Derleme

A Review of Research on the Role of Different Types of Religiosity in Terror Management

Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2 30 Haziran 2024
PDF İndir
EN TR

A Review of Research on the Role of Different Types of Religiosity in Terror Management

Abstract

This review paper aims to reveal the role of different types of religiosity based on research addressing religiosity in terms of in-group and out-group distinction within the scope of Terror Management Theory (TMT). Studies point out two important results of the phenomenon: the first is the fact that general religiosity focusing on only one aspect of religiosity (religious belongingness, afterlife belief, etc.) to measure religiosity increases worldview defense, supporting the hypothesis of mortality salience. The second is the fact that different religious orientations (intrinsic, fundamentalist, etc.) cause various reactions, depending on their unique characteristics when mortality is salient. In the current study, possible reasons for the differences between research findings are discussed. In order to clarify the roles that different types of religiosity play in terror management, a classification based on the strong-flexible and exclusive-inclusive poles of the “belief” and “belonging” dimensions suggested by Sarouglu has been proposed. It has been argued that religiosity types would function in terror management in different ways, depending on the classification in which they are placed. For example, when the religious worldview is threatened, the strong-exclusive pattern (e.g., religious fundamentalism) can lead to more negative reactions, while the strong-inclusive pattern (e.g., intrinsic religiosity) can be associated with positive processes in inter-group relationships. Future research on this classification and types of religiosity can provide unique contributions to developing TMT. On the other hand, knowing the roles of different forms of religiosity in managing existential concerns may be of therapeutic benefit in coping with death, bereavement, grief and related processes.

Keywords

Kaynakça

  1. Abeyta AA, Blake EN (2020) The existential implications of individual differences in religious defensive and growth orientations: Fundamentalism, quest religiosity, and intrinsic/extrinsic religiosity. In The Science of Religion, Spirituality, and Existentialism (Eds KE Vail III, C Routledge):351–357. Cambridge, MA, Academic Press.
  2. Aksüt-Çiçek, S. (2008) Dindarlık ile saldırganlık arasındaki etkileşimin terör yönetimi kuramı çerçevesinde incelenmesi (Yüksek lisans tezi). Mersin, Mersin Üniversitesi.
  3. Allport GW (1966) The Religious context of prejudice. J Sci Study Relig, 5:447–457.
  4. Allport GW, Ross JM (1967) Personal religious orientation and prejudice. J Pers Soc Psychol, 5:432–443.
  5. Alparslan K (2022) Ölüm kaygısı ve dindarlık arasındaki ilişki üzerine bir değerlendirme. Dini Araştırmalar, 25:529-552.
  6. Altemeyer B (2003) Why do religious fundamentalists tend to be prejudiced? Int J Psychol Relig, 13:17–28.
  7. Altemeyer B, Hunsberger B (1992) Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice. Int J Psychol Relig, 2:113–133.
  8. Arrowood RB, Coleman TJ, Swanson SB, Hood RW, Cox CR (2018) Death, quest, and self-esteem: re-examining the role of self-esteem and religion following mortality salience. Relig Brain Behav, 8:69–76.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

İngilizce

Konular

Din Psikolojisi , Kişilik ve Bireysel Farklılıklar

Bölüm

Derleme

Erken Görünüm Tarihi

21 Ocak 2024

Yayımlanma Tarihi

30 Haziran 2024

Gönderilme Tarihi

18 Temmuz 2023

Kabul Tarihi

28 Eylül 2023

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2024 Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

JAMA
1.Alparslan K, Kuşdil ME. A Review of Research on the Role of Different Types of Religiosity in Terror Management. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar. 2024;16:289–305.

Cited By

Creative Commons Lisansı
Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar Creative Commons Atıf-Gayriticari-Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.