Confirmatory Analysis of the Indonesian Version of the Centrality Religiosity Scale

Suci Nugraha, Elizabeth Kristi Poerwandari, Dharmayati B. Utoyo


Religiosity in studies of sociology and psychology of religion is generally measured by using a scale constructed for a particular religious tradition. The Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CSR) developed by Huber & Huber (2012) is a religiosity measure scale that can be used by adherents of different religions. Research on religiosity in heterogeneous Indonesian society requires an instrument that can be used by various religious adherents. The purpose of this study is to translate and test the reliability and validity of CSR from English to Indonesian. The translated CRS is a 15-item version that is divided into 5 dimensions, namely ideology, knowledge, experience, public worship, and private worship. This study was conducted in 2 stages. It began with translating the English version of the CRS-15 measuring instrument into Indonesian which was carried out using the back forward translation method from Brislin (1980). The next stage was to test the psychometric appropriateness of CRS-15 using confirmation analysis which was conducted on data from 328 research respondents who were recruited using a convenient sampling technique. The results of statistical analysis showed satisfactory reliability results (α=.787). In addition, it was also indicated that the Indonesian version of the CRS consists of 14 items and could be used in studies of religiosity in Indonesian-speaking communities. 


religious centrality scale, religiosity, personality psychology

Full Text:



Abbasi, SB, Kazmi, F., Wilson, N., & Khan, F. (2019). Centrality of religiosity scale (CRS) confirmatory factor analysis. Sociology International Journal, 3 (4), 319–324.

Allport, GW, & Ross, JM (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5 4, 432–443.

Amaliah, I., Aspiranti, T., & Riani, W. (2020). Religiosity Performance of BMT Leaders and Its Implications to Sukuk Preference. MIMBAR: Journal of Social and Development, 36 (2), 401–410.

Asamani, L., & Opoku Mensah, A. (2016). Religion as an Antecedent of Employees' Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 3 (7), 34–45.

Austin, P., Macleod, R., Siddall, P., McSherry, W., & Egan, R. (2017). Spiritual care training is needed for clinical and non-clinical staff to manage patients' spiritual needs. Journal for the Study of Spirituality, 7 (1), 50–63.

Aziz, S., & Rehman, G. (1996). Index of religiosity: The development of an indigenous measure. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 22 (1–2), 79–85.

Batara, JBL (2018). Public Practice of Religion and Prosocial Behavior among Filipino College Students. Prism, 23 (1).

Baumsteiger, R., & Chenneville, T. (2015). Challenges to the Conceptualization and Measurement of Religiosity and Spirituality in Mental Health Research. Journal of Religion and Health, 54 (6), 2344–2354.

Brislin, RW (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. Methodology, 389–444.

de Vries-Schot, M., Pieper Heitink, G., van Uden, M., & Pieper, J. (2008). Healthy Religion and Salutary Faith: Clarification of Concepts from the Perspectives of Psychology, Psychiatry and of Theology. Journal of Empirical Theology, 21 (1), 88–108.

Gheorghe, H. (2019). The Psychometric Properties of a Romanian Version of the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS 15). Religions, 10 (1).

Glock, CY, & Stark, R. (1965). NoReligion and Society in Tension Title. Rand McNally.

Höllinger, F., & Eder, A. (2016). Functional equivalence and validity of religiousness indicators in cross-cultural comparative surveys. Methodological Innovations, 9, 2059799115622756.

Hood, RW, Spilka, B., & Hilll, PC (2009). The Psychology of Religion, Fourth Edition: An Empirical Approach. In The Guilford Press (4th ed.).

Huber, S., & Huber, OW (2012). The Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS). Religions, 3 (3), 710–724.

Huber, S., & Krech, V. (2008). The religious field between globalization and regionalization: Comparative perspectives. What the World Believes: Analyses and Commentary on the Religion Monitor, 53–93.

Kelly, G. (1955). The Psychology of Personal Constructs. Norton.

King, M., Speck, P., & Thomas, A. (2001). The royal free interview for spiritual and religious beliefs: development and validation of a self-report version. Psychological Medicine, 31 (6), 1015–1023.

Kline, RB (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (Methodology in the Social Sciences) (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.

Krauss, S., Hamzah, A., Juhari, R., & Abdul Hamid, J. (2005). The Muslim Religiosity-Personality Inventory (MRPI): Towards Understanding Differences in the Islamic Religiosity among the Malaysian Youth. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 13 (2), 173–186.

Lee, JC, & Kuang, X. (2020). Religiosity Scale ( CRS ): Teacher Perspectives. 1965.

Stark, R., & Glock, CY (1968). American Piety: The Nature of Religious Commitment. University of California Press.

Wardhani, N., & Dewi, R. (2015). Content Validity Study Crs-15 Tii (the Centrality of Religiosity Scale – For the Atmosphere of Islamic Religious Traditions in Indonesia. Proceedings of SNaPP2015 Social, Economic, and Humanities, 5 (1), 749–754.

Wild, D., Grove, A., Eremenco, S., McElroy, S., Verjee-Lorenz, A., & Erikson, P. (2005). Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: Report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Values in Health, 8 (2), 94–104.

Wilkes, RE, Burnett, JJ, & Howell, RD (1986). On the Meaning and Measurement of Religiosity in Consumer Research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 14 (1), 47–56.

Zarzycka, B. (2008). Tradition or charisma? Religiosity in Poland. Religion Monitor 2008. EUROPE - Overview of Religious Attitudes and Practices, 26–29.

Zarzycka, B., & Rydz, E. (2014). Centrality of Religiosity and Sense of Coherence: a Cross-sectional Study with Polish Young, Middle and Late Adults. International Journal of Social Science Studies, 2 (2), 126–136.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

MIMBAR : Jurnal Sosial dan Pembangunan is licensed under  Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License