EXPLORING REGIONAL DIFFERENCES IN RELIGIOSITY

AMONG MUSLIM YOUTH IN MALAYSIA

STEVEN E. KRAUSS, AZIMI H. HAMZAH, TURIMAN SUANDI,
SIDEK M. NOAH, RUMAYA JUHARI, JAMIAH H. MANAP
UNIVERSITt PUTRA MALAYSIA
KHAIRUL A. MASTOR, HASNAN KASSAN, AZMA MAHMOOD,
UNIVERSITIKEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA
REVIEW OF RELIGIOUS RESEARCH 2006, VOLUME 47:3, PAGES 238-252
Despite strong evidence of regional differences in religiosity levels in the U.S. (Stump
1986; Chalfant and Heller 1991), attempts to compare these findings with those of
populations outside the U.S., and with non-Christian adherents, have been scant.
Among Muslims and Muslim countries in particular, little known research has been
conducted looking at regional differences in religiosity. In Malaysia, a predominantly
Muslim nation, less modernized rural areas are considered by many to be more reli-
giously and culturally traditional than urban areas (EASCAP 2002). Despite com-
mon perceptions about the differences in religiosity among rural and urban youth
that are reflective ofthe dramatic differences in lifestyle and culture ofthe two regions,
to date no known formal attempt has been made to uncover differences in religiosi-
ty between rural and urban Muslim youth. The current study aimed to address this
gap by comparing religiosity among young Muslims from urban and rural areas of
Malaysia, utilizing a multi-dimensional religiosity model and scales developed specif-
ically for the Malaysian Muslim community (The Muslim Religiosity-Personality
Inventory, or MRPI). Findings indicated significantly higher levels of religiosity for
rural Muslim youth than their urban counterparts across all ofthe religiosity vari-
ables. The findings are significant for the formulation of Islamic education and prac-
tice strategies for the promotion of positive behavioral and moral development among
Malaysian Muslim youth.
INTRODUCTION
T
he research on religiosity among western populations, particularly in the U.S., has
consistently reported higher levels of religiosity among rural residents as opposed
to their urban counterparts (Stump 1986; Chalfant and Heller 1991). Such findings
often refer to high rates of church attendance in the South or to low rates on the West Coast,
but considerable differences have been shown to exist throughout the rest of the nation as
well (Stump 1986). Years of opinion polling, along with textbooks and literature of rural
life, confirm this relationship. Studies on rural religiosity in the U.S. have also revealed
that rural religious belief tends to have more religiously conservative tones and values (Chal-
fant and Heller 1991).
Among Muslim populations in predominantly Muslim countries, the regional religios-
238
Exploring Regional Differences in Religiosity Among Muslim Youth
ity scenario is relatively unknown from an empirical perspective. Little has been identified
in the way of formal attempts to understand religiosity differences among Muslims, par-
ticularly Muslim youth, according to regional diversity. Rural areas in Malaysia, for exam-
ple, are considered by many to be more traditional along religious and cultural lines than
urban areas. This is evidenced by, among others, higher rates of female labor force partic-
ipation in urban areas as opposed to rural areas (Economic and Social Commission for Asia
and the Pacific 2002). Despite common perceptions about rural and urban youth due to the
differences in lifestyle and culture of the two regions, to date no known formal attempt has
been made to uncover differences in religiosity between rural and urban Muslim youth. The
current study thus aimed to address this gap in the non-U.S. literature on regional differ-
ences in religiosity by comparing young Muslims in rural and urban communities in Malaysia.
The study utilized a religiosity model and instrument developed specifically for Muslim
populations known as the MRPI (Muslim Religiosity-Personality Inventory).
MUSLIM RELIGIOSITY MODEL AND INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT
Prior to assessing differences in religiosity among young urban and rural Muslims from
Malaysia, a religiosity model and instrument reflective ofthe tawhidic (divine unity) worid-
view of Islam was developed. The need for such an instrument has been identified by Sham-
suddin (1992) who indicated that Muslims, in particular, are in need of a relatively different
scale to measure religiosity because ". . . the Islamic concept of religion is fundamentally
different from other concepts of religion." Since the dimensions of religion are defined by
the very concept of religion, ". . . the content dimensions of Muslim religiosity vary con-
siderably with Judeo-Christian religious tradition" (Shamsuddin 1992:105). Spilka et al.
(2003:3) also noted that, "most psychological research has been conducted within the Judeo-
Christian framework." According to Ghorbani et al. (2000:2), "Studies of English-speak-
ing populations have dominated the literature. Other societies have received greater recent
attention (e.g., Gorsuch et al. 1997; Grzymala-Moszczynska 1991; Hovemyr 1988; Kaldestad
and Stifoss-Hanssen 1993), but Judeo-Christian commitments still remain the most com-
mon object of investigation." They add that "The need to empirically study other religious
traditions is obvious. Success in meeting that need clearly rests upon the availability of rel-
evant psychological scales (Ghorbani et al. 2000:2)." Finally, Wilde and Joseph (1997:899)
add, "Work on religiosity has tended to focus almost exclusively on Christianity." The dis-
proportion of research efforts being almost exclusively from a Western, Judeo-Christian
perspective and worldview raises important questions pertaining to how religiosity has been
conceptualized in much of the current literature and depicts a clear need for organic meas-
urement instruments reflective of other non-Judeo-Christian faiths.
To address this need in religiosity instrumentation, the MRPI was created to reflect the
unique tawhidic (divine unity) worldview of the Islamic faith. This religiosity model pre-
supposes that religiosity from the Islamic perspective can be understood according to two
main constructs. The first is called "Islamic Woddview." The "Islamic Woridview" construct
reflects the Islamic tawhidic paradigm (doctrine of divine unity/oneness of God) and is meas-
ured or assessed primarily through the Islamic creed {aqidah), which details what a Muslim
should know, believe, and inwardly comprehend about God and religion as laid down by the
Qur'an and Sunnah (way) ofthe Prophet Muhammad, which represent the two primary sources
of Islamic religious law, belief and practice within {Sunni) Islam. Thus, MRPI survey items
developed for the "Islamic Worldview" construct aimed to ascertain one's level of agreement
239
Review of Religious Research
Diagram 1:
MRPI Muslim Religiosity Measurement Model
Islamic Religiosity
I. Islamic Worldview-
Tawhidic Paradigm Rooted in:
Aqidah ~ FotmdalJon Knowledge,
Beliefs and Understanding; and the
Six Articles of Faith {Artain al-lman):
Angels
Messengers
2. Religious Personality-Worship
(Ibadai) - General and Special
A. Geaeral Worsh
Pillars of kiam and Related Behaviors
- Direct Relations with God
Books of Revelation
Day of Judgment
The Divine n)ecree
B. Special Wonbip t^Ibadah)
Relations with Creation
(Mu 'amalat)
Testification of Faith
Prayer
Fasting
Alms
Pilgrimage
Relationship with human
beings
Relationship with rest of
creation
with statements relating to the Islamic pillars of faith (arkan al-Iman) (i.e. belief in: God,
Angels, Messengers and Prophets of God, Books of Revelation, The Day of Judgment, and
the Divine Decree), which represent the foundation of the Islamic creed {aqidah).
The second major construct of the Islamic religiosity concept is called "Religious Per-
sonality." "Religious Personality" represents the manifestation of one's religious worid-
view in righteous works {amalan saleh), or the particular ways that a person expresses his
or her traits or adapts to diverse situations in the worldone's manifested aspects of per-
sonal identity, life definition, and worldviewthat are guided by Islamic religious teach-
ings and motivated by God-consciousness. "Religious Personality" includes behaviors,
motivations, attitudes and emotions that reflect Islamic teachings and commands. This con-
struct is represented by item statements relating to formal ritual worship or "special iba-
daf that reflect one's direct relationship with God; and daily mu'amalat, or religiously-guided
behaviors towards one's family, fellow human beings and the rest of creation (i.e., animals,
the natural environment, etc.), which are known as general worship or "general ibadat."
A key underlying aspect of the Religious Personality construct in sum is akhlaq Islamiyyah,
or the Islamic notion of refined character that underpins a religious personality. Akhlaq
Islamiyyah is the manifestation of the tawhidic worldview in one's everyday actions, which
presupposes a way of life that requires constant and ongoing consciousness of not only the
present, earthly worid (al-dunya), but that of the life-to-come (al-akhira). The tawhidic
worldview of Islam is thus a metaphysical one that puts God at the center, and upholds Him
as the Ultimate Reality, making return to Him the inevitable result for everything in cre-
ation. The Islamic woridview thus defines God as not only the Creator and law-giver, but
worship and service in His way as the very object of life itself (al-Attas 2001). These con-
cepts are illustrated in Diagram 1.
240
Exploring Regional Differences in Religiosity Among Muslim Youth
METHODS
Psychometric properties ofthe MRPI
The subscales ofthe MRPI were originally developed using the rational method, drawn
from the Islamic religiosity theoretical constructs illustrated above. In the present study,
however, a factor analytic or statistical approach was used to determine the subscales. The
four subscales in the present study were arrived at using a variety of psychometric meth-
ods including response distribution, reliability (internal consistency), factor analysis with
oblique rotation, convergent and discriminant validity and by determining the interdimen-
sional correlations between the different MRPI scales.
Scale Development
For the Islamic Worldview scale, a five-point scale was used ranging from (1) "Not at all
in agreement with my view" to (5) "Exactly the same as my view," in line with the objective
ofthe scale which was to gauge respondents' understanding of Islamic aqidah (creed/founda-
tional beliefs). A Likert scale was chosen to determine the extent of agreement and range of
perception rather than a simple correct-incorrect dichotomy.
For the second dimension. Religious Personality, a five-point scale was also used rang-
ing from (I) "I rarely do this" to (5) "I always do this," to measure a range of behaviors
that represent the manifestation and spirit of Islamic worldview in everyday life, including
but not limited to ritual behaviors and actions toward others, oneself, and the natural world
at large.
Sampling
The overall sample for the study was n - 1,692, and comprised youth from four states
within Malaysia: Kuala Lumpur (Wilayah Perseketuan), Johor Bahru, Kelantan and Perlis.
The states were randomly selected and represented a mix of rural and urban youth resi-
dents. Scores for each scale were summed and the means and standard deviations report-
ed. T-tests were conducted to determine differences in religiosity dimension and sub-dimension
mean scores according to place of residence (rural/urban).
Sampling was conducted using a combination of random, cluster and stratified meth-
ods. Three age groups, early youth (16-20), middle youth (21-24), and older youth (25-35),
represented the three sample sub-populations. These were further broken down into six
diverse social-affiliation or cluster groups, which included: IPTA youth (public university
students); youth organization members; Serenti (drug rehabilitation center) members; polit-
ical party members; youth at-large (non-affiliated youth); and young factory workers. Data
was collected over a six-month period. Upon completion of the MRPI field test, data was
cleaned and analyzed using SPSS software version 11.
Limitations ofthe MRPI
A noteworthy limitation of the present study pertains to its use of Islamic knowledge.
The religiosity measurement instrument (MRPI) was developed specifically for young Mus-
lims from Malaysia. Thus, it incorporates the Islamic school of thought most widely prac-
ticed by the Muslims of Malaysia, that which is taught in all public and most private Islamic
institutions in the country. From the perspective of Islamic jurisprudence, Malaysians typ-
ically follow the majority ahl al Sunnah waljama 'ah mazhab (traditional Sunni Islam school
241
Review of Religious Research
Table 1:
Means, Standard Deviations, T-test and Cronbach Alpha Scores
for tbe Islamic Religiosity Dimensionsby Place of Residence
Place of
Residence
Urban
(n=1003)
Rural
(n=665)
Overall
(n=1692)
Mean
4.15
4.25
4.19
Islamic Worldview
Std. Dev. t
0.47 -4.015*
0.47
0.47
Alpha
.82
Mean
3.50
3.61
3.55
Religious Personality
Std. Dev. t
0.52 -4.172*
0.52
0.52
Alpha
.91
* Denotes significance at the p < .05 level
of law/thought). Thus, all Islamic references and knowledge cited in the study fall within
the parameters set by this school, so as to be relevant to Malaysian youth and their knowl-
edge and understanding of Islam. This represents an important limitation, however, in that
certain aspects of the study, including certain items on the measurement instrument and
topics dealing with Islamic knowledge of a legal nature, may not be appropriate for Mus-
lims in other parts of the world and/or those that follow different schools of thought.
RESULTS: PSYCHOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF THE MRPI
Response Distribution
For the Islamic Worldview scale, although the distribution of responses among the 1692
respondents had somewhat of a negative skew (-0.93), the value was within acceptable lim-
its (i.e., between -1.0 and +1.0), demonstrating acceptable levels of skewness and distri-
bution of scores (Huebner, Suldo and Valois 2003). For the Religious Personality scale, the
distribution of responses was much less skewed (-.15) and well within acceptable limits.
Reliability -Internal consistency
The internal consistencies of the two main religiosity dimensions were tested using Cron-
bach Alpha. Internal consistencies greater than .70 were considered adequate (Epps, Park,
Huston, and Ripke 2003). For the Islamic Worldview scale, the alpha was .82 while for the
Religious Personality scale, the alpha was .91 (see Table I).
Construct ValidityFactor Analysis
A principal components factor analysis using oblique rotation was used to determine the
factor structure of the scales. The item data were entered into SPSS and factored to con-
firm if they would empirically fall into the theoretical constructs upon which the invento-
ry was based. Oblique rather than orthogonal rotation was used because it has been suggested
that religiosity variables tend to be inter-related and an oblique rotation as opposed to an
orthogonal method enables one to measure the degree of inter-relationship between factors
(De Jong, Faulkner, and Warland 1976). Furthermore, oblique rotation allows one to over-
242
Exploring Regional Differences in Religiosity Among Muslim Youth
Table 2:
Mean, Standard Deviation, T-test and Cronbach Alpha Scores
for Islamic Worldview Sub-Scales - by Place of Residence
Islamic
Worldview
Sub-Dimension
Place of
Residence
Urban
(n=1003)
Rural
(n = 665)
Overall
(n = 1692)
Mean
4.07
4.14
4.09
Worldly
Std. t Alpha
Dev.
0.67 -2.258* .83
0.65
0.67
Mean
4.28
4.41
4.33
Spiritual
Std. t Alpha
Dev.
0.49 -5.636* .67
0.44
0.48
* Denotes significance at the p < .05 level
come simple structure bias by using an unrestricted factor rotation tbat allows for tbe pos-
sibility of tbe items resulting in a general factor. Varimax, or an ortbogonal rotation, pre-
cludes any general factor because tbere is no way to overcome tbe simple structure bias
tbat is present wben tbe items come from tbe same domain (Gorsucb 1997).
For tbe Islamic Worldview scale, tbe analysis initially produced a six-factor solution
(based on Eigenvalues > I), wbicb accounted for 43% of tbe variance. According to tbe Scree
Plot, bowever, it appeared tbat tbree factors predominated (37% of tbe variance). Tbe data
was tben re-factored according to a tbree-factor solution. Following multiple extractions and
removal of items witb loadings less tban .4, a rotated solution of 3 factors of 25 items was
arrived at. However, following reliability analysis, it was sbown tbat tbe tbird factor was not
reliable, witb an alpba coefficient of only .41. Factor analysis was tbus run again according
to a two-factor solution resulting in two factors tbat accounted for 33% of tbe variance. Tbe
two factors, as indicated in Table 2, were botb found to be reliable. Tbe oblique factor solu-
tion indicated a factor intercorrelation of only .28. Tbe factor loadings for tbe two Islamic
Worldview subscalesnamed 'Woridly' and 'Spiritual'are sbown in Table 3.
For tbe Religious Personality scale, tbe same procedure was conducted. Tbe analysis
initially produced an 18-factor solution (Eigenvalues > 1) wbicb accounted for 55% of tbe
variance. According to tbe Scree plot, bowever, tbe results indicated tbat tbree factors pre-
dominated (29% of tbe variance). Following several extractions and removal of items witb
loadings less tban .4, a rotated solution of 3 factors of 44 items was arrived at. However,
tbe oblique factor solution indicated tbat tbe first and second factors correlated witb one
anotber above .3 (.51), indicating tbe possibility tbat a generalized dimension may under-
lie tbe tbree factors. Tbe oblique rotation metbod allows for tbe intercorrelation of factors
to determine tbis (DeJong, Faulkner, and Warlandl976). Upon furtber analysis of tbe items
tbemselves, no evident grouping resulted from tbe tbree factor solution. A second analysis
was tberefore run based on a two-factor solution. Tbe component correlation matrix based
on oblique rotation indicated tbat tbe two factors again correlated moderately (.53), bow-
ever, tbis time a clear rational grouping resulted from tbe two-factor solution. As sucb, tbe
243
Review of Religious Research
Table 3:
Factor Loadings for Islamic Worldview Sub-Scales
Item Statement Factor 1 - Factor 2 -
Worldly Spiritual
Certain rules ordained by Allah S.W.T. can be violated to achieve success .740
in worldly life.
To fully develop their nations, Muslims cannot completely follow .674
Islamic teachings
All Islamic laws can be modified to fulfill contemporary needs .670
People who impart beneficial knowledge to others will be rewarded for .668
it in this world only
Islamic teachings do not fulfill the needs of human beings' natural .641
state (fitrah). (negative item)
Islamic values are applicable only in certain situations, places and .637
times (negative item)
Allah S.W.T. will not test a person who internalizes and practices .627
religion, (negative item)
Damage and destruction that occur in the world are the negative results .610
of non-believers' actions (negative item)
A man should leave his job when told by the doctor that he will die .485
within a short time (negative item)
In emergency situations, Islam allows Muslims to abandon obligatory .474
prayer (solat). (negative item)
Rasulullah created laws that were not given to him by Allah .474
S.W.T. (negative item)
All laws/rulings in the Qur'an are for the advantage and well-being .447
of Muslims only (negative item)
Rasulullah's teachings are for the advantage and well-being of Muslims .420
only, (negative item)
Allah S.W.T will not forgive people who commit sins intentionally .418
(negative item)
All human activities must be done for the sake of Allah S.W.T. .642
Allah S.W.T's rules fulfill all of His creatures' needs. .589
All deeds {shari'ah) performed by Rasulullah were guided by revelation. .582
If Allah S.W.T. wills to destroy a place, both Muslims and non-Muslims .571
living there may be affected.
Allah S.W.T. is knowledgeable of the movements of the sand particles .568
at the bottom of the ocean.
Rainfall is controlled by angels that have been commanded by .531
Allah S.W.T
All deeds performed by people who have reached the age of puberty .467
will be accounted for in the Hereafter.
Worldly life cannot be separated from life hereafter .462
People are far from Allah S.W.T. when they commit sins (negative item) .425
244
Exploring Regional Differences in Religiosity Among Muslim Youth
Table 4:
Mean, Standard Deviation, T-test and Cronbach Alpha Scores
for Religious Personality Sub-Scalesby Place of Residence
Religious
Personality
Sub-Dimension
Place of
Residence
Urban
(n = 1003)
Rural
(n = 665)
Overall
(n = 1692)
Mean
3.24
3.37
3.30
Ritual
Std, t Alpha
Dev,
0,63 -4.139* .90
0.63
0.63
Mean
3.82
3.90
3.85
Mu'amalat
Std, t Alpha
Dev,
0.57 -3.052* .83
0,52
0.55
* Denotes significance at the p < ,05 level
Religious Personality scale was also broken down into two subscales named 'Ritual' and
'Mu'amalat', in line with the theoretical model presented above. The two factors, as indi-
cated in Table 4, were both found to be reliable. The factor loadings for the Religious Per-
sonality subscales are shown in Table 5,
Convergent and Discriminant Validity
Convergent validity analysis of the two main religiosity scales was assessed by relating
the Islamic Worldview and Religious Personality scores to two additional scales included
in the study using Spearman Rho correlations (due to skewness of data). The Islamic World-
view scale, which set out to measure "Islamic religious understanding," was correlated with
a Perceived Knowledge scale, which was composed of 22 items and measured respondents'
perceptions of their level of knowledge on five categories of Islamic knowledge and prac-
tice (see Appendix A for scale items). Accordingly, these two scales should converge due
to their similarity in content, i.e, relation to Islamic understanding and knowledge. Respon-
dents were asked to rate on a scale from one to five their level of knowledge for each item
(i.e, 1 = no knowledge to 5 = a lot of knowledge) The result of the Spearman Rho correla-
tion for the Islamic Worldview and Perceived Knowledge scales was .34, which was sig-
nificant at the .01 level (Table 6),
The Religious Personality scale was likewise correlated against a Risk Behavior scale,
which was composed of 11 items that included a range of anti-social behaviors (as deemed
by the target population's Islamic school of thought) (see Appendix B for scale items). For
the Risk Behavior scale, respondents were asked to indicate the frequency of engagement
in the list of risk behaviors (i.e. 1 - never to 5 = always). The result of the Spearman Rho
correlation for the Religious Personality and Risk Behavior scales was ,37, which was also
significant at the .01 level. Since the Risk Behavior scores were reverse coded prior to
analysis, the resulting correlation is positive as opposed to negative, indicating discrimi-
nant validity (Table 6).
245 ,
Review of Religious Research
Table 5:
Factor Loadings for Religious Personality Sub-Scales
Item Statement Factor 1 - Factor 2 -
Ritual Mu'amalat
I make sure all my family members are following the teachings ,761
{sunnah) of Rasulullah
I try to understand the meaning of Qur'anic words/verses ,733
I make effort to have ablution {wudhu') at all times ,690
I make an ongoing effort to increase the frequency of my non-obligatory ,687
(nafil) prayers
I make sure that when I read the Qur'an, I understand its demands ,658
I make effort to deepen my understanding of Islamic law ,654
I like to take advantage of opportunities to understand Islam with ,649
my family
I invite others to perform obligatory prayer {solat) ,638
I frequently discuss religious issues with my friends ,634
I find time to recite the Qur'an even if I am busy . ,614
I make effort to internalize the Prophet's ethical conduct in my daily life ,576
I feel sad when Ramadhan ends ,574
I set aside money every year for charity .531
I feel at peace when I hear the Qur'an recited .524
I look for opportunities to give charity (sadaqa) ,522
I have started saving money for hajj since my early days ,506
I love my brothers and sisters in Islam as I love myself .487
I thank Allah S,W,T when beggars come to my house ,484
I do not enter a person's house until I am invited ,629
I worry if I cannot pay debt on time ,613
I respect all opinions ,603
I feel worried when I hurt my parents ,583
I do not expose the shortcomings of others ,580
I do not neglect my friends' dignity ,576
I make effort to make my guests feel as comfortable as possible ,572
I make effort not to display my personal good deeds ,553
I use public buses, walkways, etc, with care/respect ,530
I feel happy when someone says something good about one of .496
my friends
I will keep a person's identity hidden when I talk about them and .489
they are not present
I prefer to do any form of labour than to beg ,483
I refer to the people who know when I feel uncertain about Islamic rulings ,480
I like to help the poor without anyone knowing ,472
I work hard to achieve my goals in the specified time ,431
246
Exploring Regional Differences in Religiosity Among Muslim Youth
Table 6:
Spearman Rho Correlations for Convergent/Discriminant Validity
Islamic Worldview Religious Personality
Islamic Worldview 1 .31**
Religious Personality .31** 1
Perceived Knowledge .34** .46**
Risk Behaviors .23** ,37**
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
Interdimensional Relationships
The correlations among the two Islamic Religiosity scales and two Islamic Worldview
subscales are shown in Table 7. For the two main scales, Islamic Worldview and Religious
Personality, the inter-correlation was found to be .30. For the two Islamic Worldview sub-
scales, the inter-correlation was .24 while for the two Religious Personality subscales, it
was .53. The inter-correlation between Religious Personality and the Worldly subscale was
.21, while the inter-correlation between Religious Personality and the Spiritual subscale
was .32. The inter-correlation between Islamic Worldview and the Ritual subscale was .20,
while the inter-correlation between Islamic Worldview and the Mu'amalat subscale was
.34. All correlations were low-to-moderate and significant at the .01 level, indicating that
the scales are interrelated and that each scale represents a unique construct.
Descriptives and Comparisons of Means
Following the summation of the religiosity dimensions and sub-dimension scales, the
mean scores were compared. Results for the Islamic Worldview scale indicated a higher
mean score for rural youth (4.25) than for urban youth (4.15) (based on the survey scale of
1 to 5). For the Religious Personality scale, the results also indicated a higher mean score
for respondents from rural areas (3.67) than those from urban areas (3.57) (on the survey
scale of 1 to 5). To determine whether the differences between rural and urban respondents
were significant, t-tests were conducted for both scales. T-test results indicated that the dif-
ferences in scores on both scales between rural and urban respondents were shown to be
significant at the .05 level (p < .001). The results are shown in Table 1 above.
To investigate each main scale more closely, mean scores for the Islamic Worldview and
Religious Personality subscales were compared. The results are shown in Tables 2 and 4
above. Descriptive and t-test results indicated that the greatest differences between rural
and urban respondents from the perspective of the Islamic Worldview subscales were found
to be on the Spiritual subscale (t - -5.636), followed by the Worldly subscale (t = -2.258).
T-tests also confirmed that the differences between the two groups for both scales were sig-
nificant at the .05 level.
For the Religious Personality subscales, the results indicated that the larger difference
between rural and urban respondents was found on the Ritual subscale (t - -4.139), fol-
lowed by the Mu'amalat subscale (t = -3.052). T-tests also confirmed that the differences
between the two groups for both scales were significant at the .05 level. Accordingly, the
findings indicate significantly higher mean scores on all four subscales of religiosity for
rural Muslim youth from Malaysia.
247
Review of Religious Research
Table 7:
Pearson Product Moment Correlations for Religiosity Scales and Sub-Scales
Variables/
Scales
Islamic
Worldview
Islamic Worldview 1
Religious Personality .30**
Worldly
Spiritual
Ritual
Mu'amalat
9 3**
.58**
20**
.34**
Religious
Personality
1
. 21**
.32**
. 9 1**
. 83**
Worldly
1
.24**
. 13**
.26**
Spiritual
1
. 25**
. 33**
Ritual Mu'amalat
1
. 53** 1
** Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed)
DISCUSSION
On the results of the psychometric analysis of the MRPI scales, some commonality can
be found with Ghorbani et al.'s (2000) Muslim Attitudes to Religion Scale (MARS). In their
study, a factor analysis was conducted to determine the factorial structure for the adapted
MARS scale. From the analysis, a three factor structure for Islamic religiosity was observed
among their sample of Iranian students. The three factors included personal help, Muslim
worldview, and Muslim practices. Two of these factors are similar to the MRPI's Islamic
Worldview and Religious Personality factors, indicating some level of congruency between
the MRPI and existing (mostly adapted) Muslim religiosity scales. The MRPI, unlike the
MARS, was not an adapted scale but was based on an Islamic theoretical model where items
were developed from Islamic traditional literature. The congruence between the factors on
the MARS and MRPI in the current study, however, lends some level of support for com-
mon religiosity constructs across faith traditions, as the MRPI was developed from an Islam-
ic theoretical framework and Islamic textual sources and the MARS was adapted from the
original ARS scale that was originally designed for Christian respondents.
The results from the descriptive analysis and t-tests in the current study indicate that
there are significant differences in religiosity between rural and urban Malaysian Muslim
youth, according to the MRPI religiosity model, with rural youth scoring higher in every
dimension. These differences were reflected in the scores for the two main religiosity scales
as well as the four subscales. The fmdings are consistent with the literature on regional dif-
ferences in religiosity as reported in studies on American youth and adults (such as Stump
1986; Chalfant and Heller 1991), which tend to depict greater levels of religiosity among
habitants in rural areas.
Higher levels of religiosity among rural populations reflect the growing disparity between
the urban and rural areas within Malaysia itself As Malaysia is a rapidly developing nation,
most of the development and modernization has taken place in the urban centers, primari-
ly in the greater Kuala Lumpur area and surrounding Selangor state. Whereas ethnic Malays
are in the majority nationally, ethnic Chinese constitute the predominant group in Kuala
Lumpur and other urban centers, although the city also has a large Malay population and a
substantial ethnic Indian minority. In addition to population dynamics, the influences of
westernization and popular culture are arguably much greater as well. On the other hand,
248
Exploring Regional Differences in Religiosity Among Muslim Youth
the rural areas, for the most part, have maintained much of their traditional lifestyle as the
economic boom that began in the late 1980s and early 1990s has only begun to reach the
rural areas of the country. In many ways, this has produced somewhat of a cultural divide
in the nation between the ultra-modem and traditional. A more intensive examination of
the prominence and role of religion itself in shaping the lifestyle of rural and urban resi-
dents is a logical next step for researchers.
Unlike other Muslim countries, particularly those in the Middle East, Malaysia has arguably
experienced a smoother transition to modernization, and has retained a manageable balance
between proponents of strict secularism and Islamist factions within the country. The "soft"
culture and tradition of the Muslim Malays, consistent and vibrant economic development,
high rates of employment, Islam as the officially recognized state religion, and a moderate
and inclusive central government have all been important factors in maintaining a relative-
ly peaceful and harmonious national environment. According to Laffan (2003:398), this is
a critical combination of factors: "It has only been when the state has attempted to intervene
in defining or manipulating Islam, or indeed when it has ignored religion on the path to
uneven development, that it has sown the seeds of violence on the disenchanted fringes of
Islamic movements." Perhaps for these reasons, unlike many other Muslim countries, Malaysia
has avoided major problems with fundamentalist movements; despite the heightened and
more visible role ofthe main opposition party, PAS (Parti Islam SeMalaysia).
The stability, prosperity and less prominent role of Islamic political movements in
Malaysia may help to explain why social learning theory can by applied to explain current
patterns of religiosity among rural and urban Muslim youth. In the case of other Muslim
countries, this may not be the case due to the heightened influences of modernist socio-
political movements that have perhaps played a more prominent role in shaping the reli-
gious conscious, behaviors and practices of the general population (Butko 2004). In the
Malaysian example, the relative stability and much lower rate of modernization and change
in the rural settings varies greatly from the dramatic changes that have occurred in the urban
settings during the past twenty years. It could therefore be postulated that young urban Mus-
lims are exposed to a much more diverse cultural milieu that is less influenced by religion
and traditional lifestyle than their rural counterparts.
At the local level, more inquiry is needed to learn about the religious and social envi-
ronments in both rural and urban areas within Malaysia and how they are changing with
modemization. This study has begun to uncover a few key areas for future religiosity research
in Malaysia and other developing countries home to Muslim populations. In particular, as
communal religiosity changes with modemization and changing social factors such as fam-
ily, community, and political life (see Cheu 1997), how is this impacting personal religiosity,
particularly among young people? Even more, can trends such as extremism be detected
from such an inquiry? More comprehensive research efforts are needed to better understand
how Muslim youth are moderating their religious knowledge in light of the dramatic changes
occurring within their societies. How do urban youth, for example, make sense of the dras-
tic social changes they are experiencing around them, in light of a religious tradition that
paints many aspects of such changes (e.g., excessive materialism and individualism) in a
negative light? In light of the dramatic changes occurring within nations like Malaysia, a
better understanding of how rural and urban Muslim youth apply their knowledge to cope
and adapt to modemization in its differing forms is called for. Changes in key social insti-
tutions such as family, school and community all impact the religious lives of youth. Research
249
Review of Religious Research
efforts should be directed at better understanding how this is occurring, to what extent, what
key factors are involved, and what are the important assets, competencies, or types of knowl-
edge that help young Muslims understand and navigate the changes occurring around them.
Such findings could also greatly increase understanding of Muslim youth behavior in the
non-Muslim world, by providing a deeper look into their religious practice that goes beyond
simplistic and superficial stereotypes of Muslim religious life. To this end, a better under-
standing of the root causes and influences of Muslim behavior in light of religious knowl-
edge and the forces of modernity can be attained.
All correspondence can be sent to: Dr. Steven Eric Krauss, Institute for Community and Peace Studies (PEKKA)
Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), Serdang, 43400, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia, Phone: 011-603-8946-8580;
email: abd_lateef@hotmail.com.
APPENDIX A:
PERCEIVED KNOWLEDGE SCALE ITEMS
1. The rights of neighbors
2. Syariah law
3. Mazmumah (bad character)
4. TajwidAl-Quran (correct recitation of At-Qur'an)
5. Ethics of reading Al-Quran
6. Memorization of surah lazim (short chapters of Al-Quran)
7. The meaning of Al-Fatihah (the opening chapter of Al-Qur'an)
8. Proper method of making Ghusl fcompulsory bath)
9. Proper method of making Wudhu' (ablution prior to prayer)
10. Proper method of making Tayammum (dry Ablution)
11. Adab berislinjak (ethics of cleaning oneself after using the toilet)
12. Azan and Iqamat (call to congregational prayer and announcement of the start of prayer)
13. Asmaulhusna (Names of God)
14. Leading congregational prayer
15. 20 Attributes of God
16. Attributes of Prophet Muhammad
17. Pillars of iman (faith)
18. Prophet Muhammad's family lineage
19. The character of Prophet Muhammad
20. The challenges faced by Prophet Muhammad to propagate Islam
21. Life stories of Prophet Muhammad's companions
22. Ethics of communicating with parents
250
Exploring Regional Differences in Religiosity Among Muslim Youth
APPENDIX D:
RISK BEHAVIOR SCALE ITEMS
1. Loitering
2. Smokitig
3. Gamblitig
4. Taking Illegal Drugs
5. Drinking Alcohol
6. Watching Pornographic Videos
7. Readitig Poniographic Books
8. Kissing (outside of marriage)
9. Pre-marital Sex
10. Homosexuality
11. Livitig with member of opposite sex (outside of marriage or family)
REFERENCES
al-Attas, Syed Muhammad Naquib. 2001. Prolegomena to the Metaphysics of Islam. International Institute of
Islamic Thought and Civilization (ISTAC): Kuala Lumpur.
Boylan, Colin, Sharifah Nor and Azizah Abdul Rahman. 1992. Rural Education Provision: Insights from Aus-
tralia and Malaysia. Paper presented at AARE-ERA Conference, Singapore 1996. Retrieved January 18, 2005
from: http://www.aare.edu.au/96pap/boylc96097.txt.
Burisch, Matthias. 1984. "Approaches to Personality Inventory Construction: A Comparison of Merits." Ameri-
can Psychologist 35:863-872.
Butko, Thomas, J. 2(X)4. "Revelation or Revolution: A Gramscian Approach to the Rise of Political Islam." British
Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 31(1 ):41-62.
Chalfant, H. Paul and Peter L. Heller. 1991. "RuralAJrban Versus Regional Differences in Religiosity." Review
of Religious Research 33(1):76-B6.
Cheu, Hock Tong. 1997. "Global Culture and its Effect on the Malay Family and Community." Globalization and
Indigenous Culture, online journal. Institute for Japanese Culture and Classics, Kokugakuin University.
Retrieved October 23, 2001 from http://www.kokugakuin.ac.jp/ijcc/wp/global/index.html.
De Jong, Gordon E, Joseph E. Eaulkner, and Rex H. Warland. 1976. "Dimensions of Religiosity Reconsidered:
Evidence from a Cross-Cultural Study." Social Forces 54(4):866-889.
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (EASCAP). 2002. A Review of the Youth Situation
and National Policies and Programmes. United Nations. Retrieved January 17, 2005 from:
http://www.unescap.oig/esid/hds'youtli/youth_malaysiapdfl#search='youth%20in%20malaysia%20a%20review%20of%
20the%20youth%20situatiQn'.
Epps, Sylvia R., Seoung Eun Park, Aletha C. Huston, and Marika Ripke. 2003. Psychometric Analyses ofthe Pos-
itive Behavior Scale in the New Hope Project and the Panel Study of Income Dynamics." Paper presented at
the Indicators of Positive Development Conference, March 12-13,2003, Washington, DC. Retrieved July 29,
2005 from: www.childtrends.org/Files/EppsParkRipkeHustonPaper.pdf.
Ghorbani, Nima, P. J. Watson, Ahad Framarz Ghramaleki, Ronald J. Morris, and Ralph W. Hood Jr. 2000. "Mus-
lim Attitudes Towards Religion Scale: Factors, Validity and Complexity of Relationships with Mental Health
in Iran." Mental Health, Religion and Culture. 3(2):125-133.
Gorsuch, Richard, L. 1997. "Exploratory Factor Analysis: Its Role in Item Analysis." Journal of Personality
Assessment, 68(3):532-560.
Gorsuch, Richard L., Mylvaganam, Gaithri and Gorsuch, Kay. 1997. "Perceived Religious Motivation." Inter-
national Journal for the Psychology of Religion 7: 253-261.
Grzymala-Moszcczynska, Halina. 1991. "The Psychology of Religion in Poland." International Journal for the
Psychology of Religion 1:243-247.
Grace, Chrisopher. 2000. "A Copious Aggregation of Religious Scales (Book Review)." Journal of Psychology
and Theology 2S:1\-12.
Hill, Paul. C, and Ralph W. Hood Jr. 1999. Measures of Religiosity. Religious Education Press, Birmingham, AL.
251
Review of Religious Research
Hood Jr., Ralph W., Bernard Spilka, Bruce Hunsberger, and Richard L. Gorsuch 1996. The Psychology of Reli-
gion: An Empirical Approach (2"" ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Hovemyr, Maria. 1998. "The Attribution of Success and Failure as Related to Different Patterns of Religious Ori-
entation." International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 8(2): 107-124.
Huebner, E. Scott, Shannon M. Suldo, and Robert F. Valois. 2003. "Psychometric Properties of Two Brief Mea-
sures of Children's Life Satisfaction: The Students' Life Satisfaction Scale (SLSS) and the Brief Multidimen-
sional Students' Life Satisfaction Scale (BMSLSS)." Paper presented at the Indicators of Positive Development
Conference, March 12-13,2003, Washington, DC. Retrieved July 29,2005 ftom: httpy/www.childtrends.org/Files/Hueb-
nerSuldoValoisPaperpdf.
Kaldestad, Eystein and Hans Stifoss-Hanssen. 1993. "Standardizing Measures of Religiosity for Norwegians."
International Joumal for the Psychology of Religion 3:111-124.
Laffan, Michael. 2003. "The Tangled Roots of Islamist Activism in Southeast Asia." Cambridge Review of Inter-
national Affairs I6(3):397-4\4.
Shamsuddin, Quazi Md. Ilyas. 1992. "Dimensions of Muslim Religiosity: Measurement Considerations." In Zafar
Afaq Ansari (ed.). Qur 'anic Concepts of Human Psyche, pp. 99-114. Islamabad: Institute of Islamic Culture.
Spilka, Bernard, Ralph W. Hood, Jr.., Bruce Hunsberger, and Richard Gorsuch. 2003. The Psychology of Reli-
gion: An Empirical Approach (3'^'' edition). London: The Guilford Press.
Stump, Roger, W. 1986. "Regional Variations in the Determinants of Religious Participation." Review of Reli-
gious Research 27(3):208-225.
Wilde, Alex and Steven Joseph. 1997. "Religiosity and Personality in a Moslem Context." Personality and Indi-
vidual Differences 23:899-900.
Yinger, J. Milton. 1970. The Scientific Study of Religion. New York: Macmillan.
252