Theresa Flagler

The Association between Need for Achievement and Religiosity

Introduction

The association between need for achievement and religiosity. Explores achievement motivation & religiosity in a secular society. No association found between them, yet nAch priming significantly impacted motivation.

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to determine whether or not there was an association between achievement motivation and level of religious behaviour and beliefs in a modern secular society. In order to examine this, a two by two factorial study was designed in which participants were identified as having high or low religiosity, and then randomly assigned to a group in which they were primed with either high or low need for achievement (nAch). After this, participants were tested for their level of achievement motivation. No significant effect was found between religiosity and motivation, and there was no interaction between the two independent variables. However, there was a significant effect found for nAch in that participants primed for high nAch had a higher level of achievement motivation, and those primed for low nAch had a lower level of achievement motivation. These results do not support previous correlational research which found an association between religious beliefs and achievement motivation.

Review

The study addresses an intriguing and timely question regarding the potential association between need for achievement and religiosity, particularly within the context of a modern secular society. This is a topic that has seen varying findings in previous literature, making this experimental approach valuable. The researchers employed a 2x2 factorial design, which is a strong methodological choice for examining main effects and interactions between variables. The explicit aim to move beyond purely correlational research by utilizing a priming manipulation for need for achievement is commendable, indicating an effort to investigate causal pathways or at least a more controlled relationship. While the experimental design is a strength, the abstract raises several methodological questions that warrant further detail. The process by which participants were "identified as having high or low religiosity" is crucial but unspecified; the validity and reliability of this categorization are essential for interpreting the results. Similarly, the method used to "test for their level of achievement motivation" post-priming also needs to be clearly described to assess the robustness of the dependent variable. The finding that priming for nAch successfully influenced participants' achievement motivation is important as a manipulation check, confirming the experimental manipulation worked as intended. However, the core finding of no significant effect between religiosity and motivation, and no interaction, directly contradicts prior correlational work. This null result is significant, but its interpretation requires careful consideration of whether the current experimental design (and its operationalizations) truly captured the phenomena previously observed in correlational studies, or if the lack of association is genuinely robust under these conditions. Despite the null findings regarding the primary hypothesis, this study makes a valuable contribution by challenging previously reported associations with a more controlled, quasi-experimental design. The results suggest that, at least under the specific conditions tested, religiosity does not directly predict achievement motivation, nor does it moderate the effect of nAch priming. Future research would benefit from clarifying the operational definitions and measurements of both religiosity and achievement motivation, particularly how "identification" of religiosity was achieved. It would also be insightful to explore potential moderating variables that might explain the presence or absence of this association in different populations or societal contexts, and to consider whether the "modern secular society" aspect played a specific role in these findings. Furthermore, a deeper discussion on why these findings diverge from correlational research, beyond just methodological differences, would enhance the theoretical contribution.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.