- Email: [email protected]
Religious orientation, religious coping and happiness among UK adults
Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202 www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Religious orientation, religious coping and happiness among UK adults Christopher Alan Lewis a
a,*
, John Maltby b, Liz Day
c
School of Psychology, University of Ulster at Magee College, Londonderry BT48 7JL, Northern Ireland, UK b School of Psychology, University of Leicester, UK c Psychology Subject Group, Sheffield Hallam University, UK Received 25 September 2003; received in revised form 25 June 2004; accepted 4 August 2004 Available online 6 November 2004
Abstract It has been demonstrated that the relationship between religiosity and happiness varies according to the precise measures used and the samples studied. To examine further the generalisability of this association the present work examined the relationship between religiosity and happiness within the context of the distinction between subjective and psychological well-being. One hundred and thirty eight UK adults completed two measures of both religiosity (the ÔAge UniversalÕ Religious Orientation Scale [Intrinsic and Extrinsic subscales] and the Religious Coping Scale [Positive and Negative subscales]) and happiness (the Depression–Happiness Scale and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form). In general, no significant associations were found between religiosity scores and happiness scores. However, both higher intrinsic orientation scores and positive religious coping were significantly associated with higher scores on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form. It is proposed that these differential findings are consistent with the theoretical distinction between subjective and psychological well-being. It is suggested that when religiosity is related to happiness, it is related to psychological well-being, which is thought to reflect human development, positive functioning and existential life challenges. Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Religiosity; Religious orientation; Religious coping; Happiness; Well-being
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 28 7137 5315; fax: +44 28 7137 5493. E-mail address: [email protected] (C.A. Lewis).
0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.08.002
1194
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
1. Introduction Within the psychology of religion there is renewed empirical interest in examining the relationship between religion and happiness. Previous research has employed a variety of different measures of both religiosity, including measures of religious attitude, behaviour and practice, and happiness, including both single item and multi-item scales, among a variety of different samples. The results of these studies have largely been equivocal (for an overview see Robbins & Francis, 1996) and are difficult to integrate due to the divergent methodologies employed. In contrast, two sets of recent studies have employed more systematic methodologies and have both utilised the same measure of religiosity, the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity (Francis & Stubbs, 1987). One series of studies has examined the relationship between religion and happiness among various populations by employing the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity and the Oxford Happiness Inventory (Argyle, Martin, & Crossland, 1989). Results among samples of 360 undergraduates in the UK (Robbins & Francis, 1996), 212 undergraduates in the USA (Francis & Lester, 1997), 100 undergraduates in the UK (French & Joseph, 1999), 994 15–16-year-olds in England (Francis, Jones, & Wilcox, 2000), 456 first-year undergraduate students attending one institution in Wales (Francis et al., 2000), 496 members of a branch of the University of the Third Age in the south of England (Francis et al., 2000), 295 UK individuals, ranging in age from late teens to late seventies (Francis & Robbins, 2000), and 89 undergraduate students in Wales (Francis, Robbins, & White, 2003a), have demonstrated a significant positive association between scores on the Oxford Happiness Inventory and scores on the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity. However, Francis, Ziebertz, and Lewis (2003b) did not report a significant correlation among 331 undergraduate students in Germany. Two related studies, reported by Francis and Katz (2002) and by Francis, Katz, Yablon, and Robbins (in press), administered the Hebrew translation of the Oxford Happiness Inventory together with the Katz-Francis Scale of Attitude toward Judaism (Francis & Katz, 2002) to samples of 298 Hebrew-speaking female and 203 Hebrew-speaking male undergraduates in Israel. After taking into account individual differences in personality, these data demonstrated a significant association between religiosity and happiness. In contrast to this body of work, a smaller series of studies has employed the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity (Francis & Stubbs, 1987) and the Depression–Happiness Scale (Joseph & Lewis, 1998; McGreal & Joseph, 1993) among various populations. Results among samples of 154 Northern Irish undergraduate students (Lewis, Lanigan, Joseph, & de Fockert, 1997), 64 English Anglican priests (Lewis, Maltby, & Burkinshaw, 2000) and 70 English congregational members of the Anglican Church (Lewis et al., 2000) have demonstrated no significant association between scores on the Depression–Happiness Scale and scores on the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity. However, French and Joseph (1999) did report a significant association among 100 undergraduates in the UK. In addition, related research by Lewis (2002) among a sample of 154 Northern Irish university students demonstrated a positive association between scores on the Depression–Happiness Scale and frequency of church attendance. The differential associations of the Oxford Happiness Inventory and the Depression–Happiness Scale with the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity, is somewhat surprising given that there is strong evidence for the high correlation between the two measures of happiness (French & Joseph, 1999; Hills & Argyle, 2002; Joseph & Lewis, 1998).
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
1195
One explanation can be gained from the comparison of the items of the two scales based on a theoretical and empirical distinction between subjective well-being and psychological well-being highlighted by Keyes, Shmotkin, and Ryff (2002). Within this distinction, subjective well-being is seen as an evaluation of life as an aspect of the balance between positive and negative affect, while psychological well-being is viewed as the outcome of the engagement with wider individual development and the existential challenges within life (Keyes et al., 2002). The two scales may differentiate in the way that they measure happiness. Whereas for the Depression–Happiness Scale items are centered around simple statements based on the last seven days ‘‘I felt cheerful’’ [item 6], ‘‘I felt happy’’ [item 12], and may reflect subjective well-being, the Oxford Happiness Inventory, although it contains the same time reference, it may measure global aspects of happiness by reflecting reflections on a longer period of time (e.g. ‘‘I am completely satisfied about everything in my life’’ [item 12, 3], and ‘‘All past events seem extremely happy’’ [item 18]). Therefore, the items seem to reflect a greater and more general contentment with oneÕs life. Therefore the scores on the Oxford Happiness Inventory seem to reflect psychological well-being. Recently Hills and Argyle (2002) have developed a psychometrically improved version of the Oxford Happiness Inventory, entitled the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire along with a ShortForm. The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form also contains no time reference, and contains items that may measure global aspects of happiness reflecting reflections on a longer period of time (e.g. ‘‘I feel that life is very rewarding’’ [item 3] and ‘‘I am well satisfied about everything in my life’’ [item 12]). Initial work by Hills and Argyle (2002) has demonstrated that the two measures are very strongly correlated 0.80. At present no study has examined the relationship between a measure of religiosity, the Depression–Happiness Scale and either the Oxford Happiness Inventory or the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire. Given the writings of Keyes et al. (2002), it is proposed that the present research should seek to encompass the theoretical and empirical distinction between subjective and psychological well-being. Additionally, some attention may be needed in regards to the particular religiosity measure used. Although religiosity can be conceptualised and operationalised in a variety of different ways (see Hill & Hood, 1999 for a review), there are presently two dominant research perspectives within the psychology of religion and well-being literature. The first dominant construct within contemporary psychology of religion relates to religious orientation. Individuals described as having an intrinsic orientation toward religion are described as wholly committed to their religious beliefs, and the influence of religion is evident in every aspect of their life (Allport, 1966). On the other hand, those who demonstrate an extrinsic orientation toward religion have been described as using religion to provide participation in a powerful in-group (Genia & Shaw, 1991), protection, consolation, and social status (Allport & Ross, 1967), religious participation (Fleck, 1981), and an ego defence (Kahoe & Meadow, 1981). However, due to a number of studies investigating the extrinsic orientation toward religion (Gorsuch & McPherson, 1989; Gorsuch & Venable, 1983; King & Hunt, 1969; Leong & Zachar, 1990; Maltby, 1999), there is the strong suggestion that the extrinsic orientation towards religion comprises two dimensions, extrinsic-personal (protection, consolation) and extrinsic-social (religious participation, social status). Gorsuch (1988) argues that this distinction between the intrinsic and extrinsic orientations to religion has been the most useful to the research on the relationship between religiosity and wellbeing.
1196
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
The second dominant perspective is that of religious coping (Pargament, 1997). This theoretical perspective views religion as a coping process (Pargament, 1990, 1996, 1997; Pargament et al., 1992; Pargament & Park, 1995). Pargament (1990, 1997) suggests that a religious coping model might better explain the relationship between religiosity and psychological well-being. He argues that such a theoretical model would address the complex and continuous process by which religion interlocks with an individualÕs life and allows them to deal with stresses in life. Pargament (1997) uses and extends coping theory by arguing that religion may enter the coping process in a number of ways, be it in terms of using religious coping to appraise the causes of stressful events, using religious coping to cope with stressful events, or using religious coping to come to terms with critical life events. Furthermore, Pargament views religious coping as a mediating factor in the relationship between religious orientation and psychological well-being. Pargament and his colleagues have developed a number of measures of religious coping, ranging from those that concentrate on problem areas of religious coping to identification of a number of dimensions of specific coping processes (Pargament et al., 1992; Pargament, 1996). However, Pargament, Smith, Koenig, and Perez (1998) suggest a two-factor model of religious coping in response to stressful life events; positive and negative religious coping. This model of coping encompasses a number of positive and negative religious coping styles including religious forgiveness, collaborative religious coping, spiritual connection, and religious purification. These authors report that positive coping is associated with fewer symptoms of psychological distress, while negative religious coping is associated with higher levels of depression and reporting of psychological symptoms. Despite the dominance of research employing the constructs of both religious orientation and religious coping within the psychology of religion, there is a paucity of previous work examining the relationship between either religious orientation and happiness or religious coping and happiness, particularly considering different measures of happiness within the context of subjective and psychological well-being. Therefore, contrasting findings across the two series of studies described above illustrate that the relationship between religiosity and happiness varies according to the precise measure of happiness used (Robbins & Francis, 1996). Furthermore, it is argued that there is a requirement for a continued examination of the relationship between religiosity and happiness using additional measures of religiosity and happiness to augment previous research and to help identify which components of happiness are related to which aspects of religiosity. The aim of the present study was therefore to examine the relationship between happiness, as conceptualised and operationalised by both the Depression–Happiness Scale and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form, and measures of religious orientation and religious coping.
2. Method 2.1. Sample The sample comprised of 138 (55 male and 83 female) UK adults: ages ranged from 17 to 39, with a mean age of 24.05 years (SD = 4.82 years). Respondents were obtained from a number of workplaces and community groups in the North of England. Participants were selected from those willing to be respondents from the workplaces and community groups visited.
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
1197
2.2. Questionnaires All respondents completed a questionnaire booklet containing: The Depression–Happiness Scale (Joseph & Lewis, 1998; McGreal & Joseph, 1993). This is a 25item scale designed to measure positive affect. It contains 12 items concerned with positive feelings (e.g., ‘‘I felt happy’’, item 12) and 13 items concerned with negative feelings (e.g., ‘‘I felt sad’’, item 1). Items concerning negative feelings are reverse scored so that lower scores on the scale indicate a lower frequency of positive feelings and a higher frequency of negative feelings. Respondents are asked to think about how they have felt in the past seven days and to rate the frequency of each item on a 4-point scale: Never (0); Rarely (1); Sometimes (2); and Often (3). Scores range between 0 and 75, with higher scores indicating a higher frequency of positive feelings and a lower frequency of negative feelings. The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form (Hills & Argyle, 2002). The 8-item scale has been revised down from a well-established, reliable and valid longer 29-item version (Argyle et al., 1989; Hills & Argyle, 2002). The short-form of the scale was devised for use when time and space is limited, and its correlation with the full-length scale is .90 (Hills & Argyle, 2002). Sample items include; ‘‘I am well satisfied with everything in my life’’ [item 12], and ‘‘I feel fully mentally alert’’ [item 21]. Responses to items are scored on a 6-point Likert-type scale: Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (6). Scores range from 8 to 48 with higher scores indicating a measure of broad happiness. The ÔAge-UniversalÕ I-E Scale—12 (Gorsuch & Venable, 1983; Maltby, 1999). This scale is a derived, revised, and amended measure of the Religious Orientation Scale (Allport & Ross, 1967). Since the inception of the Religious Orientation Scale, a number of suggestions have been made to improve psychometric confidence in the measurement of the intrinsic and extrinsic religious constructs. Suggestions have included item changes, changes in response format, and scoring methods (Gorsuch & McPherson, 1989; Gorsuch & Venable, 1983; King & Hunt, 1969; Leong & Zachar, 1990; Maltby & Lewis, 1996). In the main, consideration of such changes suggest that the intrinsic orientation towards religion is a constant feature of religious orientation, while an extrinsic orientation towards religion represents two separate factors; extrinsic-social and extrinsic-personal. The present scale administered is a 12-item version of the ÔAge-UniversalÕ Religious Orientation Scale (Gorsuch & Venable, 1983), which adopts items suggested by Gorsuch and McPherson (1989), and changes to the response format (Maltby & Lewis, 1996). Maltby (1999) reports among 3300 USA, English and Irish adults, psychometric confidence in combining these suggestions to measure an intrinsic orientation towards religion (6 items; e.g., ‘‘It is important to me to spend time in private thought and prayer’’ [item 5]), an extrinsic-personal orientation towards religion (3 items; e.g., ‘‘What religion offers me most is comfort in times of trouble and sorrow’’ [item 8]), and an extrinsic-social orientation towards religion (3 items; e.g., ‘‘I go to church because it helps me make friends’’ [item 2]). Responses to items are scored on a 3-point scale: No (1), Do not know (2), Yes (3). Scores range from 6 to 18 on the intrinsic orientation scale, and scores range from 3 to 9 on both the extrinsic orientation scales. With each scale, higher scores indicate a higher level of that religious orientation. The brief RCOPE (Pargament et al., 1998). This religious coping measure is a 14-item indicator of a 2-factor model (comprising seven items each) of Positive and Negative Religious Coping. Positive coping items include (‘‘I looked for a stronger connection with God’’ [item 1], ‘‘Focused on
1198
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
religion to stop worrying about my problems’’ [item 7]), and Negative Religious Coping items (‘‘Wondered whether God had abandoned me’’ [item 8], ‘‘Questioned the power of God’’ [item 14]). The scale demonstrates adequate reliability and validity (Pargament, 1997; Pargament et al., 1998). Responses to items are scored on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree). On both scales, scores range from 7 to 35 with higher scores indicating a higher level of each religious coping style. 2.3. Data Analysis The data were analysed by the SPSS statistical package, using the reliability, descriptive, correlation and regression routines (SPSS Inc, 1988).
3. Results Satisfactory levels of internal reliability (Cronbach, 1951) were found for the Depression–Happiness Scale (a = 0.92), Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form (a = 0.74), the Religious Orientation Intrinsic Scale (a = 0.87), the Religious Orientation Extrinsic Personal Scale (a = 0.83), the Extrinsic Social Scale (a = 0.87), the Religious Coping Positive Scale (a = 0.94), and the Religious Coping Negative Scale (a = 0.78). These findings are consistent with those reported by the authors of the measures. A series of t-tests compared the mean scores and standard deviations for all the scales by sex (see Table 1). No significant differences were found between men and women for any of the religiosity measures. However, males were found to score significantly higher than females on both the happiness measures. For the total sample, partial correlations, with the effects of gender and age removed, showed no significant associations between scores on the Depression–Happiness Scale and scores on the Religious Orientation Intrinsic Scale, Religious Orientation Extrinsic Personal Scale, Religious Orientation Extrinsic Social Scale, Religious Coping Negative Scale, and the Religious Coping Positive Scale. Similarly, no significant associations were found between scores on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form and scores on the Religious Orientation Extrinsic Personal Scale, Religious Orientation Extrinsic Social Scale, and the Religious Coping Negative Scale. Table 1 Mean scores (standard deviation) of all the measures by sex Scale
Men (n = 55)
Women (n = 83)
Depression–Happiness Scale Oxford Happiness Questionnaire (Short-Form) Intrinsic Extrinsic-personal Extrinsic-social Positive religious coping Negative religious coping
49.74 29.80 09.86 04.95 03.86 10.97 08.20
42.38 (13.8) 27.20 (5.3) 09.92 (3.7) 05.18 (2.0) 04.18 (1.6) 11.08 (6.0) 08.980 (2.7)
*p
< 0.05;
**p
< 0.01;
***p
< 0.001.
(12.2) (5.0) (3.8) (2.3) (1.4) (6.4) (1.9)
t 3.66*** 3.29** 0.10 0.71 1.35 0.91 1.64
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
1199
Table 2 Pearson product moment correlation between all the variables with sex and age partialled out (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) *p
Depression–Happiness Scale Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form Intrinsic Extrinsic-personal Extrinsic-social Positive religious coping Negative religious coping
< 0.05;
**p
< 0.01;
***p
2
3
4
5
6
7
0.76**
0.02 0.22**
0.10 0.03 0.69***
0.07 0.01 0.60*** 0.35***
0.09 0.32*** 0.66*** 0.55*** 0.21**
0.07 0.08 0.33*** 0.31*** 0.19* 0.60***
< 0.001.
However, there were significant associations between the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire ShortForm and scores on the Religious Orientation Intrinsic Scale and the Religious Coping Positive Scale (see Table 2). Due to the positive association of two of the religious variables (intrinsic religious orientation and positive religious coping) and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form, a multiple regression was performed to examine which of the two variables contributed unique variance in scores on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form. The regression statistic (r) was significantly different from zero (F(4,164) = )10.42, p < 0.001; r = 0.35, r2 = 0.12, Adj (r2 = 0.11). For Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form scores, positive religious coping accounted for unique variance (B = 0.26, b = 0.33, Sr2 = 0.11, p < 0.01) whilst intrinsic religious orientation did not (B = 0.05, b = 0.04, p > 0.05).
4. Discussion The aim of the present study was to examine the relationship between happiness, as conceptualised and operationalised by the Depression–Happiness Scale and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form, and measures of religious orientation and religious coping. From the present data four points are worthy of comment. First, there was no significant association between measures of religiosity and happiness, when religiosity was measured in terms of religious orientation and religious coping, and when happiness was measured with the Depression–Happiness Scale. This finding is consistent with previous work using the Depression–Happiness Scale alongside both an attitudinal measure of religiosity (Lewis et al., 1997, 2000) and a behavioural measure (Lewis, 2002). Second, there was a significant association between measures of religiosity and happiness, when religiosity was measured in terms of intrinsic religious orientation, and positive religious coping, and when happiness was measured through the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form. These results are consistent with previous research using the related Oxford Happiness Inventory (Francis & Lester, 1997; Francis & Robbins, 2000; Francis et al., 2000, 2003a, 2003b; French & Joseph, 1999; Robbins & Francis, 1996). Further, of the two measures of religiosity associated with the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form, positive religious coping accounted for unique variance in scores on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form. This latter finding
1200
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
suggests that any happiness that results from religiosity may be the result of successful optimistic religious coping strategies, as measured by positive religious coping. Third, there was a strong association between the two measures of happiness (0.76). This finding attests to the convergent validity of the two measures, and is consistent with previous work using the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form, as well as the measure from which it is derived, the Oxford Happiness Inventory (French & Joseph, 1999; Hills & Argyle, 2002; Joseph & Lewis, 1998). Fourth, the finding that males and females did not differ in terms of scores on the religiosity measures is not consistent with the gender differences usually found, whereby females score higher than males (Francis, 1997). However previous studies among English samples have not reported significant gender differences on religiosity measures (Maltby, Lewis, & Day, 1999). The finding, that females and males did differ in terms of scores on the happiness measures, is not consistent with the literature on either the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form or the Depression–Happiness Scale (Hills & Argyle, 2002; Joseph & Lewis, 1998; McGreal & Joseph, 1993). The present findings provide clear evidence that the differential relationship found between religiosity and happiness, as measured by the Depression–Happiness Scale and the Oxford Happiness Inventory (and Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form), across a number of religiosity measures, is more related to of the type of happiness measure used, rather than the precise measurement of religiosity. The explanation for these findings is based on a theoretical and empirical distinction between subjective well-being and psychological well-being (Keyes et al., 2002). Though there is no data to directly support such a view, as direct measures of subjective and psychological well-being were not included in the present study, in terms of other measures of subjective and psychological well-being it does provide an explanation of why religiosity may be related to one aspect of happiness and not another. Therefore, it can be suggested that intrinsic religiosity and positive religious coping is related to psychological well-being happiness (Oxford Happiness Questionnaire) but not subjective well-being happiness (Depression–Happiness Scale). Intrinsic religious orientation and positive religious coping are thought to reflect a positive, committed, long-term and adaptive involvement in religiosity, in which religion is thought to help and equip the individual to make sense of the world, and enable the individual to respond positively in the appraisal and coping of stressful events over longer periods of time. Therefore, it is these adaptive approaches to religiosity, which lead to a longer-term happiness. These distinctions, using different definitions of well-being, seem to begin to explain some of the inconsistencies previously noted in the religious and happiness literature. Therefore, the present findings are important, because they clarify the precise nature of the relationship between religiosity and happiness and clearly reaffirm the view that the relationship between religiosity and happiness varies according to the precise measures used. This work readily fits into recent calls to emphasise the theoretical context of positive psychology to understand religiosity, particularly when considering positive outcomes (Maltby & Day, 2003; Tsang & McCullough, 2003). Future work should therefore continue to examine the relationship between religiosity and happiness using established measures of happiness such as the Depression–Happiness Scale and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire alongside various measures of religiosity, including attitudinal and behavioural measures (Hill & Hood, 1999), as well as other indices of positive psychology subjective well-being and psychological well-being.
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
1201
In conclusion, the present findings, among a sample of UK adults, demonstrates that the relationship between religiosity and happiness varies according to the precise measure of happiness used, and suggests that when religiosity is related to happiness, it is related to psychological well-being happiness and not subjective well-being happiness.
References Allport, G. W. (1966). Religious context of prejudice. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 5, 447–457. Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 432–433. Argyle, M., Martin, M., & Crossland, J. (1989). Happiness as a function of personality and social encounters. In J. P. Forgas & J. M. Innes (Eds.), Recent advances in social psychology: an international perspective (pp. 189–203). North Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychomterika, 16, 297–334. Fleck, J. R. (1981). Dimensions of personal religion: a trichotomous view. In J. R. Fleck & J. D. Carter (Eds.), Psychology and Christianity (pp. 66–80). New York: Harper Row. Francis, L. J. (1997). The psychology of gender differences in religion: a review of the empirical research. Religion, 27, 81–96. Francis, L. J., Jones, S. H., & Wilcox, C. (2000). Religiosity and happiness: during adolescence, young adulthood and later life. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 19, 245–257. Francis, L. J., & Katz, Y. J. (2002). Religiosity and happiness: a study among Israeli female undergraduates. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 13, 75–86. Francis, L.J., Katz, Y.J., Yablon, Y., & Robbins, M. (in press). Religiosity, personality, and happiness: a study among Israeli male undergraduates. Journal of Happiness Studies. Francis, L. J., & Lester, D. (1997). Religion, personality and happiness. Journal of Contemporary Religion, 12, 81–86. Francis, L. J., & Robbins, M. (2000). Religion and happiness: a study in empirical theology. Transpersonal Psychology Review, 4, 17–22. Francis, L. J., Robbins, M., & White, A. (2003a). Correlation between religion and happiness: a replication. Psychological Reports, 92, 51–52. Francis, L. J., & Stubbs, M. T. (1987). Measuring attitudes towards Christianity: from childhood to adulthood. Personality and Individual Differences, 8, 741–743. Francis, L. J., Ziebertz, H.-G., & Lewis, C. A. (2003b). The relationship between personality and religion among undergraduate students in Germany. Archiv Fur Religionpsychologie, 24, 307–313. French, S., & Joseph, S. (1999). Religiosity and its association with happiness, purpose in life, and self-actualisation. Mental Health, Religion and Culture, 2, 117–120. Genia, V., & Shaw, D. G. (1991). Religion, intrinsic–extrinsic orientation, and depression. Review of Religious Research, 32, 274–283. Gorsuch, R. L. (1988). Psychology of religion. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 201–221. Gorsuch, R. L., & McPherson, S. E. (1989). Intrinsic/Extrinsic measurement: I/E-revised and single-item scales. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 28, 348–358. Gorsuch, R. L., & Venable, G. D. (1983). Development of an ÔAge-UniversalÕ I–E scale. Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion, 12, 181–197. Hill, P. C., & Hood, R. W. Jr., (1999). Measures of religiosity. Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press. Hills, P., & Argyle, M. (2002). The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire: a compact scale for the measurement of psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1073–1082. Joseph, S., & Lewis, C. A. (1998). The Depression–Happiness Scale: reliability and validity of a bipolar self-report scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54, 537–554. Kahoe, R. D., & Meadow, M. J. (1981). A developmental perspective on religious orientation dimensions. Journal of Religion and Health, 20, 8–17.
1202
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
Keyes, C. L. M., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. D. (2002). Optimizing well-being: the empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 1007–1022. King, M. B., & Hunt, R. A. (1969). Measuring the religious variables: amended findings. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 8, 321–323. Leong, F. T. L., & Zachar, P. (1990). An evaluation of AllportÕs Religious Orientation Scale across one Australian and two United States samples. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50, 359–368. Lewis, C. A. (2002). Church attendance and happiness among Northern Irish undergraduate students: no association. Pastoral Psychology, 50, 191–195. Lewis, C. A., Lanigan, C., Joseph, S., & de Fockert, J. (1997). Religiosity and happiness: no evidence for an association among undergraduates. Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 119–121. Lewis, C. A., Maltby, J., & Burkinshaw, S. (2000). Religion and happiness: still no association. Journal of Beliefs and Values, 21, 233–236. Maltby, J. (1999). The internal structure of a derived, revised, and amended measure of the religious orientation scale: the ÔAge-UniversalÕ I-E Scale-12. Social Behavior and Personality, 27, 407–412. Maltby, J., & Day, L. (2003). Religious orientation, religious coping and appraisals of stress: assessing cognitive factors in the relationship between religiosity and psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1209–1224. Maltby, J., & Lewis, C. A. (1996). Measuring intrinsic and extrinsic orientation toward religion: amendments for its use among religious and non-religious samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 937–946. Maltby, J., Lewis, C. A., & Day, L. (1999). Religion and psychological well-being: the role of personal prayer. British Journal of Health Psychology, 4, 363–378. McGreal, R., & Joseph, S. (1993). The Depression–Happiness Scale. Psychological Reports, 73, 1279–1282. Pargament, K. I. (1990). God help me: toward a theoretical framework of coping for the psychology of religion. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 2, 195–224. Pargament, K. I. (1996). Religious methods of coping: resources for the conservation and transformation of significance. In E. P. Shafranske (Ed.), Religion and the clinical practice of psychology (pp. 215–239). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Pargament, K. I. (1997). The psychology of religion and coping: theory, research and practice. London: Guilford Press. Pargament, K. I., Olsen, H., Reilly, B., Falgout, K., Ensing, D. S., & Vanhaitsma, K. (1992). God Help Me (2): the relationship of religious orientations to religious coping with negative life-events. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 31, 504–513. Pargament, K. I., & Park, C. L. (1995). Merely a defence? The varieties of means and ends. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 13–32. Pargament, K. I., Smith, B. W., Koenig, H. G., & Perez, L. (1998). Patterns of positive and negative religious coping with major life stressors. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37, 710–724. Robbins, M., & Francis, L. J. (1996). In Are religious people happier a study among undergraduates. In L. J. Francis, W. K. Kay, & W. S. Campbell (Eds.). Research in religious education (pp. 207–217). Leominster: Gracewing. SPSS Inc. (1988). SPSSX user’s guide. New York: McGraw-Hill. Tsang, J., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Measuring religious constructs: a hierarchical approach to construct organization and scale selection. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: a handbook of models and measures (pp. 345–360). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Religious orientation, religious coping and happiness among UK adults Christopher Alan Lewis a
a,*
, John Maltby b, Liz Day
c
School of Psychology, University of Ulster at Magee College, Londonderry BT48 7JL, Northern Ireland, UK b School of Psychology, University of Leicester, UK c Psychology Subject Group, Sheffield Hallam University, UK Received 25 September 2003; received in revised form 25 June 2004; accepted 4 August 2004 Available online 6 November 2004
Abstract It has been demonstrated that the relationship between religiosity and happiness varies according to the precise measures used and the samples studied. To examine further the generalisability of this association the present work examined the relationship between religiosity and happiness within the context of the distinction between subjective and psychological well-being. One hundred and thirty eight UK adults completed two measures of both religiosity (the ÔAge UniversalÕ Religious Orientation Scale [Intrinsic and Extrinsic subscales] and the Religious Coping Scale [Positive and Negative subscales]) and happiness (the Depression–Happiness Scale and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form). In general, no significant associations were found between religiosity scores and happiness scores. However, both higher intrinsic orientation scores and positive religious coping were significantly associated with higher scores on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form. It is proposed that these differential findings are consistent with the theoretical distinction between subjective and psychological well-being. It is suggested that when religiosity is related to happiness, it is related to psychological well-being, which is thought to reflect human development, positive functioning and existential life challenges. Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Religiosity; Religious orientation; Religious coping; Happiness; Well-being
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 28 7137 5315; fax: +44 28 7137 5493. E-mail address: [email protected] (C.A. Lewis).
0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.08.002
1194
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
1. Introduction Within the psychology of religion there is renewed empirical interest in examining the relationship between religion and happiness. Previous research has employed a variety of different measures of both religiosity, including measures of religious attitude, behaviour and practice, and happiness, including both single item and multi-item scales, among a variety of different samples. The results of these studies have largely been equivocal (for an overview see Robbins & Francis, 1996) and are difficult to integrate due to the divergent methodologies employed. In contrast, two sets of recent studies have employed more systematic methodologies and have both utilised the same measure of religiosity, the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity (Francis & Stubbs, 1987). One series of studies has examined the relationship between religion and happiness among various populations by employing the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity and the Oxford Happiness Inventory (Argyle, Martin, & Crossland, 1989). Results among samples of 360 undergraduates in the UK (Robbins & Francis, 1996), 212 undergraduates in the USA (Francis & Lester, 1997), 100 undergraduates in the UK (French & Joseph, 1999), 994 15–16-year-olds in England (Francis, Jones, & Wilcox, 2000), 456 first-year undergraduate students attending one institution in Wales (Francis et al., 2000), 496 members of a branch of the University of the Third Age in the south of England (Francis et al., 2000), 295 UK individuals, ranging in age from late teens to late seventies (Francis & Robbins, 2000), and 89 undergraduate students in Wales (Francis, Robbins, & White, 2003a), have demonstrated a significant positive association between scores on the Oxford Happiness Inventory and scores on the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity. However, Francis, Ziebertz, and Lewis (2003b) did not report a significant correlation among 331 undergraduate students in Germany. Two related studies, reported by Francis and Katz (2002) and by Francis, Katz, Yablon, and Robbins (in press), administered the Hebrew translation of the Oxford Happiness Inventory together with the Katz-Francis Scale of Attitude toward Judaism (Francis & Katz, 2002) to samples of 298 Hebrew-speaking female and 203 Hebrew-speaking male undergraduates in Israel. After taking into account individual differences in personality, these data demonstrated a significant association between religiosity and happiness. In contrast to this body of work, a smaller series of studies has employed the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity (Francis & Stubbs, 1987) and the Depression–Happiness Scale (Joseph & Lewis, 1998; McGreal & Joseph, 1993) among various populations. Results among samples of 154 Northern Irish undergraduate students (Lewis, Lanigan, Joseph, & de Fockert, 1997), 64 English Anglican priests (Lewis, Maltby, & Burkinshaw, 2000) and 70 English congregational members of the Anglican Church (Lewis et al., 2000) have demonstrated no significant association between scores on the Depression–Happiness Scale and scores on the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity. However, French and Joseph (1999) did report a significant association among 100 undergraduates in the UK. In addition, related research by Lewis (2002) among a sample of 154 Northern Irish university students demonstrated a positive association between scores on the Depression–Happiness Scale and frequency of church attendance. The differential associations of the Oxford Happiness Inventory and the Depression–Happiness Scale with the Francis Scale of Attitude toward Christianity, is somewhat surprising given that there is strong evidence for the high correlation between the two measures of happiness (French & Joseph, 1999; Hills & Argyle, 2002; Joseph & Lewis, 1998).
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
1195
One explanation can be gained from the comparison of the items of the two scales based on a theoretical and empirical distinction between subjective well-being and psychological well-being highlighted by Keyes, Shmotkin, and Ryff (2002). Within this distinction, subjective well-being is seen as an evaluation of life as an aspect of the balance between positive and negative affect, while psychological well-being is viewed as the outcome of the engagement with wider individual development and the existential challenges within life (Keyes et al., 2002). The two scales may differentiate in the way that they measure happiness. Whereas for the Depression–Happiness Scale items are centered around simple statements based on the last seven days ‘‘I felt cheerful’’ [item 6], ‘‘I felt happy’’ [item 12], and may reflect subjective well-being, the Oxford Happiness Inventory, although it contains the same time reference, it may measure global aspects of happiness by reflecting reflections on a longer period of time (e.g. ‘‘I am completely satisfied about everything in my life’’ [item 12, 3], and ‘‘All past events seem extremely happy’’ [item 18]). Therefore, the items seem to reflect a greater and more general contentment with oneÕs life. Therefore the scores on the Oxford Happiness Inventory seem to reflect psychological well-being. Recently Hills and Argyle (2002) have developed a psychometrically improved version of the Oxford Happiness Inventory, entitled the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire along with a ShortForm. The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form also contains no time reference, and contains items that may measure global aspects of happiness reflecting reflections on a longer period of time (e.g. ‘‘I feel that life is very rewarding’’ [item 3] and ‘‘I am well satisfied about everything in my life’’ [item 12]). Initial work by Hills and Argyle (2002) has demonstrated that the two measures are very strongly correlated 0.80. At present no study has examined the relationship between a measure of religiosity, the Depression–Happiness Scale and either the Oxford Happiness Inventory or the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire. Given the writings of Keyes et al. (2002), it is proposed that the present research should seek to encompass the theoretical and empirical distinction between subjective and psychological well-being. Additionally, some attention may be needed in regards to the particular religiosity measure used. Although religiosity can be conceptualised and operationalised in a variety of different ways (see Hill & Hood, 1999 for a review), there are presently two dominant research perspectives within the psychology of religion and well-being literature. The first dominant construct within contemporary psychology of religion relates to religious orientation. Individuals described as having an intrinsic orientation toward religion are described as wholly committed to their religious beliefs, and the influence of religion is evident in every aspect of their life (Allport, 1966). On the other hand, those who demonstrate an extrinsic orientation toward religion have been described as using religion to provide participation in a powerful in-group (Genia & Shaw, 1991), protection, consolation, and social status (Allport & Ross, 1967), religious participation (Fleck, 1981), and an ego defence (Kahoe & Meadow, 1981). However, due to a number of studies investigating the extrinsic orientation toward religion (Gorsuch & McPherson, 1989; Gorsuch & Venable, 1983; King & Hunt, 1969; Leong & Zachar, 1990; Maltby, 1999), there is the strong suggestion that the extrinsic orientation towards religion comprises two dimensions, extrinsic-personal (protection, consolation) and extrinsic-social (religious participation, social status). Gorsuch (1988) argues that this distinction between the intrinsic and extrinsic orientations to religion has been the most useful to the research on the relationship between religiosity and wellbeing.
1196
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
The second dominant perspective is that of religious coping (Pargament, 1997). This theoretical perspective views religion as a coping process (Pargament, 1990, 1996, 1997; Pargament et al., 1992; Pargament & Park, 1995). Pargament (1990, 1997) suggests that a religious coping model might better explain the relationship between religiosity and psychological well-being. He argues that such a theoretical model would address the complex and continuous process by which religion interlocks with an individualÕs life and allows them to deal with stresses in life. Pargament (1997) uses and extends coping theory by arguing that religion may enter the coping process in a number of ways, be it in terms of using religious coping to appraise the causes of stressful events, using religious coping to cope with stressful events, or using religious coping to come to terms with critical life events. Furthermore, Pargament views religious coping as a mediating factor in the relationship between religious orientation and psychological well-being. Pargament and his colleagues have developed a number of measures of religious coping, ranging from those that concentrate on problem areas of religious coping to identification of a number of dimensions of specific coping processes (Pargament et al., 1992; Pargament, 1996). However, Pargament, Smith, Koenig, and Perez (1998) suggest a two-factor model of religious coping in response to stressful life events; positive and negative religious coping. This model of coping encompasses a number of positive and negative religious coping styles including religious forgiveness, collaborative religious coping, spiritual connection, and religious purification. These authors report that positive coping is associated with fewer symptoms of psychological distress, while negative religious coping is associated with higher levels of depression and reporting of psychological symptoms. Despite the dominance of research employing the constructs of both religious orientation and religious coping within the psychology of religion, there is a paucity of previous work examining the relationship between either religious orientation and happiness or religious coping and happiness, particularly considering different measures of happiness within the context of subjective and psychological well-being. Therefore, contrasting findings across the two series of studies described above illustrate that the relationship between religiosity and happiness varies according to the precise measure of happiness used (Robbins & Francis, 1996). Furthermore, it is argued that there is a requirement for a continued examination of the relationship between religiosity and happiness using additional measures of religiosity and happiness to augment previous research and to help identify which components of happiness are related to which aspects of religiosity. The aim of the present study was therefore to examine the relationship between happiness, as conceptualised and operationalised by both the Depression–Happiness Scale and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form, and measures of religious orientation and religious coping.
2. Method 2.1. Sample The sample comprised of 138 (55 male and 83 female) UK adults: ages ranged from 17 to 39, with a mean age of 24.05 years (SD = 4.82 years). Respondents were obtained from a number of workplaces and community groups in the North of England. Participants were selected from those willing to be respondents from the workplaces and community groups visited.
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
1197
2.2. Questionnaires All respondents completed a questionnaire booklet containing: The Depression–Happiness Scale (Joseph & Lewis, 1998; McGreal & Joseph, 1993). This is a 25item scale designed to measure positive affect. It contains 12 items concerned with positive feelings (e.g., ‘‘I felt happy’’, item 12) and 13 items concerned with negative feelings (e.g., ‘‘I felt sad’’, item 1). Items concerning negative feelings are reverse scored so that lower scores on the scale indicate a lower frequency of positive feelings and a higher frequency of negative feelings. Respondents are asked to think about how they have felt in the past seven days and to rate the frequency of each item on a 4-point scale: Never (0); Rarely (1); Sometimes (2); and Often (3). Scores range between 0 and 75, with higher scores indicating a higher frequency of positive feelings and a lower frequency of negative feelings. The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form (Hills & Argyle, 2002). The 8-item scale has been revised down from a well-established, reliable and valid longer 29-item version (Argyle et al., 1989; Hills & Argyle, 2002). The short-form of the scale was devised for use when time and space is limited, and its correlation with the full-length scale is .90 (Hills & Argyle, 2002). Sample items include; ‘‘I am well satisfied with everything in my life’’ [item 12], and ‘‘I feel fully mentally alert’’ [item 21]. Responses to items are scored on a 6-point Likert-type scale: Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (6). Scores range from 8 to 48 with higher scores indicating a measure of broad happiness. The ÔAge-UniversalÕ I-E Scale—12 (Gorsuch & Venable, 1983; Maltby, 1999). This scale is a derived, revised, and amended measure of the Religious Orientation Scale (Allport & Ross, 1967). Since the inception of the Religious Orientation Scale, a number of suggestions have been made to improve psychometric confidence in the measurement of the intrinsic and extrinsic religious constructs. Suggestions have included item changes, changes in response format, and scoring methods (Gorsuch & McPherson, 1989; Gorsuch & Venable, 1983; King & Hunt, 1969; Leong & Zachar, 1990; Maltby & Lewis, 1996). In the main, consideration of such changes suggest that the intrinsic orientation towards religion is a constant feature of religious orientation, while an extrinsic orientation towards religion represents two separate factors; extrinsic-social and extrinsic-personal. The present scale administered is a 12-item version of the ÔAge-UniversalÕ Religious Orientation Scale (Gorsuch & Venable, 1983), which adopts items suggested by Gorsuch and McPherson (1989), and changes to the response format (Maltby & Lewis, 1996). Maltby (1999) reports among 3300 USA, English and Irish adults, psychometric confidence in combining these suggestions to measure an intrinsic orientation towards religion (6 items; e.g., ‘‘It is important to me to spend time in private thought and prayer’’ [item 5]), an extrinsic-personal orientation towards religion (3 items; e.g., ‘‘What religion offers me most is comfort in times of trouble and sorrow’’ [item 8]), and an extrinsic-social orientation towards religion (3 items; e.g., ‘‘I go to church because it helps me make friends’’ [item 2]). Responses to items are scored on a 3-point scale: No (1), Do not know (2), Yes (3). Scores range from 6 to 18 on the intrinsic orientation scale, and scores range from 3 to 9 on both the extrinsic orientation scales. With each scale, higher scores indicate a higher level of that religious orientation. The brief RCOPE (Pargament et al., 1998). This religious coping measure is a 14-item indicator of a 2-factor model (comprising seven items each) of Positive and Negative Religious Coping. Positive coping items include (‘‘I looked for a stronger connection with God’’ [item 1], ‘‘Focused on
1198
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
religion to stop worrying about my problems’’ [item 7]), and Negative Religious Coping items (‘‘Wondered whether God had abandoned me’’ [item 8], ‘‘Questioned the power of God’’ [item 14]). The scale demonstrates adequate reliability and validity (Pargament, 1997; Pargament et al., 1998). Responses to items are scored on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree). On both scales, scores range from 7 to 35 with higher scores indicating a higher level of each religious coping style. 2.3. Data Analysis The data were analysed by the SPSS statistical package, using the reliability, descriptive, correlation and regression routines (SPSS Inc, 1988).
3. Results Satisfactory levels of internal reliability (Cronbach, 1951) were found for the Depression–Happiness Scale (a = 0.92), Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form (a = 0.74), the Religious Orientation Intrinsic Scale (a = 0.87), the Religious Orientation Extrinsic Personal Scale (a = 0.83), the Extrinsic Social Scale (a = 0.87), the Religious Coping Positive Scale (a = 0.94), and the Religious Coping Negative Scale (a = 0.78). These findings are consistent with those reported by the authors of the measures. A series of t-tests compared the mean scores and standard deviations for all the scales by sex (see Table 1). No significant differences were found between men and women for any of the religiosity measures. However, males were found to score significantly higher than females on both the happiness measures. For the total sample, partial correlations, with the effects of gender and age removed, showed no significant associations between scores on the Depression–Happiness Scale and scores on the Religious Orientation Intrinsic Scale, Religious Orientation Extrinsic Personal Scale, Religious Orientation Extrinsic Social Scale, Religious Coping Negative Scale, and the Religious Coping Positive Scale. Similarly, no significant associations were found between scores on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form and scores on the Religious Orientation Extrinsic Personal Scale, Religious Orientation Extrinsic Social Scale, and the Religious Coping Negative Scale. Table 1 Mean scores (standard deviation) of all the measures by sex Scale
Men (n = 55)
Women (n = 83)
Depression–Happiness Scale Oxford Happiness Questionnaire (Short-Form) Intrinsic Extrinsic-personal Extrinsic-social Positive religious coping Negative religious coping
49.74 29.80 09.86 04.95 03.86 10.97 08.20
42.38 (13.8) 27.20 (5.3) 09.92 (3.7) 05.18 (2.0) 04.18 (1.6) 11.08 (6.0) 08.980 (2.7)
*p
< 0.05;
**p
< 0.01;
***p
< 0.001.
(12.2) (5.0) (3.8) (2.3) (1.4) (6.4) (1.9)
t 3.66*** 3.29** 0.10 0.71 1.35 0.91 1.64
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
1199
Table 2 Pearson product moment correlation between all the variables with sex and age partialled out (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) *p
Depression–Happiness Scale Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form Intrinsic Extrinsic-personal Extrinsic-social Positive religious coping Negative religious coping
< 0.05;
**p
< 0.01;
***p
2
3
4
5
6
7
0.76**
0.02 0.22**
0.10 0.03 0.69***
0.07 0.01 0.60*** 0.35***
0.09 0.32*** 0.66*** 0.55*** 0.21**
0.07 0.08 0.33*** 0.31*** 0.19* 0.60***
< 0.001.
However, there were significant associations between the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire ShortForm and scores on the Religious Orientation Intrinsic Scale and the Religious Coping Positive Scale (see Table 2). Due to the positive association of two of the religious variables (intrinsic religious orientation and positive religious coping) and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form, a multiple regression was performed to examine which of the two variables contributed unique variance in scores on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form. The regression statistic (r) was significantly different from zero (F(4,164) = )10.42, p < 0.001; r = 0.35, r2 = 0.12, Adj (r2 = 0.11). For Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form scores, positive religious coping accounted for unique variance (B = 0.26, b = 0.33, Sr2 = 0.11, p < 0.01) whilst intrinsic religious orientation did not (B = 0.05, b = 0.04, p > 0.05).
4. Discussion The aim of the present study was to examine the relationship between happiness, as conceptualised and operationalised by the Depression–Happiness Scale and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form, and measures of religious orientation and religious coping. From the present data four points are worthy of comment. First, there was no significant association between measures of religiosity and happiness, when religiosity was measured in terms of religious orientation and religious coping, and when happiness was measured with the Depression–Happiness Scale. This finding is consistent with previous work using the Depression–Happiness Scale alongside both an attitudinal measure of religiosity (Lewis et al., 1997, 2000) and a behavioural measure (Lewis, 2002). Second, there was a significant association between measures of religiosity and happiness, when religiosity was measured in terms of intrinsic religious orientation, and positive religious coping, and when happiness was measured through the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form. These results are consistent with previous research using the related Oxford Happiness Inventory (Francis & Lester, 1997; Francis & Robbins, 2000; Francis et al., 2000, 2003a, 2003b; French & Joseph, 1999; Robbins & Francis, 1996). Further, of the two measures of religiosity associated with the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form, positive religious coping accounted for unique variance in scores on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form. This latter finding
1200
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
suggests that any happiness that results from religiosity may be the result of successful optimistic religious coping strategies, as measured by positive religious coping. Third, there was a strong association between the two measures of happiness (0.76). This finding attests to the convergent validity of the two measures, and is consistent with previous work using the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form, as well as the measure from which it is derived, the Oxford Happiness Inventory (French & Joseph, 1999; Hills & Argyle, 2002; Joseph & Lewis, 1998). Fourth, the finding that males and females did not differ in terms of scores on the religiosity measures is not consistent with the gender differences usually found, whereby females score higher than males (Francis, 1997). However previous studies among English samples have not reported significant gender differences on religiosity measures (Maltby, Lewis, & Day, 1999). The finding, that females and males did differ in terms of scores on the happiness measures, is not consistent with the literature on either the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form or the Depression–Happiness Scale (Hills & Argyle, 2002; Joseph & Lewis, 1998; McGreal & Joseph, 1993). The present findings provide clear evidence that the differential relationship found between religiosity and happiness, as measured by the Depression–Happiness Scale and the Oxford Happiness Inventory (and Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form), across a number of religiosity measures, is more related to of the type of happiness measure used, rather than the precise measurement of religiosity. The explanation for these findings is based on a theoretical and empirical distinction between subjective well-being and psychological well-being (Keyes et al., 2002). Though there is no data to directly support such a view, as direct measures of subjective and psychological well-being were not included in the present study, in terms of other measures of subjective and psychological well-being it does provide an explanation of why religiosity may be related to one aspect of happiness and not another. Therefore, it can be suggested that intrinsic religiosity and positive religious coping is related to psychological well-being happiness (Oxford Happiness Questionnaire) but not subjective well-being happiness (Depression–Happiness Scale). Intrinsic religious orientation and positive religious coping are thought to reflect a positive, committed, long-term and adaptive involvement in religiosity, in which religion is thought to help and equip the individual to make sense of the world, and enable the individual to respond positively in the appraisal and coping of stressful events over longer periods of time. Therefore, it is these adaptive approaches to religiosity, which lead to a longer-term happiness. These distinctions, using different definitions of well-being, seem to begin to explain some of the inconsistencies previously noted in the religious and happiness literature. Therefore, the present findings are important, because they clarify the precise nature of the relationship between religiosity and happiness and clearly reaffirm the view that the relationship between religiosity and happiness varies according to the precise measures used. This work readily fits into recent calls to emphasise the theoretical context of positive psychology to understand religiosity, particularly when considering positive outcomes (Maltby & Day, 2003; Tsang & McCullough, 2003). Future work should therefore continue to examine the relationship between religiosity and happiness using established measures of happiness such as the Depression–Happiness Scale and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire alongside various measures of religiosity, including attitudinal and behavioural measures (Hill & Hood, 1999), as well as other indices of positive psychology subjective well-being and psychological well-being.
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
1201
In conclusion, the present findings, among a sample of UK adults, demonstrates that the relationship between religiosity and happiness varies according to the precise measure of happiness used, and suggests that when religiosity is related to happiness, it is related to psychological well-being happiness and not subjective well-being happiness.
References Allport, G. W. (1966). Religious context of prejudice. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 5, 447–457. Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 432–433. Argyle, M., Martin, M., & Crossland, J. (1989). Happiness as a function of personality and social encounters. In J. P. Forgas & J. M. Innes (Eds.), Recent advances in social psychology: an international perspective (pp. 189–203). North Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychomterika, 16, 297–334. Fleck, J. R. (1981). Dimensions of personal religion: a trichotomous view. In J. R. Fleck & J. D. Carter (Eds.), Psychology and Christianity (pp. 66–80). New York: Harper Row. Francis, L. J. (1997). The psychology of gender differences in religion: a review of the empirical research. Religion, 27, 81–96. Francis, L. J., Jones, S. H., & Wilcox, C. (2000). Religiosity and happiness: during adolescence, young adulthood and later life. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 19, 245–257. Francis, L. J., & Katz, Y. J. (2002). Religiosity and happiness: a study among Israeli female undergraduates. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 13, 75–86. Francis, L.J., Katz, Y.J., Yablon, Y., & Robbins, M. (in press). Religiosity, personality, and happiness: a study among Israeli male undergraduates. Journal of Happiness Studies. Francis, L. J., & Lester, D. (1997). Religion, personality and happiness. Journal of Contemporary Religion, 12, 81–86. Francis, L. J., & Robbins, M. (2000). Religion and happiness: a study in empirical theology. Transpersonal Psychology Review, 4, 17–22. Francis, L. J., Robbins, M., & White, A. (2003a). Correlation between religion and happiness: a replication. Psychological Reports, 92, 51–52. Francis, L. J., & Stubbs, M. T. (1987). Measuring attitudes towards Christianity: from childhood to adulthood. Personality and Individual Differences, 8, 741–743. Francis, L. J., Ziebertz, H.-G., & Lewis, C. A. (2003b). The relationship between personality and religion among undergraduate students in Germany. Archiv Fur Religionpsychologie, 24, 307–313. French, S., & Joseph, S. (1999). Religiosity and its association with happiness, purpose in life, and self-actualisation. Mental Health, Religion and Culture, 2, 117–120. Genia, V., & Shaw, D. G. (1991). Religion, intrinsic–extrinsic orientation, and depression. Review of Religious Research, 32, 274–283. Gorsuch, R. L. (1988). Psychology of religion. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 201–221. Gorsuch, R. L., & McPherson, S. E. (1989). Intrinsic/Extrinsic measurement: I/E-revised and single-item scales. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 28, 348–358. Gorsuch, R. L., & Venable, G. D. (1983). Development of an ÔAge-UniversalÕ I–E scale. Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion, 12, 181–197. Hill, P. C., & Hood, R. W. Jr., (1999). Measures of religiosity. Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press. Hills, P., & Argyle, M. (2002). The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire: a compact scale for the measurement of psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1073–1082. Joseph, S., & Lewis, C. A. (1998). The Depression–Happiness Scale: reliability and validity of a bipolar self-report scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54, 537–554. Kahoe, R. D., & Meadow, M. J. (1981). A developmental perspective on religious orientation dimensions. Journal of Religion and Health, 20, 8–17.
1202
C.A. Lewis et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1193–1202
Keyes, C. L. M., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. D. (2002). Optimizing well-being: the empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 1007–1022. King, M. B., & Hunt, R. A. (1969). Measuring the religious variables: amended findings. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 8, 321–323. Leong, F. T. L., & Zachar, P. (1990). An evaluation of AllportÕs Religious Orientation Scale across one Australian and two United States samples. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50, 359–368. Lewis, C. A. (2002). Church attendance and happiness among Northern Irish undergraduate students: no association. Pastoral Psychology, 50, 191–195. Lewis, C. A., Lanigan, C., Joseph, S., & de Fockert, J. (1997). Religiosity and happiness: no evidence for an association among undergraduates. Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 119–121. Lewis, C. A., Maltby, J., & Burkinshaw, S. (2000). Religion and happiness: still no association. Journal of Beliefs and Values, 21, 233–236. Maltby, J. (1999). The internal structure of a derived, revised, and amended measure of the religious orientation scale: the ÔAge-UniversalÕ I-E Scale-12. Social Behavior and Personality, 27, 407–412. Maltby, J., & Day, L. (2003). Religious orientation, religious coping and appraisals of stress: assessing cognitive factors in the relationship between religiosity and psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1209–1224. Maltby, J., & Lewis, C. A. (1996). Measuring intrinsic and extrinsic orientation toward religion: amendments for its use among religious and non-religious samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 937–946. Maltby, J., Lewis, C. A., & Day, L. (1999). Religion and psychological well-being: the role of personal prayer. British Journal of Health Psychology, 4, 363–378. McGreal, R., & Joseph, S. (1993). The Depression–Happiness Scale. Psychological Reports, 73, 1279–1282. Pargament, K. I. (1990). God help me: toward a theoretical framework of coping for the psychology of religion. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 2, 195–224. Pargament, K. I. (1996). Religious methods of coping: resources for the conservation and transformation of significance. In E. P. Shafranske (Ed.), Religion and the clinical practice of psychology (pp. 215–239). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Pargament, K. I. (1997). The psychology of religion and coping: theory, research and practice. London: Guilford Press. Pargament, K. I., Olsen, H., Reilly, B., Falgout, K., Ensing, D. S., & Vanhaitsma, K. (1992). God Help Me (2): the relationship of religious orientations to religious coping with negative life-events. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 31, 504–513. Pargament, K. I., & Park, C. L. (1995). Merely a defence? The varieties of means and ends. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 13–32. Pargament, K. I., Smith, B. W., Koenig, H. G., & Perez, L. (1998). Patterns of positive and negative religious coping with major life stressors. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37, 710–724. Robbins, M., & Francis, L. J. (1996). In Are religious people happier a study among undergraduates. In L. J. Francis, W. K. Kay, & W. S. Campbell (Eds.). Research in religious education (pp. 207–217). Leominster: Gracewing. SPSS Inc. (1988). SPSSX user’s guide. New York: McGraw-Hill. Tsang, J., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Measuring religious constructs: a hierarchical approach to construct organization and scale selection. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: a handbook of models and measures (pp. 345–360). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.