Role of spirituality and the impact on social responsibility

Abstract

Research on social responsibility shows that community and social organizations play an important role in developing social responsibility. Religious groups comprise a considerable number of community and social organizations. The present study explored the impact of spirituality on social responsibility and assumed a positive correlation. Measures included a demographic questionnaire with questions about religious affiliation and social service, the Social Responsibility Scale (Starrett, 1996) which measures global social responsibility and social activism, the Religious Orientation Scale (ROS) by Allport and Ross (1967) which measures Intrinsic (I) and Extrinsic (E) religious orientation, and the Quest scale (Q) by Batson and Schoenrade (1991) which measures religious searching . Data were gathered from student volunteers. Results indicated that GFU students generally reported that they were Christian, intrinsically oriented, and attended religious services at least once a week. Reed students generally reported they were atheist/agnostic, were extrinsically oriented, and attended religious services less than three times per year. On the Starrett scale, GFU students indicated they were more socially conservative and were more likely to focus social service on individuals, while Reed students were more likely to focus on global and institutional expressions of social service. The two groups were similar on Quest and on Traditional Values and Fatalistic Indifference. The groups also showed similar levels of giving and volunteering. Two distinct patterns of attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors related to social service emerged. One is characterized by Christian commitment, intrinsic religious orientation, high religious participation, and social service focused on individuals. The second is characterized by atheism/agnosticism, extrinsic religious orientation, low religious participation, and social service focused globally and on institutional change. The original goal of identifying three patterns of spirituality and social service was partly successful. Introduction Social responsibility is defined as pro-social behavior that seeks to advance and promote the welfare of others. Some, such as Starrett (1996), contend that conservative religious beliefs are inversely related to social responsibility. However, other researcher conclude that social responsibility and religion are positively related. Youniss, McLellan, and Yates (1999) reported that involvement in community service was more common for youth with a religious influence than those without it. Wilson & Musick (1997) and Osterle et al. (1998) found parallel results in adults. This seeming inconsistency might be explained when the measures of social responsibility and religion are examined carefully. Saroglou et. al. (2005) suggest that religiousness has a definite but limited effect on reported prosocial behavior that does not reflect self-delusion. In summary, personality, genetics, and community involvement influence social responsibility. Definitions of social responsibility and some of the findings appear to be related to deeply held moral perspectives of researchers and participants. The present study investigated the connections among religious orientation and affiliation, various forms of social service, and Starrett’s Social Responsibility Scale. Method Participants Data were collected in undergraduate psychology classes in two private Pacific Northwest Universities. In all 136 students participated, 65 from George Fox University, a Quaker university, and 71 from Reed College, a non-religiously affiliated private college. There were 45 males (41.5%) and 88 females (58.5%). Ethnically, 113 of the participants were Caucasian (86.3%), 4 were Asian (3.1%), 2 were African-American (1.5%), 3 were Hispanic (2.3%), and 9 selected “other” (6.9%). For the religious-affiliated university all but one identified him or herself as a Christian (98.5%). For the non-religiously affiliated university, 48 identified themselves as Atheist/Agnostic (69.5%), 12 as Christian (17.4%), 3 as Jewish (4.3%), and 6 as “other” (8.7%). Instruments Instruments included the Social Responsibility Scale (Starrett, 1996), the Religious Orientation Scale (Allport and Ross, 1967), and the Quest Scale Revised (Batson and Ventis, 1982). Demographic questions, included items about spiritual beliefs, social and community volunteer activities, and religious involvement. Starrett’s original subscales along with those proposed by Bufford, et. al. (2004) were scored for the Social Responsibility Scale (Starrett, 1996). Procedure Students at both universities were sampled from introductory psychology classes. Scores were computed for the original Social Responsibility scales developed by Starett, including Global Social Responsibility (GSR), Responsibility Toward People (RP), and Social Conservatism (SC), along with the modified GSR scales, Traditional Values (TV), Institutionalized Peacemaking (IP), and Fatalistic Indifference (FI) developed by Bufford et al (2004). Spirituality was measured by the Religious Orientation Scale’s (ROS) of Extrinsic (E) and Intrinsic (I), as well as the revised Quest scale (Q). Demographic information, religious orientation, and social involvement were also measured.