Uncovering the relations among religiosity, empathic concern, and helping

Abstract

Certain lines of research support the existence of positive overall relations among religiosity, empathy, and helping, whereas others observe no such relations. These discrepancies may result from inconsistent theoretical definitions, variable operationalizations, and experimental situations. The present study attempted to resolve these inconsistencies to clarify the nature of these relations. One hundred and four university student participants read an ostensible news article describing a fellow student in need of aid. Participants in a realistic helping condition were asked whether they would volunteer to help, whereas participants in a hypothetical helping condition indicated whether they would help if given the opportunity. Intrinsic religious motivation, second naiveté orientation, and religious fundamentalism were all positively correlated with state empathic concern, whereas extrinsic-personal motivation, quest motivation, orthodoxy orientation, and religious fundamentalism were associated with various facets of trait empathy. Regarding helping behaviors, a significant main effect of situation realism indicated that individuals in the hypothetical group were more likely to help than were those in the realistic group. An additional significant main effect of second naiveté religious orientation suggested that those higher in second naiveté were more likely to help than those lower in it. Three significant interactions were found: a) higher intrinsic religious motivation and trait perspective taking predicted increased realistic helping but decreased hypothetical helping, and b) the external critique religious orientation predicted decreased real helping but increased hypothetical helping. Implications of the findings and limitations of the study are discussed. Uncovering the Relations Among Religiosity, Empathic Concern, and HelpingResearch on religiosity has identified many links between religion and prosociality. One particular branch of research seeks to understand the complex relations among religiosity, empathy (Duriez, 2004), and helping behaviors (Batson, Floyd, Meyer, & Winner, 1999). However, previous findings have been contradictory, largely due to inconsistent variable operationalizations, theoretical definitions, and situational factors.The present study sought to further explore these relations, utilize more cohesive definitions from both religiosity and empathic concern research, examine one of the glaring methodological inconsistencies of prior research (employing real versus hypothetical experimental helping situations), and subsequently resolve some of the conflicting results observed by other researchers. Defining ReligiosityReligiosity, as a construct, is difficult to define in any single clear, concise manner. Definitions have traditionally contained such elements as a search for what is generically referred to as "the sacred," adherence to a particular theological perspective, and ritualized worship practices (Zinnbauer & Pargament, 2005). Defining religiosity is further complicat...