Psychology of Religion and Spirituality

© 2019 American Psychological Association 2021, Vol. 13, No. 2, 194– 203
1941-1022/19/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/rel0000265

Indigenizing an Islamic Psychology

Nausheen Pasha-Zaidi
Houston Community College and University of Houston—Downtown

Islamic psychology is making its mark, but whose voices are being heard? And how are the data being
interpreted? Growing Islamophobia has created both a need to be heard and a desire to have some control and
ownership of the narrative that is disseminated. Using a multilevel interdisciplinary paradigm (MIP) allows for
the marriage of numbers and words to address the challenges of research methodology when applied to the
psychology of religion. However, it does not take into account Islamic ways of knowing, nor does it
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

necessarily address the issues of power within the traditional institution of research, particularly as it applies
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

to researcher and participant relationships. As such, a multilevel interdisciplinary paradigm may be enhanced
through the Islamization of knowledge along with participatory research methods to develop an indigenous
Islamic psychology that is reflective of the social and political realities of contemporary Muslim communities.

Keywords: Islamic psychology, Islamization of knowledge, multilevel interdisciplinary paradigm, de-

colonizing research methods, psychology of Muslims

What is Islamic psychology? Is it a subfield of mainstream Traditional Research Methods in Psychology

psychology that tries to redefine secular paradigms in Islamic
terms? Is it an amalgamation of Islamic jurisprudence as it is
applied to mental health in contemporary societies? Is it an attempt
to capture the philosophical underpinnings of Muslim scholars like
Al-Ghazali and Ibn Sina, who theorized about the workings of the
mind? A simple google search of the term Islamic psychology
leads to these and a variety of other possible frameworks that can
contribute to the definition of Islamic psychology. Depending on
one’s background and field of interest, the methods used to address
research questions will differ. However, given the rampant Islam-
ophobia that is spread through media outlets as well as the internal
strife among Muslim communities around the world, now is the
time to develop a psychology that provides a framework for
unifying the Muslim Ummah, or nation, while acknowledging the
cultural differences in the behaviors, attitudes, practices and
worldviews of the 1.8 billion Muslims that constitute approxi-
mately 24% of the global population, according to estimates from
the Pew Research Center (2015). The questions that this article
addresses are the following: (a) How should research in psychol-
ogy be conducted to best allow for the inclusion of diverse ways of
knowing, and (b) who should conduct that research? As an inter-
national social scientist, my interest in Islamic psychology focuses
on the lived experiences of Muslims around the world, and this is
where I believe a decolonized approach to research along with a
multilevel interdisciplinary paradigm (MIP) and a framework fo-
cusing on Islamic ways of knowing may be highly applicable.
Let’s begin with a review of traditional approaches to research in
psychology.
This article was published Online First April 11, 2019.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Nausheen
Pasha-Zaidi, Department of Psychology, Houston Community College,
and Department of Psychology, University of Houston—Downtown, 1
Main Street, Houston, TX 77002. E-mail: nausheenpasha@outlook.com
Research methods in psychology follow scientific principles to
measure, describe, explain, and predict behavior. Based on the
characteristics of the scientific method, researchers should be able
to replicate the study and obtain similar, if not the exact, findings;
theories must be stated in a way that they may be disproven or
falsified; theoretical concepts must be precisely defined and mea-
surable so that others may test them; and in situations where
multiple explanations are possible, we must always accept the
simplest explanation (a concept known as Occam’s razor). Re-
search in the natural sciences easily fits the requirements of the
scientific method and consequently, holds greater prestige in the
scientific community. To gain standing as an independent science,
the development of psychology as a discipline reflects in many
ways the desire to distance itself from its philosophical traditions.
In doing so, it often prefers positivistic and reductionist approaches
to understanding human experiences which value observable phe-
nomena and quantifying of behaviors over introspective methods
that were historically deemed to be less scientific (Hayes, 2000).
Quantitative methods use hypotheses or predictions of behavior
which reflect knowledge ascertained from our own experiences
and the existing literature in the field. A goal of quantitative
research is to generalize information to large numbers of people.
As most of the psychology research has been conducted with
American college students and other individuals representing
Western industrialized countries (Arnett, 2008), there is an in-
creasing level of dissatisfaction regarding the ways in which
psychology has promulgated the generalizability of findings based
on the experiences, behaviors, and attitudes of a small section of
the world’s population. Considering that Americans account for
less than 5% of the world’s population and Western industrialized
nations only represent about 12%, the criticism has created a need
for alternative approaches to understanding human phenomena
(Henrich, Heine, & Norenzayan, 2010). Additionally, if we keep in
mind that Muslims account for almost 24% of the world’s popu-

194
 INDIGENIZING AN ISLAMIC PSYCHOLOGY
lation (Pew Research Center, 2015), the need for an Islamic
psychology in particular becomes even more relevant.
Although the first psychologists used interpretive methods of
enquiry such as introspection that allowed participants to talk
about their own experiences, the positivistic tradition catapulted
psychology into the realm of a “real” science. As such, quantitative
research continues to be the most highly regarded. Nonetheless,
increasing numbers of researchers have once again begun to use
qualitative methods such as case studies, narratives, and ethnog-
raphies to address the shortcomings of quantitative psychology.
Qualitative research also follows the scientific method, but is a
more iterative process focusing on the analysis of nonnumerical
data, such as written texts, photos, audio, and video files. Although
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
qualitative research is not generalizable to large communities of
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
people, it allows deeper understanding of specific phenomena and
as such, provides a lens into human lives that statistics are unable
to deliver. To gain the benefits of both quantitative and qualitative
methods, researchers may also use a mixed methods approach that
combines numerical and non-numerical data analyses, thereby
promoting the breadth and depth of enquiry (Plano Clark & Cre-
swell, 2015).
So how do these approaches to research help us in our under-
standing of religion and psychology, with the view of defining an
Islamic psychology in particular? The extant literature shows that
both quantitative and qualitative forms of research play a part in
how religion is explored, yielding a plethora of data that is con-
nected to a wide variety of psychological domains, including social
psychology, cultural psychology, developmental psychology, and
neuroscience (Hood & Belzen, 2005; Hood, Belzen, Paloutzian, &
Park, 2013; Paloutzian & Park, 2005). The steps involved in
research clearly illustrate the dominant paradigms within social
science. On one hand, the “the positivist and postpositivist para-
digms are based on the idea that there is a single truth to be
discovered and that scientific knowledge is far more valuable than
subjective or experiential knowledge” (Braun, Browne, Ka’opua,
Kim, & Mokuau, 2014, p. 118). In other words, there is one reality
and our job as researchers is to uncover the nuances of that single
reality by being as objective as possible. This is essentially the goal
of quantitative research. Constructivism, on the other hand, seeks
to explore the multiplicity of realities that are socially constructed
through our interactions and experiences. This fits well with qual-
itative research as it allows for a subjective view of human phe-
nomena. Yet neither of these paradigms allows for the inclusion of
transcendental ideas of reality that take into consideration the
relationship between the physical and the spiritual realm. Given
the numerous ways in which religion can be studied, using the MIP
framework (Emmons & Paloutzian, 2003) may bridge the gap
between qualitative and quantitative forms of enquiry and pave the
way to developing a clearer definition of an Islamic psychology.
Multilevel Interdisciplinary Paradigm and
Islamic Psychologies
Psychology as a discipline has traditionally intersected with
religion in a number of ways. Psychodynamic theories such as
Jung’s collective unconscious and humanistic perspectives such as
Maslow’s notion of self-actualization are examples of Western
theoretical frameworks that integrate psychology and religion
(Schultz & Schultz, 2016). Despite the availability of theoretical
195
models, research initially focused on creating more accurate mea-
surements of behaviors and attitudes rather than on applying
conceptualizations of mental processes to explore religion in psy-
chology. This disjointed approach between empirical research and
psychological schools of thought created two lines of enquiry, one
focusing on data and the other emphasizing ideology (Paloutzian
& Park, 2005). In attempting to create a more holistic approach to
religion in psychology, Emmons and Paloutzian (2003) recom-
mended the use of the MIP that “recognizes the value of data at
multiple levels of analysis while making nonreductive assumptions
concerning the value of spiritual and religious phenomena” (p.
395). Let’s unpack this statement in relation to defining an Islamic
psychology.
York Al-Karam (2018a) argued that MIP provides a much-
needed template upon which the scholarship in Islamic psychology
can be grounded as it calls for multiple ways of exploring phe-
nomena with a focus on “meaning-sensitive” measurements
(Paloutzian & Park, 2005) that enable researchers to find points of
convergence between dichotomous traditions while allowing for
the study of each religion from within its specific belief system.
This is an important framework for Islamic psychology as the faith
encompasses other Abrahamic traditions and promotes a compre-
hensive way of life that embodies individual and social obligations
that are rooted in the five pillars of Islam (belief in one God,
prayer, almsgiving, fasting, and pilgrimage to Mecca, which is
known as the Hajj). These pillars form the basic tenets of the faith
and are evident in all Muslim societies. In fact, much of the
quantitative research on Islamic religiosity is concerned with be-
havioral measures that look at how these factors apply to Muslims
in different parts of the world. However, this bodes the question:
Is Islamic psychology simply a study of Muslims? In discussing
the evolution of Islamic psychology from its roots in Greek phil-
osophical traditions, Haque (2004) contended that there is a dif-
ference between Islamic philosophy and Muslim philosophy, the
former relying mainly on the Quran and hadiths (prophetic tradi-
tion) as sources of knowledge, while the latter blended Islamic
ideas with Hellenistic thought. This dichotomous approach to
Islam and Muslims may be applicable to contemporary discourse
on Islamic psychology and is another reason for the use of MIP in
developing a coherent framework. As social science continues to
view residents of Western nations as the center of enquiry, quite a
bit of the lived experiences of Muslims are a reflection of our role
as the “other” in secular countries such as the United States,
Canada, and Great Britain. Additionally, psychology research con-
ducted within Islamic societies often adapts Western theories as
these are the ones that are readily available in the literature. Using
an MIP would allow for greater integration of Islamic conceptu-
alizations throughout the research process and in doing so, pave
way for the inclusion of Muslim scholars in the extant literature.
As literature reviews are an integral part of all social science
research, relying solely on Western theorists limits the research
questions that we can explore and the interpretations that we can
make. A study of psychoanalysis and mental health, for example,
would undoubtedly build upon the work of Freud, but a study of
psychoanalysis and Muslim mental health would be more com-
plete if it referenced the contributions of Al-Razi or his mentor,
Al-Tabari, both of whom emphasized the importance of psycho-
therapy within an Islamic framework in the 9th century (Haque,
2004), long before Freudian psychoanalysis was conceived. Un-
 196 PASHA-ZAIDI
fortunately, the contributions of Muslim scholars to psychology
are relatively unknown even to Muslim researchers.
Western psychology developed as an independent discipline by
eschewing its philosophical, spiritual, and metaphysical elements
in favor of a secular and objective approach mirroring the hard
sciences. In doing so, it limited the kinds of human phenomena
that could be studied. Using the MIP to frame an Islamic psychol-
ogy would promote the development of a unique discipline that
invites a multitude of perspectives and allows for a more complete
investigation of human nature. By promoting a multilevel ap-
proach, MIP would enable researchers within Islamic psychology
to consider how Islamic thought influences systems of meaning at
the individual level, but it would also encourage the study of
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Muslim communities and societies, thus allowing for a larger
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
foundation upon which to build knowledge. Philosopher and social
scientist Abdol Karim Soroush noted (as quoted in Noor, 2002),
There is no such thing as a “pure” Islam or an a-historical Islam that
is outside the process of historical development. The actual lived
experience of Islam has always been culturally and historically spe-
cific, and bound by the immediate circumstances of its location in
time and space. If we were to take a snapshot of Islam as it is lived
today, it would reveal a diversity of lived experiences which are all
different, yet existing simultaneously. (pp. 15–16)
Being an interdisciplinary paradigm, MIP espouses the integra-
tion of multiple methods of enquiry. As each discipline values
slightly different ways of knowing, research within the domain of
Islamic psychology would be able to reflect various subdisciplines
of psychology, but also the intersection of psychology with disci-
plines such as theology, law, and medicine to better understand the
human condition in its physical, spiritual, and societal forms. For
practicing Muslims, Islam is not solely a religion, but rather a way
of life. As such, Islamic psychology as a paradigm should not be
relevant only in terms of clinical applications and personality
theories that reflect Islamic thought, although the majority of the
work under the umbrella of Islamic psychology currently falls
within these domains (Abu-Raiya, 2015; Ansari, 2002; Hanin
Hamjah & Mat Akhir, 2014; Haque & Keshavarzi, 2012; Haque &
Mohamed, 2009; Ivry, 2012; York Al-Karam, 2018b). Perhaps it is
due to the fact that the terms Islam and Muslims are linguistically
dissimilar (unlike terms like Christianity and Christian or Bud-
dhism and Buddhist, which share common root words), but there
appears to be a division between the topics that fall under Islamic
psychology and those that apply to the psychology of Muslims.
This differentiation was observed by Kaplick and Skinner (2017)
in their discussion of the evolution of what they termed the Islam
and Psychology movement. However, the question arises: Is this a
necessary division? Psychology is separated into subdisciplines
such as clinical/counseling psychology, social–personality psy-
chology, educational psychology, and industrial– organizational
psychology, but these divisions are based on area of specialty, not
between the subject and the people to whom it applies. A wider net
for Islamic psychology would allow for greater research opportu-
nities and interdisciplinary collaborations across the various sub-
sets. Thus, organizational psychologists who research Islamic fi-
nance, social psychologists who study Islamic norms, educational
psychologists who look at Islamic schools, and counseling psy-
chologists who use Islamic practices in psychotherapy, for exam-
ple, would all fall under the auspices of Islamic psychology, or
rather Islamic psychologies (Rothman & Coyle, 2018). Although
the topics are not necessarily related, the larger umbrella would
provide a more unified structure for different specializations and
create a shared system of knowledge (York Al-Karam, 2018a).
Using MIP would additionally encourage the field of Islamic
psychology to explore the meanings of Quranic verses and inter-
pretations of the Sunnah as well as the historical and contemporary
lived experiences of Muslims which may reflect cultural norms,
family and peer relationships, individual preferences, and a host of
other factors interacting with religious systems of belief. For
Islamic psychology to truly become a holistic and unique social
science, I believe that it must be flexible enough to embrace both
Islamic ideology and the diversity of Muslim experiences. The use
of MIP to frame the development of an Islamic psychology would
certainly lend itself to such.
Islamic Ways of Knowing
Although the MIP is a good place to start deconstructing the
research process, a critical approach to research methods is needed
to change the ways in which we explore human behaviors. As MIP
was developed from the perspective of mainstream Western psy-
chology, the development of a unique Islamic psychology would
also need to consider methodologies that are based on Islamic
worldviews. Two scholars, in particular, stand out in their effort to
create an Islamic approach to knowledge, S. M. Naquib Al-Attas
and Ismail R. Al-Faruqi. Al-Faruqi (1989) addressed the crisis of
knowledge development in contemporary Islamic contexts—a no-
tion he identified as the “malaise of the Ummah,” which has
resulted in an estrangement between essential Islamic beliefs and
the concept of scientific progress. The latter places secular values
as the epitome of academic discourse, whereas religious discourse
is seen as the antithesis of modernization. The emphasis on secu-
larism is particularly important in the development of an Islamic
psychology given the “othering” of Islam and Muslims in Western
societies—a view that has implications for studying Muslim ex-
periences within non-Muslim majority contexts as well as within
Muslim majority contexts. According to Al-Faruqi (1989), the
Islamization of knowledge (IOK) requires a framework that nor-
malizes and revitalizes Islamic principles that have been distorted
over centuries from outside forces such as the colonization of
Muslim lands (and minds) as well as internal power structures that
have led to ignorance, literalism, and dogmatic worldviews within
Muslim communities. To make this distinction clearer, Al-Attas
(1993) preferred the term Islamization of contemporary knowl-
edge, thus focusing on the influence of Western secular knowledge
as the perceived universal norm in modern societies.
This view falls in line with other indigenous psychology move-
ments that advocate for the development of internal and culture-
specific paradigms to investigate contemporary societies from
within (Kim, Yang, & Hwang, 2006). “The emergence of the idea
of Islamization of contemporary knowledge stems from the basic
premise that contemporary knowledge is neither value-free nor
universal” (Hashim & Rossidy, 2000, p. 23). Consequently, the
emic approach to research would allow for Islamic psychology to
create its own set of paradigms based on Muslim experiences from
ecological, historical, and cultural contexts.
The first and foremost principle for an Islamic psychology
would, thus, be the understanding that God is the One Creator and
 INDIGENIZING AN ISLAMIC PSYCHOLOGY
to Him belongs all that is the heavens and the earth, including
human experience. This is inherently linked to the concept of
fitrah, which refers to human nature, or the natural belief in God
that each human being is born with. It is God that has provided
human beings with free will and so, it is our ability to make
choices that determines our behaviors, attitudes, and cognitive
processes. As psychology is the study of mental processes and
behaviors, this aspect of Islam is essential to the development of an
Islamic psychology. The belief in the Oneness of God provides
unity to the diversity of experiences among Muslims around the
world.
Another central feature in an indigenous Islamic psychology
would be the construction of the self. Understanding the self in
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
terms of one’s internal state as well as the interaction with others
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
is a key element of psychological enquiry and differentiates psy-
chology from other social sciences. From an Islamic perspective,
the self is understood as the soul that inhabits our bodies. Here
Al-Ghazali’s framework of the soul which encompasses four as-
pects (the nafs or ego, the aql or intellect, the qalb or heart, and the
ruh or spirit) is the guiding paradigm that has been espoused by
many contemporary scholars in the development of an Islamic
psychology (Abu-Raiya, 2012; Haque, 2004; Skinner, 2010). The
nafs is the part of the soul that leans toward worldly desires and
distracts human beings from our relationship with God. The aql is
the center of human cognition which allows us to think and reason
in concert with the qalb, which serves as the spiritual center. These
two aspects of the soul, the heart and the intellect, work together
to promote the acquisition of knowledge. Possibly the closest
concepts to these in Western secular psychology would be the
notion of multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1983, 1993) or emo-
tional quotient versus IQ (Goleman, 1995), both of which are
well-studied areas in educational psychology. Finally, the ruh is
the part of the soul that is believed to directly connect to God; it is
through this spiritual connection that human beings can potentially
receive guidance and healing (Rothman & Coyle, 2018).
Being subservient to the power of One God is a reminder of our
place in an infinite world order where positivistic notions that
focus on only observable and measurable phenomenon fall short.
Al-Faruqi (1989) notes that the search for knowledge is unending.
There will always be more to discover as the laws of nature are a
condition of both Islam and science. As the reality of the world
around us is a part of God’s creation, using the scientific method
does not need to be considered a secular endeavor because there is
no contradiction between science and Islam. In terms of psychol-
ogy and Islam, both are searching for answers to the human condition
within the confines of the physical reality in which human beings live.
However, where secular research methods focus solely on human
beings within ourselves and our societies, Islamic research methods
would include variables and research questions related to our rela-
tionship with God and how that may influence our behaviors, per-
ceptions, attitudes, and interactions. It would certainly be relevant as
well to investigating the relationship between nature and nurture.
Thus, growing fields such as behavioral neuroscience would benefit
from the basic principles of research within an Islamic psychology.
Another consideration that is important to remember is that the
dominant approaches in psychology research do not address the
issue of hierarchy within the system. Traditional approaches put
researchers in the seat of power. This begins in step one from
identifying the phenomenon of interest and continues throughout
197
the process. Although qualitative research is much less positivistic
than quantitative research, it nonetheless falls prey to the same
notions of hierarchy. The questions that receive attention continue
to be a reflection of what researchers deem worthy while the
interpretation of findings may disregard or misinterpret important
aspects of knowledge that may not be apparent to those whose
experiences are not reflective of the community being studied
(Denzin, Lincoln, & Smith, 2008). Here again, the IOK (Al-
Faruqi, 1989) is a useful paradigm. Within Islam, all human beings
are considered equal in the eyes of God; thus anyone has the power
and the right to seek knowledge. In fact, seeking knowledge is one
of the duties imposed upon men and women in Islam as indicated
by a number of verses in the Quran as well as within the hadiths.
Furthermore, the Quran stated, “O People, We have created you
(all) of a single pair, a male and female; and We have constituted
you into tribes and nations that you may know one another”
(49:13). This quote provides an important gateway to the devel-
opment of an Islamic psychology as it considers both the unifying
aspect of Islam as a way of life for Muslims around the world,
while acknowledging the sociocultural and individual differences
between Muslims as a reality ordained by God. The goal of Islamic
psychology research would then be to discover both the universals
of human phenomena as well as the characteristics that are unique,
as both are a part of God’s creation.
By including the essential facets of Islam in the conceptualiza-
tion of psychology, researchers would be able to better understand
human nature within Muslim societies as well as Muslim experi-
ences in non-Muslim majority contexts. Investigating behavior
within natural contexts would be the beginning, but including
people from the communities that are being studied in all aspects
of the research process would provide a more authentic under-
standing of behaviors, attitudes, and experiences. This is the heart
of the decolonizing process.
Decolonizing the Research Process
Indigenous communities such as Native American tribes and the
Maori people of New Zealand have been vocal in their response to
the limitations of traditional research methods. Having been sub-
jugated by colonial rule, native peoples have a history of oppres-
sion that extends beyond politics to include academic and scien-
tific discourse.
Past researchers have disempowered communities, imposed stereo-
types that reinforced internalized racism, and conducted research that
benefited the careers of individual researchers, or even science at
large, but brought no tangible benefit to the communities struggling
with significant health disparities. Many tribal nations have provided
accounts of researchers who have exploited tribes by coming in,
taking information from tribal members, and providing nothing in
return. (Simonds & Christopher, 2013, p. 2186)
When looking at data from indigenous communities as well as
international and cross-cultural populations, researchers often use
the norms of mainstream populations as their point of comparison.
This determines the types of conclusions that are made and the
interventions that are utilized. However, social constructs are in-
herently value-laden and bound by culture (Luborsky & Sankar,
1993), whereas translations of instruments into English, which is
the dominant language of scientific enquiry, do not always ade-
 198 PASHA-ZAIDI
quately capture the experiences of non-English speakers. This can
be problematic for researchers who are looking for valid measure-
ment tools, especially those who are wary of imposing interpreta-
tions based on what secular, English-dominated, Western science
has deemed to be normal.
Researchers working with indigenous, international, and cultur-
ally diverse groups may find qualitative studies to be less deter-
ministic as they are more open-ended in their exploration of
phenomena. Unfortunately, even qualitative studies are prone to
misinterpretations if the data do not fit with the researchers’ own
understanding. For example, a qualitative study of physicians
discussing the higher mortality rates of Native Hawaiians versus
non-Hawaiians suggested that Native Hawaiians were more fatal-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
istic and less interested in health care than other ethnic groups in
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Hawaii (Braun, Look, & Tsark, 1995). However, a later study of
Hawaiian and non-Hawaiian cancer survivors (Braun, Mokuau,
Hunt, Kaanoi, & Gotay, 2002) found that Native Hawaiians were
just as proactive in their health care as non-Hawaiians. If doctors
were to frame their ideas about Native Hawaiians based solely on
the first study, they would possibly be less stringent in their efforts
to provide health care. Of course, science is an ongoing process—
remember, one of the characteristics of the scientific method is to
provide knowledge that can be falsified by other researchers;
however, when working with lesser known, stigmatized, or cul-
turally diverse groups, findings that support negative stereotypes
can be especially harmful. Research on stereotype formation illus-
trates that once we have decided on a particular belief, we prefer
to focus on information that supports our belief, rather than on
contradictory information that can cause cognitive dissonance (John-
ston, 1996). Perhaps more disturbing is the fact that even when
confronted by evidence that contradicts a stereotype, we tend to find
ways to discount that information (Seta, Seta, & McElroy, 2003).
Thus, there is a greater burden on researchers to provide accurate
interpretations of minority groups.
The criticism that indigenous communities hold with regard
to the Western traditions of scientific enquiry can easily apply
to the study of religion and is a part of the discourse related to
the IOK framework. In fact, we can see the overlap between
indigenous ways of knowing and Islamic understanding of
human phenomena in the ways in which the physical and
spiritual realm are believed to coexist (Haque, 2004; Shahjahan,
2005). As noted earlier, decolonized research fits with the
Islamization of science and technology, which has been of
interest to scholars as a way of connecting the sociopolitical
realities of indigenous Muslim nations with the tools and ex-
pertise that have developed through Western scientific endeav-
ors. Hassan, Sidek, Mohamed, and Kudus (2016) stated that the
Islamization of science “is not a process of replacing the
existing knowledge with a new knowledge that has been con-
verted to Islam” (p. 1359), but rather a system of meaning-making
that integrates science and religion in a holistic manner to help us
better reflect on humanity, nature, and God. Al-Attas (as cited in
Hashim & Rossidy, 2000) espoused the inclusion of intuition in the
scientific method as a valid tool, and this is certainly applicable in
the interpretation of both qualitative and quantitative data. Given
what Coyle (2001) referred to as the “religious gap” between
social scientists and the people they study, it is not inconceivable
that much of what is known within the psychology of religion is
subject to the (mis)interpretations of researchers who may be
distant from the belief systems that they study. In an analysis of the
growing empirical literature on Islam and psychology, Abu-Raiya
and Pargament (2011) noted that most studies with Muslims only
provided a superficial view of Islam. Although the positivistic
tradition espouses objective criteria and impersonal analysis, the
development of research questions and measurement tools, and the
interpretation of statistical analyses still require a nuanced under-
standing of the phenomena being studied. This does not happen in
a contextual vacuum, but as a result of what we can find in the
extant literature. If researchers begin with questions that do not
address the complexities of a community, the answers they find
will be limited in scope. If psychological instruments are based on
inappropriate or incomplete conceptualizations of behaviors and
attitudes, the statistical analyses will be limited in their applica-
bility, even if the results are statistically significant! Within the
domain of an Islamic psychology, for example, is it enough to base
religiosity on participants’ self-reported behaviors? What if a par-
ticular religiosity tool represents the behaviors that are common
within one cultural context, but uncommon within another? While
working on my dissertation, for example, I remember searching for
a valid psychological tool to measure the religiosity of South Asian
Muslim women. Although there were a number of instruments, the
only one I could get permission to use at the time was the Muslim
Attitudes Toward Religion Scale (Wilde & Joseph, 1997), which
included an item about praying at a masjid. Although communal
prayers can be an indicator of religiosity among Muslim males, I
knew from my own experiences that it would not necessarily be
applicable to the religiosity of South Asian Muslim women, espe-
cially older generations or those living in their native countries,
who often prefer to pray at home. The instrument did not capture
these nuances. Being a part of the cultural and religious commu-
nity that I was studying provided me with insight to critically
examine the religiosity measure and to get a clearer picture of the
overall results. Although I realized at the time that this knowledge
was key to my personal understanding of the research that I was
conducting, I did not fully appreciate its importance in the overall
scheme of things.
Although researchers who focus on indigenizing psychology
have been calling for the development of indigenous measures
that capture attributes of psychological constructs that may be
unique or particularly salient to the populations being studied
(Yamaguchi & Ariizumi, 2006; Yang, 2006: Church, 2010), it
is often easier and less time-consuming to modify, translate,
and validate existing measures to reflect cultural and religious
norms of lesser studied populations. This is certainly one option
in the initial stages of developing an Islamic psychology. A
search of measurement tools used by researchers published in
the Journal of Muslim Mental Health in the Winter 2017 issue
indicated this practice to some extent. Some of the tools that
appeared in the issue include the Oxford Happiness Inventory
and the Sahin-Francis Scale of Attitude Toward Islam, which
were used with students in Malaysia (Tekke, Francis, & Rob-
bins, 2018); the Twenty Statements Test of Self-Concept, the
Descriptive Attitude Scale, and the Differential Emotion Scale,
used with female college students in Saudi Arabia (El Alaoui,
Pilotti, Mulhem, Tallouzi, & Al Mqbas, 2018); and the Diag-
nostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, which was
used to assess the mental health of an American Muslim woman
(Musleh, 2018).
 INDIGENIZING AN ISLAMIC PSYCHOLOGY
It is important to note, however, that over the past decade,
researchers have been formulating and validating measurement
tools that are specifically created by and for Muslim popula-
tions, and these are increasingly available in Western psychol-
ogy literature. In Musleh’s (2018) case study, for example, the
participant was asked to complete the Muslim Experiential
Religiousness Scale, which was specifically developed by
Ghorbani, Watson, Geranmayepour, and Chen (2014) as a tool
to assess Muslim spirituality with the aim of advancing an
indigenous Islamic psychology. Ashraf and Amjad (2016) have
similarly constructed an Indigenous Islamic Belief question-
naire for Pakistani Muslims; AlMarri, Oei, and Al-Adawi
(2009) have developed a brief measure of Islamic practice and
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
belief that was used with Arab Muslims in the United Arab
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Emirates and Oman as well as with Asian Muslims in Malaysia
and Indonesia; and Abu-Raiya, Pargament, Mahoney, and Stein
(2008) have created the Psychological Measure of Islamic Re-
ligiousness, which was constructed through interviews with
Muslims in Israel/Palestine and the United States. The Psycho-
logical Measure of Islamic Religiousness addresses factors such
as Islamic beliefs, ethical principles, religious struggle, reli-
gious duty, positive coping and identification, and religious
conversion. Beyond the development of Islamic religiosity mea-
sures, Saleem and Mahmood (2010) have constructed an indig-
enous Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder Scale for identifying
symptoms of the disorder among Pakistani Muslims. As one
aspect of obsessive– compulsive disorder may be manifested
through obsessions and compulsions related to religious rituals,
such measures are particularly useful for clinicians working
with Muslim populations.
Thus, indigenous measurement tools for Islamic communities
are beginning to appear in the extant literature (see Haque,
Khan, Keshavarzi, & Rothman, 2016, for an in-depth review of
research trends and assessment tools for Muslims that have
been developed over the past 10 years). Within quantitative
research, indigenous measures would provide not only culture-
specific understandings of Islam, but would be helpful as tools
that can be validated among Muslim populations in cultural
contexts for which the tools were not initially developed. In this
way, Islamic psychology can better understand what aspects of
Islamic ways of knowing are universal among Muslims in
general versus those that are culture specific. This reflects the
importance of what Abu-Raiya and Pargament (2011) called the
“bottom-up” approach to research within religious communities
which focuses on the experiences, theological beliefs, and world-
views as communicated by the participants themselves.
It is important to remember that decolonizing the research
process is not a call to eliminate the scientific method; instead, it
is a call to researchers that are working with populations that are
not represented by mainstream Western secular norms to be more
vigilant in their methodology and to refrain from “smash and grab”
or “helicopter” research that may be more beneficial to the ad-
vancement of their careers than to the wellbeing of their partici-
pants (Fong, Braun, & Tsark, 2003; Kovach, 2009). A decolonized
approach is rooted in social justice and is not so much about the
choice of methodology, but rather the context in which research is
designed and the implications of research for the communities it
studies (Smith, 2013). Decolonizing research can be done in a
number of ways. Collaborations with colleagues who work with
199
the population of interest is a good starting point and one that
many researchers are already engaged in. However, we can do
more. Proponents of decolonized research are increasingly in favor
of participatory action research (PAR) and community-based par-
ticipatory research (CBPR) approaches that involve a partnership
between the subjects of research (the participants or communities)
and the researchers themselves in an effort to produce practical
changes. A key feature of PAR, CBPR, and other participatory
approaches is the emphasis on collaboration; thus, in participatory
research, the hierarchy between the role of the researcher and the
study participants is lessened. Theoretically, this means that there
is equal responsibility for the research that is conducted, with
researchers and participants (or communities) taking a shared role
in the development and execution of research studies. In essence,
participants then become part of the research team (Kovach, 2009).
Degrees of community participation can range from full commu-
nity control of research projects to projects that are controlled and
managed by professional researchers with trained community re-
searchers being responsible for different portions (Banks et al.,
2013). Participatory forms of research have begun to gain popu-
larity in Western models for a number of reasons, including social
trends that are concerned with fighting elitism and providing more
access to higher education as well as an increasing desire on the
part of researchers to address the lack of diversity of participants
in the extant literature (Benneworth, Conway, Charles, Humphrey,
& Younger, 2009; Heron & Reason, 2008). Although the level of
power that participants have in the research process often contin-
ues to be less than that of the researchers and their affiliated
universities or institutions (Banks et al., 2013), participatory re-
search can still provide a much needed voice in the production of
scientific knowledge while scaffolding the knowledge of research
methods to members of the local communities.
Within the domain of Islamic psychology, participatory re-
search methods would allow Muslim communities and scholars
to have a greater role in the process. Rampant Islamophobia
around the world has made it increasingly important for Mus-
lims to be heard and have some control and ownership of the
narrative that is disseminated. Unfortunately, Islamophobia has
also created a sense of suspicion among Muslims; as a result,
researchers have found it difficult to engage Muslim partici-
pants in studies after 9/11 (Caidi & MacDonald, 2008). This
was my own experience as well, until I began to use a more
participatory approach to conducting research.
Personal Experiences With Participatory Research
In 2012, I began a qualitative project looking at the experi-
ences of hijab and veiling. It was originally meant to explore the
experiences of Muslim women who wore the headscarf and
those who did not. By the time it was completed, it had become
much more inclusive and much more diverse. Mirror on the
Veil: A Collection of Personal Narrative of Hijab and Veiling
(Pasha-Zaidi & Pasha, 2017) was my first foray into a partici-
patory framework. The collection is a shared effort that resulted
in personal reflections from over 30 participants, mostly Mus-
lim women, but some non-Muslims, and a few men as well. The
goal of the anthology was to provide an authentic view of hijab
and veiling from multiple perspectives—those who wear the
headscarf, those who do not, and those who have had personal
 200 PASHA-ZAIDI
interactions with Muslims or veiling. Participants were re-
cruited online, through listservs, through our own connections,
and as a result of snowball sampling. The written reflections went
through peer reviews and multiple drafts. As most of the partici-
pants were not professional writers and many were not native
English speakers, drafting and rewriting were a collaborative effort
to ensure that meaning was preserved. My coeditor and I also
worked with native English contributors whose writing reflected
the nuances of the language as it is used in different parts of the
world; thus, literary elements such as the flow of language and
voice were carefully reviewed at each step. At times, there were
disagreements between the phrasing of certain parts. This was
particularly evident between American and British English! In
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
such cases, we deferred to the contributors’ version, as we were
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
aware of our own bent toward American English.
It is important to note here that even though participants were
involved throughout the process of developing the anthology,
once the contributors were asked to sign off on their publishing
agreement, some were hesitant to do so for fear that their essays
might be misappropriated or misused to further Islamophobic
rhetoric. I believe that being a part of the Muslim community
and having developed a relationship of trust with the partici-
pants helped us reassure the participants. This is one of the
strengths of the participatory approach. When research partic-
ipants are more than just “subjects” of someone else’s study,
they become living representatives of scientific discourse. They
not only gain experience with research; they take on ownership
of the research process which can create a sustainable change
within communities, and hopefully inspire new research em-
phasizing “other” ways of knowing to counter the dominant
ideas of normal.
Decolonizing research can apply to quantitative studies as
well. Recently, I began a joint venture with graduate students at
a Turkish university as part of an international collaboration to
investigate academic resilience. The Turkish students were able to
provide much needed context from the very beginning. They
developed the literature review of the topic as it applied to their
region. Given that the study used Western measures such as the
Grit Scale (Duckworth & Quinn, 2009) and the scales of Self-
Efficacy, Task Value, and Self-Regulation adapted from Vel-
ayutham, Aldridge, and Fraser (2011), the participation of the
Turkish students was imperative to ensure the validity of the
constructs being studied. During the translation of the quantita-
tive instruments, they were able to make suggestions regarding the
applicability of certain concepts to the cultural context, which
allowed us to develop more appropriate items. Once the statistical
analysis had been completed, they were able to find nuances within
the results that reflected cultural information that I would not have
readily gauged. Their cooperation at different points in the process
was essential for the study (Pasha-Zaidi, Afari, Sevi, Urganci, &
Durham, 2018). The students continue to provide guidance in our
current project exploring the relationship between adverse child-
hood experiences and academic resilience among university stu-
dents in Istanbul.
Challenges and Recommendations
The use of MIP, Islamic ways of knowing, and decolonized
research practices in the development of an Islamic psychology
is not without its challenges. The end of ijtihad (free interpre-
tation) in the 14th century saw a decline in the application of
critical frameworks that were the sign of intellectualism during
the Golden Age of Islam (circa 750 –1250 AD). This was
further exacerbated by the European colonization of Muslim
lands in the 18th and 19th centuries (Razak, 2011). Although
recent scholars have noted that critical enquiry is allowed in
matters other than religion (Haque, 2004), the notion of ques-
tioning authority continues to be less acceptable within Islamic
circles compared to secular Western nations. This is further
supported by Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, which indicate
that hierarchical notions of authority (a concept known as
power distance) are valued within Muslim-majority regions
(Hofstede, 2017). The idea of decolonizing research and thus
lessening the hierarchy between the experts and the participants
may therefore be a difficult step for many Muslim communities,
but I believe it is one that is necessary in the current political
climate.
Additionally, in order for Muslim scholarship to be revital-
ized through internal frameworks such as the general principles
of the IOK, Muslims need to find ways to overcome the dogma
and fear of critically assessing Islamic ideas that were laid
down by scholars before the end of the period of ijtihad. Again,
this may not be an easy endeavor. Uddin and Mazumder (2014)
provided an overview of some of the ways in which IOK has
been interpreted by different scholars and how its emphasis on
indigenizing the sciences using a religious worldview has both
its supporters as well as its detractors. For example, although
Sardar (1986) supported the idea that Muslims need to develop
appropriate frameworks of knowledge that reflect Islamic prin-
ciples and promote critical thinking and plurality, Hoodboy and
Abdus Salam vehemently rejected the notion that science needs
to be “Islamicized” in their claim that science is a universal
construct (Hashim & Rossidy, 2000). In fact, according to
Abdus Salam, “there is only one universal science, its problems
and modalities are international and there is no such thing as
Islamic science just as there is no Hindu science, no Jewish
science, no Confucian science, nor Christian science” (as cited
in Uddin & Mazumder, 2014, p. 100). However, this is where
the social sciences may provide a bridge for scholars on oppo-
site ends of the debate. Given that indigenous psychology has
been making strides in illustrating that Western secular ways of
knowing are not necessarily universal (Kim et al., 2006), IOK
may be useful in developing an indigenous Islamic psychology
which focuses not only on the mind and human experience, but
also includes the ways in which Islamic principles are inter-
preted and applied in different social contexts. As seeking
knowledge is an Islamic duty for men and women that is
currently being stifled, thus leading more credibility to secular
social science that does not have the self-imposed limitations on
the exploration of human phenomena, it behooves Muslim
social scientists to find ways of exploring Islamic perspectives
from within our communities.
Another challenge lies in our ability to use the contributions
of the original Islamic psychologists—the Muslim philosophers
and scientists who formulated many of the principles and prac-
tices that are used in contemporary psychology. Although the
inclusion of historical scholarship in the development of an
Islamic psychology is imperative, the availability of informa-
 INDIGENIZING AN ISLAMIC PSYCHOLOGY
tion in English is limited (Haque, 2004). English is the language
of scientific discourse and will likely continue to be so for the
foreseeable future. Thus, it is important for those working on
developing an Islamic psychology to find ways to increase the
availability of materials in English so that information regard-
ing Muslim contributions to the field is more readily available
to the wider scientific community.
Participatory research itself can be difficult in part due to
unclear ethical guidelines related to the collaboration of research-
ers with the people that are being researched. Banks et al. (2013)
noted that “current institutional ethical codes, guidelines and eth-
ical review procedures are not particularly well-suited to CBPR”
(p. 263). This means that important aspects of research such as the
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Institutional Review Board process may face challenges with
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
allocating the person(s) responsible for ethical oversight of the
study. When participants have some control over what is being
studied and the implication of findings, especially if the results are
counter to the narrative that communities want to disseminate,
there can be a conflict of interest between scientific discovery and
personal gain. This is reminiscent of the kinds of conflicts to which
corporate interests are prone if they only promote studies that show
their products and services in a positive light. Additionally, the
ability to maintain the confidentiality of participants is highly com-
promised in participatory research. Even if participants are open to
being named in the research, they may not be prepared for the level of
intrusion into their personal lives that the research process can entail.
This may be particularly disturbing if the subject matter is sensitive.
The development of protocols that allow community members to end
or limit their participation can also be more difficult if the lines
between researchers and the researched are blurred.
Redefining institutional guidelines so that they are more reflective
of relationship-based ethics can be helpful. Being embedded in the
research context of marginalized communities requires an ability to
understand that scientific enquiry must go beyond “doing no harm.”
Thus, providing joint training to enhance the communication and
relationship-building of professional researchers and their participant
collaborators may also be needed. Instead of favoring ethical models
that are based on impartial and standardized rules, a framework of
social justice that takes into consideration the importance of trust,
care, and wellbeing of communities can provide a more flexible
approach to developing awareness among researchers and community
members regarding the complexities and potential conflicts of work-
ing together (Banks et al., 2013).
Finally, conducting research as part of a unique Islamic psychology
requires some agreement on the nature and purpose of knowledge. A
level of reflexivity and critical enquiry would be needed to reflect on
the influences of secularism, cultural constructions of Islam, and our
own personal beliefs. Abu-Raiya (2017) noted that “both social and
theological desirability could lead to obtaining inaccurate data and
therefore might affect the validity of interpretations of studies con-
ducted with individuals from different religious faiths” (p. 548). This
may be a particularly difficult bind for Muslims as the threat of
Islamophobia makes it harder to critically consider questions of faith
in public forums. As the current political climate, especially in regions
of the world where Muslims are a minority, has created a threatening
environment for Islamic practices and public identities, any deviation
from the positive representation of the faith may result in group
sanctions. This is a well-known characteristic of group behavior and
reflects the self-protective processes that become active in the pres-
201
ence of real or perceived danger (Miller, Maner, & Becker, 2010).
The importance of saving face is also relevant here as many Islamic
communities represent collectivist cultures for whom cohesion is an
essential component of harmonious relationships (Hofstede, 2017).
Yet without a willingness to entertain questions and investigate alter-
native ideas, we cannot really develop a unique and usable frame-
work.
Conclusion
This article espouses a critical consideration of the nature of
traditional research in psychology. The use of the MIP provides a
framework that can help in the development of an Islamic psy-
chology that is inclusive of the lived experience of Muslims and
how Islamic practices may be interpreted around the world. MIP
can help Islamic psychology become an umbrella for research
practices that integrate Islamic ways of knowing with other disci-
plines in the humanities, social sciences and natural sciences.
Given the impact of Islamophobia in contemporary society, how-
ever, MIP alone cannot accomplish this task. By using an indig-
enous framework such as the IOK, researchers can develop re-
search questions and utilize tools of enquiry that are inclusive of
the essential aspects of Islam, thus encouraging the development of
a unique Islamic psychology. Finally, using decolonized research
methods such as PAR and CBPR can enable Muslims to become
more than the “other” as their participation becomes integral to the
research process.
Social activism is not only an inherent part of decolonizing
research, it is a critical component of the Islamic faith. As stated in
the Quran (4:135),
O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! Stand up firmly for
justice, witnesses for God, even if it is against yourselves, your
parents and your relatives, and whether the case is of a rich person or
a poor person. God is nearer to them than you are; His Law comes
first. Follow not your emotions lest you fall short of justice. If you
distort your testimony or turn away from this Command, Allah is
Aware of all your actions.
Furthermore, the life of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon
Him) was devoted to social justice. As a Muslim social scientist, I
believe it is imperative for Islamic psychology to promote research
practices that are rooted in social activism, based on scientific
principles, and reflective of Islamic values and the diversity of
Muslim experiences around the world. Although it is not an easy
task, I believe that the use of the MIP along with a framework that
revitalizes the Islamization of contemporary knowledge and inte-
grates decolonized research methods will enable researchers to
begin this journey.
References
Abu-Raiya, H. (2012). Toward a systematic Qura’nic theory of personality.
Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 15, 217–233. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1080/13674676.2011.640622
Abu-Raiya, H. (2015). Working with religious Muslim clients: A dynamic,
Qura’nic-based model of psychotherapy. Spirituality in Clinical Prac-
tice, 2, 120 –133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/scp0000068
Abu-Raiya, H. (2017). A critique from within: Some important research
issues that psychologists of religion and spirituality should further work
on. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 20, 544 –551. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/13674676.2017.1377945
 202 PASHA-ZAIDI
Abu-Raiya, H., & Pargament, K. I. (2011). Empirically based psychology of
Islam: Summary and critique of the literature. Mental Health, Religion &
Culture, 14, 93–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13674670903426482
Abu-Raiya, H., Pargament, K. I., Mahoney, A., & Stein, C. (2008). A
psychological measure of Islamic religiousness: Development and evi-
dence for reliability and validity. The International Journal for the
Psychology of Religion, 18, 291–315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508
610802229270
Al-Attas, S. M. N. (1993). Islam and secularism. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia:
International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization.
Al-Faruqi, I. R. (1989). Islamization of knowledge: General principles and
work plan (2nd ed.). Herndon, VA: International Institute of Islamic
Thought.
AlMarri, T. S., Oei, T. P., & Al-Adawi, S. (2009). The development of the
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Short Muslim Practice and Belief Scale. Mental Health, Religion &
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Culture, 12, 415– 426. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13674670802637643
Ansari, Z. (2002). Islamic psychology. In R. P. Olson (Ed.), Religious
theories of personality and psychotherapy: East meets West (pp. 325–
357). New York, NY: Haworth Press.
Arnett, J. J. (2008). The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs
to become less American. American Psychologist, 63, 602– 614. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.602
Ashraf, M., & Amjad, A. (2016). Indigenous Islamic Belief Questionnaire.
Pakistan Journal of Clinical Psychology, 15, 51– 67.
Banks, S., Armstrong, A., Carter, K., Graham, H., Hayward, P., Henry, A.,
. . . Moore, N. (2013). Everyday ethics in community-based participatory
research. Contemporary Social Science, 8, 263–277. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1080/21582041.2013.769618
Benneworth, P., Conway, C., Charles, D., Humphrey, L., & Younger, P.
(2009). Characterizing modes of university engagement with wider
society: A literature review and survey of best practice. Newcastle upon
Tyne, England: Office of the Pro Vice Chancellor, Newcastle Univer-
sity.
Braun, K. L., Browne, C. V., Ka’opua, L. S., Kim, B. J., & Mokuau, N. (2014).
Research on indigenous elders: From positivistic to decolonizing method-
ologies. The Gerontologist, 54, 117–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geront/
gnt067
Braun, K. L., Look, M., & Tsark, J. U. (1995). Native Hawaii mortality
rates. Hawaii Medical Journal, 54, 723–729.
Braun, K. L., Mokuau, N., Hunt, G. H., Kaanoi, M., & Gotay, C. C. (2002).
Supports and obstacles to cancer survival for Hawaii’s native people.
Cancer Practice, 10, 192–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-5394.2002
.104001.x
Caidi, N., & MacDonald, S. (2008). Information practices of Canadian
Muslims post 9/11. Government Information Quarterly, 25, 348 –378.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2007.10.007
Church, A. T. (2010). Measurement issues in cross-cultural research. In G.
Walford, E. Tucker, & M. Viswanathan (Eds.), The Sage handbook of
measurement (pp. 151–177). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi
.org/10.4135/9781446268230.n9
Coyle, B. R. (2001). Twelve myths of religion and psychiatry: Lessons for
training psychiatrists in spiritually sensitive treatments. Mental Health,
Religion & Culture, 4, 149 –174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/713685628
Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S., & Smith, L. T. (2008). Handbook of critical
and indigenous methodologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi
.org/10.4135/9781483385686
Duckworth, A. L., & Quinn, P. D. (2009). Development and validation of
the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91,
166 –174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223890802634290
El Alaoui, K., Pilotti, M. A. E., Mulhem, H., Tallouzi, E. A., & Al Mqbas,
M. M. A. (2018). The role of language and cultural orientation in guilt
and shame experienced by bilingual female speakers. The Journal of
Muslim Mental Health, 11, 17–25.
Emmons, R. A., & Paloutzian, R. F. (2003). The psychology of religion.
Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 377– 402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/
annurev.psych.54.101601.145024
Fong, M., Braun, K. L., & Tsark, J. (2003). Improving Native Hawaiian
health through community-based participatory research. Californian
Journal of Health Promotion, 1, 136 –148.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New
York, NY: Basic Books.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam Books.
Ghorbani, N., Watson, P. J., Geranmayepour, S., & Chen, Z. (2014).
Measuring Muslim spirituality: Relationships of Muslim experiential
religiousness with religious and psychological adjustment in Iran. Jour-
nal of Muslim Mental Health, 8, 77–94.
Hanin Hamjah, S., & Mat Akhir, N. S. (2014). Islamic approach in
counseling. Journal of Religion and Health, 53, 279 –289. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1007/s10943-013-9703-4
Haque, A. (2004). Psychology from Islamic perspective: Contributions of
early Muslim scholars and challenges to contemporary Muslim psychol-
ogists. Journal of Religion and Health, 43, 357–377. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s10943-004-4302-z
Haque, A., & Keshavarzi, H. (2012). Integrating indigenous healing meth-
ods in therapy: Muslim beliefs and practices. International Journal of
Culture and Mental Health, 7, 297–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
17542863.2013.794249
Haque, A., Khan, F., Keshavarzi, H., & Rothman, A. E. (2016). Integrating
Islamic traditions in modern psychology: Research trends in last ten
years. The Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 10, 75–100.
Haque, A., & Mohamed, Y. (Eds.). (2009). Psychology of personality:
Islamic perspectives. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Cengage Learning Asia.
Hashim, R., & Rossidy, I. (2000). Islamization of knowledge: A compar-
ative analysis of the conceptions of Al-Attas and Al-Faruqi. Intellectual
Discourse, 8, 19 – 44.
Hassan, M. A., Sidek, S., Mohamed, S., & Kudus, N. (2016). The per-
spectives of four Muslim scholars on Islamisation of science. Science
International, 28, 1359 –1362.
Hayes, N. (2000). Doing psychological research. Abingdon, United King-
dom: Taylor & Francis Group.
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Most people are not
WEIRD. Nature, 466, 29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/466029a
Heron, J., & Reason, P. (2008). Extending epistemology within a cooper-
ative inquiry. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action
research: Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 366 –380). London,
United Kingdom: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781848607934.n32
Hofstede, G. (2017). Dimensions of national culture. Retrieved from
https://www.hofstede-insights.com/models/national-culture/
Hood, R. W., & Belzen, J. A. (2005). Research methods in the psychology
of religion. In R. F. Paloutzian & C. L. Park (Eds.), Handbook of the
psychology of religion and spirituality (pp. 62–79). New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Hood, R. W., Belzen, J. A., Paloutzian, R. F., & Park, C. L. (2013).
Research methods in the psychology of religion and spirituality. In R. F.
Paloutzian & C. L. Park (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of religion
and spirituality (2nd ed., pp. 75–93). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Ivry, A. (2012). Arabic and Islamic psychology and philosophy of mind. In
E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford, CA:
Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved from https://
plato.stanford.edu/entries/arabic-islamic-mind/
Johnston, L. (1996). Resisting change: Information-seeking and stereotype
change. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 799 – 825. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199609)26:5⬍799::AID-
EJSP796⬎3.0.CO;2-O
 INDIGENIZING AN ISLAMIC PSYCHOLOGY
Kaplick, P. M., & Skinner, R. (2017). The evolving Islam and psychology
movement. European Psychologist, 22, 198 –204. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1027/1016-9040/a000297
Kim, U., Yang, K. S., & Hwang, K. K. (2006). Contributions to indigenous
and cultural psychology. In U. Kim, K. S. Yang, & K. K. Hwang (Eds.),
Indigenous und cultural psychology: Understanding people in context
(pp. 3–25). New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-387-
28662-4_1
Kovach, M. (2009). Indigenous methodologies: Characteristics, conversa-
tions, and context. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
Luborsky, M. R., & Sankar, A. (1993). Extending the critical gerontology
perspective: Cultural dimensions. Introduction. The Gerontologist, 33,
440 – 444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geront/33.4.440
Miller, S. L., Maner, J. K., & Becker, D. V. (2010). Self-protective biases
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
in group categorization: Threat cues shape the psychological boundary
between “us” and “them.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
ogy, 99, 62–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0018086
Musleh, S. (2018). Eating disorder of a Muslim American “hijabi” woman:
Case study and cultural formulation. The Journal of Muslim Mental
Health, 11, 67–78.
Noor, F. A. (2002). New voices of Islam. Leiden, The Netherlands: Inter-
national Institute for the Study of Islam in the Modern World.
Paloutzian, R. F., & Park, C. L. (2005). Integrative themes in the current
science of the psychology of religion. In R. F. Paloutzian & C. L. Park
(Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality (pp.
3–20). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Pasha-Zaidi, N., Afari, E., Sevi, B., Urganci, B., & Durham, J. (2018). The
responsibility of learning: A cross-cultural examination of the relation-
ship of grit, motivational beliefs, and self-regulation among college
students in the U.S., UAE, and Turkey. Learning Environments Re-
search. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10984-
018-9268-y
Pasha-Zaidi, N., & Pasha, S. (2017). Mirror on the veil: A collection of
personal narratives on hijab and veiling. London, United Kingdom:
Critical, Cultural and Communications Press.
Pew Research Center. (2015). The future of world religions: Population
growth projections 2010 –2050. Washington, DC.
Plano Clark, V. L., & Creswell, J. W. (2015). Understanding research: A
consumer’s guide (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Higher Ed.
Razak, M. A. A. (2011). Globalization and its impact on education and
culture. World Journal of Islamic History and Civilization, 1, 59 – 69.
Rothman, A., & Coyle, A. (2018). Toward a framework for Islamic
psychology and psychotherapy: An Islamic model of the soul. Journal of
Religion and Health, 57, 1731–1744. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10943-
018-0651-x
Saleem, S., & Mahmood, Z. (2010). The development of an indigenous
Obsessive–Compulsive Scale. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 4, 39 –51.
Sardar, Z. (1986). Islamic future: The shape of ideas to come. Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia: Pelanduk Publication.
203
Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2016). Theories of personality (11th ed.).
Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Seta, J. J., Seta, C. E., & McElroy, T. (2003). Attributional biases in the
service of stereotype maintenance: A schema-maintenance through com-
pensation analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29,
151–163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167202239040
Shahjahan, R. A. (2005). Mapping the field of anti-colonial discourse to
understand issues of indigenous knowledges: Decolonizing praxis.
McGill Journal of Education, 40, 213–240.
Simonds, V. W., & Christopher, S. (2013). Adapting Western research
methods to indigenous ways of knowing. American Journal of Public
Health, 103, 2185–2192. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.301157
Skinner, R. (2010). An Islamic approach to psychology and mental health.
Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 13, 547–551.
Smith, L. T. (2013). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indige-
nous peoples (2nd ed.). London, United Kingdom: Zed Books Ltd.
Tekke, M., Francis, L. J., & Robbins, M. (2018). Religious affect and
personal happiness: A replication among Sunni students in Malaysia.
The Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 11, 3–15.
Uddin, M. H., & Mazumder, M. A. (2014). Islamization of knowledge: An
exploratory study of concepts, issues, and trends. International Journal
of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 1, 99 –109.
Velayutham, S., Aldridge, J., & Fraser, B. (2011). Development and
validation of an instrument to measure students’ motivation and self-
regulation in science learning. International Journal of Science Educa-
tion, 33, 2159 –2179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.541529
Wilde, A., & Joseph, S. (1997). Religiosity and personality in a Moslem
context. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 899 –900. http://dx
.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00098-6
Yamaguchi, S., & Ariizumi, Y. (2006). Close Interpersonal Relationships
among Japanese: Amae as distinguished from attachment and depen-
dence. In U. Kim, K. S. Yang, & K. K. Hwang (Eds.), Indigenous and
cultural psychology: Understanding people in context (pp. 163–174).
New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-387-28662-4_7
Yang, K. S. (2006). Indigenous personality research. In U. Kim, K. S.
Yang, & K. K. Hwang (Eds.), Indigenous and cultural psychology:
Understanding people in context (pp. 285–314). New York, NY: Spring-
er. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-387-28662-4_13
York Al-Karam, C. (2018a). Islamic psychology: Towards a 21st century
definition and conceptual framework. Journal of Islamic Ethics, 2,
97–109.
York Al-Karam, C. (2018b). Islamically integrated psychotherapy: Uniting
faith and professional practice. West Conshohocken, PA: Templeton
Press.
Received August 23, 2018
Revision received January 29, 2019
Accepted February 19, 2019 䡲