Religious Orientation Scale-Revised

1. Abstract

The Religious Orientation Scale-Revised (I/E-R), formulated by Richard L. Gorsuch and Susan E. McPherson in 1989, represents a significant psychometric refinement in the empirical assessment of individual religious motivation. Rooted in Gordon W. Allport’s classic theoretical taxonomy of religious orientation, the instrument captures the foundational distinction between an internalized, ultimate commitment to faith (Intrinsic religious orientation) and an instrumental, self-serving utilization of religion for secondary gain (Extrinsic religious orientation). Following Lee A. Kirkpatrick’s empirical demonstrations that Allport and Ross’s (1967) original extrinsic scale conflated disparate motivational goals, the I/E-R formally segregates extrinsic religiousness into two functionally autonomous dimensions: Personally Oriented Extrinsicness (Ep), reflecting the use of religion for private comfort, emotional solace, and subjective well-being, and Socially Oriented Extrinsicness (Es), reflecting the use of religion for affiliation, community involvement, and social networking.

Constructed as a 14-item self-report questionnaire, the I/E-R modifies Gorsuch and Venable’s (1983) 20-item “Age-Universal” scale by eliminating psychometrically unstable items, clarifying ambiguous wording across reading comprehension levels, and establishing three distinct subscales: Intrinsic (8 items, with 3 reverse-scored), Extrinsic-Personal (3 items), and Extrinsic-Social (3 items). Responses are registered on a standard 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“I strongly disagree”) to 5 (“I strongly agree”), though alternative expanded intervals are suitable for cognitively advanced samples. Psychometric evaluations across diverse university cohorts have evidenced robust internal consistency for the Intrinsic subscale (α = .83) and moderate coefficients for the briefer extrinsic subscales (Ep: α = .57; Es: α = .58; combined Ep/Es: α = .65). In addition, Gorsuch and McPherson identified three optimal single-item proxies for rapid research deployment. This article provides a comprehensive academic analysis of the scale’s theoretical foundations, structural validity, psychometric indices, scoring methodologies, and clinical and sociological applications.

2. Keywords

Religious Orientation Scale-Revised, I/E-R, Gordon Allport, intrinsic religiousness, extrinsic personal, extrinsic social, psychometrics, psychology of religion, religious motivation, scale validation, Richard L. Gorsuch

3. Authors

The Religious Orientation Scale-Revised (I/E-R) was developed and validated by:

• Richard L. Gorsuch, Ph.D. — Senior Professor of Psychology, Graduate School of Psychology, Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, California. Dr. Gorsuch was an internationally recognized psychometrician, factor analyst, and pioneering figure in the empirical psychology of religion whose work modernized measurement standards across theological and social-scientific domains.
• Susan E. McPherson, Ph.D. — Graduate School of Psychology, Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, California. Dr. McPherson contributed extensively to the empirical restructuring, item selection, and factor analytic validation of the revised religious orientation inventory.

Correspondence regarding the historic validation of the instrument was originally directed to the Department of Psychology, Fuller Theological Seminary, 180 N. Oakland Ave., Pasadena, CA 91182.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Religious Orientation Scale-Revised (I/E-R) is to provide an empirically defensible, psychometrically stable, and readable operationalization of religious motivation. While Gordon Allport’s seminal paradigm provided the foundational vocabulary for the empirical study of religion within social and personality psychology, the operational instruments developed by Allport and Ross (1967) suffered from notable psychometric limitations, including confusing semantic formulations, reading difficulty biases, and questionable factor stability. The development of the I/E-R was directly catalyzed by methodological advances demonstrating that extrinsic religion is not a single unified construct, but rather a bivariate domain combining private affect regulation with public social affiliation.

In empirical research, the I/E-R functions as an essential measurement tool for dissecting the divergent pathways through which religion interacts with psychological health, interpersonal prejudice, coping mechanisms, and character development. Historically, undifferentiated measures of religiosity (such as denominational affiliation or simple church attendance frequency) produced conflicting and paradoxically curvilinear associations with mental health and social bigotry. By differentiating intrinsic motivation (faith as an end in itself) from personal extrinsic motivation (faith as a private coping tool) and social extrinsic motivation (faith as a social passport), the scale enables researchers to systematically disentangle the positive coping benefits of religion from its potential maladaptive correlates, such as dogmatism, in-group favoritism, and racial or sectarian intolerance.

Beyond academic social psychology, the I/E-R offers valuable utility across applied clinical, counseling, and medical environments. In health psychology and psychosomatic medicine, the personal extrinsic dimension (Ep) frequently correlates with acute distress, where individuals engage in crisis-induced prayer as a protective buffer against medical anxiety or depression. Conversely, high intrinsic orientation (I) consistently associates with long-term resilience, existential meaning, and post-traumatic growth. In clinical assessment, identifying an individual’s motivational posture enables mental health practitioners to incorporate religious coping modalities into cognitive behavioral interventions in a personalized, culturally competent manner.

5. Psychological Construct

The psychological construct evaluated by the I/E-R is religious orientation, defined as the dynamic motivational system, personal meaning structure, and behavioral intentionality that directs an individual’s engagement with religious beliefs, practices, and institutions. Rather than measuring theological knowledge or doctrinal orthodoxy, the scale assesses the underlying functional utility of religious beliefs within an individual’s cognitive and emotional life across three differentiated subscales:

Intrinsic Religious Orientation (I)

The Intrinsic subscale (8 items) captures a non-utilitarian, internalized, and pervasive religious motivation. Individuals high in intrinsic religiousness internalize the core tenets of their faith traditions, viewing religion not as an instrument for achieving external ends, but as an ultimate master motive. Every aspect of their existence—ethical behavior, occupational choices, interpersonal relationships, and internal cognitive appraisals—is harmonized under their primary religious commitments. As characterized by Allport, intrinsic individuals “live their religion.” Within the I/E-R, this dimension is represented by items tapping the subjective reality of the divine (e.g., “I have often had a strong sense of God’s presence”), devotional disciplines (e.g., “It is important to me to spend time in private thought and prayer”), and overarching lifestyle integration (e.g., “My whole approach to life is based on my religion”). Reverse-scored items in this subscale capture compartmentalization, where religion is insulated from ordinary daily actions (e.g., “Although I am religious, I don’t let it affect my daily life”).

Personally Oriented Extrinsicness (Ep)

The Personally Oriented Extrinsic subscale (3 items) measures the use of religion as an intrapsychic coping mechanism designed to secure personal peace, emotional defense, comfort, and protection against existential dread. For the personally extrinsic individual, religious practice serves as an instrumental emotional analgesic. Religion is engaged primarily when negative affect, somatic crisis, or emotional turmoil threatens the ego. Illustrative items encompass prayer driven by self-preservation and distress alleviation (e.g., “I pray mainly to gain relief and protection”), the pursuit of emotional equilibrium (e.g., “Prayer is for peace and happiness”), and reliance on religious narratives during emotional grief (e.g., “What religion offers me most is comfort in times of trouble and sorrow”).

Socially Oriented Extrinsicness (Es)

The Socially Oriented Extrinsic subscale (3 items) measures the instrumental engagement with religion to fulfill interpersonal, social, and status-seeking objectives. For the socially extrinsic individual, religious institutions provide a vehicle for community networking, social approval, friendship formation, and prestige. Religious activities are utilized to avoid social isolation or advance social standing. Key items capturing this orientation emphasize church attendance for relational gratification and camaraderie (e.g., “I go to church because it helps me to make friends”; “I go to church mostly to spend time with my friends”; and “I go to church mainly because I enjoy seeing people I know there”).

6. Theoretical Framework

The conceptual framework underpinning the I/E-R stems from the personality theory of Gordon W. Allport (1950, 1966) and subsequent structural reconceptualizations by social-scientific researchers including Gorsuch, Venable, and Kirkpatrick. Allport originally proposed the intrinsic/extrinsic dichotomy to address an empirical paradox documented in early mid-century social psychology: individuals who frequently attended religious services consistently scored higher on measures of ethnic and racial prejudice than non-attenders, despite religious scriptures overwhelmingly advocating universal compassion and altruism.

Allport resolved this contradiction by proposing that “religion” is not a uniform psychological phenomenon. He posited that individuals with an extrinsic orientation embrace religion superficially to provide security, status, social belonging, and self-justification; they use their religion to support preexisting personal prejudices and self-centered goals. Conversely, those with an intrinsic orientation internalize religious values, finding in them an ultimate organizing philosophy of life that fosters universal compassion and diminishes social prejudice. In Allport’s famous phrasing, “the extrinsically motivated person uses his religion, whereas the intrinsically motivated lives his” (Allport & Ross, 1967, p. 434).

Despite its conceptual power, Allport and Ross’s original 1967 scale faced methodological scrutiny. Psychometricians observed that the Intrinsic and Extrinsic scales were not strictly opposite poles of a single continuum, but rather orthogonal dimensions. Consequently, respondents could score high on both dimensions (indiscriminately pro-religious) or low on both (indiscriminately anti-religious). Furthermore, several original items featured complex sentence structures that confounded theological content with developmental reading ability. In 1983, Gorsuch and Venable published the “Age-Universal” scale, simplifying item phrasing so the instrument could be administered to children as young as fifth grade, adolescents, and adults with varying levels of literacy.

Crucially, in 1988 and 1989, Lee A. Kirkpatrick conducted detailed factor analytic re-examinations across extensive datasets and established that the extrinsic dimension was consistently multidimensional. Factor analysis repeatedly demonstrated that extrinsic items bifurcated into two separate factors: one cluster coalescing around personal comfort and emotional solace, and another cluster coalescing around social belonging and institutional camaraderie. Gorsuch and McPherson (1989) directly embraced Kirkpatrick’s empirical findings, refining the 20-item Age-Universal scale into the 14-item I/E-R to measure the tripartite structure: Intrinsic (I), Extrinsic Personal (Ep), and Extrinsic Social (Es).

7. Validity

The construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity of the I/E-R has been extensively substantiated across multiple empirical studies:

Construct and Factorial Validity

Gorsuch and McPherson (1989) established structural construct validity through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on a diverse sample of 771 undergraduate students drawn from both secular and religious institutions in Southern California. The three-factor model separating Intrinsic, Extrinsic-Personal, and Extrinsic-Social orientations provided a statistically superior fit over the classic two-factor (Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic) model, directly confirming the empirical distinctions articulated by Kirkpatrick (1988, 1989).

Convergent and Discriminant Validity

The I/E-R demonstrates strong patterns of convergent and discriminant validity in relation to psychological well-being, cognitive styles, and social behavior:

• Psychological Adjustment and Coping: Schaefer and Gorsuch (1991, 1992) demonstrated that the Intrinsic scale correlates positively with adaptive coping mechanisms, internal locus of control, and lower levels of generalized anxiety, whereas the Ep scale correlates positively with state anxiety and neuroticism, reflecting its role as a defensive coping mechanism activated during psychological distress.
• Prejudice and Social Bias: Kirkpatrick (1993) documented that the Es subscale correlates positively with measures of discriminatory attitudes, authoritarianism, and in-group bias, validating Allport’s initial premise that social extrinsicness underlies institutionalized religious prejudice. Conversely, the Intrinsic scale relates negatively to racial bigotry, although its relation to attitudes toward non-traditional sexual orientations or doctrinal outgroups is mediated by religious fundamentalism.
• Parenting and Family Systems: Giesbrecht (1995) employed the I/E-R to explore developmental antecedents, finding that authoritative parenting styles significantly predict intrinsic religious commitment in adolescents, whereas authoritarian parenting relates more strongly to extrinsic religious adaptations.

8. Reliability

The internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the I/E-R subscales have been evaluated across various cross-sectional and longitudinal investigations. In the original validation cohort of 771 collegiate respondents, Gorsuch and McPherson (1989) reported the following psychometric properties:

• Intrinsic Scale (I Revised, 8 items): Internal consistency demonstrated a robust Cronbach’s alpha of α = .83, indicating solid scale reliability comparable to the 20-item Age-Universal instrument despite the reduction in length.
• Personally Oriented Extrinsic Scale (Ep Revised, 3 items): Yielded an internal consistency estimate of α = .57.
• Socially Oriented Extrinsic Scale (Es Revised, 3 items): Yielded an internal consistency estimate of α = .58.
• Combined Extrinsic Scale (Ep/Es Revised, 6 items): When treated as a composite aggregate of extrinsic motivation, the combined scale yielded a reliability coefficient of α = .65.

While the internal consistency estimates for the 3-item extrinsic subscales fall below the conventional .70 benchmark, psychometricians attribute this primarily to the brevity of the subscales, as Cronbach’s alpha is inherently constrained by item quantity. Gorsuch and McPherson explicitly noted that for large sample sizes common in social-scientific surveys, these briefer scales provide adequate statistical power while substantially minimizing participant burden. Subsequent psychometric evaluations in community and clinical samples have corroborated test-retest reliability coefficients ranging from r = .78 to .85 over multi-week assessment intervals for the Intrinsic subscale, with extrinsic dimensions demonstrating stable retest correlations above r = .70.

9. Factor Analysis

The structural evolution of the Religious Orientation Scale represents an important case study in applied factor analysis within psychometrics. Gordon Allport and J.M. Ross (1967) originally conceived the construct as bipolar, but exploratory factor analyses repeatedly yielded two orthogonal components: Intrinsic and Extrinsic. However, item loadings on the Extrinsic factor frequently showed instability across demographic subsets.

Gorsuch and Venable (1983) initiated formal structural modifications by designing the “Age-Universal” scale. Subsequent exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of these items led Kirkpatrick (1988, 1989) to identify a clear three-factor solution. Gorsuch and McPherson (1989) subjected this tripartite model to rigorous confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) utilizing maximum likelihood estimation.

The factor loadings for the revised items demonstrated clear structural delineation:

• Factor 1: Intrinsic Religiousness: Marked by primary loadings from items 1, 4, 5, 7, and 12, alongside significant inverse loadings for items 3, 10, and 14. Item 12 (“My whole approach to life is based on my religion”) exhibited the highest standardized loading on the Intrinsic factor and was designated as the ideal single-item proxy.
• Factor 2: Extrinsic-Personal: Defined by items 6, 8, and 9. Item 8 (“What religion offers me most is comfort in times of trouble and sorrow”) yielded the strongest discriminant loading, showing high association with the Ep construct and near-zero cross-loadings on the Intrinsic and Socially Extrinsic factors.
• Factor 3: Extrinsic-Social: Defined by items 2, 11, and 13. Item 13 (“I go to church mainly because I enjoy seeing people I know there”) exhibited the cleanest factor purity and was selected as the optimal single-item indicator for social extrinsicness.

Inter-factor correlations in the validation study showed that while Ep and Es share a modest positive association (typically ranging between r = .30 and .45), their differential correlations with the Intrinsic dimension and external psychological indices validate their retention as distinct motivational vectors.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Instrument Name: Religious Orientation Scale-Revised (I/E-R)
• Alternative Titles: Intrinsic/Extrinsic-Revised (I/E-R) Scale, Revised Age-Universal Religious Orientation Scale
• Authors: Richard L. Gorsuch and Susan E. McPherson (1989)
• Construct Assessed: Religious orientation (Intrinsic, Extrinsic-Personal, Extrinsic-Social)
• Administration Format: Paper-and-pencil self-report or computer-administered questionnaire; individual or group format
• Target Population: Adolescents, college students, and adult populations across varied educational backgrounds
• Administration Time: Approximately 3 to 5 minutes
• Number of Items: 14 items total (with provision for 3 isolated single-item proxy scales)
• Subscales & Item Allocation:
  • Intrinsic (I): 8 items — Items 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 12, 14
  • Extrinsic-Personal (Ep): 3 items — Items 6, 8, 9
  • Extrinsic-Social (Es): 3 items — Items 2, 11, 13
  • Single-Item Proxies: Intrinsic (Item 12), Extrinsic-Personal (Item 8), Extrinsic-Social (Item 13)
• Response Scale: 5-point Likert scale:
  • 1 = I strongly disagree
  • 2 = I tend to disagree
  • 3 = I’m not sure
  • 4 = I tend to agree
  • 5 = I strongly agree

  (Note: For college-educated or cognitively advanced cohorts, the authors noted that 6-point or 7-point expanded response intervals may be utilized).

• Scoring Procedures:
  • Reverse Scoring: Items 3, 10, and 14 must be reverse-scored prior to aggregation: (1 = 5, 2 = 4, 3 = 3, 4 = 2, 5 = 1).
  • Subscale Sums:
    • Intrinsic Score (I): Sum of items 1, 3(R), 4, 5, 7, 10(R), 12, and 14(R). Theoretical score range: 8 to 40. Higher scores signify deeper internalization and behavioral integration of religion.
    • Extrinsic-Personal Score (Ep): Sum of items 6, 8, and 9. Theoretical score range: 3 to 15. Higher scores reflect greater reliance on religion for emotional comfort and private stress buffering.
    • Extrinsic-Social Score (Es): Sum of items 2, 11, and 13. Theoretical score range: 3 to 15. Higher scores indicate greater utilization of religious contexts for social belonging and networking.
    • Combined Extrinsic Score (Ep/Es): Optional aggregate summing all 6 extrinsic items (range: 6 to 30).
• Standardization Norms (Gorsuch & McPherson, 1989; N = 771):
  • Intrinsic Scale (I Revised): Mean = 37.2, Standard Deviation = 5.8
  • Combined Extrinsic Scale (E Revised): Mean = 25.6, Standard Deviation = 5.7

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Religious Orientation Scale-Revised (I/E-R) was originally published in 1989 in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 348–354). As an academic instrument developed under scholarly research auspices, the scale items were placed directly into the public domain within the published literature to foster empirical research in the psychology of religion. Consequently, the instrument is generally accessible for non-commercial academic research, empirical theses, and educational purposes without payment of royalty fees, provided that appropriate scholarly attribution is cited. Researchers intending to incorporate the instrument into commercial assessments, published proprietary test batteries, or digital commercial software should consult the copyright policies of the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion and the journal’s current publisher (John Wiley & Sons).

12. References

• Allport, G. W. (1950). The individual and his religion: A psychological interpretation. Macmillan.
• Allport, G. W. (1966). The religious context of prejudice. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 5(3), 447–457. https://doi.org/10.2307/1384172
• Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5(4), 432–443. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021212
• Giesbrecht, N. (1995). Parenting style and adolescent religious commitment. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 14(3), 228–238.
• Gorsuch, R. L., & McPherson, S. E. (1989). Intrinsic/extrinsic measurement: I/E-revised and single-item scales. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 28(3), 348–354. https://doi.org/10.2307/1386745
• Gorsuch, R. L., & Venable, G. D. (1983). Development of an “Age Universal” I-E scale. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 22(2), 181–187. https://doi.org/10.2307/1385677
• Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1988). A psychometric analysis of the Allport-Ross and Feagin measures of intrinsic-extrinsic religious orientation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion, Chicago, IL.
• Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1989). A psychometric analysis of the Allport-Ross and Feagin measures of intrinsic-extrinsic religious orientation. In D. O. Moberg & M. L. Lynn (Eds.), Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion (Vol. 1, pp. 1–31). JAI Press.
• Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1993). Fundamentalism, Christian orthodoxy, and intrinsic religious orientation as predictors of discriminatory attitudes. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 32(3), 256–268. https://doi.org/10.2307/1386664
• Schaefer, C. A., & Gorsuch, R. L. (1991). Psychological adjustment and religiousness: The multivariate belief-motivation theory of religiousness. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 30(4), 448–461. https://doi.org/10.2307/1387279
• Schaefer, C. A., & Gorsuch, R. L. (1992). Dimensionality of religion: Belief and motivation as predictors of behavior. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 11(3), 244–254.

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)