Center for Demography and Ecology University of Wisconsin-Madison Formal Religious Participation and Daily Spiritual Experiences: Separate, but Equal, Linkages with Psychological Well-Being?

Building on the idea that religiosity and spirituality are related yet distinct phenomena, this study examined whether formal religious participation and daily spiritual experiences are independently and equally associated with diverse dimensions of psychological well-being (negative affect, positive affect, purpose in life, positive relations with others, personal growth, self-acceptance, environmental mastery, and autonomy). Data came from 1,801 respondents in the 2005 National Survey of Midlife in the U.S. (MIDUS). Results indicated that more frequent daily spiritual experiences were independently and consistently associated with better psychological well-being; three salutary associations were stronger among women than men. Although more frequent formal religious participation was independently associated with higher purpose in life, positive relations with others, and (among older adults) personal growth, it was also linked with lower autonomy and environmental mastery. Overall, results suggest that daily spiritual experiences and formal religious participation are linked in separate and non-equal ways with psychological well-being. Religi-Spirituality and Psychological Well-Being 3 Formal Religious Participation and Daily Spiritual Experiences: Separate, but Equal, Linkages with Psychological Well-Being? The implications of religion and spirituality for individual well-being captured the attention of many foundational social theorists, including Karl Marx ([1844] 1970), Sigmund Freud (1928), Emile Durkheim (1912 [1995]), William James ([1902] 1912), Max Weber ([1904] 1958), and Abraham Maslow (1954). Over the past decades, there has been renewed interest in systematically exploring the interface between religi-spirituality and psychological well-being. Drawing across studies from this body of research, several recent review articles have concluded that there is a modest salutary association between various aspects of religispirituality and psychological well-being (Hackney and Sanders 2003; Koenig and Larson 2001; Sawatzky, Ratner, and Chiu 2005; Smith, McCullough, and Poll 2003). Although scholars have noted methodological and conceptual improvements in studies on religi-spirituality and individual well-being over the past several years (Hill and Pargament 2003; Miller and Thoresen 2003; Weaver et al. 2005), important gaps in understanding remain within this area. The purpose of this study was to address one primary gap by examining the extent to which religiosity and spirituality—as phenomena that are related yet distinct from one another— have unique influences on individuals’ psychological well-being. To accomplish this aim, we drew on data from the 2005 National Survey of Midlife in the U.S. (MIDUS) and investigated whether frequency of formal religious participation and daily spiritual experiences are independently and equally associated with diverse and theoretically-derived dimensions of psychological well-being. We also examined the extent to which associations between formal Religi-Spirituality and Psychological Well-Being 4 religious participation, daily spiritual experiences, and psychological well-being differ by gender and age. Theoretical Background Although the terms religiosity and spirituality are often used interchangeably, and although religious and spiritual phenomena often overlap in people’s lived experiences, many scholars have posited that religiosity and spirituality can be conceptually distinguished from each other. Integrating across previous conceptualizations of religiosity and spirituality (Berry 2005; Fetzer Institute/National Institute on Aging Working Group 1999; Hill and Pargament, 2003; James 1902[1912]; Miller and Thorensen 2003; Prasinos 1992; Underwood and Teresi 2002; Vaillant Forthcoming), we use the term religiosity to refer to the interpersonal and institutional aspects of religi-spirituality that are derived from engaging with a formal religious group’s doctrines, values, traditions, and co-members. By contrast, we use the term spirituality to refer to the psychological experiences of religi-spirituality that relate to an individual’s sense of connection with a transcendent (be it a single deity, multiple deities, an unnamed force, or anything else considered to be larger than one’s self), integration of self, and feelings of awe, gratitude, compassion, and forgiveness. To further clarify this distinction between religiosity and spirituality, we offer as an example the related-yet-distinct spiritual and religious components of an individual reciting a formal prayer in a religious/spiritual service. The religious aspects of this behavior include the fact that the prayer is derived from and recited with a larger social group to which the individual might feel belonging. The spiritual aspects of this behavior include the sense of transcendence and awe that the individual might feel when reciting the prayer. Although religiosity and spirituality can be considered two related-yet-distinct dimensions of a broad domain of human experience, it is important to recognize that religiosity Religi-Spirituality and Psychological Well-Being 5 and spirituality—even when focusing on aspects of the phenomena that can be distinguished from one and other—can be considered multidimensional constructs in their own right. For example, whereas one person might experience institutional religious life by belonging to a congregation, another person might experience religiosity through identifying with a particular religious affiliation. Similarly, while one person might experience spirituality through their feelings of awe in the presence of nature, others might experience spirituality by their feelings of connection with a higher power while engaging in a community service. The multidimensional nature of religious and spiritual phenomena poses a challenge to examinations of the interface between religiosity, spirituality, and individual well-being. As Pargament (2002) stated, “Questions about the general efficacy of religion are no more helpful than questions about the general efficacy of medicine, psychotherapy, or graduate education. They should give way to the more difficult but more appropriate question, How helpful or harmful are particular kinds of religious expressions for particular people dealing with particular situations in particular social contexts according to particular criteria of helpfulness and harmfulness?” (p. 178). Recognizing the importance of scholarship that examines associations between particular aspects of religiosity, spirituality, and psychological well-being, this study specifically investigated linkages between formal religious participation as a manifestation of institutional/interpersonal religious behavior (i.e., religiosity), daily spiritual experiences as a manifestation of psychological spiritual behavior (i.e., spirituality), and eight different dimensions of psychological well-being. Formal social scientific theorizing on religion, spirituality, and individual well-being provide a strong foundation for positing that formal religious participation and daily spiritual experiences would exhibit separate, but equal, linkages with psychological well-being. For Religi-Spirituality and Psychological Well-Being 6 example, Emile Durkheim’s ([1897] 1951) classic theorizing on the importance of social integration for individuals’ well-being suggests how religious participation—net of its potential association with individuals’ spiritual experiences—might lead to individuals’ better psychological well-being. First, Durkheim postulated that social institutions like religion can protect individuals from egoism—a state in which an individual is insufficiently connected to the broader social groups to which he or she belongs. Durkheim posited that social institutions can promote well-being by providing individuals a sense of purpose and meaning through collective goals, as well as by allowing them access to group resources in times of need. Durkheim also identified the potential utility of institutions like religion as a resource to help people avoid anomie—a state in which an individual is insufficiently structured and constrained by social institutions. Durkheim posited that without society to discipline individual passions, individuals desire more than they can attain and that this excessive desire can “condemn oneself to a state of perpetual unhappiness” (p. 248). Therefore, engagement with institutions like religion can serve to temper individuals’ desires and thereby help them to achieve better psychological well-being. Much of the contemporary theorizing on mechanisms through which religiosity affects health and well-being is congruent with Durkheim’s perspectives on the salutary effects of social institutions like religion. For example, scholars have suggested that religious involvement promotes individuals’ well-being by providing them access to social support, a source from which to cultivate social identity, as well as a factor that encourages individuals to avoid negative health behaviors (George, Ellison, and Larson 2002; Greenfield and Marks, Forthcoming). Some scholars, however, have criticized such theorizing for its predominant focus on biopsychological processes that have little to do with the more spiritual aspects of religion (see Pargament 2002, for a discussion). Religi-Spirituality and Psychological Well-Being 7 Building on the idea that religiosity might promote psychological well-being through processes that are somewhat unique from those of secular life, scholars have advanced other theories focusing on how spiritual experiences—net of their potential association with formal religious participation—can promote individuals’ well-being. Vaillant (Forthcoming), for example, has discussed spirituality as the experiences of positive emotions that result from a sense of connection with others and a transcendent. Such emotions include faith, hope, love, forgiveness, gratitude, and compassion—all which suggest strong linkages between individuals’ spiritual experiences and their psychological well-being. Vaillant recognizes that spiritual experiences oftentimes intricately overlap with aspects of institutional religious life. Nevertheless, conceptualizing spiritual experiences as being uniquely rooted in humans’ neurobiology, Vaillant suggests that spiritual experiences, regardless of the degree to which they are derived from more culturally based forms of religiosity, can promote psychological wellbeing. In sum, theorizing on the particular ways through which religiosity as an institutionalinterpersonal experience and spirituality as a phenomenological-psychological experience affect well-being suggests that formal religious participation and daily spiritual experiences might have separate, but equally important, linkages with better psychological well-being. Empirical Background Building on the large number of empirical studies that have examined linkages between religiosity, spirituality, and well-being over the past several decades, scholars have integrated across findings to provide a summary understanding of the extent to which religiosity and spirituality are associated with psychological well-being. For example, Smith, McCullough, and Poll (2003) conducted a meta-analysis across 147 investigations of the associations between Religi-Spirituality and Psychological Well-Being 8 religi-spirituality and depressive symptoms and found a modest, but robust, inverse association. Similarly, Sawatzky, Ratner, and Chiu (2005) conducted a meta-analysis across 51 studies on associations between religi-spirituality and quality of life. Results from this study also indicated a moderately salutary effect of religi-spirituality on psychological well-being. In both metaanalyses, the authors observed that much of the variance among estimates from each of the studies was partly attributable to their use of different measures of religiosity and spirituality. Moreover, neither meta-analysis distinguished between studies that examined the potentially unique psychological implications of religious participation in contrast to spiritual experiences. Recognizing the need for “a new generation of studies...to examine the link to health of different domains of religious engagement as well as to compare different groups of people for whom the strength of the religion-health association seems to vary” (p. 2848), Maselko and Kubzansky (2006) used data from respondents in the 1998 General Social Survey (with a mean age of 44.67 years) to investigate the potentially independent linkages of formal religious participation, private religious participation, and spiritual experiences with several aspects of psychological well-being. Results indicated that among both men and women, reporting weekly religious participation and having a daily spiritual experience (“feeling God’s love directly or through others, feeling inner peace, feeling God’s presence, and/or feeling touched by the beauty of creation”) were both independently associated with higher levels of global happiness. Also among both men and women, weekly religious participation—but not daily spiritual experience—was associated with lower levels of psychological distress; and among men only, weekly religious participation was associated with higher levels of life satisfaction. This study aimed to expand upon the suggestive population study of Maselko and Kubzansky (2006) by augmenting the exploration of linkages between religiosity, spirituality, Religi-Spirituality and Psychological Well-Being 9 and psychological well-being to include a wider array of outcomes that more fully address the multidimensionality of psychological well-being. Findings from previous studies that simultaneously have examined multiple dimensions of psychological well-being suggest that different patterns of associations between religiosity, spirituality, and well-being are likely to emerge across diverse dimensions of psychological well-being (e.g., Frasier, Mintz, and Mobley 2005; Krause et al. 1999; Maselko and Kubzansky 2006). Therefore, building on research that has established that negative and positive affect are not two ends of a linear, bipolar continuum (Bradburn, 1969), this study investigated both positive affect and negative affect. In addition to these aspects of well-being that focus on individuals’ moods and emotions, we also examined six other dimensions of psychological well-being that address experiences of well-being derived from fruitful engagement with one’s psychosocial world. Ryff posited these dimensions by integrating across theoretical insights from developmental, clinical, and social psychological theorizing on optimal states of well-being (see Ryff and Keyes, 1995, for a discussion). The six dimensions she proposed, and for which she validated scales, include autonomy (sense of selfdetermination), environmental mastery (the capacity to manage effectively one's life and surrounding world), purpose in life (the belief that one's life is purposeful and meaningful), positive relations with others (having quality relations with others), personal growth (feelings of continued growth and development as a person), and self-acceptance (positive evaluations of oneself and one's past life). Recent empirical work on the multidimensionality of psychological well-being has indicated that Ryff’s proposed dimensions of positive psychosocial functioning are empirically related to, yet still distinct from, positive and negative affect (Keyes, Ryff, and