Fundamentalism and Hope in a Religiously Diverse Sample in the United States

Abstract Despite their positive relationships with health outcomes, few studies directly assess the relationships among religiosity and hope. Using item factor analysis (N = 630) within a religiously diverse United States sample, we hypothesized fundamentalism (H 1 : Intratextual Fundamentalism Scale, ITFS; Multidimensional Fundamentalism Inventory, MDFI; and Religious Fundamentalism Scale, RFS) and hope measures (H 2 : Adult Hope Scale, AHS; Integrative Hope Scale, IHS) would demonstrate acceptable psychometrics and statistically (H 3 ) and practically significant relationships (H 4 ). The ITFS possessed near perfect psychometrics (CFI = 1.000, TLI = 1.000, RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.009, omega = 0.92), but other measures needed modifications. After Bonferroni corrections, we found statistically significant relationships among the RFS and the AHS (r = .16) and IHS (r = .155) as well as the ITFS and the AHS (r = .155) and IHS (r = .162), all at a small effect size. However, there were no statistically significant relationships among the MDFI and the hope measures (H 3 ). No association among a fundamentalism measure and a hope measure reached practical significance (H 4 ). Given these results, we computed correlations among the original scales and found similar results among hope and fundamentalism measures (r =  − .002–0.152). These findings indicate direct relationships among measures of hope and fundamentalism, but no relationship met the criteria for practical significance—before or after scale modifications. We discuss the implications of these findings regarding the integration of religiosity and spirituality into mental health research, training, and practice.