Abstract
This study applied the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS) to the context of Hong Kong as a part of China with the focus on a specific target group of teachers in primary and secondary schools. For the validation of the scale in the Hong Kong context, the version of CRSi-20 was tested with data collected from local teachers (N = 671). For the validation of the scale, six versions were tested (CRSi-20, CRS-15, CRSi-14, CRS-10, CRSi-7, and CRS-5). Confirmatory Factor Analysis demonstrated that the single-factor solution of five items (CRS-5) had better fit indices than the seven-item version (CRSi-7), which, in turn, was better than CRS-15 with a five-factor solution (Intellect, Ideology, Private Practice, Public Practice, and Religious Experience). The other three versions encountered a problem with high correlations between factors. Multiple-indicators multiple-causes (MIMIC) analysis was used to test the effect of covariates on the established factor structure for CRS-5, CRSi-7, and CRS-15. The results indicated that gender and religious belief are significant predictors of the centrality of religiosity scores for CRS-5, CRSi-7, and CRS-15. In addition, age was a positive predictor for public practice, and teachers’ education level was positively related to private practice for CRS-15. Implications regarding understanding for the existing literature are discussed.
Highlights
Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) of the People’s Republic of China; the results showed that
Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS)-15 and CRSi-7, which have been used in many other countries and places, are valid and reliable measures for centrality of religiosity in the Chinese context in places like Hong Kong, and provide evidence to support the usefulness of the CRS in the Chinese context
The Comparative Fit Index (CFI) indicates how well the variance of the data is represented by the models
Summary
The third dimension is the public practice, which includes the expectation of society that religious people affiliate with religious groups and have involvement in religious rituals and communal events This is partly reflected by people’s actions and frequency of participation in religious activities, such as attendance at churches for Christians or Muslims prayers on Fridays. Private practice is the fourth dimension, which concerns the expectation of society that religious people would engage in dialogical and participative patterns of spirituality, which refer to the “one-to-one experience” and “experiences of being at one”, respectively. Religious people devote their time to religious activities, such as worship and meditation, in their private space. To accommodate some of the Eastern religious practices and certain new Western types necessitating meditation as a participative pattern of spirituality, a more general term of “God or something divine” is substituted for the concept of God, and extended to “God, deities, or something divine” for Buddhism and Hinduism (Huber and Huber 2012, p. 719)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
