The role of religious coping in dealing with stressful ...

The role of religious coping in dealing with stressful events

Christine M Cass and Kathleen A Moore1 e-Oikonomia, no. 2, November 2006 an ejournal of theology, ministry and the arts2

1

Christine Cass is a sessional lecturer at Kingsley College, a member institution of the Sydney College of Divinity ([email protected]) and Kate Moore is an Associate Professor in the School of Psychology at Deakin University ([email protected]). This article has been peer reviewed and accepted as meeting the definition of research.

2

Articles are refereed by the Editorial Board and associates as noted. Through this peer review process these contributions are seen to meet the definition of research and are characterised by substantial scholarly activity, as evidenced by discussion of the relevant literature, an awareness of the history and antecedents of work described, and provided in a format which allows a reader to trace sources of the work, including through citations and footnotes.

eOikonomia, no. 2, Nov. 2006.

2

Abstract In this study we investigated the use of problem-focused, emotion-based, and religious coping strategies among a sample of 154 respondents with respect to various situations. Participants completed the RCOPE-Revised and the Deakin Coping Scale as well as nominating an event which they variously rated as a loss, a threat and a challenge using an 11-point Likert scale. Analyses revealed that spiritual support was used as a positive coping strategy in situations that were described as a loss and as a challenge but not in situations described as a threat. Use of appraisal (what can I do about it) was negatively related to loss and positively related to challenge events, but independent in threat events. For threat events, only avoidance and rejection of social support were significant, suggesting complete avoidance or denial of the situation. The results are discussed.


3

All of us experience situations of high demand or stress at various times in our lives, and how we cope with such demands and stressors has been the focus of a great deal of research. This research has typically categorised the coping strategies that people use into problem-focused, that is doing something about the problem, or emotion-based, for example, blaming oneself, wishing the problem would go away, or simply avoiding the issue. These strategies fail to account for the idea that God would be able to assist people to cope with demands or stress, through one’s faith, prayer, and the resulting comfort, or through seeking strength, support, and guidance from God via prayer. It is the aim in this paper to investigate the various styles of coping with respect to different scenarios, that is, situations perceived as a threat, a loss, or a challenge, and to determine the role that problem-focused and emotionbased coping versus what might be termed religious coping play in our assessment and management of such situations. Each day we experience minor problems, such as misplacing our keys, or running late for appointments, which Kanner, Coyne, Schaefer, and Lazarus (1981) termed daily hassles and, although annoying, they do not seem to have the cumulative negative effects that the experience of major life events bring. Holmes and Rahe (1967) described major life events as those which can, if enough are experienced in any one year, have a subsequent effect on our health in the following months. For instance, loss of a spouse, financial difficulties, change of residence could, when considered cumulatively, affect our wellbeing in the succeeding months. Of course, not all major life events are negative: positive events such as Christmas, going on holidays, and the birth of a child can also be sources of stress. Just consider the difficulties often associated with what to buy Great Aunt Maude for Christmas, who can come and where to have Christmas lunch and dinner, who cooks/brings what, and all the work and travel associated with good planning. While such events in themselves are not necessarily stressful, how we think about them can influence our reactions (Lazarus & Launier, 1978) in either a positive or negative manner. If we perceive an event as a demand or a threat, then we will most likely feel stressed; conversely, if we perceive the event as a challenge, we might be energised to deal with it. Certainly, our mental approach is different. It’s a bit like whether we consider the glass to be half-full or half-empty. If we perceive an event as a challenge, it can be hypothesised that we would use more problem-focused strategies to get on and deal with the issue and less emotion-based strategies spent avoiding it or hoping for it to go away. However, it is unclear how the use of religious coping might be employed, if at all. If, on the other hand, the event is perceived as a threat (that is, an anticipated event, such as possible job retrenchment) or a loss (a situation where


4

the event has already occurred, such as, the actual death of a partner) it might be that people will use more emotion-based coping, at least initially, or use both emotion-based and problem-focused coping. Again, it is unclear how people might use religious coping although it might be expected that greater use of religious coping will be employed. Religious coping should not be confused with attendance at church or the frequency thereof. Rather, it relates to what or how people use their faith in God to seek guidance and support to deal with life’s problems. Pargament (1997) is one of few people who have considered in any detail the concept of religious coping. Pargament proposed that people with stronger religious beliefs would be more inclined to use religious coping strategies than those not so inclined to assist them to deal with life’s problems. He does not say that religious beliefs will be used alone; rather, they would be an additional resource upon which people can draw. He even devised a scale to assess religious coping which we have factor analysed to produce two dimensions: these dimensions are spiritual support and spiritual doubting. In a study conducted by Pargament and his colleagues (1998), the positive religious coping strategy, spiritual support, which includes items such as searching for comfort through God’s love, Trusted that God was with me, Worked together with God to relieve my worries, and Tried to see how God might be trying to strengthen me in this situation, were associated with better outcomes, fewer psychological distress symptoms, and greater spiritual and psychological growth resulting from the event. Conversely, the negative religious coping strategy, spiritual doubting, was of a more pessimistic style, such as wondering if God really cares, Thinking that some things are beyond God, and Feeling angry that God is not there for me, was associated with poorer outcomes: depression, callousness towards others, and lower quality of life. The aim of this study is to investigate the use of religious and non-religious coping strategies in current or recent situations which participants self- appraised as a loss, a threat, and a challenge. Method Participants A sample of 154 participants (116 females) was recruited from three groups of young adults throughout the Melbourne metropolitan area. Fifty-nine participants were undergraduate students, 47 attended an Anglican church, and 48 attended a Pentecostal church. The sample ranged in age from 18 to 30 years (M = 21.89 years, SD = 3.22). One hundred and thirty-four participants (87.0%) had never married, 18 (11.7%) were married or living with a partner, and two (1.3%) were divorced.


5

Materials Participants provided demographic information pertaining to their gender, age, marital status, religious background, and current religious affiliation. Life Events: Participants were asked to describe briefly one recent or current stressor, and to respond to the coping scales with that stressor in mind. Participants then rated the extent to which they considered the stressor to be 1) a loss (damage/harm has already occurred), 2) a threat (damage/harm is anticipated), and 3) a challenge (problem to overcome with potential for growth/benefit) on 11-point Likert scales 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely). RCOPE (Pargament, Koenig, & Perez, 2000, revised by Cass & Moore, 2006) (see Appendix A) to a 20-item scale of two dimensions: spiritual support (e.g., looked to God for strength, support and guidance) and spiritual doubting (e.g., wondered if God really cares), was used to measure religious coping. There are 10 items per subscale. Deakin Coping Scale (Moore, 2003) a 19-item scale was used to measure problemand emotion-focused coping. The problem-focused strategies used are: appraisal/information gathering (e.g., examine my alternatives) and seeking social support (e.g., seek help from others); the emotion-focused strategy is avoidance (e.g., hoped for a solution to appear). Questions are answered on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). Procedure A written explanation of the nature of the study was provided to all potential participants. University students were invited during psychology tutorials to participate in the study. Invitations to participate in the study were also issued to young adults at an Anglican and a Pentecostal church in metropolitan Melbourne at announcement times during youth group meetings. Volunteers were informed that completion and return of the questionnaire in the reply-paid self-addressed envelope would constitute informed consent.

Results and Discussion The childhood and current religious affiliations of participants are presented in Table 1. While there are slight variations in reports of childhood versus current affiliations, these religious affiliations are statistically stable across time.


6

Table 1 Percentages of Childhood and Current Religious Affiliations of Participants Religious affiliation

Childhood (%)

Current (%)

Protestant

55.8

66.2

Catholic

16.2

9.1

Jewish

2.6

1.9

Buddhist

3.2

0.6

Greek Orthodox

2.6

1.9

Non-denominational Christian

1.3

2.7

Agnostic

0.0

0.6

18.3

17.0

No religious affiliation N = 154.

Use of coping strategies in loss, threat, and challenge situations In order to determine the use of religious and non-religious coping strategies used by respondents in situations they had variously appraised as a loss, a threat, and a challenge (rated 0 to 10 for each), a series of multiple regression (MR) analyses were conducted. MR allows one to predict the level of an outcome variable, in this case the level of perception of threat, loss, and challenge, separately, from a series of variables, in this case, the use of religious and non-religious coping strategies. Table 2 contains the results of the statistical analyses and, although each of the sets of predictor variables (that is, religious and non-religious coping strategies) explained a statistically significant amount of variance in respondents ratings of the event as a loss, a threat, and a challenge (7%, 9%, and 11% respectively), clearly other factors were also highly influential in explaining the remaining approximate 90% of variance. Even so, it is interesting to discuss the diversity of predictors for each event type, where the predictors which are significant are indicated by an asterisk (*) in the table. When the event was appraised as a loss, respondents used high levels of spiritual support but low levels of appraisal (indicated by the negative sign). In other words, loss situations appear to result in people calling upon God for strength and support, for comfort, and a stronger connection with Him, while at the same time respondents did not ask what can I do about the situation, how can I deal with it. Social support, avoidance, and spiritual doubting (lack of significant level of use indicated by absence of asterisk) were not related to loss events.


7

It seems that, in situations appraised as a loss, people are, to some extent, being supported by their faith in God; this might be interpreted as looking for a sense of meaning from the loss, or simply taking comfort from knowing that God is there for them. Other strategies seem to be of scant use, even seeking support from others. Certainly, the situation is not being avoided and one might say, can not be avoided – the loss is a reality. Anecdotal support is also found for these findings as, during times of loss, even people who are not overtly religious often turn to God or use references to Him to try and ease their or anothers’ pain. Table 2 Summary of Multiple Regression Analyses Where Religious and Non-Religious Coping Strategies Were Regressed Upon Perceptions of an Event as a Loss, Threat, and Challenge

Loss

5 F 148

R2

2.35*

.07

β

Spiritual support

.19*

Spiritual doubting

.11

Appraisal

-.19*

Social support

.12

Avoidance

.07

Threat

2.74*

.09

Spiritual support

.05

Spiritual doubting

-.04

Appraisal

.02

Social support

-.17*

Avoidance Challenge

.26** 3.60**

.11

Spiritual support

.19*

Spiritual doubting

.02

Appraisal

.18*

Social support

.15

Avoidance Note. N = 153. * p < .05, ** p < .01.

-.12


8

Interestingly, when the event was appraised as a threat, religious coping was not a significant predictor nor was appraisal, that is, what can I do about it. Certainly, the latter can be explained in terms of reduced ability to engage in cognitive functions as when anxious, an emotion which typically accompanies threat, concentration and problem-solving are attenuated. However, the lack of religious coping is more perplexing. Clearly, people are actively trying to avoid the threat and are not seeking support from others. Overall, these findings might represent a sense of immobilisation in the face of threat, that is, no proactive coping strategies are activated. Rather, avoidance of others’ support and the event itself are paramount. It is interesting, though, that spiritual doubting is independent of threat appraisal, such that, it would seem that even if people did not seek God’s support, neither did they actively doubt or criticise Him. Appraisal of the event as a challenge also revealed spiritual support as a significant predictor, together with appraisal. Considered together, these two findings suggest that the respondents are indeed proactive in dealing with challenging situations. They ask themselves what they can do about it, as well as look to God for strength, support, and guidance. Overall, it seems that such situations are wholeheartedly embraced both at an individual and at a spiritual level. While this study has provided novel insights into the use of religious coping, it should be noted that the findings are limited to participants aged from 18 to 30 years and, thus, represent only a segment of the age spectrum. It could be the case, for example, that more senior individuals, with greater life experience, might favour the use of different coping strategies. It is also impossible to attribute causality from a cross-sectional study such as this, and future research which uses a longitudinal design is desirable. However, the current study has contributed significantly to a gap in the literature with respect to the use of religious coping during times of major life events.

Conclusion The role of religious coping, notably spiritual support, was highlighted as an important coping strategy when dealing with events appraised as a loss and as a challenge: this importance was not present when dealing with events appraised as a threat. Appraisal as a coping strategy (e.g., what can I do about it, how can I manage it) was diametrically opposed in the prediction of loss (significantly less use of appraisal) compared with challenge situations (greater use of appraisal), and was not used at all in dealing with events appraised as a threat. In summary, during loss events people coped by engaging spiritual support,


9

dealing with threat events resulted in avoidance of the event and withdrawal from the support of others, while events perceived as a challenge, embodied an approach by both one’s belief in spiritual support as well as in oneself. Of course, these last two may not be mutually exclusive. The present findings contribute to our understanding of the diverse use of these coping strategies and will enhance the work of counsellors, ministers of religion, and pastoral carers working with people in crises.


10

References Cass, C. M, & Moore, K. A. (2006). The impact of religious coping on stress outcomes. Paper under review. Holmes, T. H., & Rahe, R. H. (1967). The social readjustment rating scale. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 11, 213-218. Kanner, A. D., Coyne, J. C., Schaefer, C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1981). Comparison of two modes of stress measurement: Daily hassles and uplifts versus major life events. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 1-39. Lazarus, R. S., & Launier, R. (1978). Stress-related transactions between person and environment. In A. P. Lawrence, & M. Lewis (Eds.), Perspectives in interactional psychology, pp. 287-327. NY: Plenum Press. Moore, K. (2003). Development and applications of the Deakin Coping Scale. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 21(2), 13-30. Pargament, K. I. (1997). The psychology of religion and coping: Theory, research, and practice. NY: Guilford Press. Pargament, K. I., Koenig, H. G., & Perez, L. (2000). The many methods of religious coping: Development and validation of the RCOPE. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56, 519543. 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.


11

Appendix A: Items on the RCOPE Scale-Revised Spiritual Support

Spiritual Doubting

Looked to God for strength, support, and

Wondered if God really cares.

guidance. Sought God’s love and care.

Questioned the power of God.

Sought comfort from God.

Wondered whether God had abandoned me.

Trusted that God was with me.

Thought that some things are beyond God’s control.

Worked together with God to relieve my

Felt angry that God was not there for me.

worries. Did what I could and put the rest in God’s

Made decisions about what to do without

hands.

God’s help.

Tried to see how God might be trying to

Depended on my own strength without

strengthen me in this situation.

support from God.

Looked for a stronger connection with God.

Tried to deal with the situation on my own without God’s help.

Thought that the event might bring me closer

Tried to make sense of the situation without

to God.

relying on God.

Tried to get my mind off my problems by

Felt that even God has limits.

focusing on God.