Volume 25

Researcher:  Sreepanja Singson, Doctor of Psychology (Counseling Psychology) The program is certified and accredited by European International University, (EIU-Paris) Affiliate researcher    Supervisor: Bordin Phayaphrom, Manipal GlobalNxt University, Advanced Executive Management School, email: alex@advex.ac.th    Supervisor: Wuttichai Chongkumnungsil, Nakhon Ratchasima Rajabhat University, Advanced Executive Management School, email: wuttichai@campus.advex.ac.th  ABSTRACT Introduction: It deeply colors Thai culture and societal life, and especially the beliefs surrounding amulets (powerful religious objects) and monks, whose services serve as coping mechanisms against the uncertainties and pressures of life. But there is scant research on the psychology behind these beliefs. The study seeks to understand believers’ and others’ orientation toward individual and social well-being and values on which attitudes are based in the socio-cultural context of Thai society. Methodology In-Depth Interviews: Conduct in-depth interviews with twenty-four participants using semi-structured questions to gather rich insights into their experiences and perspectives. Sample Size Expansion: Expand the sample by adding one-handed participants through purposive sampling to ensure a broader range of perspectives. Data Analysis: Apply qualitative analysis methods, including Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) and Insight7, to gain a more profound understanding of participants’ experiences and viewpoints.   Results: From a psychological perspective, the study found that cognitive processes, such as the human need for affirmation, contribute to beliefs in the efficacy of amulets. Additionally, it revealed negotiations between long-standing religious familiarity and new societal demands, where reliance on amulets and monks serves as a means of coping with contemporary life burdens and challenges. Discussion: This study highlights the relationship between religious beliefs and practices, social harmony, individual health, and cultural identity in Thailand. The findings have broad implications for understanding religious behavior and belief systems across Southeast Asia. The study reveals complex connections between psychology, religion, and social norms in Thai society.  Keywords: Thai Amulets, Monks, Religious Beliefs, Psychology, Buddhism, Social Harmony, Cultural Identity  Introduction      This paper investigates the intricate psychological mechanisms of two main pillars of Thai Buddhist Phenomena: belief in sacred amulets and trust of monks to protect in furtherance of spiritual realms. Using rich qualitative data, the paper shows that the practices support major psychological functions of anxiety reduction, meaning making and collective identification in Thai society as powerful psychological anchors. The results show that amulets act as tangible protective resources in times of uncertainty and monks represent resources for guidance beyond the formal boundaries of religiosity. Results from 24 in-depth interviews and surveys with 100 participants (93% of respondents report believing in sacred objects) showed the practices remain remarkably entrenched despite modernization. The study subverts simple readings of these practices as ‘just superstition’ showing that they involve intricate psychological mechanisms that function to cope with everyday difficulties inherent around uncertainty in Thai especially contexts. Western Reflections on Buddhism in Contemporary Thai Buddhism is very much embedded in the culture and mentality as well as social institutions of Thai. Foundational to Thai Buddhist practices are two interrelated practices: sacred amulets (Phra Kruang) and the monastic authority. The two not only function as religious souvenirs, but the subtle psychology behind them is designed to help you resiliently fulfill end of uncertainty and confrontations that life throws at you[1]. While the cultural significance is well established, little research has contributed insights regarding how these practices continue to exist in modern Thai society. In Thai culture, amulet (Phra kruang) is very typical…the Phra Kruang or amulets are considered indispensable in every aspect of life. Alluding to their antiquity and heritage from old Amaravati era, these sacred belived protective items have been a syncretic mixture between indigenous animist traditions, in particular the religious elements derived from Theravada Buddhist practices. Historically amulets have originated as ceremonial items from the Sukhothai and Ayutthaya periods to commodities in modern times. Their ubiquity today testifies to their multi-modal function, both in the temple world as religious objects and as psychiatric resources for coping with ambiguity and stress. Thai society also depends on a variety of monk-based functions, who play multi-faceted roles in society as community leaders. For instance, they often act as community leaders in rural areas (where services provided by the state are scarce) to mediate conflicts, fight for humanitarian causes and educate capacitate people. Temples are community centers providing essential social welfare services with spaces where religious practice meet social support. Such melding of the spiritual and practical functions likely explains why monks are still so influential in Thai society despite increasing modernization. Research Problem and Gaps       While previous research on Buddhist practices in Thailand has mainly examined historical, sociopolitical and cultural aspects of these practices, psychological roots have not been sufficiently explored. This void is particularly poignant since we have elaborate psychological theories, attachment styles, dissonance reduction through to meaning making processes that could potentially shed light on why people put such psychological credence into amulets and ordaining (anti)behavior. The existing accounts have multiple limitations. First, research is very descriptive documenting the religious practices without any analysis of their psychological functions. Second studies that look at the psychological issue often reference Western paradigms which do not represent the cultural and spiritual specificity of Thailand. Third, little consideration has been given to modernization, globalization, and technological changes that may affect these practices. Fourth, the commercialization of amulets is a fertile ground for discussions that they are being commodified — i.e. unraveling from sacred to economic goods. Second, comparative viewpoints among other Theravada Buddhist countries that conduct similar practices are still limited.  Research Questions and Objectives       Through this study we aim to overcome these limitations by investigating the psychological processes that underpin belief in amulets and belief in monks within Thai culture. The research aims to answer the four main questions: 1. What cognitive and psychological factors lead to belief in amulets as protective and lucky objects? 2. What perspectives exist among those who do not believe in amulets or have no faith in monks? 3. What is the role of monks in providing counseling and spiritual support? 4. How do amulets and monks function within broader social structures and cultural systems? It is important to note that these questions help

This study investigates the perspectives of 28 Chinese heritage language(CHL) learners enrolled in a first-year heritage-track Chinese course at aprivate U.S. university. Using grounded theory methodology, the analysisidentifies four major areas of insight: learners’ diverse, identity-driven goals;critical evaluations of instructional materials; preferred features for an idealCHL textbook; and thematic interests in classroom topics. Findings revealthat CHL learners seek to reconnect with their heritage, strengthen overalllanguage proficiency — including speaking — and acquire formal languageskills to support academic and professional aspirations. While theyappreciate the structure of the widely used L2-oriented textbook IntegratedChinese, they find its content to be too basic or misaligned with their needs.In contrast, supplementary materials are seen as more relevant but often toodifficult without sufficient scaffolding. Learners envision an ideal textbookthat includes advanced vocabulary and idiomatic expressions, culturallyrich content, and formal language, supported by a scaffolded and userfriendly design. They are most engaged by topics reflecting real-lifeexperiences, traditional and modern Chinese culture, and themes thataffirm their bicultural identities. The voices of these learners underscore theneed for recalibrated pedagogical materials responsive to their hybrididentities and linguistic profiles. The study highlights the importance oflearner-centered design in CHL curriculum development.Keywords: heritage language education, Chinese heritage languagelearners, material development, instructional materials, student perceptions

1This research is supported by the Research Grants Council Committee of the University Grants Council of HongKong ((1) General Research Fund (GRF) Project No. 844012 “Quadrasyllabic Idiomatic Expressions (QIEs) in Chineseand neighboring Languages: An Investigation into Linguistic and Cultural History” and (2) GRF Project No.148908 “AQuantitative and Qualitative Comparison of Word Formation in Modern Standard Chinese and Early Modern Chinese”).I am grateful for comments leading up to this paper from co-investigators in the two projects: Andy Chin, HintatCheung, and particularly Shin Kataoka who has drawn my attention to many of the examples in this paper.39On the other hand, when two related languages have dissimilar terms to express similar objects orevents, then the difference could well represent salient non-linguistic variations. For example, theword for government in Indonesia is Pemerintah and in Malay Kerajaan. In the latter case ofMalay, the word reflects the structure of government involving constitutional monarchy (asindicated by “Rajah”) whereas the case of Indonesian reflects an organization structure presidedover by a leader. The form Selamat means “hello” in Indonesia and Malaysia, originating fromSemitic languages: Arabic Salam “peace” e.g. Salaam Alaikum “peace be with you” and HebrewShalom (peace). But in the Philippine languages, it means “thank you”. This shift of meaning maynot be unreasonable if we consider the broader context of language contact interaction in which wefind the universal and customary conversation opening and closing moves, which are the same inIslamic societies (Salaam Alaikum), in stark contrast to English (with hello-hi and goodbyerespectively) and other languages. In the exchange of identical but multifunctional pragmaticexpressions during the opening and closing communicative moves among participants, a possiblesemantic switching taking place could be understandable.In Asia, two long standing major classical traditions have been recognized:(I) Sanskrit base [Indosphere2]Devanagari, on which the Sanskrit writing system is based, has influenced the writing systems ofIndosphere languages of the South Asian subcontinent, Burmese, Thai, Lao, Tibetan etc, but notIndonesia and Malaysia in which once dominant Hindu Kingdoms in the Indonesian archipelagohave given way to Islamic sultanates, with exceptions to be found in Bali, for example. In theselanguages, there has not been much evidence of the Indic past in non-materialistic terms, other thanloan words, while Jawi, the script derived from Arbic, still survives.(II) Sinitic base [Sinosphere]Its emblematic logographic writing system has greatly influenced the historical development ofSinosphere writing systems in Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and among other ethnic groups like the Nasietc, on which the associated classical traditions, including the Chinese classical language have hadsignificant impact. Thus their students to this day are often exposed to literary classics of Chineseorigin such as the Chronicles of Three Kingdoms (三國演義) and Water Margin or All Men andBrothers (水滸傳). This tradition bears interesting comparison with the lesser trend of students inThailand, Laos, and Cambodia (but not Indonesia or Malaysia) studying the Indic epic Ramayama.One distinctive feature of languages associated with Sinosphere is the importance given torelatively unique idiomatic expressions such as 不三不四 [not-3-not-4] “improper”, similar toEnglish “neither fish nor fowl” but with stronger negative connotations. For example, civil servantsin Japan, Korea and Vietnam, in order to gain promotion, have to take language examinations inwhich there are expectations on familiarity with such expressions. This is often seen as a difficultand arduous task because of the drastic typological linguistic differences between Japanese, Koreanand Vietnamese on the one hand, and Chinese on the other hand. Thus, considerable efforts have tobe made by the civil servant aspiring to promotion.It is interesting to note that whereas Korea and Japan, for example, have adopted the Chineselogographic writing system, and have even incorporated it into basically at one time or another 2 Matisoff (1990) proposed the terms Sinosphere and Indosphere to distinguish between two major and oftensuperimposed cultural traditions within Asia.40bimodal writing systems. On the other hand, related languages such as Mongolians and Manchusswitched to the Chinese language when they conquered all of China, rather than imposed their ownlanguage as the native language, with possible adaptation or adoption of the logographic script.There were some minor unsuccessful attempts such as that by the Kitan Kingdom (契丹) whichdeveloped a demotic script, and the use of Phags-Pa script of the Mongols, which though squarishin shape and written from right to left, was much more influenced by the writing system of theTibetans who have shared Lamaism as a common religion. 3This is because in puritanical times, churches would have been good examples of frugality and so there would nothave been much leftover for the resident mice there. The use of QIE in Chinese is pervasive in many domains of discourse and language use. Forexamples:(13) Greetings: 好久不見 [very-long-no-see] “long time no see”, 不見不散 [no-see-no-disperse] “wait until we meet”(14) Slogans: 安全第一 [safe-whole-number one] “safety is top priority”, 酒後勿駛[drink-after-don’t-drive] “don’t drive if you drink”(15) Movie names: 窈窕淑女 [slim-fit-gentle-lady] “My Fair Lady”, 浩劫重生[calamity-again-alive] “Cast Away”(16) Advertisement (Real Estate): 全海靚裝 [all-sea-beautiful-renovation] “fullseaview”, 樓皇氣派 [building-emperor-air-atmosphere] “imperial bearing”Chinese QIEs are relatively distinct linguistic structures, standing out from regular language,comparable to the use in English of Latin or Latinate expressions Lacuna/ lacunae; Caveat emptor.Specifically, some defining characteristics of QIEs may be summarized as follows:a) Four syllables or logographsb) Relatively fixed structure and patternsc) Figurative meaning and semantic opacityThe quadrasyllabic structure draws on a basic disyllabic propensity in Chinese, reflecting, forexample, a common reduplicative tendency in addressing close relatives:媽 ma à 媽媽 ma-ma “mother”爸 ba à 爸爸 ba-ba “father”姐 jie à 姐姐 jie-jie “sister”The quadrasyllabic propensity is further evidenced by contractions from pentasyllabic expressions,for examples: (17) 傻人有傻福 à 傻有傻福[Silly-person-has-silly-blessing] à [silly-has-silly-blessing]“Innocence is blessing”(18) 新瓶裝舊酒 à 新瓶舊酒[New-bottle-contains-old-wine] à [new-bottle-old-wine]“New wine in old bottle” 4Zhu-ge-liang 諸葛亮 and Kong-ming 孔明 are names of the same minister whose wisdom is legendary from theChronicles of the Three Kingdoms. In everyday language, quadrasyllabic, pentasyllabic expressions or expressions ofother length may be found but the more frequent use of the former, especially in more formal discourse, would signifyerudition.43QIEs involve discoursal opacity, which entails metalinguistic ability to differentiate between literaland metaphorical usage, which in turn can draw on logical deduction and can project positive ornegative polar sentiments as rhetorical devices. For instance, the QIE 孤男寡女 [lonely-mansingle-woman] “unmarried couple” has negative