This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Despite its relatively good psychometric properties and empirical validity, the 20-item Religious Fundamentalism scale developed by the authors has several problems. It does not measure all of the aspects of fundamentalism, as defined, as well as it might. And it could stand to be shorter. An item development program led to a 12-statement revision that is more internally consistent despite having broader coverage. As well, it is as reliable as the longer original scale, despite being 40% shorter, and at least as empirically valid.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Altemeyer et al. (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: