The Shepherd Scale

1. Abstract

The Shepherd Scale is an established psychometric assessment developed by Rodney L. Bassett and colleagues in 1981 to measure Christian religious identity, doctrinal belief, and behavioral practice. Arising out of the emerging movement to integrate psychology of religion with explicit biblical theology, the instrument derives its conceptual foundation and moniker from the New Testament metaphor in the Gospel of Matthew (25:32–33) regarding the separation of the “sheep from the goats.” Unlike generic measures of religiosity or institutional affiliation, the Shepherd Scale operationalizes Christian faith through an explicit, New Testament-derived framework designed to identify distinctive patterns of orthodox Christian commitment and living.

The instrument comprises 38 self-report items formatted on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (“not true”) to 4 (“true”). Structurally, the scale is partitioned into two primary conceptual domains: the 13-item Belief subscale, which assesses orthodox theological convictions regarding God, the divinity and resurrection of Jesus Christ, salvation, and human sinfulness; and the 25-item Christian Walk subscale, which evaluates behavioral, ethical, interpersonal, and devotive practices characteristic of Christian discipleship. Total scores range from 38 to 152, with higher scores reflecting greater alignment with historical Christian orthodoxy and praxis.

Extensive psychometric investigations have affirmed the scale’s empirical integrity. Initial normative validation revealed high internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .86 and a two-week test-retest reliability coefficient of .82 among Christian undergraduate cohorts. Convergent and construct validity are evidenced by robust correlations with established psychometric indices, including Glock and Stark’s Dimensions of Religious Commitment Scale (r = .41), King and Hunt’s Ten Dimension Religious Variable instrument (r = .64), and self-reported religious salience (r = .71). Factor analytic investigations have confirmed the empirical viability of its core dimensions while also elucidating nuanced sub-components such as doctrinal orthodoxy, moral compliance, and interpersonal fraternity. This article provides an exhaustive examination of the Shepherd Scale’s theoretical foundations, psychometric architecture, structural validity, practical utility, and complete standardized items.

2. Keywords

Shepherd Scale, Christian identity, religiosity measurement, psychology of religion, orthodoxy, Christian walk, religious commitment, psychometrics, Rodney Bassett, spiritual maturity, test reliability, construct validity, behavioral religiousness

3. Authors

The Shepherd Scale was conceived, developed, and validated by a collaborative research team led by Rodney L. Bassett at Roberts Wesleyan College (now Roberts Wesleyan University) in Rochester, New York. The scale was formally published in 1981 in the Journal of Psychology and Theology.

The full developmental research cohort includes:

• Rodney L. Bassett, Ph.D. — Professor of Psychology, Department of Psychology, Roberts Wesleyan College, Rochester, NY. Dr. Bassett has served as an eminent scholar in the integration of psychological science and Christian theology, focusing on religious coping, forgiveness, moral decision-making, and spiritual assessment.
• Ronald D. Sadler, B.A. — Roberts Wesleyan College, Rochester, NY.
• Edmund E. Kobischen, B.A. — Roberts Wesleyan College, Rochester, NY.
• Douglas M. Skiff, B.A. — Roberts Wesleyan College, Rochester, NY.
• I. Jean Merrill, B.A. — Roberts Wesleyan College, Rochester, NY.
• Barbara J. Atwater, B.A. — Roberts Wesleyan College, Rochester, NY.
• Paul W. Livermore, Ph.D. — Professor of New Testament and Christian Theology, Department of Religion and Philosophy, Roberts Wesleyan College, Rochester, NY. Dr. Livermore provided the formal exegetical and theological guidance necessary to ensure that the scale items accurately mirrored biblical constructs without degenerating into narrow sectarian provincialism.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Shepherd Scale is to provide an objective, empirically validated, and theologically rigorous psychometric instrument capable of assessing genuine Christian commitment, belief, and conduct. During the late 1960s and 1970s, the empirical sociology of religion and psychological measurement of faith were dominated by general sociological indices—such as frequency of church attendance, denominational affiliation, or broad attitudinal items—exemplified by the pioneering work of Glock and Stark (1966) and Allport and Ross’s (1967) Intrinsic/Extrinsic Religious Orientation Scale. While these instruments offered valuable metrics for general religious orientation, Christian psychologists and empirical researchers identified a significant measurement gap: existing tools failed to operationalize the specific, distinctive theological and behavioral mandates of historical Christian discipleship as defined by the New Testament.

Bassett and his colleagues recognized that researchers seeking to examine psychological outcomes within Christian populations were often utilizing blunt instruments that could not differentiate between nominal, cultural affiliation and an active, convictional Christian lifestyle. The subtitle of their seminal 1981 monograph, “Separating the Sheep from the Goats,” reflects an intentional psychometric effort to establish a criterion-referenced assessment based directly on biblical teachings regarding what constitutes authentic Christian faith. In Christian scripture, Jesus used the imagery of shepherds distinguishing sheep from goats (Matthew 25:31–46) to demarcate those whose lives actively embody the kingdom of God from those whose adherence is superficial or non-existent.

The clinical and research applications of the Shepherd Scale are multifaceted:

• Empirical Research in the Integration of Psychology and Theology: The scale was engineered to serve as a foundational measurement tool for empirical studies examining how explicit Christian orthodoxy and spiritual behavior interact with mental health, personality variables, coping mechanisms, marital satisfaction, and social attitudes. A bibliometric review by Jones, Ripley, Kurusu, and Worthington (1998) verified that the Shepherd Scale was among the most widely cited empirical scales in the Journal of Psychology and Theology and the Journal of Psychology and Christianity between 1985 and 1994.
• Clinical and Pastoral Assessment: In Christian counseling and pastoral psychotherapy contexts, the instrument affords clinicians an objective baseline of a client’s cognitive theological framework (Belief) alongside their operational ethical functioning (Christian Walk). This enables mental health practitioners to identify spiritual struggles, cognitive dissonance between belief and practice, or pathological guilt related to religious perfectionism.
• Differentiation of Nominal vs. Committed Populations: Sociological and social-psychological studies frequently require a reliable criterion measure to distinguish genuinely practicing Christian believers from culturally identified nominal Christians in survey research, experimental paradigms, and analog studies of counseling preferences (e.g., Godwin, 1986).
• Evaluation of Faith Maturity and Growth: Longitudinal educational and ministry studies utilize the Shepherd Scale to track changes in spiritual formation, Christian maturity, and behavioral conformity to ethical mandates among university students, seminarians, and church congregants (Bassett et al., 1991).

5. Psychological Construct

The central psychological construct operationalized by the Shepherd Scale is Christian Identity and Commitment. Bassett et al. (1981) conceptualized Christian identity not as an abstract, amorphous sentiment or simple institutional membership, but as an integrated, multi-dimensional life pattern characterized by explicit cognitive convictions coupled with tangible ethical, relational, and spiritual practices. The construct is theoretically split into two core constituent dimensions: the Belief Component (theological cognition) and the Christian Walk Component (behavioral and relational praxis).

The Belief Component (13 Items)

The Belief dimension assesses cognitive endorsement of historic Christian orthodoxy as derived from the New Testament canon. From a cognitive-behavioral perspective, religious beliefs serve as primary cognitive schemas through which an individual interprets existential meaning, moral obligation, suffering, and personal accountability. Rather than assessing vague theism, the Belief subscale operationalizes core kerygmatic tenets of the Christian faith:

• Orthodox Christology and Resurrection: Items capture explicit belief in the physical or historical resurrection of Jesus Christ (e.g., “I believe that God raised Jesus from the dead”) and the centrality of Christ as the exclusive reconciler between humanity and God (e.g., “The only means by which I may know God is through my personal commitment to Jesus Christ”).
• Soteriological and Existential Reliance: The subscale operationalizes the Christian doctrine of salvation by grace, assessing the individual’s internalized assurance of redemption, eternal life, and liberation from condemnation (e.g., “Because of God’s favor to us, through Jesus Christ, we are no longer condemned by God’s laws”; “Because of my personal commitment to Jesus Christ, I have eternal life”).
• Eschatological Accountability and Divine Sovereignty: Items measure beliefs regarding divine moral governance, ultimate justice, and individual accountability before God (e.g., “I believe that God will bring about certain circumstances that will result in the judgment and destruction of evil”; “I believe that God will judge me for all my actions and behaviors”).
• Pneumatological and Experiential Relationality: Cognition surrounding God is not merely abstract deism; it demands a belief in personal divine immanence and communion (e.g., “I believe I can have the personal presence of God in my life”; “I believe that it is possible to have a personal relationship with God through Christ”).

The Christian Walk Component (25 Items)

The Christian Walk dimension operationalizes the behavioral manifestation of faith—what the Epistle of James terms “faith demonstrated through works” (James 2:18). In psychological terms, this component captures conative, behavioral, and self-regulatory adaptations that reflect the internalization of Christian moral norms. It spans several interrelated operational spheres:

• Interpersonal Ethics and Agapic Altruism: Christian ethics demand altruistic, sacrificial concern even in the face of interpersonal hostility. The scale evaluates pro-social behavior executed without external surveillance or egoistic reward (e.g., “I do kind things regardless of who’s watching me”; “I respond positively [with patience, kindness, self-control] to those people who hold negative feelings toward me”).
• In-Group Solidarity and Christian Fellowship: A substantial subset of items explicitly focuses on behavior toward the community of faith (the Church). Items evaluate mutual burden-bearing, resource sharing, and affective solidarity (e.g., “I share things that I own with Christians”; “I share the same feelings Christians do whether it be happiness or sorrow”; “I work for Christians without expecting recognition or acknowledgments”). The developers explicitly noted in the administration instructions that loving fellow Christians does not imply hostility or lack of respect toward non-Christians, but rather reflects the biblical mandate for mutual ecclesial support.
• Asceticism and Material Detachment: Items assess resistance to materialistic hedonism, capturing value orientations prioritizing spiritual commitments over wealth and status (e.g., “Status and material possessions are not of primary importance to me”).
• Self-Regulation and Confession: Christian self-regulation requires ongoing moral self-reflection, acknowledgment of personal fallibility, and behavioral alignment with scriptural guidelines (e.g., “I realize a need to admit my wrongs to God”; “Because of my love for God, I obey his commandments”; “I have turned from my sin and believed in Jesus Christ”).
• Cognitive Discernment and Intellectual Scrutiny: Notably, the construct incorporates thoughtful engagement rather than blind credulity, assessing critical cognitive evaluation of religious claims (e.g., “I do not accept what I hear in regard to religious beliefs without first questioning the validity of it”).

6. Theoretical Framework

The theoretical architecture of the Shepherd Scale rests at the convergence of New Testament Biblical Theology and Social-Cognitive Psychology. Bassett et al. (1981) operated from the foundational premise that psychological science could legitimately operationalize religious constructs from within the theological worldview of the tradition being studied, rather than imposing external, reductionist psychological models.

Theological Exegesis and the Matthew 25 Paradigm

The principal theological paradigm originates from Matthew 25:31–46, known as the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats, alongside Johannine and Pauline theological formulations of authentic discipleship. In classical Christian dogmatics, faith (fides) encompasses both fides quae creditur (the objective faith that is believed) and fides qua creditur (the personal trust and lived commitment through which one believes). The Shepherd Scale was explicitly engineered to reflect this dualism:

• Without orthodox belief, ethical behavior represents secular moralism or universal altruism rather than distinctively Christian discipleship.
• Without the walk, cognitive belief represents sterile intellectual assent or cognitive dogmatism devoid of transformative spiritual vitality (James 2:17).

To avoid narrow sectarian bias (such as specific denominational mandates regarding liturgy, sacramental theology, charismatic expressions, or abstinence from specific cultural practices), the authors employed a New Testament theologian (Dr. Paul W. Livermore) to distill universally accepted biblical passages across canonical genres (Gospels, Pauline Epistles, General Epistles). Passages were systematically organized into core thematic matrices, ensuring that the final item bank represented an ecumenical orthodox baseline shared by Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant traditions, while remaining deeply rooted in biblical textuality.

Social-Cognitive and Value-Behavior Alignment

From a psychological standpoint, the scale aligns with Albert Bandura‘s social-cognitive theory and Fishbein and Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior. These paradigms postulate that internalized attitudes and value hierarchies (the Belief component) systematically guide and constrain intentional behavior (the Christian Walk). The scale assumes that a firmly established Christian self-identity serves as a self-regulating cognitive schema. When an individual self-categorizes as a committed follower of Christ, this self-concept mobilizes behavioral standards: the individual monitors their speech, practices sacrificial charity, demonstrates emotional solidarity with co-religionists, and engages in proactive moral reflection.

Furthermore, the instrument interfaces with Gordon Allport‘s conceptualization of intrinsic religious orientation—wherein religion is not used as an instrumental means to social prestige or guilt reduction (extrinsic orientation), but is experienced as an end in itself, thoroughly suffusing every facet of the individual’s daily functioning and worldview.

7. Validity

Extensive psychometric investigations have established robust evidence supporting the construct, convergent, known-groups, and criterion-related validity of the Shepherd Scale across diverse demographic samples.

Known-Groups and Discriminant Validity

In the original validation study by Bassett et al. (1981), known-groups validity was rigorously established by administering the scale to samples with differing religious backgrounds:

• Suburban Adult Sample: Among a community-dwelling adult sample (N = 67), individuals who self-identified as active Christians scored significantly higher on the Shepherd Scale than self-identified non-Christians, yielding a dramatic statistically significant difference: t(28) = 6.29, p < .001. This verified the scale’s primary intended utility: distinguishing individuals who embody Christian faith from those who do not.
• Secular University Cohorts: Pecnik and Epperson (1985) administered the scale to 238 state university students, demonstrating significant score differences between self-identified Christian and non-Christian students. Denominational preference (coded dichotomously as Christian vs. non-Christian) correlated strongly with overall Shepherd Scale performance (r = .52, p < .001).

Convergent Validity

The Shepherd Scale has demonstrated strong, statistically significant convergent validity when evaluated against established multidimensional measures of religiousness and spiritual salience:

• King and Hunt’s Religious Dimensions: In Bassett et al.’s (1981) Christian college cohort (N = 62), total Shepherd Scale scores correlated substantially (r = .64, p < .001) with King and Hunt’s (1975) Ten Dimension Religious Variable instrument, confirming that the scale captures core multidimensional facets of institutional and personal faith.
• Glock and Stark’s Dimensions: The instrument demonstrated a significant correlation of r = .41 (p < .01) with Glock and Stark’s (1966) Dimensions of Religious Commitment Scale.
• Religious Salience and Practice: In Pecnik and Epperson’s (1985) independent psychometric replication, Shepherd Scale scores exhibited high convergent validity with self-reported importance of religious beliefs (r = .71, p < .001) and self-reported frequency of participation in religious activities and church services (r = .43, p < .001).

Construct and Criterion-Related Studies

Subsequent empirical research has demonstrated the scale’s utility in predicting complex psychological and social phenomena:

• Attribution and Locus of Control: Lupfer, Tolliver, and Jackson (1996) utilized the Shepherd Scale in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion to investigate the “God of the gaps” attributional hypothesis, demonstrating that individuals scoring high on the Shepherd Scale systematically attribute positive life-altering occurrences to direct divine intervention while maintaining complex social-attributional frameworks.
• Prejudice and Social Attitudes: Boivin, Darling, and Darling (1987) and Boivin, Donkin, and Darling (1990) utilized the Shepherd Scale to examine the longstanding Allportian paradox regarding religiosity and racial prejudice. They demonstrated that when Christian faith is assessed via the refined behavioral and theological criteria of the Shepherd Scale, high Christian maturity does not correlate positively with racial prejudice, in sharp contrast to findings obtained when measuring nominal or extrinsic religious affiliation.
• Cognitive Complexity and Dogmatism: Mangis (1995) investigated the relationships among religious beliefs, dogmatism, and attitudes toward women, demonstrating that higher scores on the Christian Walk component predicted greater interpersonal flexibility, challenging assumptions that orthodox beliefs inherently produce rigid dogmatism.

8. Reliability

The Shepherd Scale possesses demonstrated stability, high internal consistency, and minimal measurement error across both homogeneous Christian environments and heterogeneous public institutional settings.

Internal Consistency

In the seminal psychometric investigation by Bassett et al. (1981), the complete 38-item Shepherd Scale demonstrated robust internal consistency:

• Cronbach’s Alpha: The overall scale yielded an internal consistency coefficient of α = .86 among Christian college undergraduates (N = 62), indicating high item inter-relatedness and construct homogeneity.
• Split-Half Reliability: Split-half reliability analysis in the same developmental cohort demonstrated strong parity across split halves, further corroborating the scale’s structural coherence.
• Modified Short Forms: Boivin, Darling, and Darling (1987) examined an abbreviated 29-item version of the Shepherd Scale, reporting a Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20) reliability coefficient of .73, confirming acceptable internal consistency even when items were pruned.

Temporal Stability (Test-Retest Reliability)

To evaluate the stability of the construct over time, Bassett et al. (1981) administered the instrument across a two-week interval to a test-retest cohort of Christian undergraduates. The resulting stability coefficient was r = .82 (p < .001). This high test-retest correlation demonstrates that the Shepherd Scale captures an enduring cognitive-behavioral trait and spiritual lifestyle pattern rather than transient, state-dependent affective fluctuations.

Comparative Reliability Across Samples

Subsequent normative administrations have revealed substantial variance in total score dispersion across varying populations, which highlights the scale’s diagnostic sensitivity:

• Bassett et al. (1981) Christian Undergraduates (N = 62): Mean = 136, Standard Deviation (SD) = 8.7, Range = 111–152. The restricted standard deviation reflects a well-known ceiling effect typical of religiously homogeneous institutional samples.
• Bassett et al. (1981) Suburban Community Adults (N = 67): Range = 63–152, displaying broad distributional coverage across diverse secular and faith-based community participants.
• Pecnik & Epperson (1985) State University Students (N = 238): Mean = 110, SD = 18.6, Range = 52–149. The substantially larger standard deviation in a secular university population confirms the scale’s discriminative power and absence of artificial variance constriction when administered to general populations.
• Godwin (1986) State University Students (N = 204): Mean = 116, SD = 19.4, Range = 61–149. Replicated the normative distribution discovered by Pecnik and Epperson, providing strong cross-validation of normative score dispersion.

9. Factor Analysis

Although Bassett et al. (1981) originally constructed the instrument based on a two-dimensional theoretical taxonomy—distinguishing the 13-item Belief component from the 25-item Christian Walk component—empirical factor analyses have provided deeper insights into the underlying latent structure of the instrument.

The Pecnik and Epperson (1985) Factor Analytic Replication

The definitive exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of the Shepherd Scale was conducted by Julia A. Pecnik and Douglas L. Epperson (1985), published in the Journal of Psychology and Theology. Utilizing a heterogeneous sample of 238 state university undergraduate students, Pecnik and Epperson submitted the 38 items to principal axis factor analysis with both orthogonal (Varimax) and oblique (Promax) rotations to determine whether the empirical latent factors matched Bassett et al.’s original two-component conceptual model.

Their findings revealed that while the conceptual distinction between Belief and Walk is heuristic, empirical responses coalesce into several distinct, highly interpretable latent dimensions:

• Factor 1: General Christian Commitment / Orthodoxy: This dominant general factor accounted for the largest percentage of total scale variance. It comprised high positive loadings from virtually all the theoretical Belief Component items (e.g., Christ’s resurrection, personal relationship with God, salvation from sin, reliance on Christ) alongside core self-identifying confession items from the Walk component (e.g., “I have turned from my sin and believed in Jesus Christ”; “I have told others that I serve Jesus Christ”; “Because of my love for God, I obey his commandments”). Factor loadings on this primary dimension routinely exceeded .60 to .80, indicating a unified latent core reflecting personal conversion and doctrinal adherence.
• Factor 2: Christian In-Group Fraternity and Fellowship: This factor loaded heavily on items describing specific behaviors, affection, and solidarity directed toward other Christians (e.g., “I show respect toward Christians”; “I share things that I own with Christians”; “I share the same feelings Christians do whether it be happiness or sorrow”; “I enjoy spending time with Christians”; “I am concerned about unity among Christians”). This verified that ecclesial solidarity forms a psychologically distinct behavioral subscale separable from general personal morality.
• Factor 3: Universal Altruism and Moral Conscientiousness: Items loading on this factor evaluated broad moral living, honesty, civic obedience, and patience under provocation (e.g., “I do kind things regardless of who’s watching me”; “I respond positively… to those people who hold negative feelings toward me”; “I respect and obey the rules and regulations of the civil authorities which govern me”). These items capture universal prosociality, which operates somewhat independently of strict Christological dogma.
• Factor 4: Critical Openness / Cognitive Scrutiny: Item 18 (“I do not accept what I hear in regard to religious beliefs without first questioning the validity of it”) loaded independently, reflecting an autonomous cognitive dimension of religious openness that inversely or weakly correlated with uncritical orthodoxy.

Structural Modeling and Methodological Implications

Pecnik and Epperson’s factor analytic results supported the construct validity of the instrument as a whole, but advised researchers that computing a single composite score conflates distinct dimensions: theological assent, in-group socialization, and general ethical altruism. Consequently, psychometricians recommend that while the overall sum score (38–152) serves as an effective macro-level index of total Christian commitment, investigations examining fine-grained psychological dynamics (such as prejudice, cognitive rigidity, or mental health) should analyze the subscales independently.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The operational specifications of the Shepherd Scale are outlined below:

• Complete Instrument Name: The Shepherd Scale
• Alternative Subtitle: Separating the Sheep from the Goats (Bassett et al., 1981)
• Assessment Type: Self-report psychological questionnaire / Likert-type inventory
• Target Population: Adults and adolescents (ages 16 and older); adaptable for university students, clinical populations, and church congregations
• Item Composition: 38 items total
  • Belief Component: 13 items (Items 1 through 13)
  • Christian Walk Component: 25 items (Items 14 through 38)
• Response Format: 4-point Likert-type rating scale:
  • 1 = Not true
  • 2 = Generally not true
  • 3 = Generally true
  • 4 = True
• Administration Time: Approximately 8 to 12 minutes
• Scoring Methodology:
  • All items are keyed positively in the direction of traditional Christian belief and practice.
  • Item ratings are assigned direct integer weights: 1 point for “Not true,” 2 points for “Generally not true,” 3 points for “Generally true,” and 4 points for “True.”
  • Total Score Calculation: Direct summation of all 38 items. Possible range: 38 to 152.
  • Belief Subscale Score: Sum of Items 1–13. Possible range: 13 to 52.
  • Christian Walk Subscale Score: Sum of Items 14–38. Possible range: 25 to 100.
  • Cutoff Scores: The original authors intentionally declined to establish a rigid numerical cutoff score to demarcate “sheep” from “goats.” Instead, scores should be interpreted continuously, or benchmarked against normative population samples (e.g., secular university cohorts with means around 110–116 vs. committed Christian student cohorts with means around 136).
• Special Administration Instructions: The scale must be preceded by standardized instructions emphasizing that items assessing positive attitudes toward Christians are not intended to imply prejudice or disrespect toward non-Christians. Furthermore, scriptural citations that accompanied the original scale design must be strictly omitted from administration protocols to prevent testing bias or demand characteristics.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Shepherd Scale was formally published in 1981 by Dr. Rodney L. Bassett and his associates in the Journal of Psychology and Theology. Under standard academic publishing conventions of the era, the instrument was placed directly into the academic and research public sphere for educational, clinical, and scholarly investigative use.

Licensing and Fee Structure:

• Academic and Non-Commercial Research: The scale is available for empirical research, dissertation studies, and clinical assessment free of charge. No licensing royalties or per-copy fees are assessed for non-commercial scholarly applications.
• Permissions: Researchers wishing to reproduce the Shepherd Scale in published works, commercial test batteries, or digital psychometric repositories should seek formal attribution and customary copyright clearance through the copyright holder, the Journal of Psychology and Theology (published by Biola University / SAGE Publications), and cite the original 1981 seminal publication.
• Contact and Archival Sourcing: Communications regarding historical scale development and normative data may be directed to the Department of Psychology at Roberts Wesleyan University, Rochester, New York.

12. References

The following references represent seminal psychometric validations, theoretical foundations, and empirical research applications of the Shepherd Scale:

• 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
• Bassett, R. L., Camplin, W., Humphrey, D., Dorr, C., Biggs, S., Distaffen, R., Doxtator, I., Flaherty, M., Hunsberger, P. J., Poage, R., & Thompson, H. (1991). Measuring Christian maturity: A comparison of several scales. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 19(1), 84–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164719101900109
• Bassett, R. L., Sadler, R. D., Kobischen, E. E., Skiff, D. M., Merrill, I. J., Atwater, B. J., & Livermore, P. W. (1981). The Shepherd Scale: Separating the sheep from the goats. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 9(4), 335–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164718100900406
• Boivin, M. J., Darling, H. W., & Darling, T. W. (1987). Racial prejudice among Christian and non-Christian college students. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 15(1), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164718701500105
• Boivin, M. J., Donkin, A. J., & Darling, H. W. (1990). Religiosity and prejudice: A case study in evaluating the construct validity of Christian measures. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 9(2), 41–55.
• Elzerman, J. H., & Boivin, M. J. (1987). The assessment of Christian maturity, personality, and psychopathology among college students. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 6(3), 50–64.
• Glock, C. Y., & Stark, R. (1966). Christian beliefs and anti-Semitism. Harper & Row.
• Godwin, T. C. (1986). Analogue study of expectations for Christian and traditional counseling: A partial replication and extension (Unpublished master’s thesis). Appalachian State University, Boone, NC.
• Jones, D. R., Ripley, J. S., Kurusu, T. A., & Worthington, E. L., Jr. (1998). Influential sources in the integration of psychology and theology: A decade summary. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 17(1), 43–54.
• King, M. B., & Hunt, R. A. (1975). Measuring the religious variable: National replication. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 14(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.2307/1384504
• Lupfer, M. B., Tolliver, D., & Jackson, M. (1996). Explaining life altering occurrences: A test of the “God of the gaps” hypothesis. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 35(4), 379–391. https://doi.org/10.2307/1386413
• Mangis, M. W. (1995). Religious beliefs, dogmatism, and attitudes toward women. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 14(1), 13–25.
• Pecnik, J. A., & Epperson, D. L. (1985). A factor analysis and further validation of the Shepherd Scale. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 13(1), 42–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164718501300105

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)