DSC 84

, ,v    U.4

'^,0,) IMMiK INVFNT(łttv (i

'“^Ł^iUKY (1 .awrence, 1991) ^l‘^vlcwwl »>y Todd W. HaU, and Ranrt-« « -

'ariablc: fhc („„i i

cmitains si\ subsc-.l ^ma^ ^lnventory (Ciii)

•^sJ*cts ot God image^nti""^ ^di,Tcrcm dencc. Presence. r ,■ iu. ,^Prwvi-ainl Bonevolencc. In uHV ^Acc^^ptance’

^,mag° ^S;‘^{alos contai}" shonened^Yersion^ ot

^Cac ’ °* ^{the s,x subs}cales for use in research

Dtscription: The Gil contains a total of 156

^,lcms; ^{Each of} the six main scales consists ^ot items, while thc two control scales

0    aith and Salience) each contain 12 items. The instrument is scored on a four-point lik-ert scalę with 1 indicating strong agreement and 4 indicating strong disagreement with each statement. Many negatively worded items must be reverse scored. Each subscale should bc scored separately by simply sum-ming the items contained in it. Scores rangę from 22 to 88 for the six main subscales, and from 12 to 48 for the two control scales. \ higher score represents a greater degree of the particular trait identificd by the scalę name.

Lawrence (1991) distinguishes between a person's God concept and his or her God n_ie God concept is an intellectual-izeddefinition of God ihat islargely an arii-fact of cultural and rebgious educaOon. God by on,ras,. ,s one's imu,,,ve sens awhal Lawrencedesenbesas asa

1    .; ^bered .........

Hius instead of focu t    , laden

God. iffocM*.on a morę affecbve,y

In light of P'''^,hWTi r^ss,nd,vidu-* ..........^... ’"^Vf^ew“o Ood ła for

* • t#*ii scrisc    ,

U

•‘i tell bert:se oi w nu ......

<I99|) cnnstmclcil six principul

k    < Inlltu iKc. Prwidence, Piosence,

( h.illcngc, Ac i ( pi.mcc. and Benevolence)

.ii, l i .....nimi ales (I mili and Salience).

li.i .1 ..n Hiz/Uiu s (1979) siiggeslion llial

iir (i««l nu.igr in ciealed. allered. and used

I .ii.lv Im iłi< puiposc o I pieści \ mg a

i. , t.iiiii i n ł>« inv( i o a/fictivel) Udio

^anda" ^Uh»"»"n Sorensrrn

™ring diffcrc,,, ^exP^cr|ences „f _w|f llucnce, Provi ^COnclud_ed that God tjfa ^Uwren<* Arrr......^dre h.ghly related to onf    ^,nia?^e

^Su^ou?ht to measure ,h_e ^ ^{and he ,h}< two. Lawrence used _h ^

^łor the self image as _a f_r- ^ f^{Sic themes} subscales: feelinss of ^ework for the six

fundamen^olr ^,r°^{K bC,0ng}^-

two hasic^uestii ^C°^{ntr01 divided in,}°

tiveandSir^{,0neWn8    pnmi}*

much cl i !^°^rC °^{n ,hc se,f} (How t.ch can I control God?). ,_he other being

°^rt^{e f},^{ocused on G}‘^ (How much does God control me?,. The first subdivision was |_a-

heltd Influence, and the second. Provi-dence.

The theme of belonging was likcwise di \ ided into two basie considerations. the firs of which. drawn from the work of Winnicot (1953), suggests that “belonging" for the in fant relates to the issue of presence and i experienced as the question "Is mother ther, for me?" Thus the first and most primitiv, belonging issue was labeled “Presence, which is reflected by the question ls Go there for me? The second aspect of belong insi relates to the work of Kirkpatric (1986). who, following Bowby (1969). ou lined two roles for attachment figures. Tli first, which corresponds well to the issue ( presence. is labeled "Safe Haven" and refe to a person to whom the child may retre _and find present. The second consideratio called “Secure Base," relates to the san person'* availability as he or she prov,d empowerment for the child ,o move ou a ■X, lorę ihe world. Thus ,he second belon , issue was labeled "Challenge, whr Z he represenled hy ,he dueshou Da

(iorl want me ¹⁰    _{s was} again (

The theme of Gord • _{firsl col}

virled imo IWO componen..    _js

.......-■

sdl image, ed    _{h for} c.od

„uesfioh -Am I    £ ^led -Acc