RESULTS

As a group, subjects were well-educated (mean of 21 years of schooling), had done an average of 1.5 years of formal bible study, and reported 13.2 years of informal study (standard deviation = 11.3). Subjects reported high enjoyment of (4 on a scale of 1-5) and frequency (4.3 out of 5) of reading the bible, so much so that there is concern about a possible ceiling effect. The mean score on the BCRT test (18.2, sd = 5.2) indicated that the test was of appropriate difficulty for this group.

Frequency of reading the bible correlated strongly with scores on the BCRT (r = .44), as did informal study (r = .49) and enjoyment (r = .46). Years of being a Christian (r = .32), age (r = .31), and education (r = .21) were also significant predictors, but correlations were lower. The correlations of years of formal study and BCRT scores was positive (r = .18) but was the weakest, and fell just short of statistical significance.

Multiple regression analysis allows one to examine the effect of each predictor independently of the effect of the others, as if the others were held constant. The strength of each predictor is indicated by the beta statistic, which allows a comparison of the relative strengths of each predictor. When, however, variables are highly intercorrelated (termed "multicollinearity"), it is improper to include both in a multiple regression analysis. Years of being a Christian was strongly correlated with age (r = .58) and informal study (r = .42) and was thus not used in the analysis. "Enjoyment" and "frequency" were also highly correlated (r = .58). Because both of these variables were of great interest, separate analyses were done using each.

Table 1: Multiple Regression Analysis

Table 1 contains both analyses. Informal study, enjoyment and frequency of reading were clear winners, with the highest betas. Age and education were weaker predictors. Amount of formal study was the least successful and did not come close to statistical significance. The combination of predictors accounted for about 40% of the variability of BCRT scores in both analysis (r squared).

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The results confirm that those who read the bible more on their own, and enjoy it more, know more about it. Formal study of the bible failed as a predictor of knowledge of the bible as measured by the BCRT. Recall that mean scores for enjoyment and frequency were very high: It is possible that with a wider range of scores, an even stronger relationship with bible knowledge might emerge.

Our study clearly confirms the power of self-motivated reading. But before we conclude that formal study is a waste of time, we should take a closer look at the nature of formal study.

REFERENCES

2