Revisiting the Religious Openness Hypothesis in a Migration Context: The Case of Muslims with a Turkish Migration Background in Germany
In: Journal of Empirical TheologySearch for other papers by Sarah Demmrich in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Havagül Akçe in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
The religious openness hypothesis, which states that religious traditions have the potential to integrate faith with intellect, is examined in this study within a migration context for the first time. Based on two lines of research, our central question is whether the sociological context or the Islamic tradition per se explains the (in)compatibility of faith and intellect orientation and their relation to psychological openness. Religious openness, psychological openness (ambiguity tolerance and acculturation strategies) and religiosity were measured among Muslims with a Turkish migration background in Germany. Our findings show a non-significant relationship between faith and intellect orientation and we therefore propose that the secular context is the crucial explaining factor. Religious reflection also moderates the link between different forms of religiosity and ambiguity tolerance. Finally, heterogeneous religious rationalities were uncovered that challenge the negative view of Muslims as fanatic, closed-minded people which prevails among the German majority society.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Abbe, A., Gulick, L. M. V., & Herman, J. (2007). Cross-cultural competence in Army leaders: A conceptual and empirical foundation. US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
-
Abdalati, H. (1993). Islam in focus. American Trust.
-
Altemeyer, B., & Hunsberger, B. (1992). Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 2, 113–133.
-
Badi, J., & Tajdin, M. (Eds.) (2004). Creative thinking: An Islamic perspective. International Islamic University Malaysia.
-
Barry, D. T. (2001). Development of a new scale for measuring acculturation: The East Acculturation Measure (EAAM). Journal of Immigrant Health, 3, 193–197.
-
Batson, C. D., Schoenrade, P., & Ventis, L. W. (1993). Religion and the individual: A social-psychological perspective. Oxford University Press.
-
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology, 46, 25–34.
-
Boos-Nünning, U., & Nieke, W. (1982). Orientierungs- und Handlungsmuster türkischer Jugendlicher zur Bewältigung der Lebenssituation in der BRD [Orientation and action patterns of Turkish adolescents for coping with the living situation in the FRG]. Psychosozial, 16, 63–90.
-
Brandt, M. J., & Reyna, C. (2010). The role of prejudice and the need for closure in religious fundamentalism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 715–725.
-
Budner, S. (1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30, 29–50.
-
Caligiuri, P., & Tarique, I. (2012). Dynamic cross-cultural competencies and global leadership effectiveness. Journal of World Business, 47, 612–622.
-
Çoştu, Y. (2009). Dine Normatif ve Popüler Yaklaşım: “Bir Dini Yönelim Ölçeği Denemesi” [Normative and popular approach to religion: “A Religious Orientation Scale Model”]. Journal of Divinity Faculty of Hitit Üniversity, 8, 119–139.
-
Demmrich, S., & Blume, M. (2018). Nichtreligiosität und “religiöse Unentschlossenheit” bei türkeistämmigen Migrantinnen und Migranten in Deutschland: Eine erste Beschreibung [Non-religiousness and “religious indecisiveness” among Turkish migrants in Germany]. Conflict & Communication, 17, 1–14.
-
Demmrich, S., & Akgül, S. (2020). Bullying experience among adolescents with a Turkish migration background in Germany: Ethnic class composition, integration, and religiosity as protective factors? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17, 1–16.
-
Diehl, C., & Koenig, M. (2009). Religiosity of first and second generation Turkish migrants: A phenomenon and some attempts at a theoretical explanation. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 38, 300–319.
-
Dover, H., Miner, M., & Dowson, M. (2007). The nature and structure of Muslim religious reflection. Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 2, 189–210.
-
Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1948). Intolerance of ambiguity as emotional and perceptual personality variable. Personality of Personality, 18, 108–123.
-
Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1951). Personality theory and perception. In R. R. Blake & G. V. Ramsey (Eds.), Perception: An approach to personality (pp. 92–160). Ronald.
-
Ghorbani, N., Watson, P. J., Chen, Z., & Dover, H. (2013). Varieties of openness in Tehran and Qom: Psychological and religious parallels of faith and intellect-oriented Islamic religious reflection. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 16, 123–137.
-
Ghorbani, N., Watson, P. J., Geranmayepour, S., & Chen, Z. (2014). Measuring Muslim spirituality: Relationships of Muslim experiential religiousness with religious and psychological adjustment in Iran. Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 8, 77–94.
-
Ghorbani, N., Watson, P. J., Sarmast, Z., & Chen, Z. (2018). Post-critical beliefs and religious reflection: Religious openness hypothesis in Iranian university and Islamic seminary students. Journal of Empirical Theology, 31, 49–70.
-
Golkar, S. (2012). Cultural engineering under authoritarian regimes: Islamization of universities in postrevolutionary Iran. Digest of Middle East Studies, 21, 1–23.
-
Güngör, D., Fleischmann, F., Phalet, K., & Maliepaard, M. (2013). Contextualizing religious acculturation. European Psychologist, 18, 203–214.
-
Haque, A. (2004). Psychology from Islamic perspective: Contributions of early Muslim scholars and challenges to contemporary Muslim psychologists. Journal of Religion and Health, 43, 357–377.
-
Herman, J. L., Stevens, M. J., Bird, A., Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (2010). The tolerance for ambiguity scale: Towards a more refined measure for international management research. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 34, 58–65.
-
Hill, P. C., & Edwards, E. (2013). Measurement in the psychology of religiousness and spirituality: Existing measures and new frontiers. In K. I. Pargament, J. J. Exline, & J. W. Jones (Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology. APA handbook of psychology, religion, and spirituality (Vol. 1): Context, theory, and research (pp. 51–77). American Psychological Association.
-
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: National differences in thinking and organizing. Sage.
-
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind – intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. Mc Graw Hill.
-
Jones, A. E., & Elliott, M. (2017). Examining social desirability in measures of religion and spirituality using the bogus pipeline. Review of Religious Research, 59, 47–64.
-
Kamble, S. V., Watson, P. J., Marigoudar, S., & Chen, Z. (2014). Varieties of openness and religious commitment in India: Relationships of attitudes toward Hinduism, Hindu religious reflection, and religious schema. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 36, 172–198.
-
Khan, Z. H., Watson, P. J., & Chen, Z. (2018). Religious reflection in Pakistan: Further evidence of integration between Muslim faith and intellect. Journal of Beliefs & Values, 39, 258–262.
-
MacDonald, A. P. (1970). Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability. Psychological Reports, 26, 791–798.
-
Mansour, N. (2011). Science teachers’ views of science and religion vs. the Islamic perspective: Conflicting or compatible? Science Education, 95, 281–309.
-
McCrae, R. R. (1996). Social consequences of experiential openness. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 323–337.
-
McLain, D. L. (1993). The MSTAT-I: A new measure of an individual’s tolerance for ambiguity. Educational and psychological measurement, 53, 183–189.
-
O’Connor, P. (1952). Ethnocentrism, “intolerance of ambiguity,” and abstract reasoning ability. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 526–530.
-
Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17–59). Academic Press.
-
Pollack, D. (2014). Wahrnehmung und Akzeptanz religiöser Vielfalt in ausgewählten Ländern Europas: Erste Beobachtungen [Perception and acceptance of religious diversity in selected European countries: Initial observations]. In D. Pollack, O. Müller, G. Rosta, N. Friedrichs, & A. Yendell (Eds.), Grenzen der Toleranz. Wahrnehmung und Akzeptanz religiöser Vielfalt in Europa (pp. 13–34). Springer.
-
Pollack, D., Müller, O., & Demmrich, S. (forthcoming). Religious fundamentalism among Muslims of Turkish origin in Germany. Paper submitted for peer-review.
-
Pollack, D., & Pickel, G. (2007). Religious individualization or secularization? Testing hypotheses of religious change – the case of Eastern and Western Germany. The British Journal of Sociology, 58, 603–632.
-
Sagioglou, C., & Forstmann, M. (2013). Activating Christian religious concepts increases intolerance of ambiguity and judgment certainty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 933–939.
-
Sedikides, C., & Gebauer, J. E. (2010). Religiosity as self-enhancement: A meta-analysis of the relation between socially desirable responding and religiosity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 17–36.
-
Shimamoto, T. (2008). The question of “self-knowledge” (maʾrifat an-nafs) in Islam: Mortazā Motahharī’s theory of the “Perfect Man” (ensān-e kāmel). Journal of the Interdisciplinary Study of Monotheistic Religions, 4, 25–45.
-
Tekke, M., Watson, P. J., Ismail, N. A. H., & Chen, Z. (2015). Muslim religious openness and ilm: Relationships with Islamic religious reflection, religious schema, and religious commitments in Malaysia. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 37, 295–320.
-
Watson, P. J. (2019). Psychology and religion within an ideological surround. Brill Research Perspectives in Religion and Psychology, 1, 1–89.
-
Watson, P. J., Chen, Z., & Hood, R. W. (2011). Biblical foundationalism and religious reflection: Polarization of faith and intellect-oriented epistemologies within a Christian ideological surround. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 39, 111–121.
-
Watson, P. J., Chen, Z., & Morris, R. J. (2014). Varieties of quest and the religious openness hypothesis within religious fundamentalist and biblical foundationalist ideological surrounds. Religions, 5, 1–20.
-
Watson, P. J., Chen, Z., Morris, R. J., & Stephenson, E. (2015). Religious openness hypothesis: III. Defense against secularism within fundamentalist and biblical foundationalist ideological surrounds. Journal of Psychology & Christianity, 34, 258–262.
-
Watson, P. J., Ghorbani, N., Vartanian, M., & Chen, Z. (2015). Religious openness hypothesis: II. Religious reflections and orientations, mystical experience, and psychological openness of Christian in Iran. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 34, 114–124.
-
Watson, P. J., & Morris, R. J. (2006). Intolerance of ambiguity within a religious ideological surround: Christian translations and relationships with religious orientation, need for cognition, and uncertainty response. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 28, 81–101.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 889 | 433 | 16 |
| Full Text Views | 61 | 13 | 3 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 118 | 14 | 8 |
Revisiting the Religious Openness Hypothesis in a Migration Context: The Case of Muslims with a Turkish Migration Background in Germany
In: Journal of Empirical TheologySearch for other papers by Sarah Demmrich in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Havagül Akçe in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
The religious openness hypothesis, which states that religious traditions have the potential to integrate faith with intellect, is examined in this study within a migration context for the first time. Based on two lines of research, our central question is whether the sociological context or the Islamic tradition per se explains the (in)compatibility of faith and intellect orientation and their relation to psychological openness. Religious openness, psychological openness (ambiguity tolerance and acculturation strategies) and religiosity were measured among Muslims with a Turkish migration background in Germany. Our findings show a non-significant relationship between faith and intellect orientation and we therefore propose that the secular context is the crucial explaining factor. Religious reflection also moderates the link between different forms of religiosity and ambiguity tolerance. Finally, heterogeneous religious rationalities were uncovered that challenge the negative view of Muslims as fanatic, closed-minded people which prevails among the German majority society.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 889 | 433 | 16 |
| Full Text Views | 61 | 13 | 3 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 118 | 14 | 8 |
