Validity
Convergent/Concurrent
When items on the avoidance and anxiety subscales were reverse scored, they correlated positively with intrin-
sic religiosity (0.60 and 0.29, respectively), doctrinal orthodoxy (0.59 and 0.23, respectively), and a loving image
of God (0.74 and 0.28, respectively) ( Rowatt & Kirkpatrick, 2002 ).
Divergent/Discriminant
When items were reverse scored, relatively weak correlations were observed between avoidance and anxiety
subscales with death anxiety ( 20.17 and 20.12, respectively), manifest anxiety ( 20.09 and 20.25, respectively),
positive affect (0.17 for both avoidance and anxiety subscales), and negative affect ( 20.12 and 20.25, respec-
tively) ( Rowatt & Kirkpatrick, 2002 ).
Construct/Factor Analytic
A principal components analysis with oblique rotation ( N5374) yielded loadings for the avoidance and anxi-
ety subscales ranging from 0.81 to 0.87 and 0.74 to 0.94, respectively ( Rowatt & Kirkpatrick, 2002 ). Confirmatory
factor analyses were carried out via LISREL. With error variances allowed to correlate, the 9-item unidimensional
model provided a good fit (AGFI 50.91, NNFI 50.97, RMSEA 50.08,χ2
(18)557.78, p,0.0001). Likewise, the
two-dimensional model provided a good fit (AGFI 50.94, NNFI 50.98, RMSEA 50.06,χ2
(18)538.37, p,0.003).
Criterion/Predictive
The anxiety subscale positively predicts the anxiety dimension of adult attachment ( r50.29), manifest anxiety
(r50.25), neuroticism (0.31), a controlling image of God ( r50.35), and extrinsic religious motivation ( r50.38),
whereas it negatively predicts of agreeableness ( r50.21), a loving image of God ( r50.28), and intrinsic religious
motivation ( r50.29). The avoidance subscale is similarly predictive of the anxiety dimension of adult attachment
(r50.21), neuroticism ( r50.22), and especially a controlling image of God ( r50.55), and is strongly and
(inversely) predictive of a loving image of God ( r50.74), intrinsic religiosity ( r50.60), and doctrinal orthodoxy
(r50.59) ( Rowatt & Kirkpatrick, 2002 ).
Location
Rowatt, W.C., & Kirkpatrick, L.A. (2002). Two dimensions of attachment to God and their relation to affect,
religiosity, and personality constructs. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41(4) , 637/C0651.
Results and Comments
The theoretical importance of assessing attachment to God cannot be overemphasized given its importance as
a driving factor for health outcomes related to religious involvement ( Koenig et al., 2012 ). The scale is short and
has reasonable face validity, and so appears to provide a good measure of this dimension.
ATTACHMENT TO GOD SCALE
Avoidance Dimension
1.God seems impersonal to me.
2.God seems to have little or no interest in my personal
problems.
3.God seems to have little or no interest in my personal
affairs.
4.I have a warm relationship with God (R).
5.I feel that God is generally responsive to me (R).Anxiety Dimension
6.God sometimes seems responsive to my needs, but
sometimes not.
7.God’s reactions to me seem to be inconsistent.
8.God sometimes seems very warm and other times
very cold to me.
Notes :
(R) Reverse scored item.
Reproduced with permission.533 SINGLE DIMENSIONAL SCALES
V. VICES AND VIRTUES