Religiosity and American Muslim Youth

This article was downloaded by: [Hamid, Hamada] On: 17 November 2009 Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 782504870] Publisher Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Journal of Muslim Mental Health Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t716100768 Religiosity and Presence of Character Strengths in American Muslim Youth Sameera Ahmed ab a The Family and Youth Institute, Canton, Michigan b Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan To cite this Article Ahmed, Sameera'Religiosity and Presence of Character Strengths in American Muslim Youth', Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 4: 2, 104 — 123 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/15564900903245642 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15564900903245642 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 4:104–123, 2009 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1556-4908 print / 1556-5009 online DOI: 10.1080/15564900903245642 Religiosity and Presence of Character Strengths in American Muslim Youth SAMEERA AHMED Downloaded By: [Hamid, Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 The Family and Youth Institute, Canton, Michigan Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan This study explored religiosity and the presence of character strength among American Muslim youth and analyzed 174 Muslim and Comparison youth. The results indicate that 75.5% of American Muslim youth sampled were categorized as Highly Religious, significantly more than their peers (p = .0001). Although Muslim youth were identified as Highly Religious, only 33.7% of the sample had previously explored their ideological beliefs and then made a commitment to Islam. Religiosity was significantly associated with a greater number of character strengths (p = .0002), which served as a protective factor. Finally, Highly Religious American Muslim youth were associated with the following character strengths: kindness, equity, leadership, self-regulation, prudence, gratitude, hope/optimism, spirituality, and forgiveness. Keywords Character strength, Muslim youth, religiosity INTRODUCTION Since the September 11, 2001, attacks, there has been an increased interest in understanding the estimated 5–8 million Muslims living in the United States (Bagby, Perl, & Froehle, 2001). It is estimated that almost 67% of Muslims living in America are under the age of 40 (Zogby, 2000). As such, researchers and policy makers alike are interested in gaining a better understanding of American Muslim youth and factors impacting their development. In an attempt to build greater scientific knowledge on this understudied population, this study explores religiosity and the presence of character strengths. Address correspondence to Sameera Ahmed, PhD, Director, The Family and Youth Institute, 42015 Ford Road #169, Canton, MI 48187. E-mail: [email protected] 104 In addition. complex environment. engaging in premarital sex. personal and family beliefs. including lack of support from their family and friends. loneliness. This often prompts parents to prevent age-appropriate exploration and impose many restrictions on social activities.. Al-Mateen & Afzal. 2006). fail to provide viable social and recreational alternatives. 2006). problems in maintaining their faith. Other youth may engage in normative behaviors as expected by their parents and Muslim community while potentially experiencing feelings of alienation. as well as the need to conduct additional research. Downloaded By: [Hamid. The implications of the results. are explored. In addition to the normative developmental changes. who are developing within an ever-changing.Religiosity of American Muslim Youth 105 The article begins by providing an introductory background on American Muslim youth. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 American Muslim Youth American Muslim youth. many youth believe their parents’ fear that they will acculturate into society and lose their religious and cultural identity. American Muslim youth have reported varying challenges. The manner in which a young person responds to these stressors depends on a number of differing factors.. Muslim youth have stated that their parents often lack understanding of the American social context and normative youth culture. risking being ostracized by their family and the Muslim community. As a result. Muslim youth encounter predictable biological. real or perceived discrimination. Like most young people. Muslim adolescents and young adults frequently find themselves caught in a struggle between trying to maintain their religious and cultural values while also finding a way to relate to their peers. In addition. and lack of acceptance from their peers due to differences in life styles and beliefs (Ahmed & Akhter. then identifies protective factors that may positively impact their development (i. family and peers) has been described as one of the greatest challenges experienced by American Muslim youth. and social developmental changes. which influence how they experience the world around them. and consuming alcohol or drugs. When referring to the . Some youth will engage in normative peer behaviors. and issues related to identity and acculturation (Ahmed & Akhter. Lack of support from one’s immediate context (i. Muslim youth have reported experiencing peer pressure to engage in activities and behaviors that are contrary to their religious beliefs such as dating. and available social and recreational alternatives. psychological.e. self-esteem. 2004).e. religiosity) and highlights methodological challenges in studying American Muslim youth. including but not limited to: sources of support. 2006. These difficulties are often compounded when parents. who may be unaware of the challenges experienced by the young person. even on those that do not conflict with religious values and beliefs (Ahmed & Akhter. American Muslim youth have frequently indicated that the communities they reside in are not supportive of their needs. are faced with numerous challenges and opportunities. religious. and antisocial behaviors such as truancy. 2002). and investigations of numerous high-profile charity groups. but also flourish (Seligman. polls conducted by Cornell University indicated that 44% of Americans polled believe that some form of restriction should be placed on American Muslims (Cornell. such as the issuance of the USA PATRIOT Act. coupled with the real or perceived experiences of discrimination and feelings of alienation during a crucial developmental period. has led many American Muslim youth to perceive themselves as misunderstood and as unwelcome citizens of their own country. at the very least. 2004) and 70% of American Muslim youth have reported experiencing negative reactions due to their religious beliefs and practices (Muslim Public Affairs Council [MPAC]. 2006). Although research on American Muslim youth is in its infancy. interrupt the pathways through which risk factors function. reduce the impact of risk factors. Positive psychology is the study of human strengths and virtues with the aim of reducing maladaptive behavior and building strengths and virtues to help individuals and communities not only endure and survive. government actions. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 106 S. a renewed interest in understanding human strengths has evolved through positive psychology.e. The lack of support in varying contexts. understanding factors that may prevent American Muslim youth from engaging in risky behaviors is of great interest. With respect to their society. 2005). may be challenging for American Muslim youth. There is great interest in understanding protective factors. or. ones that may serve to decrease the likelihood an individual will engage in risky behavior or lead toward the promotion of positive youth development.. many youth have voiced frustration due to lack of culturally relevant (i. Protective Factors and Character Strength Psychological research has traditionally focused on pathological and maladaptive behaviors of an individual.. These challenges may predispose many young people toward engaging in “aggressive behaviors” such as substance abuse. American). Similarly. and social programs. initial studies have reported preliminary evidence for American Muslim youth engaging in risky behaviors (Abu-Ras et al.. and aggressiveness. These . Protective factors promote development through a variety of mechanisms: They may prevent the initial occurrence of a risk factor altogether. criminal activity. As mentioned above.Downloaded By: [Hamid. 2003. Rice et al. Ahmed et al. However.. Islam & Johnson. 2009. Research has indicated that certain beliefs or values within one’s character are associated with a decrease in the impact of negative stressors. American Muslim youth are exposed to numerous factors that may increase the likelihood of engaging in risky behaviors. As such. ethnic-based immigration interviews and profiling. age-appropriate. 2009. Ahmed American Muslim community. They also have reported a lack of influence on the future direction of the community. parents. 2001). 1992). 1998. 1995). religion appears to exert a significant to moderate deterrent effect on an individual’s criminal behavior (Baier & Wright. The presence of trusting and supportive mentors. Peterson & Seligman. Researchers have suggested that religious youth are less likely to engage in health-compromising behaviors such as carrying weapons. Windle. Kotchick et al. Religious organizations and community groups often share goals and similar experiences that foster support and a stable sense of community and belongingness through rituals and community interaction (Erickson. Catalano. 2000).. Similarly. 2004. 2001). current research in the field of youth development has suggested additional factors that promote youth development. it is of particular interest to understand whether or not religiosity indeed serves as a protective factor for American Muslim youth. engaging in fights. community support (Benson. Eccles & Gootman. 2002). However. In addition to character strengths serving as protective factors. Kirchler. Roehlkepartain. 1965). and greater religiosity (Regnerus. and friends with similar beliefs and values and who help to nurture positive characteristics has been observed to function . Smith. Religiosity as a Protective Factor? Given the current geopolitical and social context. 1990. it is unknown if these factors also serve as protective factors for American Muslim youth. 1999. including: positive family interactions (Feldman et al. previous research on non-Muslim populations has theorized that religion serves as a protective factor for young people. drinking and driving. & Miller. & Fritsch. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 Religiosity of American Muslim Youth 107 character strengths are also associated with promoting positive youth development (Park. 2004). the presence of character strength that emerges based on the classification of strengths and virtues across history and cultures has been associated with being a protective factor (Park.. However. positive peer group identification (Hogg & Abrams. 1998). Tarrant et al.Downloaded By: [Hamid. Thus. prior investigation on the protective nature of religiosity on American Muslim youth has not been conducted. At present. It is believed that religion sets standards that are repeated by religious and community leaders. 2003). 2001) and sexual acting out (Donahue & Benson. & Rude. and provides young people with clear and explicit messages of socially appropriate behaviors during a period in their life that is often unclear (Erickson. and using illegal drugs (Wallace & Forman. 1998. Jessor et al. 1965).. 2003. positive experiences and bonding to conventional society (Hawkins. 2003. adolescent delinquency has been observed to negatively correlate with personal religiosity and the religiosity of their peers.. Religiosity may serve as a protective factor because of meaningful interpersonal connections through religious involvement. In addition. & Palmonari. Pombeni. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 108 S. national organizations. such as mentoring programs. a majority of the present literature on the protective nature of religion has been conducted with Christian youth and their respective congregations. These interpersonal connections are also thought to help by connecting young people to adults and established institutions. such trusting interactions within a religious setting foster identity development. thereby protecting them from possible antisocial behavior (Cook. Communities that provide youth with a place to congregate and engage in activities that help build feelings of self-worth and self-confidence. 1998). As such. a Comparison between the role of many churches in the lives of Christian youth may not be analogous to the role of many mosques in the lives of American Muslim youth. religious institutions are thought to assist young people in the development of self-regulatory abilities by providing them with role models and opportunities to model prosocial behaviors in structured settings. Specifically. Ahmed as a protective factor in the lives of young people (Busseri et al. 1997). should be considered . directions. As a result. Researchers may consider alternatives such as community. Religious organizations and institutions can serve to promote the development of character strengths and other protective factors because they often engage youth in socially sanctioned activities. Jessor et al. as well as feel positive about belonging to a group. in order to better meet their interpersonal needs such as specialized youth groups. 2000). As such.. thus. 1965. In addition. 2000).Downloaded By: [Hamid. may help to foster their sense of self and provide them with a set of convictions. can foster resiliency in adolescents through meeting their social and spiritual needs (Cook. how one defines the religious community of the young person will likely influence the degree of impact that the religious community has on their life and.. student organizations. therefore. 2000). However. Contemporary research on the protective nature of religion on young people has primarily focused its attention on religious groups that are dominant in society. American Muslim youth may consider a variety of religious organizations. 2006. many mosques provide only religious instruction and do not offer social or recreational programs for adolescents and young adults. 2000. However. Groups that offer special programs for youth. strengthen self-worth. and a community to be a part of (Cook. may not meet the social needs of its membership. in Islam there is no religious hierarchy structure. Moreover. and provide the adolescent with a set of convictions (Cook. 1965). and mosques are sometimes simple prayer halls which. providing them with meaning and a framework within which young people can work to establish their place in society and to gain a sense of purpose for the future (Erikson. not directly affiliated with their local mosque. 1968).and student-led groups to focus on meeting the needs of American Muslim youth and provide an environment promoting positive youth development. thereby providing alternative peer group and prosocial opportunities and reducing the opportunity for antisocial involvement (Kress & Elias. Erickson. or Internet communities. The phrase religious minority group refers to religious groups that clearly identify themselves as being distinct in their faith. Friday prayers can take place anywhere as long as the requirement for congregational prayers is met and thus not required to be held at an established Mosque. in particular. rituals. Friday congregational prayer cannot be used as a proxy for church attendance because attendance is not mandatory for Muslim women. there has been no research that has explored the influence of religious minority status on religious commitment or the protective nature of religiosity among American Muslim youth..Downloaded By: [Hamid. it is optional for women. 1994). For religious minority youth. To date. In addition.). and practice. religious commitment is theorized to have varying impact depending on the young person’s environment. measurement of church attendance does not adequately address the extent to which youth identify with religion. 1994). An individual’s identification with their religious minority group is thought to be strengthened when they experience negative attitudes and treatment directed toward their religious group (Markstrom-Adams et al. It is during young adulthood that many youth are expected to display their loyalty to their religious group. 1994). Few researchers have investigated religious commitment among religious minority youth. or the degree of internalization of these beliefs into their everyday life and may be more related to parental . which may not be an accurate measure of religious commitment for religious minority youth (Markstrom-Adams. Also. While Muslim men are required to attend weekly Friday congregational prayers. Measuring Religiosity Although religiosity has been identified as a protective factor among Jewish and Christian youth. Researchers have often used adolescent and young adult church attendance as a measure for religiosity. weekly mosque attendance is not required of all Muslims. measurement issues raise concern about the applicability of current measures with American Muslim youth. Individuals born into religious minority families are thought to receive greater religious socialization from their family and religious community throughout their childhood in the hopes that the individual will maintain their religious beliefs and pass them on to the next generation (MarkstromAdams et al. such as American Muslim youth. in order to avoid potential rejection due to their religious minority status. Religious organizations that cater to the needs of American Muslim youth are more likely to serve the role of religious institutions as described in the literature. Hofstra. and whose faith is not practiced by the majority of people in their society (Markstrom-Adams. and assimilate into mainstream society. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 Religiosity of American Muslim Youth 109 when studying American Muslim youth. & Dougher. Another possibility is that religious minority youth may instead choose to dissociate from their religious community. and whether there are any differences between them and their peers. In addition. endorses the same measure indicating that they pray once a day. and the meanings of the behaviors often have different significance to Muslims. 2008). However. For example. Specifically. When studying American Muslim youth. the Muslim American Society Youth (MAS Youth). Ahmed expectations than to an individual’s beliefs and practice. therefore. Hence. As such. what are the specific character strengths that are associated with greater religious commitment? METHOD Procedures Participants were recruited from organizations serving the needs of young people. not easily adaptable to non-Muslim populations (AlGhorani. were invited to participate in the research study. Finally. The study also attempts to determine whether religiosity in American Muslim youth is associated with the development of character strengths that serve as protective factors. it would be important to clarify whether a young person’s religious commitment is due to personal conviction. 2008. who is required to pray five times a day. Individuals attending activities of a community-based organization. Participants were informed that the study was aimed at understanding young people’s values. there is a need for researchers to assess the extent of an individual’s religious exploration and the degree of religious commitment. the implication is that the individual may not be Highly Religious because they are not fulfilling a basic tenet of Islam. Sahin. and behaviors. This study aims to explore the religious commitment of American Muslim youth. it looks at the religiosity of American Muslim youth. Although there has been an attempt to develop scales to better measure religiosity in Muslims. one that they have thought through and committed to. the Muslim Students Association (MSA). Francis. the implication is likely that the individual is Highly Religious. These . the norms and scales are specific to Islam and Muslims and. the study investigates the degree of religious exploration and how the findings compare with an individual’s proclaimed religiosity. if a Muslim youth. beliefs.Downloaded By: [Hamid. or a reflection of parental expectations. and a university-based organization. if religiosity is indeed associated with protective factors for American Muslim youth. & Al-Failakawi. it is important to use measures that can adequately assess their religious commitment and allow for the comparability of the results with non-Muslim peers in order to determine if religiosity significantly differs. This is of particular importance for American Muslim youth because it is theorized that they receive greater religious socialization from their family and community. if a Christian youth prays once a day. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 110 S. Another methodological issue with many of the current measures of religiosity is that they were developed based on Judeo-Christian beliefs and practices. 3 20. Participants were raised mainly in North America.4 . Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 Participants This study was comprised of 174 participants between the ages of 18 and 25 years. Table 1 Demographic Comparison of Sample Subject (N ) Muslim group Comparison group Age Years in U.7 2. In addition.3% men and 56.6 14.2 7. Upon completion of the questionnaire.S. as noted in Table 1. They were then provided with a questionnaire packet. participants were given a debriefing form. insufficient data was collected. and asked to sign consent forms. resulting in a snowball sampling. . Comparison youth were recruited through undergraduate psychology courses at a nonreligiously affiliated private metropolitan university with a diverse student body.1 2.2% women. Muslims comprised 56% of the participants (n = 99). based on parental income. and those describing their beliefs as “other. With respect to academic performance. Although the study attempted to control for socioeconomic background of participants. Hindus.39 3.27 . Participants were informed both verbally and in written format about their rights while participating in the study. GPA = grade point average. Other religious views were represented in smaller numbers (>2%). Participation in the study was voluntary. as measured by self-reported grade point average (GPA). agnostics.” Comparable numbers of male and female participants were included in the study (96 women. followed by Christians 29% (n = 51).8% men and 53.3 3.7% women while the Comparison sample consisted of 46. and included Jews. atheists. American Muslim youth were slightly older than their peers.5 15. The Muslim population consisted of 43. as the main religious groups represented. 78 men). GPA Total Male Female M SD M SD M SD 97 77 42 36 55 41 21.5 Note. Downloaded By: [Hamid. and there were no significant differences between Muslim and Comparison youth in the number of years lived in North America. Research participants were comparable with respect to similarity in age. there was no significant difference identified between Muslim and Comparison youth.9 7.111 Religiosity of American Muslim Youth individuals were also asked to invite their peers (both Muslim and nonMuslim) to participate in the study. The sample included 97 Muslim youth and 77 Comparison youth from across the nation. 2). which produced consistent results (Worthington et al. For the purpose of this study.76 . 2006).112 S. the religion with which the participant identified. age. The measure uses a 5-point Likert scale and has previously been used to measure religiosity among Muslim and non-Muslim populations (Schlosser. the RCI-10 mean is 23. The RCI-10 has been positively related to self-reported religious commitment. The EOM-EIS-2 measures identity status by assessing the degree of exploration and commitment along varying ideological and interpersonal domains: religious. and the construct validity was compared to Rokeach’s Value Survey as well as previous versions of the Religious Values Scale..3 to 0. range from 0.82. The internal consistency score was observed to be 0. with a median correlation of 0. MEASURE OF RELIGIOUS EXPLORATION The Extended Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status-2 (EOM-EIS-2) was used to measure the extent of religious exploration and commitment of an individual. and practices. Internal consistency estimates for the EOM-EIS-2 domains.93.66 (Adams. 1998). Ahmed Measures DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE Demographics included information regarding gender. with a median alpha of 0. 2003). an indication of the degree to which the test items intercorrelate with one another. range from 0. philosophical. and employs them in their daily living (Worthington et al. a cutoff score of 38 was utilized in order to minimize false positives. friendship. The EOM-EIS-2 is validated for individuals between 13 and 30 years of age and uses a 6-point Likert self-report scale. and intensity of one’s spiritual life (Worthington et al. The developers have suggested that a cutoff score of 33 be used to minimize false negatives and label someone as Highly Religious while a cutoff score of 38 be used to minimize false positives. and recreation. beliefs. the test–retest reliability coefficients was 0. occupation. dating. sex roles. The correlations of stability for the EOM-EIS-2 subscales. 2003). and GPA were also obtained.. and years lived in the United States. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 MEASURE OF RELIGIOUS COMMITMENT The Religious Commitment Inventory-10 (RCI-10) consists of 10 items measuring an individual’s religious commitment as defined by the degree to which a person adheres to his or her religious values. In addition. According to its developers.91. politics.59 to 0.1 (SD = 10.87. 2003). frequency of attendance at religious services. Scores of more than one standard deviation higher than the mean indicate that an individual is considered Highly Religious. their parental income. Downloaded By: [Hamid. an estimate of how stable the results of the measure are over a given time period.. As expected. Foster. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 Religiosity of American Muslim Youth 113 (Grotevant & Adams. agreeableness with teamwork (r = . Morris. Marlow-Crowne social desirability scores did not significantly correlate with scale scores. 1998. Such a process results in the formation of a relatively firm religious commitment that is less likely to conform and be influenced by peer pressure (Adams. For the purposes of this study. 1998).68. A total of 15 of 20 subscales from the VIA-IS were used (with permission of the instrument’s developers). However. 1973). Toder & Marcia.65).44) and spirituality (r = .30). the split-half reliability score for the EOM-EIS-2.com/products/product.10 to 0. curiosity (r = . Watson.10 to .64 (Adams. and Hood (1986) found no consistent link between religiousness and social desirability responses.73). with the exception of prudence (r = .55). 1984. Young people that were grouped as Religiously Achieved indicated that they had gone through the process of exploration and had come to a resolution regarding their religious beliefs. range from . with a total identity correlation subscale scores ranging from 0. for a review). 2001). & Nielsen. Construct validity was investigated by comparing the measure to the NEO-Personality Inventory: http://ww3. Individuals who had explored their religious beliefs and then decided to commit to their religion were categorized as Religiously Achieved. A detailed description of each character .58).parinc. the correlations were found to be substantial: Openness correlated with awe (r = . Dobson. MEASURE OF CHARACTER STRENGTH The Values in Action Inventory of Strengths Scale (VIA-IS) utilizes a 5-point Likert scale assessing an individual’s character strength by asking participants to endorse items that describe their attitudes. The split-half correlations of the subscales range from 0.68 for subscales (Grotevant & Adams. Ryan. The issue of social desirability is often of concern when dealing with the topic of religious commitment.Downloaded By: [Hamid. and love of learning (r = . values. which may appear to be viewed as a socially desirable answer. The cutoff score for an individual to be categorized as Religiously Achieved was 10.73) and self-regulation (r = . the ideological domain of religion was used in order to measure the extent of religious exploration by young people (permission was obtained from the scale’s developer). Hoffman. and conscientiousness with industry (r = . 1984). Finally. 1984. there was evidence that religious people were more likely to agree with items that reflect their normative belief system. and behaviors (Peterson & Seligman.aspx?Productid=NEOPI-R (NEO-PI).37 to 0. see Adams. In fact. Participants who either did not explore their religious beliefs or did not make a commitment to a religion were categorized as individuals that had not developed a Religiously Achieved identity.42). an indication of the degree of correspondence between two halves of the test and an estimate of the extent the halves are equivalent to one another. 05 3.52 0. and motivational stance and approach toward the future. Holds needs and impulses in check and meets them at an appropriate time.32 4. Takes on and completes given tasks. emotional.65 3.59 0.05 4. or dangerous. Articulates a philosophy of life that locates himself or herself in the universe and for whom life has meaning. forgiving ill treatment.0 M 4.48 SD 3.68 0. and works toward them even if they differ from their personal goals.114 Description Sorts through information in an objective manner and is synonymous with critical thinking.9 3. Stands up for intellectual or emotional stances that are unpopular. Draws upon experiences to help solve problems and gain perspective.5 3. VIA-IS = Values in Action Inventory of Strengths Scale.39 4.65 0.24 4. Forgiveness Spirituality Gratitude Hope/optimism Prudence Self-regulation Leadership Equity/fairness Citizenship/teamwork Kindness/generosity Industry/perseverance Integrity/honesty Valor Perspective Judgment Character strengths Table 2 VIA-IS Character Strengths Downloaded By: [Hamid. Note.7 3. and anticipates events to occur after appropriate effort.5 3. takes the welfare of others as seriously as their own. Guided by moral principles. Values others’ excellence in moral character.3 3.48 0. Presents oneself to others as well as to the self in a sincere and truthful manner by words and deeds.9 3.70 0. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 0.9 3.7 3.6 3.25 4.19 4.54 0.55 0. Takes a cognitive.46 4. Involves not taking revenge for others’ actions. Relates to others in a manner that is in the other person’s greatest interest.48 Cut-off score .28 4. and can set aside personal prejudices. difficult. even if it is in conflict with their own wishes and needs.49 4. and being willing to give someone another chance.46 0.8 4.89 0.58 0.28 4. Waits until he or she understands the situation before taking a course of action.0 3.55 0. Works well in a group. Possesses skills needed in order to accomplish the group’s work and maintain good relations among group members.49 0.30 4. not holding grudges.3 3.6 0.6 4. values group goals and purposes.38 4.95 4. 8% of the individuals were identified as Highly Religious (see Table 4).9 15. p = . which found that American Muslim youth were more likely to be categorized as Highly Religious compared to their counterparts. Examination of the categorization of the Comparison group revealed that 12. 174) = 125.4% were Muslim and 25.8%) and religious exploration (EOM-EIS2 = 14.0001. American Muslim youth scored significantly higher on the RCI-10 compared to their peers. Such a dramatic difference was not noted between the Comparison youth scores for religiosity (RCI-10 = 12. Religious Exploration Religious exploration was measured by analyzing the results of the EOMEIS-2 Religious Identity Status. RESULTS Downloaded By: [Hamid. only 33.1 12. Significance testing revealed that group assignment was related to RCI Full Scale scores. p = . compared to the 75. F(1.6% were from the Comparison group. % of Highly Religious % of Not Highly Religious 88. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 Religiosity This study investigated the religiosity of American Muslim youth and their peers. standard deviations. p = .0 26.5% of Muslim youth identified as Highly Religious by the RCI-10 in the previous analysis. and cutoff scores are provided in Table 2.7% of the entire Muslim youth population were identified as Religiously Achieved (Table 5).9 . However. the respective means.005).0 7.7%). n = 170) = 8.1 73.9% were Comparison youth as indicated in Table 3.115 Religiosity of American Muslim Youth strength. 74.0001 Note. Of those who were categorized as Religiously Achieved. RCI-10 = Religious Commitment Inventory-10.02. Of those categorized as Highly Religious in the overall sample. Chi-square analysis revealed that score differences were carried over to religious categorization.4 25. X 2(1. n = 174) = 68.1% were Muslim and 11. which measures the extent of exploration and commitment of one’s religious beliefs.5 .4 10. Further analysis of the Muslim sample found approximately three quarters of the youth were considered Highly Religious (75. Table 3 Comparison of RCI-10 Scores and Religious Categorization Muslim group Comparison group RCI-10 score Difference N M SD M p 98 78 40.0001. 88.4. Analysis revealed that there were significantly more Muslim youth categorized as Religiously Achieved than Comparison youth (X 2(1.5%). 6 4.8 SD No.3 % 1.8 4. of strengths Not Highly Religious Downloaded By: [Hamid.5 12.3 2.4 3.0001 p Difference religious between categorization .1 2.8 47.2 52.5 2.05 .0002 . Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 3.6 M 3.4 4.14 2.116 Muslim group Comparison group Overall 74 10 84 N 75.5 M .9 2.5 87.8 2. of strengths Highly Religious 24 68 92 N Table 4 Comparison of Religious Categorization and Number of Strengths 24.7 % 4.7 SD No.1 M 1. Examination also revealed that Muslim youth categorized as Highly Religious had approximately three more character strengths than Muslim youth who had not been categorized as Highly Religious.3 63 64 127 66. 96) = 15. and Comparison youth.0002. subgroups. However. 1912). F(1. F(1.8. was used to determine if religiosity was associated with being a protective factor for American Muslim youth.7 Downloaded By: [Hamid. Similarly. Highly Religious or not Highly Religious.117 Religiosity of American Muslim Youth Table 5 Comparison of Religious Identity Achieved Status Religiously Achieved Muslim Comparison Overall Not Religiously Achieved N % N % 32 11 43 33. Comparison between the Muslim youth and the Comparison youth revealed that religiosity served as a protective factor for both groups. An analysis of variance revealed that religiosity was observed as being significantly related to the number of prosocial values and behaviors within both Muslim. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 Association Between Religiosity and Character Strength The effect of religiosity measured by the RCI-10 on the presence of character strength. . and forgiveness.3 85. p = .8. Individuals were categorized into dichotomous groups based on their RCI-10 scores. p = . Highly Religious American Muslim youth were associated with the following character strengths: kindness.e.7 25. 172) =14. prudence. hope/optimism. leadership. gratitude. equity. it is important to understand which character strengths are associated with individuals identified as Highly Religious.0002.. F(1. defined as the total number of strengths obtained through the VIAIS. self-regulation.3 74.05. Highly Religious Comparison youth were associated with the following character strengths: gratitude and spirituality (Table 6).7 14. A correlation using Yule’s phi coefficient of correlation (rφ ) was conducted since both variables used were binary (Yule. spirituality. Muslim or Comparison) nor its interaction with religiosity was observed to be significant.4. 76) = 3. Comparison youth that were categorized as Highly Religious had approximately two more character strengths than Comparison youth who had not been categorized as Highly Religious. Character Strengths Associated With Highly Religious Youth Given that religiosity appears to serve as a protective factor. p = . neither group assignment (i. as indicated in Table 4. An alternative explanation could be related to notions of social identity theory that suggest certain context. Given that this data was collected within 1 year of the September 11 tragedies.185 0.153 −0.125 0. As such.292 0.710 0.235 0. and experiences can activate varying identities which contribute to greater identification and affiliation with certain groups (Tajfel.118 S. The significantly greater percentage of individuals identified as Highly Religious can be attributed to greater religious socialization often experienced by religious minority youth. The repeated activation may have caused a higher identification with their religious group than what might have been the case before 9/11. the degree of religious exploration that .000 0. 1981. further investigation needs to be done in order to validate the findings of this study.559 0. RCI-10 = Religious Commitment Inventory-10. the difference in religiosity between Muslim and Comparison youth could be attributed to religious minority status. DISCUSSION This research provides a beginning glimpse of an understudied population. In addition. as suggested by Markstrom-Adams (1994).636 −0.296 −0.488 0. chronological bias.119 0.000 0.326 Note.909 1.333 0.041 0.481 −0. 1987). Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 RCI-10 Character strength Muslim Comparison Judgment Perspective Valor Industry/perspective Honesty Kindness Citizenship/teamwork Equity Leadership Self-regulation Prudence Gratitude Hope/optimism Spirituality Forgiveness 0.134 0.326 0. Hence.803 0.316 0.814 0.210 0. it is highly possible that the Muslim youth participating in this study experienced their Muslim identity repeatedly being activated. Ahmed Table 6 Yule’s phi Coefficient of Correlation (rφ ) Between Highly Religious Youth and Character Strengths Downloaded By: [Hamid.537 0.778 0.333 0. or selection bias. the Muslim sample was primarily collected from faith-based organizations. whereas the sample for the Comparison group was gathered from a university psychology class. American Muslim youth. The study began by exploring their religiosity and found American Muslim youth in this sample to be Highly Religious. events. Turner. Although a significantly large percentage of American Muslim youth were identified as Highly Religious.034 0.125 0.713 1. hence. The following character strengths were identified as being associated with Highly Religious American Muslim youth: kindness. and forgiveness. In addition. The observed difference can be attributed to the likelihood of more intense religious socialization of religious minority youth by family. and elders without adequate opportunities to explore their beliefs. The results indicate that almost one third of the American Muslim youth sampled in this study had explored their religious beliefs as well as made a firm commitment to their religion. It is interesting to note that. this accounts for the much smaller percentage of individuals categorized as Religiously Achieved. It is equally interesting to note that the difference in religiosity and religious exploration among Comparison youth was not observed.Downloaded By: [Hamid. hence. these assumptions need to be corroborated by further investigation. but this does not mean that they have explored why they have chosen to practice their beliefs. As such. as had been previously been noted with youth from other religious groups. only one third of these individuals had actually engaged in the process of religious exploration that culminated in the their present religious commitment. Finally. gratitude. In addition. Their religious minority status contributes to the greater need to understand and evaluate their religious beliefs and values in the face of alternatives that are ever present. leadership. This study also hypothesized that religion would serve as a protective factor for American Muslim youth. self-regulation. Comparison youth do not experience the same level of pressures and expectations to maintain one’s religious values. The analysis conducted was correlational. the lack of difference. the nature of the relationship cannot be established. It is suggested that future studies investigate the mechanisms and relationships that enable religiosity to function as a protective factor. religious community. However. Hence. the fact that two thirds of the Muslim sample had not explored and made a firm commitment highlights an area of potential risk. The results indicate that religiosity was associated with greater character strength for American Muslim youth. it would be of great interest to further investigate the relationship between the character strengths . hope/optimism. Most likely. equity. this study attempted to identify character strengths associated with Highly Religious American Muslim youth. although the vast majority of American Muslim youth sampled in this study were categorized as Highly Religious. these individuals may express higher rates of religiosity. The greater percentage of American Muslim youth categorized as Religiously Achieved compared to their peers could be explained by the constant reminders in their environment that they are a religious minority group. However. there may be great expectation by these socializing agents for the young person to maintain their religious beliefs. These character strengths are highly valued among Muslims and may be a result of religious socialization. spirituality. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 Religiosity of American Muslim Youth 119 individuals engaged in and the strength of commitment to their religious beliefs are also important in understanding the potential influence of risk factors. prudence. it is important for researchers to begin to understand the impact of other factors that may influence the religiosity of religious minority youth such as parental religiosity. Such information would help provide meaning and understanding that could guide the development of prevention programs for at-risk religious minority youth. 47.. it is important to recognize which factors in the environment of Muslim youth play a greater role in promoting the religious commitment of the individual. J. parent-child relationship.). (1998). W. Specifically. In order to strengthen these results...pdf). political climate. Adams.e. C. or religious organizations? What are the developmental pathways and processes of these character strengths.. would express high levels of religiosity. J. it is important to replicate this study with other religious minority youth in varying contexts.. and popular culture.. & Arfken. Ahmed. R. S. R. G. W. E. Manuscript submitted. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 120 S. why were these strengths associated with American Muslim youth. Ego identity status. ethnicity. The study also needs to be repeated with samples coming from more comparable backgrounds (i. conformity and personality in late adolescence. (Available from G. but not their peers? Are the character strengths related to the influence of family. 1091–1104. parents’ modeling of prosocial values and behavior. regardless of particular faith group association. Furthermore. R. It would be informative to see if Muslim youth report such high levels of religiosity in countries where Islam is the majority religion.Downloaded By: [Hamid. C. Hoffman. and how can they be nurtured to promote positive youth development? Although this study begins to build our knowledge of American Muslim youth. in order to determine whether religious minority youth. The greater percentage of American Muslim youth reporting high levels of religiosity is suggested to be related to the interaction of their religious minority status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Objective measure of ego identity status: A reference manual. it is important to corroborate the findings by replicating this study to rule out any possible chronological bias of September 11.. (Ed. G.uoguelph. type and quality of relationship with peers. & Nielsen. Adams. (1984).ca/ ∼gadams/OMETS Manual. REFERENCES Abu-Ras. and why. Adams at http://www. Also. R. Alcohol use among Muslim youth: Protective and risk factors. peer religiosity. . (2009). Ryan. Moreover. much is still unknown. H. both Muslim and Comparison youth from faith-based groups) in order to rule out selection bias as well as to replicate the study in differing sociocultural contexts. peer groups. J. Ahmed associated with Highly Religious American Muslim youth. Dobson. peer prosocial values and behaviors. & Arfken. J.. E. 145–160. R. K. T. & Fisher. Sharrief. B. 204–212. Adolescence. Perl. J. 25–36. Y. Norton.. (2004). A.. 51. Al-Ghorani. Journal of Muslim Mental Health. L. D. (2000). & Akhter. M. (1984). P. S. W. 3. 38.. (2008). Sahin. Gowen. 35.. 1313–1326. Toronto. “If you love me. Spiritual development in childhood and adolescence: Toward a field of inquiry. 42. V. C. Community programs to promote youth development. The challenge of youth. Journal of Research on Adolescence. J. (2003). Norton. 2009. DC: National Academy Press. Bagby. H. Applied Developmental Science.. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. The Muslim child.Downloaded By: [Hamid. and family. 112. New York: W. Washington. Willoughby. Benson. H. (2001).. Hawkins. F. Erickson. (1998). 64– 105. Francis. (2006). keep my commandments”: A meta-analysis of the effect of religion on crime. S. Psychological Bulletin. “You have to have somebody watching your back. A. G. W. & Afzal. 717–730.. & Rude. Washington. M. (1995). F. (1965). Ahmed. 419–438. (2006. 13. J.. . Baier. I. Ontario.. Erikson. (2008). C. S. August 7. (1968). Journal of Social Issues. (2009). M. Canada. J. 8(2). Cook. Psychometric properties of two Islamic measures among young adults in Kuwait: The Sahin-Francis Scale of Attitude Toward Islam and the Sahin Index of Islamic Moral Values. P. Juggling cultural identities: Challenges for second generation African American Muslim youth. Feldman. L. M. & Wright. Al-Mateen. and if that’s God. J. New York: W.. Development of an objective measure to assess ego identity in adolescence: Validation and replication.. Busseri. Donahue. P. S. A. & Gootman. 13. L. L. K. Catalano. (2001). then that’s mighty big”: The church’s role in resilience of inner city youth. L. & Froehle. & Benson... Grotevant.. Family relationships and gender as predictor of romantic intimacy in young adults: A longitudinal study. 183–200. LA. 3. When multicultural worlds collide: Understanding and working with Muslim youth. & Miller. & Adams. B. E. H. Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention. Developmental Psychology. New Orleans. Knowledge-Practice Measure of Islamic Religiosity (KPMIR): A case of high school Muslim students in the United States.. D.. August). 9–24. L. (2002). Journal of Muslim Mental Health. R. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 7. A. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America. A longitudinal examination of the breadth and intensity of youth activity involvement and successful development... DC: Council on AmericanIslamic Relations. & Al-Failakawi. Presented at the 117th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association. R. Roehlkepartain. 263–286. adolescent. Identity: Youth and crisis. C. J. The mosque in America: A national portrait from the Mosque Study Project. H. C. S. E. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association. A. Rose-Krasnor. (1992). T. Eccles. S.. Religion and the well-being of adolescents. & Chalmers. S.. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 Religiosity of American Muslim Youth 121 Ahmed. P. 3–21. (1999).Downloaded By: [Hamid. S. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Jewish Educators Assembly. C. Costa. views of Islam.. H. 40–54. Identification with peers as a strategy to muddle through the troubles of the adolescent years. Schlosser. Park. R. Adolescent sexual risk-taking behavior in single-parent ethnic minority families. Seligman. J.. & Elias. A. Meeting the needs of the Jewish adolescent. E.htm Pombeni. V. K. 351–369.. Tarrant.. from http://psych. Vanderryn. T. H. CA: Sage. 2. Social identity in adolescence. E.. Correlates of smoking behavior among Muslim Arab American adolescents. E. S. & Palmonari. Religion in the lives of American adolescents: A review of the literature. Ithaca. Van Den Bos. N.edu/seligman/ viastrengthsinventory. Jamil. (1994). P.. O.. M. 93–102. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Kress. 327–342... VIA Inventory of Strength (VIA-IS). Washington.. & Shanahan. & Turbin. L. 597–609. A. S. (2002). Jessor. (2003). (2006). Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 122 S. & Johnson. J. Smith. MSRG special report: Restriction on civil liberties.. Muslim Public Affairs Council.. F. Ahmed Hogg. 31. J. A. K. Thousand Oaks. C. Retrieved June 21. Cooper (Eds. (1981). S. (2004). Chapel Hill. 13.). Turbin. A.. A. Hammad. D. S. L. 319–337. (2003).. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. North.. Islam.. Kirk. Themes in Jewish educational actionresearch. and Muslim Americans. 13. Hogg & J.. Human groups & social categories. Peterson. 591. January). H. DC. (2005). S... Kirchler. Justus-Liebig-Universit¨at Gießen. C. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Smith. E. L. Weglicki. (2006). Edridge. & Turner. Dorsey. M. Applied Developmental Science. Ethnicity and Health. 453–469. M. (2001). A. Kotchick. Regnerus. Developmental Psychology. Germany. M. R. Gießen. A. 2001. 24. C. M. M. & Costa. S.. (1998).upenn. NY: Cornell University. 8. Religion and identity of Muslim American youth post-London attacks. Humane orientation: A cross-cultural study in 26 countries. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.. Yakobi (Chair).. J. Risk and protection in successful outcomes among disadvantaged adolescents. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly. Tajfel. C. M. M. 407–431). The Media and Society Research Group. & Dougher. M. . J. M. Templin. The ego-virtue of fidelity: A case for the study of religion and identity formation in adolescence... In M. (2004). P. M. & Seligman. (2003). F. R. & Kulwicki. The SAGE Handbook of Social Psychology (pp. M. (1995).. In D. E.. 923–933. E. (1997. (2001). 52. Journal of Adolescence. Predictors of Arab American adolescent tobacco use. New York: Free Press. & Fritsch. Intergroup behavior and social identity. A. Protective factors in adolescent problem behavior: Moderator effects and developmental change. Rice. NY. Authentic happiness. Miller. 194–208.. Jessor. Journal of Adolescence. & Abrams. M. & Forehand. Hofstra. NC: National Study of Youth & Religion. Journal of Family Psychology.. E. Markstrom-Adams. G. B. 23(4).. (1990). Nisbet. R. J. D. A. Rye. Character strengths and positive youth development. & Marcia.. Morris. 75. M. Hamada] At: 02:51 17 November 2009 Religiosity of American Muslim Youth 123 Toder.. refinement. M. and Hood. Turner. E. (1998). D. 84–96. 579–652. M.Downloaded By: [Hamid. and validation of a brief scale for research and counseling. Jr. M. Hurrelmann (Eds. (1986). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. W. Yule. & Williams.. .. 215–232. J. Religiosity and social desirability. L.. A. (2003). Jr. R. R. Available at http://www. L. 444–468). J. Zogby Poll for the American Muslim Council. & Forman. On the methods of measuring association between two attributes. E. The Religious Commitment Inventory-10: Development. S... 50. Religion’s role in promoting health and reducing risk among American youth.. G. 26. Windle. J. C. 721–741. 98–110. Schulenberg. L. Wallace. (1987). Jr. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Applied Developmental Science. N. J. P. U. N. Maggs. In J.. Ego identity status and response to conformity pressure in college women. Worthington. (2000).. G. Wallace. 287–294. (2000). Watson. W. Foster. J. (1997). Health Education and Behavior. McCullough.org. sibling. Religion and adolescent healthcompromising behavior. Hight. and peer influences on adolescent substance use and alcohol problems. E. 25. 4. T. R. L. Ripley. T. Journal of Counseling Psychology. E. Parental. Berry. et al. Wade. J.. J. (1973). J. J. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press. & K. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. Health risks and developmental transitions during adolescence (pp.. (1912). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. 25. amcomline..). J.