Unique contributions of religious and science beliefs on meaning systems in a nationally representative American sample.

Individuals often hold beliefs in religion and in science, but how they mutually function is not well-understood. We examined these conjoint influences by examining their relative contributions to individuals' global meaning systems. We also examined whether subgroups of participants could be identified in terms of relative influence of religious or science beliefs on their meaning systems. A nationally representative sample of 300 American adults completed online surveys. Results suggested that science beliefs and religion beliefs comprise separate but only modestly negatively correlated dimensions. Both contributed similarly to the explanation of world assumptions, but only religious beliefs generally predicted goals, values and sense of meaning in life. Latent profile analysis produced a three-profile solution: one profile of moderate science and religious beliefs represented half the sample while the remainder split evenly between predominantly religious and predominantly science beliefs. In general, across most aspects of global meaning, the religious beliefs group was higher than the science beliefs and moderate beliefs in both groups. Results of this first systematic investigation of the separate effects of beliefs in religion and in science on meaning systems suggest that the balance of these beliefs is a potentially important individual difference warranting further investigation and elaboration.

Use of religious and spiritual responses after trauma to prevent posttraumatic stress symptoms and suicidality: The role of meaning in life.

BACKGROUND: The present study examined the relationship between religious/spiritual (R/S) responses to trauma, meaning in life, and psychopathology among US veterans (n = 729). METHODS: Participants (66.7% male and 83.2% White) completed study questionnaires assessing positive religious coping, divine spiritual struggle, meaning in life, posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS), and suicidality severity. Assessments were conducted via telephone interviews at baseline (T1), 3 months (T2) and 6 months (T3). RESULTS: Divine spiritual struggle was associated with lower meaning in life, higher suicidality and higher PTSS at all time points. Positive religious coping was associated with higher meaning in life at all time points and lower suicidality at T2. Meaning in life fully mediated relationships between divine spiritual struggle and both PTSS and suicidality. While higher levels of T1 positive religious coping predicted increased T3 PTSS when controlling for T1 PTSS, meaning in life partially mediated this relationship, with a negative indirect effect. Meaning in life also fully mediated the relationship between positive religious coping and later suicidality, with a negative indirect effect. DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that divine spiritual struggle consistently predicts both higher PTSS and suicidality. Further, a sense of meaning plays a large role in linking R/S responses to trauma and psychological outcomes. It holds promise as a means through which positive religious coping may exert beneficial effects. Clinicians should be particularly mindful of negative R/S responses after trauma as a risk factor for adverse psychological outcomes. Future research should examine whether meaning-based interventions are beneficial after trauma.

When suffering contradicts belief: measuring theodical struggling.

Global meaning systems help people make sense of their experiences, but suffering can violate global meaning and create distress. One type of potential violation is conflict between one's experience of suffering and one's deeply-held beliefs about God as loving, powerful, and just. The problem of theodicy-why an all-powerful and all-loving God would allow suffering-has long been an important theological and philosophical concern, but little is known about how theodicy plays out psychologically for religious individuals facing serious life difficulties. To address this issue within a specific religious tradition, Christianity, we drew upon philosophy, Christian theology, and psychology to develop the construct of theodical struggling. Through theological and philosophical input, we generated a 28-item pool and conducted 10 cognitive interviews with a diverse sample of Christian adults. In three consecutive online studies of Christian adult samples, we reduced the scale to 11 items through PCA, found a strong one-factor solution using EFA, and found support for the one-factor solution along with preliminary reliability and validity. This newly-developed Theodical Struggling Scale represents an important advance in understanding individuals' experiences of ruptures in their beliefs regarding God's goodness and paves the way for future research on this topic. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-023-04642-w.

Religiousness in the first year of COVID-19: A systematic review of empirical research.

The COVID-19 pandemic emerged suddenly in early 2020, posing a serious health threat and creating tremendous stress and distress across the world. Religion has been shown to play important and varied roles in previous disasters and health crises, but its roles in the pandemic have yet to be outlined. We aimed to summarize the research conducted on religion and COVID-19 in the first year of the pandemic with a systematic review of studies that specifically involved individual-level religiousness and COVID-19. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO covering a one-year period from the first published mention of the novel coronavirus (Jan. 5, 2020) through January 4, 2021. We included articles about COVID-19 that were peer-reviewed and empirical, measured and reported results on religion on an individual level, and were available in English. Our search produced 137 empirical articles that met the inclusion criteria. In the course of sorting studies by their primary focus, eight categories of empirical findings emerged: general distress and wellbeing (53 articles), COVID-19-specific stress (24 articles), beliefs in science, conspiracies, and misinformation (15 articles), COVID-19 public health behaviors (12 articles), perceived risk of COVID-19 (10 articles), perceived growth or positive changes taking place during the pandemic (nine articles), health behaviors (three articles), and consumer behavior (three articles). Findings indicated that religiousness was associated with both unique benefits and challenges and played a significant role in the pandemic. Religiousness was associated with a broad range of outcomes across geographical regions and populations during the first year of COVID-19. It was a commonly reported coping mechanism with varying levels of favorable associations with mental health and COVID-19-related behaviors.