False Self Scale-Relationship with God

1. Abstract

The False Self Scale-Relationship with God (FSS-RG) is a specialized psychometric instrument designed to evaluate the degree to which an individual experiences and enacts relational inauthenticity, behavioral suppression, and persona concealment within their personal relationship with God. Originally adapted from the relational false self paradigm developed by Susan Harter and operationalized in interpersonal contexts by Sippola, Buchanan, and Kehoe (2007), the FSS-RG translates core psychoanalytic and developmental constructs into the domain of the psychology of religion and spirituality. Comprising seven self-report items administered on a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree), the instrument measures the subjective sense that one must conceal unacceptable aspects of the self, alter one's emotional expressions, or manufacture a pious façade to secure divine approval or avoid divine rejection.

Psychometric evaluations across undergraduate, clinical, and religious community samples demonstrate that the FSS-RG possesses strong internal consistency, with Cronbach's alpha coefficients typically ranging from .78 to .87. Confirmatory factor analytic investigations support an essentially unidimensional structural model, wherein a single primary latent factor captures perceived divine-relational inauthenticity, accompanied by an identifiable method effect associated with a reverse-scored item reflecting authentic divine acceptance. The scale exhibits robust convergent validity through moderate-to-strong positive correlations with anxious and avoidant attachment to God as measured by the Attachment to God Inventory (AGI), religious scrupulosity, external religious orientation, shame-proneness, and psychological distress (anxiety, depression). Conversely, it demonstrates significant negative correlations with intrinsic religious motivation, perceived divine benevolence, secure attachment, and spiritual well-being. By operationalizing the theological and psychological intersection of authenticity and religious experience, the FSS-RG serves as an invaluable diagnostic and empirical tool for researchers and pastoral clinicians investigating spiritual struggles, religious deconstruction, and psychological flourishing.

2. Keywords

False Self Scale-Relationship with God, FSS-RG, false self behavior, authenticity with God, psychology of religion, attachment to God, relational authenticity, spiritual struggle, Winnicott, scrupulosity

3. Authors

The foundational interpersonal operationalization of this measure was formulated by Lorrie K. Sippola (Department of Psychology, University of Windsor), Christy M. Buchanan (Department of Psychology, Wake Forest University), and Sarah Kehoe (Wake Forest University) in their 2007 investigation of false self dynamics within adolescent peer and romantic dyads.

The adaptation of the scale to assess divine-human interactions—specifically formulating the False Self Scale-Relationship with God—was spearheaded within religious attachment and Christian psychology research programs, notably advanced by Richard Beck and colleagues at the Department of Psychology, Abilene Christian University, Texas, United States. Dr. Beck's laboratory adapted the item stems from Sippola et al. (2007) to examine authenticity, defensive theology, and affective attachment representations in divine relational functioning.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the False Self Scale-Relationship with God is to quantify an individual's propensity to present an altered, defensive, or inauthentic identity when engaging with the divine, rather than relating out of an integrated, transparent, and vulnerable core self. Rooted in both clinical psychodynamics and developmental social psychology, the scale addresses a critical lacuna in religious measurement: the qualitative distinction between outward religious compliance and inward emotional congruence. While traditional measures in the psychology of religion historically focused on explicit indices of religiosity—such as frequency of prayer, attendance at worship services, orthodoxy of theological belief, or general religious commitment—they often failed to capture the psychological reality of defensive posturing, religious masking, and the felt necessity of emotional self-censorship before God.

In clinical and pastoral contexts, the FSS-RG provides crucial insight into pathological forms of religious functioning. High scores on the instrument signal an underlying terror of abandonment or judgment, frequently manifesting as moral or religious scrupulosity, obsessive confession, spiritual perfectionism, and deep-seated existential isolation. Clinicians working with religiously affiliated clients experiencing faith crises, religious trauma, or chronic shame utilize the FSS-RG to discern whether the client's spirituality operates as a secure psychological sanctuary or as a compulsive performance arena that exacerbates psychological distress. By identifying specific areas where clients feel compelled to hide "unacceptable" emotions (such as anger, doubt, grief, or sexual desire) from God, therapists can facilitate interventions aimed at integrating disowned self-aspects and dismantling punitive, transactional God representations.

In empirical research, the FSS-RG facilitates the systematic exploration of religious coping, personality development, and interpersonal relationship functioning. Researchers employ the measure to test theoretical models linking parental attachment injuries to compensatory or corresponding relational patterns with God. It serves as an essential mediating and moderating variable in studies examining how relational authenticity in human spheres (e.g., romantic partnerships, parent-child bonds) mirrors or diverges from divine relational authenticity. Furthermore, the scale enables researchers to differentiate between benign religious devotion and neurotically motivated religious adherence, providing empirical clarity to longstanding sociological and psychological critiques regarding the potentially repressive nature of traditional religious systems.

5. Psychological Construct

The construct measured by the False Self Scale-Relationship with God is relational inauthenticity within the divine-human attachment bond. This construct reflects the cognitive, affective, and behavioral tendencies to suppress one's genuine thoughts, emotions, doubts, and perceived moral failures during prayer and contemplation, based on an internalized expectation that divine love and acceptance are strictly conditional. Conceptually, the construct is organized around several interrelated psychological dimensions:

1. Behavioral and Affective Concealment

This dimension encompasses the active suppression of genuine interior states. Individuals exhibiting high levels of concealment operate under the pervasive assumption that God cannot tolerate, or will harshly condemn, negative affective states such as anger, sorrow, resentment, or religious doubt. Consequently, the individual consciously or semiconsciously censors their authentic emotional voice during prayer, replacing raw emotional honesty with formulaic, socially or dogmatically approved petitions. Item 4 ("In order for God to like me, I cannot reveal certain things about myself to him") directly indexes this defensive withholding mechanism.

2. Role-Playing and Persona Construction

Rooted in the structural differentiation between true and false self functioning, this facet involves adopting an artificial, pious persona during divine interaction. The individual feels as though they are "performing" faith rather than inhabiting it. This creates a profound sense of internal dissonance, wherein the person experiences themselves as an impostor whose private reality is drastically divorced from their outward spiritual comportment. Items such as Item 3 ("I feel like I am a different person when I am interacting with God") and Item 5 ("I don't really act like my true self when I am interacting with God") measure this bifurcated self-state.

3. Perceived Conditional Regard and Performance Anxiety

Central to the false self construct is the belief that divine love, benevolence, and relational proximity are contingent upon flawless moral and devotional performance. The individual perceives God not as a source of unconditional grace or an omniscient refuge, but as a demanding, hyper-vigilant evaluator. This dynamic generates pervasive anxiety regarding behavioral compliance, encapsulated by Item 2 ("I feel I have to act a certain way to please God"). Under this psychological stance, the individual operates within a transactional paradigm where acceptance must be continuously earned through conformity.

4. Perceived Epistemic and Relational Alienation

Paradoxically, while Christian and theistic theologies uniformly emphasize divine omniscience—the doctrine that God knows every human thought intimately—individuals displaying high false self behavior experience a profound psychological alienation, feeling fundamentally unknown by God. Item 7 ("I feel that God doesn't know the 'true' me") reflects an emotional disconnect wherein the individual's psychological experience contradicts their formal theological beliefs. This state represents the culmination of prolonged false self maintenance: by consistently presenting a curated façade, the individual comes to feel that their authentic core is invisible, unloved, and structurally disconnected from the divine reality.

6. Theoretical Framework

The False Self Scale-Relationship with God is situated at the intersection of three foundational theoretical paradigms: psychoanalytic object relations theory, developmental self-perception theory, and attachment theory applied to religion.

Psychoanalytic Object Relations: Donald Winnicott

The primary conceptual progenitor of the false self construct is British psychoanalyst Donald W. Winnicott. In his seminal 1960 work, "Ego Distortion in Terms of True and False Self," Winnicott posited that the "True Self" represents the spontaneous, authentic, and creative core of the infant's somatic and psychic experience. For the True Self to flourish, the infant requires a "good-enough mother" who sensitively mirrors the infant's spontaneous gestures and provides a reliable "holding environment."

When the primary caregiver is repeatedly unresponsive, impinges upon the infant, or demands that the infant adapt to the caregiver's needs, the infant develops a defensive "False Self." This false self serves a protective function: it builds an exterior barrier of behavioral compliance to placate the caregiver, while shielding the vulnerable True Self from annihilation or devastating rejection. Transposed into the psychology of religion, an individual's internal working model of God can serve as an ultimate holding environment or, conversely, as the ultimate impinging caregiver. When God is internalized as an exacting, non-attuned authority, the individual construct a spiritual false self—presenting piety, feigned certainty, and moral rigidity to keep the divine pacified while the true, suffering self remains hidden in psychological exile.

Developmental Social Psychology: Susan Harter

While Winnicott conceived the false self largely as an intrapsychic defense against psychosis or profound trauma, developmental psychologist Susan Harter empirical operationalized "false self behavior" (FSB) within normative adolescent and adult development. Harter observed that during adolescence, individuals begin to perceive contradictory self-attributes across differing social contexts (e.g., being confident with peers but depressed with parents). When individuals feel that significant others do not accept their authentic attributes, they actively engage in false self behavior to gain social approval or avoid interpersonal conflict.

Harter demonstrated that false self behavior is highly context-specific rather than a static global trait. Individuals can be remarkably authentic with close friends while maintaining extensive false selves with parents or romantic partners. Sippola, Buchanan, and Kehoe (2007) adapted Harter's conceptualization to examine dyad-specific false self dynamics within adolescent romantic relationships. The FSS-RG represents the natural theoretical extension of Harter and Sippola's work: treating the divine-human relationship as a distinct relational context governed by specific perceived relational contingencies.

Attachment Theory Applied to Religion

The modern empirical framework for understanding human-divine interaction is grounded in attachment theory, originated by John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, and extended into religious psychology by Lee Kirkpatrick (1998) and Richard Beck and Angie McDonald (2004). Attachment theory posits that humans construct internal working models of self and others based on early relational experiences. Securely attached individuals possess models of self as worthy of love and models of others as responsive, available, and trustworthy.

Kirkpatrick posited that God often functions psychologically as an attachment figure—providing a "safe haven" in times of distress and a "secure base" for exploratory behavior. However, individuals exhibiting insecure attachment strategies interact with God through defensive paradigms. Insecure-anxious attachment manifests as chronic hyperactivating strategies—obsessive worry over divine abandonment, heightened vigilance, and excessive attempts to secure proximity. Insecure-avoidant attachment manifests as deactivating strategies—emotional detachment, suppressed vulnerability, and self-reliance. The FSS-RG captures the intrapsychic cost of these insecure attachment patterns: a false self is constructed precisely because the internal working model of God lacks the foundational security required for transparent relational exposure.

7. Validity

Empirical investigations have established strong evidence supporting the construct, convergent, discriminant, and criterion validity of the False Self Scale-Relationship with God.

Construct and Factorial Validity

Construct validity has been substantiated across independent religious cohorts, particularly within collegiate Christian populations and clinical outpatient settings. Studies employing structural equation modeling confirm that the scale's items tap into a unified psychological dimension distinct from generalized self-esteem or global inauthenticity. Factor analyses demonstrate that perceived inauthenticity with God functions as a coherent, latent psychological process with uniformly high factor loadings across diverse demographic subgroups.

Convergent Validity

The convergent validity of the FSS-RG has been demonstrated through robust correlations with established psychometric instruments measuring religious attachment, personality, and psychopathology:

• Attachment to God: Research utilizing the Attachment to God Inventory (AGI; Beck & McDonald, 2004) reveals statistically significant, moderate-to-strong positive correlations between the FSS-RG and both AGI-Anxiety (typically $r = .48$ to $.62, p < .001$) and AGI-Avoidance ($r = .35$ to $.51, p < .001$). Individuals who fear divine abandonment or who emotionally distance themselves from God consistently report higher levels of false self behavior.
• Spiritual Well-Being and Image of God: The scale correlates negatively with the Religious Well-Being subscale of the Spiritual Well-Being Scale (SWBS) ($r = -.42$ to $-.58, p < .001$) and with positive, loving God concepts (e.g., God as benevolent, forgiving, and close). Conversely, it correlates positively with authoritarian, critical, or distant God images ($r = .38$ to $.49, p < .001$).
• Psychological Distress and Vulnerability: The FSS-RG exhibits significant positive associations with measures of internalizing distress, including the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) ($r = .31$ to $.44, p < .01$) and generalized trait anxiety ($r = .33$ to $.46, p < .01$). Moreover, it demonstrates strong positive convergence with shame-proneness ($r = .40$ to $.53, p < .001$), highlighting the intimate connection between internalized toxic shame and the compulsion to present a sanitized persona to the divine.

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity is supported by weak or non-significant correlations with unrelated construct dimensions. Specifically, the FSS-RG demonstrates negligible correlations with social desirability measures, such as the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale ($r = -.08$ to $-.14, p > .05$), indicating that high scores do not merely reflect an inability or unwillingness to respond honestly to psychological questionnaires. Furthermore, while the FSS-RG correlates moderately with generalized, trait-level false self scales (e.g., Harter's global authenticity measures, $r = .32$ to $.41$), the magnitude of these correlations confirms that the FSS-RG captures substantial unique variance specific to the religious and divine domain, demonstrating that relational inauthenticity with God is not merely an epiphenomenon of global inauthenticity.

Criterion and Predictive Validity

In predictive validity studies, baseline scores on the FSS-RG prospectively predict negative religious coping, emotional exhaustion among clergy and ministry leaders, and long-term faith deconstruction or disaffiliation. Individuals endorsing high false self behavior at initial assessment are significantly more likely to experience chronic religious doubts accompanied by severe existential distress, rather than growth-oriented, exploratory doubt.

8. Reliability

The False Self Scale-Relationship with God exhibits high empirical reliability across multiple independent evaluations, demonstrating both strong internal consistency and temporal stability.

Internal Consistency

Across empirical studies conducted within university and community samples, the FSS-RG consistently yields strong internal consistency estimates. In initial validation cohorts within undergraduate Christian populations, Cronbach's alpha ($lpha$) coefficients have ranged between .78 and .87, demonstrating substantial homogeneity among the scale items. When evaluated via modern composite reliability metrics, McDonald's omega ($\omega$) typically equals or slightly exceeds the alpha values (e.g., $\omega = .82$ to $.88$), confirming that the measure maintains robust structural reliability even when tau-equivalence assumptions are relaxed.

Item-total correlations for the scale's six positively worded items (Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7) are uniformly high, consistently falling within the range of $r = .52$ to $.74$. Item 6 ("God loves and appreciates me for who I am"), which is reverse-scored, typically demonstrates a slightly lower but acceptable corrected item-total correlation ($r = .38$ to $.48$), reflecting the well-documented psychometric attenuation often observed with negatively keyed items.

Temporal Stability (Test-Retest Reliability)

Evaluations of temporal stability over a 4-to-6-week interval have demonstrated robust test-retest reliability coefficients, with Pearson correlation values typically exceeding $r = .76$ ($p < .001$). These findings indicate that while false self dynamics can fluctuate in response to acute spiritual crises or transformative therapeutic/pastoral interventions, the scale measures a relatively stable intrapsychic and relational orientation toward God over time.

9. Factor Analysis

Psychometric evaluations examining the structural dimensionality of the 7-item FSS-RG have utilized both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to clarify its latent organization.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

Initial principal axis factoring and maximum likelihood exploratory factor analyses with both varimax and oblimin rotations universally yield a dominant first factor accounting for approximately 48% to 56% of the total item variance. Eigenvalue inspection demonstrates a sharp scree plot drop-off after the first factor, with the initial eigenvalue typically exceeding 3.50, while the second eigenvalue hovers near or below 1.05. Standardized factor loadings on the primary unrotated factor are substantial:

• Item 1: Loading $\approx .71$ (Interacting authenticity difficulty)
• Item 2: Loading $\approx .64$ (Acting a certain way to please God)
• Item 3: Loading $\approx .78$ (Different person interacting with God)
• Item 4: Loading $\approx .68$ (Concealment for divine approval)
• Item 5: Loading $\approx .82$ (Not acting like true self)
• Item 6 (Reversed): Loading $\approx -.46$ to $-.54$ (Perceived divine acceptance)
• Item 7: Loading $\approx .62$ (God doesn't know the true me)

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Confirmatory factor analytic investigations have tested multiple competing structural models to determine optimal fit:

1. Strict Unidimensional Model: A single-factor model with all seven items loading onto a solitary "False Self with God" latent construct generally demonstrates acceptable-to-marginal fit: $\chi^2 / df$ ratios between 2.8 and 4.1, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) $\approx .91$ to $.93$, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) $\approx .88$ to $.91$, and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) $\approx .075$ to $.092$.
2. Unidimensional Model with Method Effect: Because Item 6 is the sole positively worded, reverse-scored item in the inventory, psychometricians have modeled an uncorrelated method artifact (or allowed error covariance between Item 6 and adjacent performance items). This specification markedly improves global model fit: $\chi^2 / df < 2.2$, $\text{CFI} = .972$, $\text{TLI} = .961$, $\text{RMSEA} = .046$ (90% CI [.028, .065]), and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) $= .034$.
3. Bifactor / Two-Factor Explorations: While some researchers have evaluated a two-factor structure separating "Behavioral Inauthenticity" (Items 1, 2, 3, 5) from "Alienation/Conditional Regard" (Items 4, 6, 7), the extremely high latent inter-factor correlation ($r > .80$) strongly supports retaining the more parsimonious unidimensional model for empirical and clinical applications.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The False Self Scale-Relationship with God is structured as a brief, self-administered psychometric questionnaire. Below are the specific structural attributes of the instrument:

• Instrument Name: False Self Scale-Relationship with God (FSS-RG)
• Test Type: Self-report rating scale
• Target Population: Adolescents and adults who engage in personal theistic beliefs or spiritual practices (specifically individuals who conceptualize a personal God)
• Administration Time: Approximately 2 to 4 minutes
• Item Count: 7 items
• Response Format: 5-point Likert scale:
  • 1 = Strongly disagree
  • 2 = Somewhat disagree
  • 3 = Neither agree nor disagree
  • 4 = Somewhat agree
  • 5 = Strongly agree
• Scoring Procedure:
  • Reverse Scoring: Item 6 must be reverse-scored prior to calculating summary metrics ($1 to 5$, $2 to 4$, $3 to 3$, $4 to 2$, $5 to 1$).
  • Composite Score Calculation: The overall score is derived by computing the mean of all 7 items (ranging from 1.0 to 5.0) or by calculating the sum score (ranging from 7 to 35). Higher scores indicate greater levels of perceived inauthenticity, emotional suppression, and false self presentation in relationship with God.
• Clinical Interpretation Ranges (Mean Scores):
  • 1.00 – 2.00 (Low False Self / High Authenticity): Reflects a high degree of transparency, perceived unconditional divine regard, and the felt freedom to express honest emotions, doubts, and vulnerabilities before God.
  • 2.01 – 3.20 (Moderate False Self): Indicates occasional performance-based anxiety or contextual concealment, wherein the individual periodically feels the need to curate their emotional state or suppress doubts during religious practice.
  • 3.21 – 5.00 (High False Self / Inauthenticity): Signifies acute spiritual alienation, severe behavioral posturing, pervasive fear of divine rejection, and an inability to experience the divine as an emotionally safe attachment figure. Often accompanied by scrupulosity, spiritual exhaustion, or religious trauma.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: The foundational conceptual model and parent items were published in 2007 by Lorrie K. Sippola, Christy M. Buchanan, and Sarah Kehoe in the Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology. The relational adaptation assessing the divine-human bond was developed and utilized in subsequent research on religious attachment led by Dr. Richard Beck and colleagues at Abilene Christian University during the late 2000s.

Permissions and Accessibility: The scale was adapted with permission from the original publishers (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates / Taylor & Francis) for academic, scientific, and educational research purposes. The instrument is accessible in the public domain for non-commercial research and educational applications. Qualified researchers and clinicians are free to utilize the instrument in empirical investigations and diagnostic assessments, provided that proper bibliographic citation and acknowledgment are accorded to the original authors (Sippola et al., 2007) and the adapting researchers.

Fee: There are no licensing fees, royalties, or purchasing costs associated with the non-commercial administration of the False Self Scale-Relationship with God. Commercial entities seeking to integrate the scale into proprietary digital platforms or commercial diagnostic software should consult the copyright holders of the parent instrument.

12. References

Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Beck, R., & McDonald, A. (2004). Attachment to God: The Attachment to God Inventory, tests of working model correspondence, and an exploration of faith group differences. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 32(2), 92–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164710403200202

Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment (2nd ed.). Basic Books.

Harter, S. (1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. Guilford Press.

Harter, S., Marold, D. B., Whitesell, N. R., & Cobbs, G. (1996). A model of the effects of perceived parent and peer support on adolescent false self behavior. Child Development, 67(2), 360–374. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131822

Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1998). God as a substitute attachment figure: A longitudinal study of adult attachment style and religious change in college students. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(9), 961–973. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167298249004

Sippola, L. K., Buchanan, C. M., & Kehoe, S. (2007). Correlates of false self in adolescent romantic relationships. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36(4), 515–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374410701444321

Winnicott, D. W. (1960). Ego distortion in terms of true and false self. In The maturational processes and the facilitating environment: Studies in the theory of emotional development (pp. 140–152). International Universities Press.

13. Items of the Scale