Children's God Concepts: Influences of Denomination, Age, and Gender

Ladd, Kevin L.; McIntosh, Daniel N.; Spilka, Bernard

doi:10.1207/s15327582ijpr0801_6

Cited by 34 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nye and Carlson (1984) found no differences in children's and adolescents' images of God among Catholics, Jews, and Protestants. Ladd, McIntosh, and Spilka (1998) found no differences among eight Christian denominations (e.g., Lutheran, United Methodist, and Catholic) in drawings of God by children and adolescents.…”

Section: The Role Of Culturementioning

confidence: 78%

“…In light of the consistent developmental findings, one expectation was that children would provide more concrete and fewer abstract descriptions of God and the Devil, as compared to adolescents and adults. Specifically, this was expected in regard to physical versus supernatural attributes (e.g., Bassett et al 1990; Goldman 1965; Ladd, McIntosh, and Spilka 1998), and in regard to gender descriptions emphasizing a specific gender versus blended or no gender (Ladd, McIntosh, and Spilka 1998).…”

Section: Qualitative Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Children and adolescents (ages 5–16 years) responded to questions such as “Where does God come from?” and “How old is God?”Nye and Carlson (1984:142) concluded that “understanding of the concept of God is limited by the child's level of cognitive growth.”Bassett et al (1990), using a nonverbal measure where 91 participants (ages 4 years to “college students and adults”) selected among pictures that reminded them of God, found that 4–6 year olds selected concrete images (e.g., a bearded man), 8–10 year olds chose both concrete and abstract pictures, and adults preferred abstract images (e.g., three connected circles). Finally, using a method akin to the one employed by Harms (1944), Ladd, McIntosh, and Spilka (1998) asked 968 children (ages 3–18 years) to draw God and to briefly explain their drawings. They found that older children used more symbolism, such as crosses and fire in their drawings, than did younger ones.…”

Section: The Role Of Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, a common approach has been Piagetian. This work has focused on children and adolescents, and has examined the extent to which the development of God concepts fits within a cognitive progression from concrete to abstract thought (e.g., Gorsuch 1968; Harms 1944; Ladd, McIntosh, and Spilka 1998).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Conceptions of God and the Devil Across the Lifespan: A Cultural‐Developmental Study of Religious Liberals and Conservatives

Jensen¹

2009

Scientific Study of Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Utilizing a cultural-developmental approach, this interview study examined how children, adolescents, and adults from religiously liberal and conservative groups conceptualize God and the Devil. Participants (N = 120) conceptualized God and the Devil along similar dimensions, including number (e.g., one, many), gender, central attributes (e.g., physical, supernatural), and evaluation (e.g., positive, neutral). Within-subject differentiations of God and the Devil occurred on all dimensions. Religiously liberal and conservative groups differed on attributes, evaluations, and degree of control ascribed to God and the Devil. With respect to age, results suggest a rethinking of the Piagetian interpretation that children's conceptions of supernatural entities are more concrete, more anthropomorphic, and less abstract than those of adolescents and adults. The results instead point to the usefulness of a cultural-developmental approach.

show abstract

Section: The Role Of Culturementioning

confidence: 78%

Section: Qualitative Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: The Role Of Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Conceptions of God and the Devil Across the Lifespan: A Cultural‐Developmental Study of Religious Liberals and Conservatives

Jensen¹

2009

Scientific Study of Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Social scientists and psychologists tend to reverse this causal order and argue that individuals anthropomorphize the idea of the supernatural to reflect cultural values and desirable human traits (cf. Benson and Spilka 1973; Gorsuch and Smith 1983; Ladd, McIntosh, and Spilka 1998; Roberts 1989). Whether humans create their God or God creates humans, earthly images of God indicate how believers perceive the ultimate object of their religious devotion.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

God in America: Why Theology Is Not Simply the Concern of Philosophers

Froese¹,

Bader

2007

Scientific Study of Religion

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As citizens of the most technologically advanced and economically developed country in the world, nearly all Americans stalwartly maintain their faith in God, much more so than residents of other postindustrial countries (Norris and Ingelhart 2004). But what is the content and meaning of this belief? Perhaps belief in God has become so pervasive in contemporary American culture that it reflects little about believers' deeper religious thoughts, identities, and actions. We find the opposite to be true. Outside the confines of seminaries, competing beliefs about who God is and what God wants have a clear and important connection to everyday religious life in the United States. Subtle distinctions in American images of God powerfully predict religious diversity as measured by belief in the truth of a single religious faith, religious devotion, and attitudes about the compatibility of secular and religious spheres. More specifically, we discern that American religious conservatism, in all its forms, can be aptly characterized by the belief that God is highly engaged in the world and particularly judgmental of human behavior.

show abstract