LEADER 02154nam 2200361 450 001 9910598181703321 005 20230218145008.0 035 $a(CKB)4920000000094771 035 $a(NjHacI)994920000000094771 035 $a(EXLCZ)994920000000094771 100 $a20230218d2019 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur||||||||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 00$aMeasures of Spirituality/Religiosity-Description of Concepts and Validation of Instruments /$fedited by Arndt Bu?ssing 210 1$aBasel, Switzerland :$cMDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute,$d2019. 210 4$dİ2019 215 $a1 online resource (148 pages) 311 $a3-03897-758-6 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 330 $aWhy do we need more questionnaires to measure aspects of spirituality/religiosity when we already have so many well-tried instruments in use? One answer is that research in this field is growing and that new research questions continuously do arise. Several of these new questions cannot be easily answered with the instruments designed for previous questions. The field is expanding and, consequently, the research topics. Meanwhile several multidimensional instruments were developed which cover existential, prosocial, religious and non-religious forms of spirituality, hope, peace and trust-and several more. The 'disadvantage' of these instruments is the fact that some are conceptually broad and often rather unspecific, but they might be suited quite well for culturally and spiritually diverse populations when the intention is to compare such diverse groups. This is the reason why more research on new instruments is needed as can be found in this Special Issue, and to stimulate a critical debate about their pros and cons. 606 $aReligion and science 615 0$aReligion and science. 676 $a261.55 702 $aBu?ssing$b Arndt 801 0$bNjHacI 801 1$bNjHacl 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910598181703321 996 $aMeasures of Spirituality$92932999 997 $aUNINA