Studies in Empowerment

Steps Toward Understanding and Action

Robert E Hess

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN:
  9780866562836
• eBook ISBN:
  9781317774372
• Topic: Psychologie
• Subtopic: Psychische Gesundheit in der Psychologie

This adaptable book offers diverse applications of the empowerment model to the promotion of mental health and the prevention of mental illness. Topics span the developmental trends of empowerment as an individual achievement, a community experience, and a professional aim in relation to social intervention strategies and tactics.

Empowerment in a Religious Setting:
A Multivariate Investigation

Kenneth I. Maton
Julian Rappaport

ABSTRACT. This study examines the correlates and contexts of empowerment among members of a Christian, nondenominational religious setting. The research approach combines participant-observation and measurement development methodology to capture the empowering aspects of religious experience in a form which lends itself to quantitative analysis, without excessive loss of the phenomenological meaning of that experience. The criterion of empowerment is progress toward a salient goal of members—interpersonal behavior change in the direction of group ideals (i.e., in the direction of becoming more like Jesus). Present and retrospective past measurement of perceived interpersonal behavior yielded eight predictor variables from member peer, self-report, and interviewer sources. These variables include religious orientation, locus of control, spiritual experience, group involvement, and religious history. The relationship of the predictors to interpersonal behavior change was assessed in canonical correlation analyses. Results from multiple data sources find that those seen by themselves and by others as empowered are committed to a relationship with God and with others in the setting. They may be described, in part, as experiencing a “psychological sense of community.” In addition, they report a life crisis prior to joining the setting and a sense that God is in control of the events of their life. Follow-up data, three years later, finds a relationship between commitment and life satisfaction. Two years of participant-observation provide hypotheses, consistent with several psychological theories, for suggesting salient setting variables which provide a context for understanding the results.

RESEARCH STRATEGY

The relationship between religion and psychological well-being has been of interest to researchers for several decades (Argyle, 1959; Dittes, 1971; Donaldson, 1976; Sanua, 1969; Stark, 1971). A renewed interest has emerged among those who emphasize the importance of natural support systems for social policies and programs (e.g., President’s Commission on Mental Health, 1978). Natural support systems are those relationships (e.g., family, friend, neighbor) and settings (e.g., voluntary and religious associations) which constitute the enduring social fabric of individual lives. In American life religious groups represent one of the most prevalent of such natural settings (Jacquet, 1972). They constitute a potential resource for those who believe that the efficacy and reach of traditional mental health services as sources of empowerment are limited. However, at present little is known about the processes and impacts of most natural support systems, including religious settings. The research reported here is aimed at contributing to the understanding of the processes by which members of a particular religious setting come to experience empowerment.

Since much of religious experience is subjective, it has not readily lent itself to analysis by conventional scientific approaches. Nevertheless, a great deal of our psychological understanding of human beings is grounded in attempts to objectify phenomenology. In principle, religious experience may be describable by using many of the familiar methods of personality assessment and multivariate data analysis which can be applied to understand other complex internal processes. This paper is, in part, an attempt to capture the empowering aspects of religious experience in a form which lends itself to quantitative analysis, without excessive loss of the phenomenological meaning of that experience.

In order to lend validity to our understanding of the quantitative measures, we have selected a strategy for research which relies on participant-observation as a means to allow us to interpret the more objective data collected. The selection of that strategy necessarily meant that we had the advantage of knowing a great deal about almost every individual who completed our measures, as well as about the internal organizational processes of the setting. Presumably, we could interpret the responses to our questionnaires in light of that knowledge. Similarly, we were able to construct measures based on our knowledge of the setting as well as our knowledge of measurement development technology. This approach has the disadvantage, given the time investment, of limiting our work to one setting and of leaving us open to charges of “bias” in our interpretation of data. That charge may be partly overcome by our use of multiple sources of data—self-report, reports of peers who are a part of the setting and those who are outside the setting, and by use of several independent interviewers who were not participant-observers. We do our best to describe our methodology such that the readers may draw their own conclusions as to the wisdom of our research strategy.

It is useful to note at the outset several additional limitations of such a study, as well as some of the advantages. We attempt to use what we have learned from our data to understand those who are “empowered” in a particular religious community. As such, this data is viewed as a case study of a particular setting which generates hypotheses about other similar settings. When we first approached this setting as observers we expected to find it to be one wherein a significant portion of the members would express the belief that their experience is empowering. The members of the setting were only later asked to participate in systematic individual analysis when, following a year of participant-observation, we became convinced that the setting was successful in facilitating empowerment among many of its members.

Our year long observation of setting participants and of certain leadership qualities and structural arrangements (some of which are described later in this paper) led us to the decision that our initial belief that we would find a reasonable number of people who would experience a sense of empowerment was correct. Given the likelihood of finding enough people who would experience a sense of empowerment, we only then decided that it would be profitable to look at individual differences among those who did and did not experience such a change, and to continue a second year of participant-observation. Thus, within our case study we were able to conduct a comparative study of individual differences. However, this study does not attempt to verify the assessment of the setting per se as “empowering” by comparing it to other settings—rather, it should be understood as a case study of people in a particular organization. We make no claim as to the relative impact of the setting as a vehicle for empowerment. Quantitative assessment is limited to within-setting analysis of individual differences on certain criterion behaviors which have been selected as an index of empowerment.

The thrust of this research is to look for multivariate relationships among a set of individual predictors and a set of criterion variables so as to describe the perceived experiences of those who score relatively highest on the criterion measures of empowerment. In simple terms we ask: Within this religious setting how can we describe those who are seen by themselves and by others as empowered?

The multiplicity of perspectives from which the empowerment construct can be viewed and the diversity of goals and contexts of natural settings place special demands on research in the area. For instance, a natural setting can be said to empower individuals to the extent it helps members to: (1) develop a personal sense of being able to effect important life aims and/or (2) acquire psychological or material resources necessary for the accomplishment of life aims and/or (3) actually achieve (or make progress towards achieving) personal aims. The meaning of personal control and the nature of the resources and goals defined as important varies from setting to setting and individual to individual. Researchers must be careful to be sensitive to the nature of each setting to determine the meaning of the empowerment construct. For example, in religious settings a sense of too much personal control, to the exclusion of the sense of God’s control, is often viewed by members as a negative, rather than a positive attribute.

The criterion of empowerment employed here is perceived interpersonal behavior change in the direction of group ideals (described in detail in the measures section). Perceived interpersonal behavior change was chosen as the criterion of empowerment because it represents a salient goal of group members. In the members’ view, as measured by their ratings of ideal behavior, empowerment is best indexed by a sense of closeness with a loving God who actively transforms (i.e., empowers) members’ lives in the direction of becoming more like Jesus (i.e., increased compassion and humility and a desire to serve and help others). This way of selecting the criterion measure is an attempt to meet the demand that the variables studied are central to the phenomenology of the people under study. In this setting empowerment is understood by the members to enable them to behave in particular interpersonally appropriate ways.

In addition to self-reports, the research design employed member and nonmember peer ratings of members’ interpersonal behavior. Measures were taken retrospectively for the time period prior to joining the group and again with reference to the present. The anchor point for the criterion scales is the mean of members’ ideal ratings for each dimension of interpersonal behavior, again an attempt to be consistent with the phenomenology of the group. The specific dimensions selected emerged from principal components analysis of members’ ratings.

The predictor (individual differences) variables studied emerge from a combination of observation, theoretical considerations, and empirical analyses. Participant-observation revealed two especially salient dimensions of individual difference. One is the extent of love, forgiveness, and expectation for positive outcomes experienced in a personal relationship with God and Jesus. This dimension contains elements which diverse psychological theorists such as Sullivan, Rotter, and Rogers indicate as important conditions for behavior change and development. Individuals also differ in their involvement in the setting, an important dimension since extent of involvement should influence the impact of the setting on the person.

Since these two dimensions are salient both to the population under study and mainstream psychological theories, a set of summary items assessing them was designed for interviewer and member peer ratings. In addition, self-report “intrinsic religion” and locus of control items were included since one or both variables have been found to be correlated with psychological criteria in studies of other populations (Entner, 1977; Kahoe, 1974; McClain, 1978; Pargament, Tyler, & Steele, 1979). In keeping with a multidimensional perspective, and consistent with our belief that multivariate data analytic procedures are an appropriate tool for understanding individual differences, first order components analysis for each source and set of items separately, and second order components analysis across first order scales were used so that the final set of predictor scales would be based on empirical characteristics of the population under study. It was expected that the emerging (individual difference predictor) dimensions would be positively related to perceived interpersonal change (the criterion) measures generated from self, member, and nonmember peers.

METHOD: PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION, PEER AND SELF-REPORT

Research Setting

This research is part of a larger, continuing study of a non-denominational Christian fellowship in a medium sized midwestern city. The fellowship evolved from a small Bible study...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Editor
• Foreword: Empowerment: An Antidote for Folly
• Studies in Empowerment: Introduction to the Issue
• Citizen Empowerment: A Developmental Perspective
• Empowerment in a Religious Setting: A Multivariate Investigation
• The Fort McDowell Yavapai: From Pawns to Powerbrokers
• Vehicles for Empowerment: The Case of Feminist Movement Organizations
• Help Seeking and Receiving in Urban Ethnic Neighborhoods: Strategies for Empowerment
• Creating and Using Social Technologies for Community Empowerment
• The Illusion of Empowerment: Community Development Within a Colonial Context
• Empowerment and Synergy: Expanding the Community's Healing Resources
• Thoughts on Empowerment