| Historically, people have used religion in order to cope with life problems. Most people do not face stressful events without resources. They bring with them a system of generalized beliefs which affect how they deal with difficult moments. They also bring with them a belief about what, or who, affects changes and outcomes. This belief is referred to as locus of control. Evidence suggests that religious beliefs may be incorporated into the coping process to produce religious problem-solving styles. Until recently, most research in religious coping and problem-solving and locus of control has centered around physical health issues. Psychologists have neglected the religious dimension when studying human response to coping with stress.; This study of religious problem solving styles broadens knowledge of the relationship between religion and locus of control. The Religious Problem Solving Scale (RPSS), designed to distinguish different degrees of responsibility assigned to self or God in solving problems, and Rotter's Internal-External Control Scale (I-E Scale) was administered to 128 undergraduate students (32 males and 96 females; age range 17--43) attending a Midwestern private Christian liberal arts college. It was hypothesized that those participants with the Deferring style of religious problem solving (i.e., responsibility for problem-solving focused on God) would have an external locus of control. Participants with the Self-Directing style (i.e., the responsibility for problem solving being assumed almost exclusively by the individual) would have an internal locus of control. Finally, the locus of control in participants who have the Collaborative style (i.e., responsibility on both the individual and God) would not be distinct. That is, it would not be internal or external, but would fall somewhere in the middle of the continuum of locus of control.; The results indicated no statistically significant correlations between religious problem solving style score and locus of control score. However, further analysis indicated no locus of control preference in the Deferring style, a trend toward an external locus of control in the Self-Directing style, and an endorsement for internal locus of control in the Collaborative style. As there were no other studies or literature found pairing these two instruments, it is difficult to draw anything other than preliminary conclusions as to why the hypotheses were not supported. |
