation may be more
crucial during those Eriksonian stages associated with the child-bearing, midlife, and
mature years. Indeed, popular polling data support such an inference (Gallup,
1989). There is an intuitive link between the virtues associated with many
religious/spiritual traditions and the virtues attending the Eriksonian stages
associated with young adulthood, midlife, and the mature years—namely, love, care,
and wisdom. In addition, the questions that emerge as a result of having children
or caring for someone or something outside of oneself, making lifestyle value
changes at midlife, and reevaluating one’s life and approaching death may

precipitate the types of "crises" associated with religious exploration and

commitment.

 

 

APPENDIX

122

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

 

OFFICE OF VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH EAST LANSING 0 MICHIGAN 0 48824-1046
AND DEAN OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL

March 5, 1993

TO: Mr. Dan Wilcox
1532 Spencer
Lansing, MI 48915

RE: IRB #: 93-093
TITLE: SEPARATENESS AND CONNECTEDNESS IN THE PARENT-
YOUNG ADULT RELATIONSHIP: PROVIDING A CONTEXT
FOR YOUNG ADULT RELIGIOUS EXPLORATION

REVISION REQUESTED: N/A
CATEGORY: l-C
APPROVAL DATE: 03/04/1993

The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects’ (UCRIHS) review of this project is complete.
I am pleased to advise that the rights and welfare of the human subjects appear to be adequately protected and
methods to obtain informed consent are appropriate. Therefore, the UCRIHS approved this project including any
revision listed above.

UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year, beginning with the approval date shown above. Investigators
planning to continue a project beyond one year must seek updated certiﬁcation. Request for renewed approval must
be accompanied by all four of the following mandatory assurances.

1. The human subjects protocol is the same as in previous studies.

2. There have been no ill effects suffered by the subjects due to their participation in the study.

3. There have been no complaints by the subjects or their representatives related to their participation in the
study.

4. There has not been a change in the research environment nor new information which would indicate greater

risk to human subjects than that assumed when the protocol was initially reviewed and approved.

There is a maximum of four such expedited renewals possible. Investigators wishing to continue a project beyond
that time need to submit it again for complete review.

UCRIHS must review any changes in procedures involving human subjects, prior to initiation of the change.
Investigators must notify UCRIHS promptly of any problems (unexpected side effects, complaints, etc.) involving

human subjects during the course of the work.

If we can be of any future help, please do not hesitate to contact us at (517) 355-2180 or FAX (517) 336—1171.

1:. 1‘

avid E. Wright, Ph.D.
UCRIHS Chair

Sincerely,

   

DEW2pjm

cc: Dr. John Powell

.WSU as an 4jfrrmunvr Aaron 'Equa/ Oppmrumly Insmuuon

123

i i n r
My name is Dan Wilcox, and I am working towards my Ph.D. in
counseling psychology. I hope you will agree to participate in this
investigation of religious development and family relationships.

In order to participate, you are being asked to complete
questionnaires containing items regarding general information about
yourself, your family relationships, and your approach to religion
and spirituality. It should take approximately 35 minutes of your
time.

All responses to these items will be anonymous. Please don't put
your name on any of these forms. Of course, your participation is
entirely voluntary. You may choose not to participate at all or to
refuse to answer certain of the questions. Though your participation
would be extremely helpful to this research, there will be no way
for anyone to know whether you participate or not.

You indicate your voluntary agreement to participate by
completing and returning these questionnaires.

Finally, while no direct benefit to you can be expected from
filling out these questionnaires, I hope that responding to the items
will create some interest. If you have any questions or concerns
about your participation in this study, please feel free to contact
Dan Wilcox at (517) 482-6152.

Once again, thank you for participating in this research and for
helping me to complete my degree!

 

 

N55391:“?

8.

 

124

W
Male Female 2. Age:
Year in School (check) _ Fr __ So _ Jr _ Sr _Grad

College Major:

 

Are you living at your parent's home at this time?

 

Yes

No

 

Your religious affiliation (denomination)
Religious affiliation of your parents:
Father:

Mother:

 

 

What is the degree of your current interest in

religion/spirituality ? (check one)

9.

__ not interested
slightly interested

moderately interested

very interested

 

What is the degree of your parents current interest in

religion/spirituality? (check one)

Mother: Father:

not interested
slightly interested
moderately interested
very interested

 

 

125

10. How frequently do you attend church or synagogue? (check

one)
__ rarely or never
_ occasionally (3-5 times a year)
_ once a month
_ once a week
_ more than once a week

11. Have you had a religious/spiritual conversion experience (ie.
been "born again', committed to a religious position that was
previously unknown or inadequately understood, etc.)?

Yes No If yes, at what age?

12. How often did you see your father and mother go to church or
synagogue, pray, read the Bible or engage in other religious
activity?

never ,or rarely sometimes often
13. How often did you engage in private religious behaviors
(prayer, contemplation, reading, etc) at home during your
adolescent years?

never or rarely sometimes often

14. Who/what were most important influences in your religious
development? (Check the top three)

peers or friends

pastors

teachers

parents

sibling

books/readings

formal religious education (confirmation, Sunday school)
worship service

prayer/meditation

 

 

126

EAQ

The following pages contain statements that describe family relationships and the
kinds of feelings and experiences frequently reported by adolescents and young adults.
Using the scale below, please respond to each item by placing the appropriate number
in the space, provided next to each item that best describes your parents, your
relationship with your parents and your relationship with them. Please provide a
single rating to describe your parents and your relationship with them. If only one of
your parents are living, or if your parents are divorced, respond with reference to
your living parent or the parent towards whom you feel closer.

 

1 2 3 4 5
Not at All Somewhat A Moderate Quite A Very Much
Amount Bit

|n geneLal mv parents,,,,

1) are persons 1 can count on to provide emotional support when I feel
troubled.

 

2) support my goals and interests.
3) live in a different world.
4) understand my problems and concerns.

__ 5) respect my privacy.
6) restrict my freedom or independence.

7) are available to give me advice or guidance when I need it.
8) take my opinions seriously.

_ 9) encourage me to make my own decisions.

10) are critical of what I can do.

11) impose their ideas and values on me.

12) have given me as much attention as l have wanted.

13) are persons to whom I can express differences of opinion on
important matters.

__ 14) have no idea what I am feeling or thinking.

 

- qr"

 

 

127

 

1 2 3 4 5

 

Not at All Somewhat A Moderate Quite A Very Much
Amount Bit

15) have provided me with the freedom to experiment and learn things
on my own.

 

16) are too busy or otherwise involved to help me.
17) have trust and conﬁdence in me.
18) try to control my life.

19) protect me from danger and difficulty.

 

20) ignore what I have to say.

21) are sensitive to my feelings and needs.
22) are disappointed in me.

23) give me advice whether or not I want it.

24) respect my judgement and decisions, even if different from what they
would want.

 

25) do things for me, which I could do for myself.

26) are persons whose expectations I feel obligated to meet.

 

27) treat me like a younger child.

ur ecen v s s o e s . e are 3 were ersons..
__ 28) I looked forward to seeing.
__ 29) with whom I argued.
30) with whom I felt relaxed and comfortable.
__ 31) who made me angry.
__ 32) I wanted to be with all of the time.
__ 33) towards whom I felt cold and distant.

34) who got on my nerves.

 

128

 

1 2 3 4 5
Not at All Somewhat A Moderate Quite A Very Much
Amount Bit

’ ' O ' 0' 00' ' 0“
I' . I .

35) who aroused feelings of guilt and anxiety.

36) to whom I enjoyed telling about the things I have done and learned.
37) for whom I felt feelings of love.

38) I tried to ignore.

39) to whom I confided my most personal thoughts and feelings.

40) whose company I enjoyed.
__ 41) I avoided telling about my experiences.

WM
42) with warm and positive feelings.

43) feeling let down and disappointed by my family.

ll‘l .. z : -' o - 000-“ o z. “00 z. o: -0. o u:.:

__ 44) I look to my family for support, encouragement, and/or guidance.

 

45) I seek help from a professional, such as a therapist, college
counselor, or clergy.

46) I think about how my family might respond and what they might say.

47) I work it out on my own, without help or discussion with others.

48) I discuss the matter with a friend.

 

49) I know that my family will know what to do.

 

50) I contact my family if I am not able to resolve the situation after talking it
over with my friends.

 

1 29
1 2 3 4 5
Not at All Somewhat A Moderate Quite A Very Much
Amount Bit

WM
51) I feel more confident in my ability to handle the problems on my own.
52) I continue to feel unsure of myself.

53) I feel that I would have obtained more understanding and comfort from a
fﬁend.

54) I feel confident that things will work out as long as I follow my parents
advice.

 

55) I am disappointed with their response.

 

 

130

RFQ

We: Please read each item and indicate to what extent it reﬂects your own

thoughts and feelings WWW
WW. Using the scale below, place the appropriate number
next to the item in the space provided.

 

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree

1. I’m very sure what religion means to me, and I don’t feel a need to

look any further.

2. I am not confused about religion and spirituality, and I don’t expect my
views to change much in the future.

3. l have a strong belief in God, but I continue to have questions and
continue to search for greater understanding.

4. I ﬁnd exploring my spirituality when I have doubts strengthens it.
5. It might be said I value my religious doubts and uncertainties.
6. l have been driven to ask religious questions out of a growing

awareness of the tensions in my world and in my relation to my world.

7. My spiritual development has emerged out of a growing sense of
personal identity.

8. Doubts and questions confuse me and hinder my spiritual
development. I prefer to be doubt-free.

9. I’ve never really questioned my religion. If it is right for my parents, it
must be right for me.

10. Questions are more important to my religious experience than are
answers.

11. It is better for a person's religious beliefs to be ﬁrm and free of doubt.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

131

Education has led me to question some of the teachings of my church
or synagogue and family.

I am satisﬁed with my spirituality; 1 don’t expect my spiritual beliefs and
attitudes to change in the next few years.

I attend the same church or synagogue my family always attended,
and I’ve never really questioned why.

A person would never develop mature religious beliefs without doubt,
exploration, or questioning.

My spiritual beliefs and practices are pretty much the same today as
they were a few years ago.

I try not to read too much about spiritual issues or harbor too many
doubts; I like to be sure about what I believe.

With regard to religion, I’m not at the point where I’m ready to commit
to one thing; I’m more open-minded in everything at the moment.

I’m looking around and seeing a lot of different ways of being religious
or spiritual. Many of these ways interest me, but I’m not ready to
make a deﬁnite decision.

At times I ﬁnd myself wondering, “Just what do I believe?“ I even ﬁnd
myself questioning my own religious upbringing and traditions.

At times, perhaps during a worship service or chapel, I wonder, "Do I
really believe what I am reading or saying?"

Even though I have ﬁrm religious or spiritual convictions, there are
many religious issues on which my views are still changing.

Sometimes I wish I weren’t so vague when it comes to my religious
beliefs, but I am still forming my opinions.

I’m presently questioning parts of my spirituality that I used to take for
granted or believed because Iwas told to believe.

God wasn’t very important to me until I began to ask questions about
the meaning of my own life.

 

 

a.

 

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

132

I ﬁnd religious doubts upsetting and not conducive to my spiritual
development.

My religious attitudes and practices may change in the future.

I’ve gone through a period of serious questioning about faith and can
now say that I understand what I believe as an individual.

A person’s spirituality is unique to each individual. I’ve considered and
reconsidered it myself and know what I believe.

I am still trying to decide what spirituality means to me and how I want
to practice my spirituality.

After considerable thought, I’ve developed my own views on religion
and spirituality and don’t believe anyone will likely change my
perspective.

My parents know what is best for me in terms of involvement in
religion and spirituality.

Discussions with teachers or friends will not change my religious
beliefs and practices.

I guess I am pretty much like my parents when it comes to religion. I
follow what they do in terms of my own religious practices.

My own views on religion and spirituality were taught to me by my
parents and family, and I really don’t see a need to question what they
taught me.

It took me awhile to ﬁgure it out, but now I really know myself and what
I want spiritually.

In my own spiritual and religious development, lﬂnd myself engaging
in lots of discussions with others and some self-exploration.

There are many reasons for making religious and/or spiritual
commitments, but I have chosen my spiritual orientation on the basis
of certain values and beliefs I have personally examined.

133

PSI

Instructions: The following list of statements describes aspects of students'
relationships with both their mother and father. Imagine a scale ranging from 1 to 5
that tells how well each statement applies to you. In the space next to the statement, '
please enter a number from 1 to 5. If the statement does not apply enter '1'. Please
be completely honest. Your answers are entirely conﬁdential and will be useful only if
they accurately describe you.

 

Not at all A little bit Moderately Quite a bit Very
true of me true of me true of me true of me true of me
1 2 3 4 5

1. Sometimes my mother is a burden to me.

2. I feel like I am constantly at war with my mother. 2.
g

3. I blame my mother for many of the problems that l have.

4. I wish I could trust my mother more.

5. l have to be careful not to hurt my mother's feelings.

6. I sometimes feel like I'm being punished by my mother.

7. I wish my mother wasn't so overprotective.
8. I wish my mother wouldn't try to manipulate me.

9. I wish my mother wouldn’t try to make fun of me.

10. I feel that l have obligations to my mother that I wish I didn’t

have.

 

__ 11. My mother expects too much of me.
__ 12. I wish I could stop lying to my mother.

__ 13. I often wish that my mother would treat me more like an adult.
__ 14. I am often angry at my mother.

__ 15. I hate it when my mother makes suggestions about what I do.
__ 16. Even when my mother has a good idea I refuse to listen to it
because she made it.

__ 17. I wish my mother wouldn't try to get me to take sides with her.

18. I argue with my mother over little things.

 

134

Not at all A little bit Moderately Quite a bit Very

true of me true of me true of me true of me true of me
1 2 3 4 5

__ 19. My mother is sometimes a source of embarrassment to me.

__'20. I am sometimes ashamed of my mother.

__ 21. I get angry when my mother criticizes me.

__ 22. When I don't write my mother often enough I feelguilty.

__ 23. I feel uncomfortable keeping things from my mother.

__ 24. I often have to make decisions for my mother.

__ 25. I sometimes resent it when my mother tells me what to do.

__ 26. Sometimes my father is a burden to me.

_ 27. I feel like I am constantly at war with my father.

_ 28. I blame my father for many of the problems that I have.

__ 29. I wish I could trust my father more.

__ 30 I have to be careful not to hurt my father's feelings.

__ 31. I sometimes feel like I'm being punished by my father.

32. I wish my father wasn't so overprotective.

33. I wish my father wouldn't try to manipulate me.

34. I wish my father wouldn't try to make fun of me.

35. I feel that I have obligations to my father that I wish I didn't
have.

36. My father expects too much of me.

37. I wish I could stop lying to my father.

38. I often wish that my father would treat me more like an adult.
39. I am often angry at my father.

40. I hate it when my father makes suggestions about what I do.

W'.

 

135

Not at all A little bit Moderately Quite a bit Very
true of me true of me true of me true of me true of me
1 2 3 4 5

—————

41. Even when my father has a good idea I refuse to listen to it
because he made it.

42. I wish my father wouldn't try to get me to take sides with him.
43. I argue with my father over little things.

44. My father is sometimes a source of embarrassment to me.

45. I am sometimes ashamed of my father.

46. I get angry when my father criticize me.

47. When I don't write my father often enough I feel guilty.

48. I feel uncomfortable keeping things from my father.

49. I often have to make decisions for my father.

50. I sometimes resent it when my father tells me what to do.

 

I . I’a_.ﬁ V

 

 

REFERENCES

 

 

REFERENCES

 

Adams, G. R. Bennion, L, 8Huh,K.(1989).QbiestnLe_meaeuLe_Qtego_idem11x
Wand ed..) (Available from G. R. Adams,

Laboratory for Research on Adolescence, Utah State University)

Adams, G. R., 8 Gullotta, T. (1983). Adelesgenuifeexperienees. Monterey, CA:

Brooks/Cole.

 

Adams, G. R., Shea, J., 8 Fitch, S. A. (1979). Toward the development of an
objective assessment of ego-identity status. JeumaLQLYeuthjne
Adolescence. 8. 223-228.

Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. 0., Waters, F... 8Wall, S. (1978). Eanemeef
attaehmentJneychelegiealﬂudmﬂhestLangejituaﬂen. Hillsdale, NJ.

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Albrecht, S. T., 8 Cornwall, M. (1989). Life events and religious change. Beyim
QLBeIIgIeuaBesearch. 31. 23- 38.

Allison, M. D., 8 Sabatelli, R. M. (1988). Differentiation and individuation as
mediators of identity and intimacy in adolescence. JeumeLQLAdelescem
Research. 3. 1-16.

 

Allport, G. W. (1950). IhBJﬂdeuaLanihiiLeilgien. New York: Macmillan.

Anderson, S. A., 8Sabatelli, R. M. (1990). Differentiating differentiation and
individuation: Conceptual and operational challenges. IheAmeriean
JeumaLotEamilylheLapy. 1.8, 32- 50.

Archer, S. L. (1989). The status of identity: Reﬂections on the need for
intervention. MW. 12. 345-359.

Argyle, M., 8 Beit-Hallahmi, B. (1975). Wm.
London: Routledge.

136

137

Armsden, G., 8 Greenberg, M. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer
attachment: Individual differences and their relationship to psychological

well-being in adolescence. JeumeLQfleutnjndAdeleseenee, 16, 427-
454.

 

 

 

Asa, L. F. (1994). BsychelegyeLLehglouecommItmenLandﬁeleleomeMJ
WWW. Unpublished manuscript.

Bakan. 0- (1966). Ihe_duality_of_easlstence:_lselatien_and_cemmitmem1ri

westernmen. Boston: Beacon. L
Batson, C., 8Schoenrade, P. A. (1991a). Measuring religion as quest: 1. ‘

Validity concerns. .lmImaLmLIneeriemiﬁcemmLBeligian. :39. 416429. :
Batson, C, 8Schoenrade, P. A. (1991b). Measuring religion as quest: 2. it

Reliability concerns. .leumaLtoLtheﬁelemlﬂcﬂudLQLBI-zllglen. 3.0. 430-

447.

Batson, C., 8Ventis, W. L. (1982) W
peyehelogjealenelyeie New York: Oxford University Press.

Baumrind, D. (1987). A developmental perspective on adolescent risk taking' In

contemporary America. In C. E. Irwin (Ed), AdeleeceaneciaLbehayier
andbealthmp. 93- -.125) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

 

Baumrind, D. (1991). The inﬂuence of parenting style on adolescent

competence and substance use. JeumamLEaﬂyAdeleecenee, 1.1, 56-95.

Becvar, D. S., 8Becvar, R. J. (1988). W
Boston: Allyn 8 Bacon.

Beit-Hallahmi, B. (1977). Curiosity, doubt, and devotion: The beliefs of
psychologists and the psychology of religion. In H. M. Malony (Ed. ),

WWme. 381- -.391) Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Benjamin, L. S. (1979). Structural analysis of differentiation failure. Esyehjetm,
42, 1-23.

Bergin, A. (1983). Religiosity and mental health: Acritical reevaluation and

meta-analysis. W. 151.. 170-
174.

138

Bergin, A. E., 8 Jensen, J. P. (1990). Religious orientation of psychotherapists:
A national survey. Esychetheyapy, 21, 3-7.

Blos, P. (1967). The second individuation process of adolescence.

Eslcbeanahctleﬁtuduﬂheﬁhﬂd. 22 162- 186.

Blos, P. (1979). The second individuation process. In P. Blos (Ed) 1118
00‘ ‘1 o «9' I‘ ‘00111 -_ ‘ '1 00- (pp. 141- 170).
New York: International University Press.

Blustein, D. L, Walbridge, M. M, Friedlander, M. L. 8Palladino, D. E. (1991).
Contributions of psychological separation and parental attachment to the

career development process. .LQumaLoICQunselingﬂychelegy. 3.8. 39-
50.

Bowen. M. (1978). BMW. New York: Harper8

Row.

Bowlby, J. (1988). Aeecummmﬁmimmmmheauhmumm
de_elepment. New York. Basic Books.

Boyes, M. C., 8 Chandler, M. (1992). Cognitive development, epistemic doubt,

and identity formation in adolescence. Jeumemmandﬁdelesgenge,
21, 277-304.

Byrnes, P. (1984). Iheesyehelogyeﬂeljgjen. New York: Free Press.

Campbell, B, Adams, G. R., 8 Dobson, W. R. (1984). Family correlates of
identity formation in late adolescence: A study of the predictive utility of
connectedness and individuality in family relations. Jggmemﬂeumjnd
Ado1eseence. 1.3. 509-525.

Caplovitz. D., 8 Sherrow, F. (1977). WWW
eoLegeeLadIiates. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage,

Carter, E., 8McGoIdrick, M. (1989). WEI—A
ﬂammkiQLtamjllmeLapy. New York. Gardner Press

Clark, C. A., 8Worthington, E. L., Jr. (1987). Family variables affecting the
transmission of religious values from parents to adolescents: A review.

EamIILEerspeetiye. 21 1-21.

139

Cooper, C. R., Grotevant, H. D., 8 Condon, S. M. (1983). Individuality and
connectedness in the family as a context for adolescent identity formation
and role-taking skill. In H. D. Grotevant and C. R. Cooper (Eds),

Adelescemjexelenmemjnjhetamﬂx. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Danser, D. B., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Clark, C. A., 8 Berry, J. T. (1988). Effects
of theological belief and church attendance on parental beliefs and

behaviors in families of preadolescent ﬁrst sons. EamﬂLEQLSQQCIhLe. 22.
87-106.

Dudley, R. L., 8Cruise, R. J. (1990). Measuring religious maturity: Aproposed
scale. BeviemzLBeligioueBeseeich. 32. 97-109.

Elkind, D. (1964). Age changes In the meaning of religious Identity BeyjeyLQf
ReliabieBesearch. 6, 36-40.

Elkind, D. (1970). The origins of religion in the child. Beyieyy Qf BEIIQIQIIS
BeaeaLch. 12. 35-42.

Enright, R, Lapsley, D. Cullen, J., 8Lallensack, M. (1979). Apsychometric
examination of Rasmussen’ s ego identity scale. W131
BehaxkzraLDeyelenment 6. 89-103.

Erickson, J. A. (1992). Adolescent religious development and commitment. A
structural equation model of the role of family, peer group, and educational

inﬂuences. JeumejﬂuheSeiennﬂeﬁjudLQLBeﬁgien, 31, 131- 152.
Erikson, E. H. (1958). W. New York: Norton.
Erikson, E. H. (1963). Childendeeclety. New York: Norton.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Idenjjty;_Y_o_u_ttI_and_e[jeie. New York: Norton.
Feldman, K. (1969). Change and stability of religious orientations during college.

Partl: Freshman- -senior comparisons. W. .11.
40- 60.

Feldman, S. S., 8 Gehring, T. M. (1988). Changing perceptions of family

cohesion and power across adolescence. Childjelelepmem. 59. 1034-
1045.

Fowler, J. W. (1981). Went
and1he_quest_fer.meening.NewYorszarper&Row.

140

Fowler, J. W. (1984). BecenungeduiLbecemlngChnstIaaniiitdeiLeleoment
antheChﬂsiianiaiih NewYork: Harper&ROW

Frank, S. J., Avery, C. B., 8 Laman, M. S. (1988). Young adults’ perceptions of
their relationships with their parents: Individual differences in
connectedness, competence, and emotional autonomy. Beyelepmemal

Esychelegy. pp. 729-737.

Frank, S. J., Pirsch, L. A., 8 Wright, V. C. (1990). Late adolescents’ perceptions
of their relationships with their parents: Relationships among
deidealization, autonomy, relatedness, and insecurity and implications for
adolescent adjustment and ego identity status. JeumeLQLYmuhjnd
Adelescenee. 19. 571-588.

Franz, C. E., 8 White, K. M. (1985). lndividuation and attachment in personality

development: Extending Erikson’s theory. JeumeleLEeLeenaijiy, 53, 224-
256.

Freud, A. (1958). Adolescence. Esxchdanelﬂmﬂudmneﬁhﬂd 1.6. 225-278.
Fulton. A- (1991). Intrinsmndnuesiieilgldiimleniaiiomemmdmesexuai

I O I I
‘l ll‘l .Iqul‘l o. II 1!. Q‘I -. . ' I ‘v. I 0 Ho. - ‘

Leligidii. Unpublished manuscript.

Gallup, G. (1989). WWW. Princeton.
NJ: Gallup Organization and Princeton Religion Research Center.

Gallup, G.,8Castelli, J. (1989). Ihepeeple’erejigien. New York: Macmillan.

Gelso, C. J., 8 Fassinger, R. E. (1992). Personality, development, and
counseling psychology: Depth, ambivalence, and actualization. JeemeLef
Qeunselineﬂsxchelegy. 39. 275- 298.

Genia, V. (1994). Secular psychotherapists and religious clients: Professional

considerations and recommendations. JeumeLQtCeuneeﬂngend
Develenmem. 12 395- 398.

Gilligan, C. (1987). Adolescent development reconSIdered lnC. E. lnIvin (Ed ),
With San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gorsuch, R. L. (1988). Psychology of religion. AnnueJ_Beyiew_Qf_Esychelegy.
39. 201-221.

141

Greenberg, J., 8 Mitchell, S. (1983). New.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Greenberger, E. (1984). Deﬁning psychosocial maturityin adolescence. In P.
Karoly8J. J. Steffen (Eds..) AdelescemmnaMiQLdiseLdeWaﬂdne

andeoniemeoramcencemsﬁw. ed., pp. 3-39). Lexington, MA: D. C.
Heath.

Grotevant, H. D. (1992). Assigned and chosen identity components: Aprocess
perspective on then Integration In G. R. Adams, T. P. Gullotta, 8 R.

Montemayor (Ed.), Adeleseemjdemnﬂermeﬁen. Newbury Park, CA.
Sage.

Grotevant, H. D., 8 Cooper, C. R. (1986). lndividuation in family relationships: A
perspective on individual differences in the development of identity and

role-taking skill in adolescence. HumanDeiLelonment. 22. 82-100.

Grotevant, H. D. 8 Cooper, C. R. (1985). Patterns of interaction in family
relationships and the development of identity exploration in adolescence.

thldDﬁXEIQQmQDL 55. 425-428.

Grotevant, H. D., 8 Cooper, C. R. (1988). The role of family experience in career
exploration: A life span perspective. In P. Baltes, R. H. Lerner, 8 D.

Featherman (Eds), WM (Vol. 8, pp. 231-
258). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Hall, G. S. (1905). Adeleeeenge. New York: Appleton.
Hauser, J. (1981). Adolescents and religion. Adeleecenee, 62, 309-320.

Hauser, S. T., Powers, S. I., 8Noam, G. G. (1991). Adeleeeenmndjneir
W. New York: Free Press

Hershmann, D. (1991). Adolescents and religion. Iheﬁhnsiienﬁeniuizy. 103.

Hill, C. I. (1986). A developmental perspective on adolescent "rebellion” in the

church. JeumechEsxchelogLandlheelegy. 151.. 306-318.

Hill, J. P. (1987). Research on adolescents and their families: Past and

prospect. In C. E. Irwin (Ed). AdelemnisdeiamehalidLaDdheaﬂh (pp.
13-31). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hill, J. P., 8Holmbeck, G. N. (1986). Attachment and autonomy during
adolescence AnnalseLthldDeiLelenmeni. 3. 145- 189

142

Hoffman, J. A. (1984). Psychological separation of late adolescents from their
parents. JoumaieLCeunselingEsychoiegiL 31. 170- 178.

Hunsberger, B. (1978). The religiosity of college students: Stability and change

over years at university JouinaleLiheSQieniiﬂeﬁtudyeLBeligldn. 11.
139- 154.

Johnson, P. E. (1959). Conversion. EasteLaLEeyeheldgy. 1.0. 51-56.

Josselsmv R- (1937)- MW
interned. New York: Jossey-Bass.

Josselson, R. (1988). The embedded self. land thou revisited. In D. K. Lapsley

8 F. C. Power (Eds) SeitegeendideniiianiegiaiiiLeenoLQaches
New York: Springer-Verlag.

Josselson, R. L. (1980). Ego development in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.),
HandbookeLadolesceniesychelogymp. 188-210). New York: Wiley.

Kegan, R. (1982). IheelolxingeelLELoblemendoLosessjnhuman
deyeldpmellt. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kenny, M. E. (1987). The extent and function of parental attachment among
ﬁrst-year college students. JdumLQIlmdhdeAddleecence. 1.6. 17-27.

Kenny, M. E. (1990). College seniors’ perceptions of parental attachments: The

value and stability of family ties. JeumeLeLQQuegesmdenLQeyeleQmenL
3.1. 39-46.

Kirkpatrick, L. A., 8Shaver, P. R. (1990). Attachment theory and religion:
Childhood attachments, religious beliefs, and conversions. JeumaLfeLthe
Scieniiﬂcﬁiudxetﬁeligm. 29, 315-334.

Knefelkamp, L. I... 8SIepitza, R. (1978). Acognitive- d-evelopmental model of
career development: An adaptation of the Perry scheme. In C. A. Parker

(Ed ). Encodiaginddeieloomeniincellegestudenis Minneapolis

University of Minnesota Press.

Kroger, J. (1989). 0‘11' '1 q... ‘ ‘ " 1‘ eel-.1 ‘ 9‘1 “1 ‘I .10 o 1‘.
New York: Routledge.

Levine, S. (1984). W. New York: Harcourt-Brace-Jovanovich.

143

Loevinger. J. (1977). W. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Lopez, F. G. (1991). Patterns of family conﬂict and their relation to college

student adjustment. JdumaLQfCoiinselingendDeiielenment 69. 257-
260.

Lopez, F. G. (1992). Family dynamics and late adolescent identity development.

In S. D. Brown 8 R. W. Lent (Eds) HandboekeLcoimseiindesychelegy
(Vol. 2, pp. 251-283). New York. Wiley.

Lopez, F. G., 8 Gover, M. (1993). Self-report measures of parent-adolescent
attachment and separation-individuation: Aselective review. JeumeLQI

Ceunselingendﬁeiielooment. 7.1. 560- 569.

Lopez, F. G., Watkins, C. E., Manus, M. 8Hunton-Shoup, J. (1992). Conﬂictual
independence, mood regulation, and generalized self-efﬁcacy: Test ofa

model of late adolescent identity. WM. 3.9.
375- 381.

Mahler, M., Pine, F., 8 Bergman, A. (1975). Ihepeyehelegieeiﬂnhgﬂhe
humenjefem. New York: John Wiley.

Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego Identity status. Jeumel
QLEersenelIiILandﬁociaLEsychology. 3. 551-558.

Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Hendbeekef
edgieeeentesyehelegymp. 159-187). New York: Wiley.

Marcia, J. E. (1988). Common processes underlying ego identity, cognitive/
moral development, and individuation. In D. K. Lapsley8 F. C. Power

(Eds.,) Semegdendjdeniiiyzdnteetaiiyeapoioaehes New York:
Springer-Verlag.

Markstrom-Adams, C. (1992). A consideration of intervening factors in
adolescent identity formation. In G. R. Adams, T. P. Gullotta, 8R.

Montemayor (Eds.), AdeleecenLidemjlyJeLmeﬁen. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.

McFarland. S (1991) IssuesiedisimcienddmoenanLLellgloiiseneniaileL
Quesienddsedminaiiemeyisiied Unpublished manuscript.

144

McFarland, S., 8Warren, J. C. (1992). Religious orientation and selective
exposure among fundamentalist Christians. JeumalJQLtbeﬁeiemmi:
SiudLoLBeligien.

Montemayor, R. (1986). Family variation in parent-adolescent storm and stress.
JeumaletedolescenLBeseaLch. 1. 15-31.

Moore, D. (1987). Parent-adolescent separation: The construction of adulthood

by late adolescents. QayelepmemeLEeyChelegy, 23, 298-307.
Offer, D., 8 Offer, J. (1975). Emmjeenagejeyoungmenheod. New York:

Basic Books.

Parker, M. S. (1985). Identity and the development of rellglous thlnklng lnA. S.
Waterman (Ed). Identityinedelescemlimcesmndcenientsmp. 43-

60). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

ParkS,S..(1986) 1"'--" run-.0. ‘-.1--.-.".1-‘.o
San Francisco: Harper8Row.

Perry,W.G. (1970). o 1 0' ‘ ‘01 -. v... ‘ 1' -. 0.‘ ‘0911‘1 '11‘ o ‘0‘
years. New York: Holt, Rinehart, 8 Winston.

Pipp,S., Jennings, S., Shaver, P, Lamborn, 8., 8Fischer, K. W. (1985).
Adolescent theories about the development of their relationships with

parents. JoiirnaLoLEeLsonaliiyendﬁoeialﬂychology. 4.8. 991- 1001.

Potvin, R. H, 8Lee, C. F. (1982). Adolescent rellglon Adevelopmental
approach SecieloelceLAnaIysis.§3.131-.144

Potvin, R. H, 8Sloane, D. M. (1985). Parental control, age, and religious
practice. BeyieinLoLBeﬂgioueBeseaLch. 21. 3-14.

Quintana, S. M., 8 Lapsley, D. K. (1987). Adolescent attachment and ego
identity: A structural equations approach to the continuity of adaptation.
JourneletedeLescemaeseaLch. 2. 393409.

Ragan, C. Mahony, H. N., 8Beit-l-l,allahmi B. (1980). Psychologists and
religion: ProfeSSIonal factors and personal belIef Beyje__o_f_Beligjeue
BeseaLch. 21, 208-217.

Rice, K. G. (1990). Attachment in adolescence: A narrative and meta-analytic
review. JoumLotloiiihendAdolescence. 19. 511-538.

145

Rice, K. G, Cole, C. A, 8Lapsley, D. K. (1990). Separation-individuation family
cohesion, and adjustment to college. Measurement validation and test of

atheoretical model. W. 31, 195-202.

Rice, K. G., 8 Whaley, T. J. (1994). A short-tenn longitudinal study of within-
semester stability and change in attachment and college student

adjustment. W. 35. 324-330.

Sloane, D. M., 8Potvin, R. H. (1983). Age differences in adolescent
religiousness. WWO. 25. 142- 154

Spilka, B, Hood, R. W., 8Gorsuch, R. L. (1985). WWW
empiﬂeajeppmeen. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice-Hall.

Starbuck, E. D. (1899). IhepsyehdldgLQImligien. New York: Charles

Scribner’s Sons.

Steele, 1.. (1986). Developmental psychology and spiritual development. In S. L.

Jones (Ed) EsycheloguntheLhﬁsiianiaMinimducionLLeader
(pp. 95-117). Grand Rapid, MI: Baker.

Stephen, J., Fraser, E., 8 Marcia, J. E. (1992). Moratorium-achievement (mama)
cycles in lifespan identity development: Value orientations and reasoning
system correlates. JQIJLDEIDLAdeIeSQeDQe. 15. 283-300.

Tan, A., Kendis, R., Fine, J. 8Porac, J. (1977). Ashort measure of Eriksonian
ego identity JoumaLoLBeLsenaIItLAssessmem. .41. 279-284.

Ullman, C- (1989). WWW
9501919150. New York: Plenum Press.

Watson, P. J., Howard, R. Hood, R. W, 8Morris, R. J. (1988). Age and
religious orientation. ReylemLBeIigieueBeeeamh, 29, 271-280.

Waterman, A. S. (1982). Identity development from adolescence to adulthood:
An extension of theory and a review of research. Qeyelepmenjai

Esychelogy.18. 341-358.

White, K. M., Speisman, J. C. Costos, D. 8Smith, A. (1987). Relationship

maturity: Aconceptual and empirical approach. MW
Dexeionmeni.18.81-101.

146

Worthington, E. L. (1989). Religious faith across the lifespan Implications for
counseling and research. IheCQuneeimgﬁyehelegisi. 11, 555-612.

Youniss, J. 8Smollar, J. (1985). Adelescemielandnsmmmmhemners.
andiriends. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

HIGRN STRTE UN I.V

llllllllllllzlllllll ollljll ll lllllIIIllIllIlIIlI's