diversity and the god image: louis hoffman, ph.d., cospp john l. hoffman, ph.d., csulb examining...

Post on 18-Jan-2018

217 Views

Category:

Documents

0 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

Phase One - CFA  Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results  Each of the six proposed factors had a strong factor structure  However, there was a discriminant validity problem (covariances >.90) for the presence, acceptance, and influence factors

TRANSCRIPT

Diversity and the God Image:

Louis Hoffman, Ph.D., COSPPJohn L. Hoffman, Ph.D., CSULB

Examining Ethnic Differences in the

Experience of God for a College-Age Population

Theoretical Foundation

Philibert (1985) on self-image: Belonging

Goodness

Control

Lawrence (1997) on God Image: Presence Challenge Acceptance Benevolence Influence Providence

Phase One - CFA

Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results

Each of the six proposed factors had a strong factor structure

However, there was a discriminant validity problem (covariances > .90) for the presence, acceptance, and influence factors

Phase Two - EFA

Exploratory Factor Analysis Results Egocentric = presence + acceptance + influence Growth = challenge + providence Benevolence = benevolence

What does it mean?

The Egocentric Factor

Fowler Stage 2 – literal relationship

drawn from a singular external source (e.g. parent)

Stage 3 – largely literal relationship drawn from a social group

Both emphasize God conceptStudent Development

TheoryEthnic Development Theory

The Growth Factor

Challenge – In response to God’s presence, should I stay with God, or does she/he call me to interact with the world?

Providence – God’s freedom to influence Those who

perceived God as wanting them to grow (challenge) also gave God credit for that growth (providence)

The Benevolence Factor

Lawrence cautioned that the object-focus of God’s goodness often led to dogmatic answers (God concept)

Instead, we emphasized God’s willingness to love others

Phase Three - MIMIC

Religiosity and Spirituality

More integrated for people of color

Age/Class-Level Upper-level Whites

were more egocentric Lower-division

students of color were more egocentric

Racial identity?

Phase Three - MIMIC

Psychotherapy White participants

who had received therapy were less egocentric and less benevolent

Non-White participants who had received therapy were more egocentric

Discussion

What are your thoughts?

What does this mean for you personally?

What does all this mean for your work with clients?

top related