The Centrality of Religiosity Scale as a Psychological Assessment

This case assignment is focused on the psychological assessment by Huber S. and Huber O.W. The characteristics of the “evaluation” include objectivity, validity, practicality, reliability, and consistency of the results obtained. The Centrality of Religiosity Scale is used when it is essential to measure the “degree of religiosity”, the power of its influence on an individual. This method is used in the field of religious studies, sociology, and psychology of religion.

In addition, there are several central questions in the assessment. The scientists have found that each respondent can make their evaluation, following different criteria. For instance, in the assessment of the researcher’s work, they seek to find out how to correctly determine the representativeness of the dimensions of religiosity, how to avoid discrepancies, and summarize the results. How and in what ways can one identify the reliability of specific measures and what is their reasonableness, thoughtfulness, and logic? Moreover, “the explorers” try to find a solution to the issues within the framework of the five main dimensions of religiosity. So, how can the problem of representativeness and the possibility of generalization of religious content be eliminated?

The CRS scale refers to the Charles Glock model of religion in terms of defining representative dimensions. The authors of the project claim that CRS follows probabilistic logic. The validity of the strategy of measuring religiosity in individuals has been confirmed empirically. Besides, the relevance and significance of the questions from the test is confirmed according to political, social, and theological concepts, the complexity of religious emotions.

The Norms of People Used to Develop the Assessment

The norms of the people used to develop the assessment were based on the use of quantitative criteria for evaluating the results of the test. This allows one to determine the level of achievement or the degree of severity of religiosity. The criteria are statistical indicators of the standardization sample, as well as various signs and symptoms indicating a certain level of severity of the diagnosed qualities. The test norms are obtained on the basis of determining the average values and variance in the standardization sample. Such elements are calculated for a normative sample of the average statistical aspect and variance as a basis for developing estimates of the scale test. Quantitative norms are contained in special tables attached to the test manuals. Hence, they can determine the relative position of each specific result in comparison with sample data expressed in fractions of variance.

The assessment formed on the severity, significance, as well as importance for the individual. The five theological dimensions listed in the paper are the central norms, standardized measurement methods and criteria for assessing the degree of religiosity, which help to achieve the goals and objectives set during the assessment. The scale that measures the degree of true religiosity represents several different options among themselves. They differ in the number of questions on the fulfillment of which the determination of the degree of an individual’s religiosity is based. The selection of questions is based on urgency and importance for the relevant dimensions.

The questions in some cases relate to prayers, communication with the deity, religious services, meditations. They are constructed and formulated according to the principle of measuring the intellectual, ideological characteristics of the subject. It also takes into account the public and personal practice of a person, his experienced experience. The wording of the answers is determined using a five-point scale – the sum of points is calculated and divided by the number of issues.

Thus, the test norms used by researchers express the standardization of the test score. They allow the researchers to determine the level of achievement and the degree of expression of the degree of religiosity with the help of certain methods, rules and strategies. In this case, the norms are necessary when interpreting the primary indicators as a standard with which the evaluation results are compared.

The Reliability of the Assessment

The reliability of any assessment is determined by the stability of the results and the accuracy of psychodiagnostics measurements. In fact, the centrality of the religiosity scale (CRS) has several versions and evaluation options, and accordingly, each of them shows its results regarding the accuracy of the data obtained. In particular, this point concerns more updated and expanded types of assessment that provide unambiguous formulations and increase reliability.

For instance, if one take into account the Brazilian culture, mentality and society, then the CRS scales with the signs “10BR” and “5BR” have proven themselves better in the part of South America. The scientists believe that CRS-10BR shows better compliance indices in contrast to CRS-5BR, but both types of assessment are suitable for simple and fast data collection among the population in Brazil (Esperandio, et al., 2019). According to recent research in 2020, the results of the assessment conducted in Georgia confirm the presence of stability and accuracy in the context of the centrality of religiosity (Badurashvili & Huber, 2020). It is an indisputable fact that the CRS-5 test showed the consistency of characteristics, suitability for longitudinal analysis. CRS-7 represents an alternative to CRS-5 and similarly provides comparable results. Additionally, the scale of the centrality of religiosity within Hong Kong with an emphasis on a specific target group shows validity in a specific number of cases. It is proved that CRS-5 had the best compliance indicators of CRSi-7 (Lee, 2020). Besides, Ackert scientist proves high reliability, strength, and reliability of CRSi-7 in countries such as Romania, Russia, and Georgia (Ackert, 2021). There is a high probability of accurately calculating the coefficient of the indicator of religiosity.

In addition, the CRS versions have been repeatedly translated into several languages of the world. This method already has its adaptation, specially developed for studying the religiosity of Buddhists, Hindus, and Muslims. The “measure of centrality” continues to be developed, supplemented, and improved within the framework of intercultural principles and systems. For example, the Urdu version has achieved the authenticity of the content through the translation process of direct reverse translation (Abbasi et al., 2019). The final model of the CRS Urdu language had reliable compliance indices for assessing the level of religiosity.

Therefore, the high authenticity and accuracy of the method of measuring the centrality, importance, or severity of religious meanings for a person have been confirmed by various scientific studies. It is proved that the obtained data results inspire serious confidence and confidence in the authenticity and facticity of methods and means. Nevertheless, when presented again, the CRS tasks cause the subjects to have an equivalent reaction to the first presentation. The outcomes of the conducted studies and assessments are close to the truth, and the validity shows that the results relate to the phenomenon that is being studied by the researchers.


Abbasi, S.B., Kazmi, F., Wilson, N., & Khan, F. (2019) Centrality of religiosity scale (CRS) confirmatory factor analysis. Sociology International Journal, 3(4), pp. 319-324. Web.

Ackert, M. (2021). Centrality of religiosity scale – test of model configuration, reliability, and consistency in Romania, Georgia, and Russia [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Universität Freiburg. Web.

Badurashvili, I., & Huber, S. (2020). Validation of the short forms of the centrality of religiosity scale in Georgia. Religions 11(2), p. 57. Web.

Esperandio, M.R.G., August, H., Viacava, J.J.C., Huber, S., & Fernandes, M.L. (2019) Brazilian validation of centrality of religiosity scale (CRS-10BR and CRS-5BR). Religions, 10(9), p. 508. Web.

Lee, J. C. (2020). Validation of the Chinese version of the centrality of religiosity scale (CRS): Teacher perspectives. Religions, 11(5), p. 266; Web.

Cite this paper

Select style


PsychologyWriting. (2023, September 18). The Centrality of Religiosity Scale as a Psychological Assessment. Retrieved from


PsychologyWriting. (2023, September 18). The Centrality of Religiosity Scale as a Psychological Assessment.

Work Cited

"The Centrality of Religiosity Scale as a Psychological Assessment." PsychologyWriting, 18 Sept. 2023,


PsychologyWriting. (2023) 'The Centrality of Religiosity Scale as a Psychological Assessment'. 18 September.


PsychologyWriting. 2023. "The Centrality of Religiosity Scale as a Psychological Assessment." September 18, 2023.

1. PsychologyWriting. "The Centrality of Religiosity Scale as a Psychological Assessment." September 18, 2023.


PsychologyWriting. "The Centrality of Religiosity Scale as a Psychological Assessment." September 18, 2023.