The Relationship of Psychological Type Preferences to Biblical Interpretation

Abstract

This paper tests the theory that lay people prefer interpretations of the bible that match their psychological type preferences. A sample of 404 lay, adult Anglicans from 11 different churches read a healing story from Mark's gospel and then chose between interpretative statements designed to appeal to particular psychological type preferences. Psychological type preferences were assessed according Jung's typology using the Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS). Participants preferred interpretations that matched their personality preferences in both the perceiving (sensing versus intuition) and judging (feeling versus thinking) processes. Theological content may also have influenced choice independently of psychological type preferences because those with conservative rather than liberal attitudes to the bible also preferred sensing over intuitive and feeling over thinking interpretations.

Psychological type profile of Lead Elders within the Newfrontiers network of churches in the United Kingdom

“…At the conceptual level, the theory has been employed in discussions of many areas of relevance to practical theology, including prayer (Michael & Norrisey, 1984;Keating, 1987, Duncan, 1993, ministry and leadership (Oswald & Kroeger, 1988), Christian growth (Goldsmith & Wharton, 1993), communicating the gospel (Butler, 1999), preaching (Francis & Atkins, 2000, 2002Francis & Village, 2008), congregations (Edwards, 1993;Baab, 1998), and faith (Francis, 2005). At the empirical level, the theory has been operationalised to examine the psychological profiles associated with distinctive expressions of the Christian faith, including charismatic experience (Francis & Jones, 1997;Jones, Francis, & Craig, 2005), styles of believing (Francis & Jones, 1998), religious attitudes (Jones & Francis, 1999;Fearn, Francis, & Wilcox, 2001;Francis, Robbins, Boxer, Lewis, McGuckin, & McDaid, 2003;Francis, Jones, & Craig, 2004), tolerance for religious uncertainty (Francis & Jones, 1999), mystical orientation (Francis & Louden, 2000;Francis, 2002;Francis, Village, Robbins, & Ineson, 2007), religious orientations (Francis & Ross, 2000), dogmatism (Ross, Francis & Craig, 2005), biblical interpretation (Village & Francis, 2005), belief about the Bible and the Holy Spirit (Village, 2005), prayer preferences (Francis & Robbins, 2008), cathedral visiting (Francis, Williams, Annis, & Robbins, 2008), and Celtic Christianity (Francis, Craig, & Hall, 2008).…”

What happened to the fig tree? An empirical study in psychological type and biblical hermeneutics

“…Subsequently a small body of empirical research has begun to test this application of theory using both quantitative (Village & Francis, 2005;Francis, Robbins, & Village, 2009;Village (2010) and qualitative (Francis, 2010b) approaches.…”

“…The first quantitative study Village and Francis (2005) invited a sample of 404 lay adult Anglicans from 11 different churches to read a healing story from Mark's Gospel and then to choose between pairs of interpretative statements designed to distinguish between the perceiving functions (sensing and intuition) or between the judging functions (thinking and feeling). The participants also completed the Keirsey Temperament Sorter (Keirsey & Bates, 1978) as a measure of psychological type.…”

The relationship of intrinsic, extrinsic, and quest religious orientations to Jungian psychological type among churchgoers in England and Wales

“…A fourth strand has examined the connection between psychological type and different styles of believing (Francis & Jones, 1998, 1999aVillage, 2005). Other studies have examined the relationship between psychological type and dogmatism (Ross, Francis, & Craig, 2005), preferred ways of interpreting scripture (Village & Francis, 2005), religious affiliation (Ross & Francis, 2006), Celtic Christianity (Francis, Craig, & Hall, in press), and the experience and appreciation of cathedral visitors (Francis, Williams, Annis, & Robbins, in press). …”