LEADER 02148nam  2200361   450 
001 9910688470903321
005 20230702095840.0
010   $a3-03897-759-4
035   $a(CKB)5400000000000146
035   $a(NjHacI)995400000000000146
035   $a(EXLCZ)995400000000000146
100   $a20230702d2019      uy             0
101 0 $aeng
135   $aur|||||||||||
181   $ctxt$2rdacontent
182   $cc$2rdamedia
183   $acr$2rdacarrier
200 00$aMeasures of Spirituality/Religiosity $edescription of concepts and validation of instruments /$fedited by Arndt Bu?ssing
210  1$aBasel, Switzerland :$cMDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute,$d2019.
215   $a1 online resource (148 pages)
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
606   $aExaminations$xValidity
615  0$aReligion and science.
615  0$aExaminations$xValidity.
676   $a261.55
702   $aBu?ssing$b Arndt
801  0$bNjHacI
801  1$bNjHacl
906   $aBOOK
912   $a9910688470903321
996   $aMeasures of Spirituality$92932999
997   $aUNINA