“…As we have elsewhere observed, critiques of the cognitive-developmental paradigm in the psychology of religious and spiritual development, and in near domains, have been numerous, concerned with both theory and method, have in some cases questioned the pertinence of results from related empirical research, and claimed the need for alternative, or at least, complementary, quasi-independent, approaches. Criticisms aimed at Goldman and allied researchers, have largely claimed a lack of sensitivity to context, especially religious context and the relative intensity of exposure to religious content, (Batson, Schoenrade and Ventis, 1993;Hoge & Petrillo, 1978;Pierce & Cox, 1995;Spilka et al, 2003), and their concentration on the cognitive development of children and adolescents, to the exclusion of adults, as well as for the lack of longitudinal studies, by researchers who have insisted on the increasing significance of context in relationship to variables of stage and structure across developmental domains, including religious and spiritual development, across the life span, particularly in the adult years (Armstrong & Crowther, 2002;Belzen, 2009;Day, 2008a, in press, a, b;Day & Youngman, 2003;Dillon & Wink, 2002;Mattis et al, 2001;Popp-Baier, 1997;Ray & McFadden, 2001;Roukema-Koning, 2005;Wheeler, Ampadu, & Wangari, 2002;Zinnbauer, Pargament, & Scott, 1999).…”