As previously found, three styles of religious problem solving were hypothesized. In a sample of 272 male clergy and spouses, factor analysis was used to assess the dimensionality of the Religious ProblemSolving Scale using a short form consisting of 18 of the original 36 items. Factor analysis pointed to a three-factor solution with six items each loading on each factor corresponding to three styles of religious problem solving. These three styles suggest a manner of problem solving in which the individual is in a partnership with God in coping (Collaborative), one in which the individual assumes total responsibility for problem solving (Self-Directing), and one in which the individual abandons responsibility for problem solving, leaving it up to God (Deferring). The study also found high internal consistency among the items forming the three subscales. The study substantiates three distinct scales of religious problem solving and supports a fuller consideration of the religiosity variable in problem solving and coping for clergy. The value of parsimony in scale design or usage in research is implied. A survey of scholarly work on religious attribution theory in the psychology of religion suggested that religion influences the meaning given to many problems and situations (Gorsuch and Smith 1983; Spilka and Schmidt 1993; Pargament, Sullivan, Tyler, and Steele 1982). Earlier research supported the conclusion that religion appeared to provide guidance for the selection of solutions to problems and in providing emotional support (Pargament and Hahn 1986; Pargament 1990). Unidimensional and global indicators such as religious participation, attendance, and beliefs do not capture the complexity and multidimensional nature of religion (Williams 1994). More complex conceptualization of the religiosity variable has been proposed (Schaefer and Gorsuch 1991). More specific dimensions of religiosity are needed to describe its influence when an individual faces times of crisis (Pargament 1995). Consistent with the tenets of religious attribution theory, Pargament, Kendell, Hathaway, Gravengoed, Newman, and Jones (1988) hypothesized three styles of religious problem solving: Deferring, Collaborative and Self-Directing. These styles reflect positions on a continuum of locus of responsibility and level of activity of the individual in the resolution of problems. With the Deferring style, the responsibility for problem solving is focused on God, with the individual remaining relatively inactive in the process. With the Collaborative style, the locus of responsibility is on both the individual and God, with both being active in the problem-solving process. With the Self-Directing style, the responsibility for problem solving is assumed almost exclusively by the individual who plays the active role in the implementation of solutions.