The Experts below are selected from a list of 13677 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jacob A. Belzen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Ein Ende, das zum Anfang wurde: die Zeitschrift für Religionspsychologie, 1907-1913: zur (Vor)Geschichte der IAPR (1/4) - The end that turned into a new beginning: the journal for the Psychology of Religion, 1907-1913: on the (pre)history of the Inte
Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 2013Co-Authors: Jacob A. BelzenAbstract:In 2014, the International Association for the Psychology of Religion (IAPR) will have its centennial, and so will its scientific journal, the present Archive for the Psychology of Religion [Archiv für Religionspsychologie, ARp]. This first article on IAPR’s (pre)history analyses the fate of the forerunner of ARp, which was published from 1907-1913. When Psychology in general began to develop as an empirical, research-based "scientific discipline" since the midst of the 19th century, the Psychology of Religion became a prominent application of that "new" science of Psychology, involving many of the founding fathers of present day Psychology. Shortly after evoking these beginnings, the focus of the present article turns to the development of early scientific infrastructure for the Psychology of Religion. While the Psychology of Religion was initiated by European scholars such as Fechner (1801-1887) and Wundt (1832-1920), it was the organizer of American Psychology in general who started the first journal in this field, G. Stanley Hall (1844-1924). Through his European admirer Gustav Vorbrodt (1860-1929), Hall’s journal may have been an inspiration to the founding of the first European journal for the Psychology of Religion, the German-speaking Zeitschrift für Religionspsychologie. Most likely the psychiatrist Johannes Bresler (1866-1942) took the initiative to start this journal and had invited pastor Gustav Vorbrodt (1860-1929), who had already repeatedly and vigorously called for psychological study of Religion, to join him as editor. Consequently, the subtitle of the journal was ‘Grenzfragen der Theologie und der Medizin [Boundary Questions in Theology and Medicine].’ The present paper discusses both Vorbrodt’s and Bresler’s work in the realm of the Psychology of Religion, as it does the contributions of two further editors; the philosopher-historian of Religion Georg Runze (1852-1938), an honorary professor at Berlin University, and Otto Klemm (1884-1939), a collaborator of Wilhelm Wundt and later the director of the latter’s psychological laboratory in Leipzig and the first to hold a professorship for applied Psychology. Several reasons are discussed to answer the question why the Zeitschrift für Religionspsychologie ceased publishing. Based on empirical-archival research, special attention is given to scholarly disagreements (and rivalry) behind the transition of the Zeitschrift für Religionspsychologie to the new Archiv für Religionspsychologie
-
The comeback of the Psychology of Religion: the aims of the present volume
Psychology of Religion, 2011Co-Authors: Jacob A. BelzenAbstract:“The Psychology of Religion is back. It is alive and kicking!” If that were the main message of the present volume, or even of this introduction, one would immediately need to raise some critical questions. We should at least ask why this assertion should count as special, as something worth mentioning, as anything new. Is it, for example, “news” that this branch of Psychology is “back?” Many psychologists have never heard anything about the Psychology of Religion; a great number of them would be sincerely amazed if one were to ask their opinion about it. To the best of their knowledge, nothing like the “Psychology of Religion” exists; they wouldn’t have a clue what that is, could be, or should be. And many contemporaries who are or would be interested in a scholarly approach to the study of Religion would perhaps be equally puzzled upon hearing the claim this essay opens with: unlike most present-day psychologists, they may have heard about the Psychology of Religion, but only as something from the past, as something the founding fathers of Psychology at large had been involved in, but that, for whatever reasons, already no longer existed by World War I. There have indeed been excellent scholars, well acquainted with the history of Psychology, and themselves involved in the field of research on Religion, who have declared the Psychology of Religion “dead” outright. Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, an Israeli-American psychologist who published extensive research on Religion, asserted in 1974 in the leading Journal for the History of the Behavioral Sciences that the Psychology of Religion ceased to exist by 1930 (Beit-Hallahmi, 1974, p. 87). And already in 1953, Jan Hendrik van den Berg, a leading international spokesman of the phenomenological movement in Psychology and the first professor of Psychology to be appointed at a Dutch theological faculty (Belzen, 2007), determined the “death” of Psychology of Religion to have occurred in 1921 (van den Berg, 1953, p. 36). That claims such as those of Beit-Hallahmi and van den Berg can be and have been refuted (Belzen, 2008), is not an issue to enter into right now: the existence and proliferation of their opinion is what matters here.
-
A political end to a pioneering career: Marianne Beth and the Psychology of Religion
Religions, 2011Co-Authors: Jacob A. BelzenAbstract:Although forgotten in both Religionswissenschaft (the Science of Religion) and Psychology, Marianne Beth (1880-1984), initially trained as a lawyer and already in 1928 called a "leading European woman", must be considered as one of the female pioneers of these fields. She has been active especially in the Psychology of Religion, a field in which she, together with her husband Karl Beth, founded a research institute, an international organization and a journal. In 1932, the Beths organized in Vienna (where Karl was a professor) the largest conference ever in the history of the Psychology of Religion. Because of her Jewish descent, Marianne Beth fled to the USA when Austria was annexed by Nazi Germany in 1938. This brought an abrupt end to her career as researcher and writer. The article reconstructs Marianne Beth"s path into Psychology, analyzes some of her work and puts her achievements in an international perspective.
-
towards cultural Psychology of Religion principles approaches applications
2010Co-Authors: Jacob A. BelzenAbstract:Principles.- Building Bridges.- A Hermeneutical, Interdisciplinary Approach to the Study of Religion.- Cultural Psychology of Religion.- The Way Out of Contemporary Debates on the Object of the Discipline.- Approaches.- Methodological Issues.- When Psychology Turns to Spirituality.- The Question of the Specificity of Religion.- A Cultural Psychological Promise to the Study of Religiosity: Background and Context of the "Dialogical Self".- Applications.- Religion as Embodiment.- Religion, Culture and Psychopathology.- Psychopathology and Religion.- Religion and the Social Order.
-
Psychology of Religion: perspectives from cultural Psychology
Mental Health Religion & Culture, 2010Co-Authors: Jacob A. BelzenAbstract:After a brief introduction, this paper tries to establish what type of Psychology the Psychology of Religion is. Having introduced cultural Psychology in general, some theories applicable in research on Religion are presented, and some examples of cultural psychological research of religious phenomena are discussed.
Raymond F Paloutzian - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Psychology of Religion in the World
Revista Pistis Praxis, 2017Co-Authors: Raymond F PaloutzianAbstract:The Psychology of Religion used to be a small and little known field. Although a few pockets of work in the area were done when Psychology began, it was functionally nonexistent for 1/3 of Psychology’s history, and received little attention for most of the rest of it. However, in the past 20 years the field has become vast in scope. It now intersects all subfields of general Psychology. Also, the Psychology of Religion no longer exists only in Western countries. It is now an international field with research being conducted worldwide. This article summarizes this trend and documents Psychology of Religion in the world and in Brazil as a part of it. The need for a multilevel interdisciplinary approach to research and theory is highlighted, as a way to synthesize knowledge of religiousness cross-culturally and trans-religiously. Future research should invoke a meaningmaking model in order to examine not merely observable religious behaviors, beliefs, or experiences, but their underlying roots, i.e., their meanings and attributions made about them. Such research can help us eliminate barriers between disciplines, cultures, Religions, and nations.
-
handbook of the Psychology of Religion and spirituality
2005Co-Authors: Raymond F Paloutzian, Crystal L ParkAbstract:Part I: Foundations of the Psychology of Religion. Paloutzian, Park, Integrative Themes in the Current Science of the Psychology of Religion. Zinnbauer, Pargament, Religiousness and Spirituality. Hill, Measurement in the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality: Current Status and Evaluation. Hood Jr., Belzen, Research Methods in the Psychology of Religion. Corveleyn, Luyten, Psychodynamic Psychologies and Religion: Past, Present, and Future. Kirkpatrick, Evolutionary Psychology: An Emerging New Foundation for the Psychology of Religion. Part II: Religion through the Developmental Lens. Boyatzis, Religious and Spiritual Development in Childhood. Levenson, Aldwin, D'Mello, Religious Development from Adolescence to Middle Adulthood. McFadden, Points of Connection: Gerontology and the Psychology of Religion. Mahoney, Tarakeshwar, Religion's Role in Marriage and Parenting in Daily Life and during Family Crises. Part III: Religion and Basic Psychology Subdisciplines. Newberg, Newberg, The NeuroPsychology of Religious and Spiritual Experience. Ozorak, Cognitive Approaches to Religion. Emmons, Emotion and Religion. Piedmont, The Role of Personality in Understanding Religious and Spiritual Constructs. Donahue, Nielsen, Religion, Attitudes, and Social Behavior. Part IV: The Construction and Expression of Religion. Park, Religion and Meaning. Exline, Rose, Religious and Spiritual Struggles. Paloutzian, Religious Conversion and Spiritual Transformation: A Meaning-System Analysis. Hood Jr., Mystical, Spiritual, and Religious Experiences. Spilka, Religious Practice, Ritual, and Prayer. Altemeyer, Hunsberger, Fundamentalism and Authoritarianism. McCullough, Bono, Root, Religion and Forgiveness. Geyer, Baumeister, Religion, Morality, and Self-Control: Values, Virtues, and Vices. Part V: Psychology of Religion and Applied Areas. Oman, Thoresen, Do Religion and Spirituality Influence Health? Miller, Kelley, Relationships of Religiosity and Spirituality with Mental Health and Psychopathology. Pargament, Ano,Wachholtz, The Religious Dimension of Coping: Advances in Theory, Research, and Practice. Shafranske, The Psychology of Religion in Clinical and Counseling Psychology. Giacalone, Jurkiewicz, Fry, From Advocacy to Science: The Next Steps in Workplace Spirituality Research. Silberman, Religious Violence, Terrorism, and Peace: A Meaning-System Analysis. Park, Paloutzian, One Step toward Integration and an Expansive Future.
-
The Psychology of Religion.
Annual review of psychology, 2002Co-Authors: Robert A. Emmons, Raymond F PaloutzianAbstract:This chapter discusses progress in the Psychology of Religion by highlighting its rapid growth during the past 25 years. Recent conceptual and empirical developments are described, with an emphasis on the cognitive and affective basis of religious experience within personality and social Psychology. Religion and spirituality as domains of study, as well as being common and important process variables that touch a large portion of human experience, are highlighted. Movement away from the previously dominant measurement paradigm is noted, and particularly promising directions suggestive of an emerging interdisciplinary paradigm are described.
Lee A Kirkpatrick - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Precis: Attachment, Evolution, and the Psychology of Religion
Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 2006Co-Authors: Lee A KirkpatrickAbstract:In this summary of my recent book (Kirkpatrick, 2004), I outline a general theoretical approach for the Psychology of Religion and develop one component of it in detail. First I review arguments and research demonstrating the utility of attachment theory for understanding many aspects of religious belief and behavior, particularly within modern Christianity. I then introduce evolutionary Psychology as a general paradigm for Psychology and the social sciences, arguing that Religion is not an adaptation in the evolutionary sense but rather a byproduct of numerous psychological systems that evolved for other adaptive purposes, of which the attachment system is just one example. I conclude by summarizing numerous advantages of this framework over other extant approaches to the Psychology of Religion.
-
Toward an evolutionary Psychology of Religion and personality
Journal of Personality, 1999Co-Authors: Lee A KirkpatrickAbstract:Evolutionary Psychology is an emerging paradigm for the social sciences that offers a powerful metatheoretical framework for personality Psychology and, as I attempt to demonstrate in this article, for the Psychology of Religion as well. I argue that Religion is not an evolved adaptation; rather, the diverse range of beliefs, behavior, and experience that we collectively refer to as Religion emerge as byproducts of numerous, domain-specific psychological mechanisms that evolved to solve other (mundane) adaptive problems. These include mechanisms for reasoning about the natural world (naive physics and biology), about other people’ minds (naive Psychology), and about specific kinds of interpersonal relationships (attachment, kinship, social exchange, coalitions, status hierarchies).
-
an attachment theory approach Psychology of Religion
International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 1992Co-Authors: Lee A KirkpatrickAbstract:The purpose of this essay is to demonstrate that attachment theory, as origi- nally proposed by John Bowlby and subsequently refined by a host of other researchers, provides a powerful framework for integrating research and theory concerning the Psychology of Religion. The essay begins with a brief over- view of contemporary models of attachment, with particular emphasis on adult attachment relationships. Selected literature is reviewed concerning a variety of topics in the Psychology of Religion, including research on images of God, conversion, and prayer, and attachment theory is shown to provide a useful conceptual framework for integrating these findings. It is argued that extending attachment theory in this direction may benefit Religion researchers as well as social and developmental psychologists interested in such topics as interpersonal relationships, stress and coping, and loneliness.
David M Wulff - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Psychology of Religion classic and contemporary
1996Co-Authors: David M WulffAbstract:Introduction: The Psychology of Religion in a Changing World. The Formal Beginnings: Three Traditions. The Biological Foundations of Religion. Behavioral and Comparative Theories of Religion. Religion in the Laboratory. The Correlation Study of Religion. The Perspective of Sigmund Freud. Object-Relations Theory and Religion. Erik H. Erikson: Religion in the Human Life Cycle. C. J. Jung and the Analytical Tradition. William James and His Legacy. The German Descriptive Tradition. The American Humanistic Synthesis. Epilogue. Glossary. References. Source Notes. Picture Credits. Indexes.
-
Betwixt the Object and the Eye of the Beholder: Thoughts on Making the Psychology of Religion More Interesting
International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 1996Co-Authors: David M WulffAbstract:Students disappointed in the Psychology of Religion may be overwhelmed by its pluralism or looking for answers to inappropriate questions. Yet it is also true that the Psychology of Religion is sometimes narrowly conceived, inappropriately reduction- istic, or preoccupied with what is obvious. Norager's recommendation that the field reduce its allegiance to Psychology and give Religion a larger voice is heartily endorsed, though traditional religious Psychology may be less helpful than Narager anticipates. Incorporating the new perspectives and insights of the hermeneutic-in- terpretive literature, in conjunction with closer collaboration with our research participants, should also help to make the Psychology of Religion a more interesting and influential field of study.
-
Psychology of Religion classic and contemporary views
1991Co-Authors: David M WulffAbstract:The Psychology of Religion The Biological Foundations of Religion Behavioral and Comparative Theories of Religion Religion in the Laboratory The Correlation Study of Religion The Perspective of Sigmund Freud Object-Relations Theory and Religion Erik H. Erikson: Religion in the Human Life Cycle C G Jung and the Analytical Tradition William James and His Legacy The German Descriptive Tradition The American Humanistic Synthesis Epilogue Glossary References Source Notes Author Index Subject Index.
Herman Westerink - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Spirituality in Psychology of Religion: A Concept in Search of Its Meaning:
Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 2012Co-Authors: Herman WesterinkAbstract:Summary In this article it is argued that the apparent vagueness and broadness of the concept ‘spirituality’ and the difficulty in finding an agreeable definition for it are related to the different meanings of the concept within different intellectual and religious contexts and, subsequently, to different valuations of spirituality in relation to Religion and lived religiosity. This article also examines the concept spirituality in the context of the Psychology of Religion’s historical entanglement with theology. On the one hand, the Psychology of Religion has emancipated itself from theological discourse and theological institutions. On the other hand, the Psychology of Religion is still closely connected to a modernist theological project of founding religiousness in a province of the mind that resists religious critique of traditional contents and institutional structures in a secular era. The author pleas for more differentiation between theistic and non-theistic dimensions of the concept spirituality.
-
Participation and Giving Ultimate Meaning: Exploring the Entanglement of Psychology of Religion and Phenomenology of Religion in the Netherlands
Numen, 2010Co-Authors: Herman WesterinkAbstract:Psychology of Religion in the Netherlands is rediscovering its historic entanglement with phenomenology of Religion in the context of a current transition emancipating itself from the theological objective of re-establishing the relation between theology and faith practice (from the 1960s onwards), and developing into a discipline focusing on “lived Religion” and interculturality in closer cooperation with religious studies. In this article the entanglement of Psychology of Religion and phenomenology of Religion is explored starting with the writings of Gerardus van der Leeuw, his interest in a psychological method in phenomenology and his reception of Levy-Bruhl’s concept of mystic participation. It is argued that Psychology of Religion in the Netherlands after the Second World War emerged out of the critique by Fokke Sierksma of the phenomenological method in the context of emancipating the science of Religion ( godsdienstwetenschap ) from theology, and the reaction this provoked in the work of Han Fortmann, who defended Levy-Bruhl and Van der Leeuw in order to “save” religiosity in a modern secularized world. This theological objective further colored developments in Psychology of Religion, notably the current discussion on “giving ultimate meaning” ( zingeving ). In the light of an expected closer cooperation between Psychology of Religion and religious studies, a critical reflection on the often unreflected theological positions and objectives in discussions on “giving ultimate meaning” is pleaded for.
