Running Head: VIEWS OF SUFFERING
1
Views of Suffering and Emotional Well-Being
Madeline Jarrett
University of Notre Dame
Author Note
Madeline P. Jarrett, Department of Psychology, University of Notre Dame
This research was made possible in part by support from the Undergraduate Research
Opportunity Program, Institute for Scholarship in the Liberal Arts, College of Arts and Letters,
the University of Notre Dame. The author would like to thank Dr. Daniel Lapsley and Paul Stey,
M.A., for their encouragement and support in the undertaking of this project.
Correspondence should be sent to Madeline Paige Jarrett, Department of Psychology, University
of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, 46556. E-mail: [email protected]
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
2
Add abstract
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
3
All the world is full of suffering. It is also full of overcoming.
Helen Keller
Introduction
Attempts to reconcile the suffering that takes place in the world with the existence of a
morally good God have been made by philosophers and theologians over the course of history.
These attempts are referred to as theodicies (Green, 2005). Theodicies are a common topic of
study in the field of theology; however, little empirical research has been conducted to
investigate how a person’s theodicy relates to his or her emotional well-being. Theodicies are an
important topic of study because people’s worldviews play major roles in shaping their
interpretation of their life experiences (Pargament, 1997). In particular, negative life events, such
as serious illness, often prompt people to assess the meaning of their lives (Saunders, 1978).
Negative life events are often understood as experiences of suffering in the lives of those who
experience them. Thus, one’s perspective on the reasons for which suffering occurs is vital for
understanding or contextualizing the negative life events that one has experienced. In order to
help patients cope with life events, therapists should be familiar with various views of suffering,
and they should to be able to identify resources for dealing with suffering contained in certain
worldviews (Peteet, 2001). In order to more fully understand views of suffering and the ways in
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
4
which they should be approached in a therapeutic setting, an investigation of views of suffering
and their relationship to emotional well-being has been conducted.
This project has empirically investigated the relationship between theodicies and
emotional well-being. The relationship between personal theodicies, images of God, and
experiences of life stress has been examined in order to expand upon the understanding of the
relationship between theodicies and well-being.
Emotional well-being and stressful life events
There is a rich psychological literature documenting the negative effects of stressful life
events on emotional well-being. Higher prevalence of negative life events (e.g. severe marital
conflict, childhood trauma) are associated with a higher risk of developing major depressive
disorder (Kasen, Chen, Sneed, & Cohen, 2010). Similarly, chronic strain, often associated with
stressful life events, is correlated with depressive symptomology (Avison & Turner, 1988).
Comorbidity between post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and symptoms of depression and
anxiety were assessed longitudinally, and researchers found that experience of traumatic events
is highly related to development of depressive and anxious symptomology (Johansen, Eilertsen,
Nordanger, & Weisaeth, 2013). Moreover, the traumatic events were found to have a lasting,
chronic impact on mental health.
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
5
The negative effects of stressful life events are documented in numerous populations. For
example, in a sample of single mothers, it was found that the experience of stressful life events
is highly correlated with high levels of depression (Samuels-Dennis, 2006). In another study of
African American mothers, it was found that negative life events predicted the presence of
depression and anxiety (Mitchell & Ronzio, 2011). Similarly, in a study of police officers,
researchers found that exposure to multiple stressful life events was highly correlated with
elevated depression scores (Hartley, Violanti, Fekedulegn, Andrew, & Burchfiel, 2007). These
studies demonstrate that stressful life events have negative consequences on emotional wellbeing.
Religiosity, stressful life events, and emotional well-being
Religiosity plays an important role in the aforementioned relationship between stressful
life events and emotional well-being. There is a dense psychological literature investigating the
relationship between religiosity and well-being. For example, research has explored topics
relating to religious motivations (e.g. Cohen, Hall, Keonig, & Meador, 2005; Byrd, Hageman, &
Isle, 2007), religious social support (e.g. Ellison & George, 1994; Krause, Ellison, Shaw,
Marcum, & Boardman, 2001), and religion and negative emotions (e.g. Macavei & Miclea,
2008). Numerous studies have found a negative correlation between religiosity levels and
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
6
depression (e.g. Miller, Warner, Wickramaratne, & Weissman, 1997; Aukst-Margeti!,
Jakovljevi!, Margeti!, Bi"!an, & #amija, 2005) and anxiety (e.g. Mann, McKeown, Bacon,
Vesselinov, & Bush, 2008; Abdel-Khalek, 2009). In addition, a number of studies found that a
positive correlation exists between religiosity level and positive affect (Patrick & Kinney, 2003)
and religiosity levels and happiness (Francis, Katz, Yablon, & Robbins, 2004).
With regards to specific life events, research has shown that religiosity/positive religious
coping acts as a buffer against negative emotional well-being in the face of negative life events
(Koenig, George, & Siegler, 1988). For example, Bjorck and Thurman (2007) conducted a study
assessing the relationship between negative life events, religious coping, and psychological
functioning. They found that negative life events were associated with increased use of both
positive and negative religious coping as well as decreased psychological functioning. More
importantly, they found that the use of positive religious coping in the face of negative life
events buffered against the manifestation of decreased psychological functioning (e.g.
depression). Another study found that, with regards to the experience of negative life events,
spirituality significantly moderated the effects of depression and anxiety (Young, Cashwell, &
Shcherbakova, 2000). This literature demonstrates that religion may be a protective factor
against negative emotional adjustment in the face of negative life events.
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
7
Images of God and emotional well-being
As indicated by the research linking religiosity, negative life events, and emotional
adjustment, one’s understanding of God/a higher power (or lack thereof) is likely to play a
significant role in one’s understanding of suffering. Therefore, it is important to examine the
research on perceptions of God and their relationship to emotional well-being. Belief in a
benevolent, just, and supportive God is associated with more positive coping outcomes among
people who had experienced serious negative life events in the past year (Pargament, Ensing,
Falgout, Olsen, Reilly, et al., 1990). Stronger belief in God-mediated control is correlated with
higher levels of optimism and self-worth, greater life satisfaction, and less death anxiety (Krause,
2005). A loving conception of God is correlated with lower psychological distress (Levin, 2002).
In addition, a negative correlation was found between religiosity and depressive symptoms, and
this correlation was stronger among participants experiencing unusually high stress due to
negative life events (Smith, McCullough, & Poll, 2003). Conceptions of God as deistic and
supportive are correlated with both positive and negative mental health, but conceptions of God
as abandoning are correlated with poorer mental health (Phillips, Pargament, Lynn, & Crossley,
2004). In a sample of psychiatric patients, belief in God was associated with greater reductions in
depression and self-harm and with greater improvements in psychological well-being (Rosmarin,
Bigda-Peyton, Kertz, Smith, & Rauch, 2013). Anger towards God is negatively correlated with
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
8
age and religiosity, and with regards to measures of past experience, atheists and agnostics
tended to have negative views of God (or a hypothetical God; Exline, Park, Smith, & Carey,
2011). A study of an atheist population found that half of those classified as younger atheists had
lost one or both parents before the age of twenty, and a large percentage of atheists reported
being unhappy in childhood and adolescence (Vetter & Green, 1932).
Views of suffering and stressful life events
Given the relationship between conceptions of God and stressful life events, it is
important to investigate the research examining perspectives on suffering and the experience of
stressful life events. Positive psychological outlook is negatively associated with the
development of depression, anxiety, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder after the experience of
a traumatic event (Linley, Joseph, & Goodfellow, 2008). A study of Taiwanese cancer patients
found that positive views of suffering (e.g. regarding the suffering as a life challenge, seeking
wisdom from their experience of suffering) were commonly adopted in the face of their
challenge and helped them psychologically and spiritually cope with their cancer (Chio, Shih,
Chiou, Lin, Hsiao, & Chen, 2008). Joseph (2009) found that stressful life events (e.g. medical
problems, interpersonal experiences, natural disasters) are perceived by some as opportunities
for personal growth. He discusses the idea that people are intrinsically motivated to move in a
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
9
growthful direction and to search for a fulfilling life. Importantly, he notes that positive growth
after the experience of a traumatic event should not be viewed as a result of the event but as a
result of the mindset of the person who experienced the event. Moreover, he emphasizes the
clinical relevance of perspectives on suffering.
Current study
Although a number of studies have investigated the relationship between stressful life
events, religiosity, and emotional well-being, the relationship between conceptions of God and
well-being, and the impact of certain perspectives on suffering, the empirical literature on views
of suffering and their relationship with emotional well-being and stressful life events is very
scarce. The aim of the present study is to begin to fill this gap in the literature and offer a better
understanding of the ways in which people’s views of suffering relate to psychological concepts.
One of the most important aspects of religion and its role as a buffer between stressful
life events and emotional well-being is its ability to provide a mechanism by which to
understand suffering and a context in which to help cope with suffering. Thus, a person’s
specific view of suffering based on his or her religious (or non-religious) beliefs is likely to have
important implications on his or her coping ability and thus, emotional well-being.
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
10
The goals of this study were to gain a better psychometric understanding of the newly
developed Views of Suffering Scale (Hale-Smith, Park, & Edmondson, 2012), examine the
relationship between views of suffering and emotional well-being, and examine the relationship
between views of suffering and images of God (which will also investigate the validity of the
Views of Suffering Scale).
Hypotheses
It was hypothesized that views of suffering would act as moderators between stressful
life events and emotional well-being. Specifically, it was hypothesized that views of suffering
that allow for growth (i.e. “soul-building”) and constructive personal formation (i.e.
“overcoming”) or spiritual formation (i.e. “suffering God,” “encounter”) would buffer against
the experience of depression and anxiety in the presence of stressful life events. In addition, it
was hypothesized that views of suffering that offer negative explanations for suffering (i.e.
“retribution”) would be associated with higher levels of depression and anxiety. It was also
predicted that conceptions of suffering as potentially constructive (i.e. “soul-building,”
“overcoming,” “suffering God,” “encounter”) would be positively correlated with more
benevolent conceptions of God. Additionally, it was predicted that overall, the VOSS would
correlate with the Images of God Scale.
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
11
Method
Participants
The study consisted of 430 randomly selected students (173 males, 257 females) from
the University of Notre Dame. The mean age of the sample was 19.76 (range=17-23, standard
deviation=1.24). The sample was composed a fairly uniform distribution of freshman (27%),
sophomores (25%), juniors (24%), and seniors (24%). Among the sample, 74% reported belief
in God, 13% reported belief in a higher power of some kind, 8% was agnostic, and 5% of the
sample was atheist. The sample was primarily Catholic (77%), but also included other Christians
(11.5%), small percentages of Buddhist, Hindu, and Jewish believers (each about 0.2%), other
non-Christians (0.7%), and participants with no religious affiliation (11%).
Instruments
Views of Suffering. The Views of Suffering Scale (VOSS; Hale-Smith, Park, &
Edmondson, 2012) was used to assess participants’ views of suffering. This relatively new scale
was developed in order to assess people’s views of suffering based on prominent religious belief
systems. Two studies within their initial scale development paper addressed the reliability and
validity of the scale. In the first study, the researchers gathered a body of theodicy-related beliefs
based on a variety of North American denominational religious beliefs, beliefs unassociated with
any denomination, and non-theistic beliefs. Based on a large sample of responses from college
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
12
undergraduates, subscales were identified using exploratory factor analysis (see appendix for
subscales and their descriptions). Items for inclusion in the second study were selected based on
factor loadings greater than 0.5 and item communalities greater than 0.4. In the second study, a
new sample of students was tested to assess the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the
scale. Three models were tested, and Model 2 was found to have the best fit (!2(360) = 595.77, p
< .001; !2/df = 1.66; CFI = .95; RMSEA = .05, 90% CI [.04, .05]; AIC = 865.76). The finalized
subscale scores were all within the recommended Cronbach’s alpha range of .7 to .9, indicating
excellent reliability. To determine test-retest reliability, the researchers examined the correlation
coefficients between time 1 and time 2 of a 14-day interval. Cronbach’s alphas were used for
each subscale to determine the internal consistency, and the values were all within the
recommended range of .7 to .9. The researchers also demonstrated good construct validity. It
was found that belief in God was positively correlated (r > .57, p < .001) with all subscales that
had to do with traditional beliefs in God (i.e. limited knowledge, suffering God, overcoming,
providence, soul-building, encounter, divine responsibility). Belief in God was negatively
correlated (p < .001) with Unorthodox (r = -.23) and Random (r = -.25) beliefs. The researchers
also tested social desirability and found that it did not present a major concern for their scale’s
validity. Overall, the researchers demonstrated good reliability and validity for their scale. Ten
subscales (three items each) are used to make up the complete 30-item scale. For the scale,
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
13
participants were asked to rate their level of agreement with statements about God and/or
suffering (e.g. “individuals suffer because of their deeds in the past,” “suffering just happens
without purpose or underlying reason”) on a six-point Likert scale.
Well-being. Psychological well-being was assessed using the short-form of the
Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scales (DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995). Antony,
Bieling, Cox, Enns, and Swinson (1998) examined the psychometric properties of the DASS-21,
and demonstrated good reliability (Cronbach’s alphas of .94 for depression, .87 for anxiety, and
.91 for stress) and good concurrent validity with the original 42-item DASS as well as other
measures of similar constructs. Participants were asked to read each statement and indicate on a
four-point Likert scale how much the statement applied to them over the past week. Statement
examples include “I found it difficult to work up the initiative to do things” and “I felt I was
close to panic.” Higher scores indicated more frequent depression, stress, and anxiety
symptomology.
Image of God. Participants’ perception of God was assessed using a 36-item short-form
of the God Image Scales (GIS; Lawrence, 1997). The Coefficient Alpha Estimates of Reliability
were all above .8, indicating a reliable measure. In addition, the scales were highly correlated
with both intrinsic religious orientation and church attendance, indicating good validity.
Participants were told to select their level of agreement (i.e. strongly agree, agree, disagree,
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
14
strongly disagree) with statements about their understanding of God. The short-form
questionnaire included statements about the nature of God’s acceptance (e.g “I know I'm not
perfect, but God loves me anyway”), challenges (e.g. “God asks me to keep growing as a
person”), and presence (e.g. “God is always there for me”).
Stressful Life Events. Life stressors were measured using a college form of the Social
Readjustment Rating Scale (SRRS; Holmes & Rahe, 1967). The College Adjustment Rating
Scale (CARS; Zitzow, 1984) was adapted to assess college students’ stress levels within
academic, social, personal, and family-home environments. Participants were given a list of life
events (e.g. “death of a close friend,” “minor violations of the law”) and asked to check each
event that they had experienced in the past six months or were likely to experience within the
next six months. Each event was assigned a certain number of points, and each participant’s total
summed score indicated his or her level of stress.
Procedure
Participants for the study consisted of a random sample of Notre Dame students recruited
via e-mail. The students were asked if they would like to participate in a study about religiosity
and psychological outcomes for a five-dollar compensation. After completing an informed
consent form, participants were asked to give their age, gender, ethnicity, and other demographic
information similar to the information that was asked for by Hale-Smith, Park, and Edmondson
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
15
(2012) in their preliminary study on the VOSS. This information was assessed through multiplechoice questions about belief in God, religious affiliations, level of religious affiliation
involvement, and levels of religiosity and spirituality. Then participants were given the VOSS
(Hale-Smith, Park, & Edmondson, 2012), the DASS-21 (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995), the GIS
(Lawrence, 1997), the CARS (Zitzow, 1984). To prevent order effects, the order in which the
scales were given to the participants was randomized. Compensation was mailed to each
participant within one week of his or her completion of the survey.
Results
Preliminary data analyses
In the preliminary data analysis, a correlation matrix (see Table 1 in appendix) was
constructed with the scales, subscales, and demographic information. The matrix displays a
number of interesting findings. For example, each VOSS subscale was significantly correlated
with each of the God Images subscales. It was predicted that conceptions of suffering as
potentially constructive would be positively correlated with more benevolent conceptions of
God. As predicted, divine responsibility, encounter, overcoming, suffering God, soul-building,
and providence views were each positively related to perception of God as accepting,
challenging, and present. Conversely, unorthodox, random, limited knowledge, and retribution
were negatively related to images of God as accepting, challenging, and present. In addition, it
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
16
was hypothesized that views of suffering that offer negative explanations for suffering (i.e.
“retribution”) would be associated with higher levels of depression and anxiety. As expected, a
retributive view of suffering was significantly correlated with depression and anxiety.
Additionally, religiosity was significantly negatively correlated with unorthodox, random,
limited knowledge, and retribution views of suffering.
With regards to the VOSS, the Chronbach’s alphas indicated good internal consistency
for the unorthodox ("=0.87), random ("=0.71), encounter ("=0.71), limited knowledge
("=0.83), retribution ("=0.80), overcoming ("=0.79), suffering God ("=0.91), soul-building
("=0.91), and providence ("=0.81) subscales. The divine responsibility ("=0.57) alpha did not
fall within the preferred range of .7-.9, however, this may be a function of the small number of
items in the subscale.
Testing a priori hypotheses
It was hypothesized that views of suffering would act as moderators between stressful
life events and emotional well-being. Specifically, it was hypothesized that views of suffering
that allow for growth (i.e. “soul-building”) and constructive personal formation (i.e.
“overcoming”) or spiritual formation (i.e. “suffering God,” “encounter”) would buffer against
the experience of depression and anxiety in the presence of stressful life events. In order to test
this hypothesis, several linear regression models were fit to test the interaction of various
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
17
subscales of the VOSS and stressful life events. In zero of the eight cases was there a significant
interaction between the VOSS subscales, stressful life events, and depression or stress.
As indicated by the correlation matrix, there is a strong pattern of relationship between
the VOSS and the GIS. In order to provide a more definitive test of this relationship, a
confirmatory factor model was fit with latent factors for VOSS and GIS. The correlations
between the latent factors were examined. The relationship was statistically significant as
evidenced by the Chi-square value of 0.00 (df = 13), the RMSEA value of 0.10 (p = .00), the
SRMR value of 0.04, and the Comparative Fix Index value of 0.95. Table 2 (see appendix)
contains the factor loading. In the table, one can see that the observed variables all loaded
significantly onto the latent factors. The standard parameter estimate of .77 and the covariance
of 14.24 (p = .00) demonstrate a strong relationship between the VOSS and the GIS.
Post-hoc analyses
As highlighted by the correlation matrix, there is a significant relationship between the
stressful life events and a retribution view of suffering. This is indicates that a mediation model
may be more appropriate for testing the relationship between stressful life events, views of
suffering, and emotional well-being. A multiple mediator model was tested, and the retribution
view of suffering was marginally significant. The path from stressful life events to retribution
was significant with a parameter estimate of .004 (p = .014), and the path from retribution to
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
18
depression was significant with a parameter estimate of .138 (p = .026). The unstandardized
parameter estimate of the indirect effect was .001 (p = .098).
Discussion
The results provide interesting information with regards to the relationship between
views of suffering and emotional well-being. It was hypothesized that views of suffering that
allow for growth and constructive personal formation or spiritual formation would buffer against
the experience of depression and anxiety in the presence of stressful life events. A moderation
model was used to test these relationships and there were no significant results. It was also
hypothesized that views of suffering that offer negative explanations for suffering (i.e.
“retribution”) would be associated with higher levels of depression and anxiety. While the initial
analyses did not reveal the predicted moderation effect, post-hoc analyses revealed that a
retributive perspective on suffering mediated the relationship between stressful life events and
depression. Thus, there is a relationship between the constructs, but the theoretical
conceptualization of the relationship needs to be slightly adjusted in future investigations. The
significant relationship between the independent variable (stressful life events) and the mediator
(retribution view of suffering) indicates that there is a third explanatory variable that influences
the relationship between stressful life events and depression. This sheds light on the role that a
retribution perspective plays in the lives of those who experience stressful life events. The
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
19
retribution perspective is the understanding of suffering as occurring because God (or higher
power) actively punishes people for their wrongdoing. Thus, given its role as a mediator, people
who experience negative life events and have a retribution view of suffering are likely to
interpret the events as punishment from God, which likely leads to an increased risk of
depression. This finding relates well to the psychological literature, and previous research offers
insight into the possible mechanisms of the mediation relationship. Images of God as loving and
merciful are positively correlated with self-worth, whereas conceptions of God as cruel and
punishing are negatively correlated with self-worth (Francis, Gibson, & Robbins, 2001).
Additionally, perceptions of God as authoritarian and punishing are correlated with aggression
(Johnson, Li, Cohen, & Okun, 2013). Conceptions of God as abandoning are correlated with
poorer mental health (Phillips, Pargament, Lynn, & Crossley, 2004). Each of these findings
offers potential insight into the meditation relationship and these possible explanations deserve
further research.
It was also predicted that conceptions of suffering as potentially constructive would be
positively correlated with more benevolent conceptions of God. This hypothesis was supported
by the analyses, as both the correlation matrix and the confirmatory factor analysis demonstrate
that there is a significant relationship between VOSS and GIS. This finding is coherent with the
idea that one’s understanding of God’s (or a higher power’s) characteristics will inform his or
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
20
her personal understanding of the reasons for which suffering occurs in the world.
Limitations
A limitation of this study was that the sample was taken from a Catholic university. This
may have led to an unrepresentative sample, and future research should aim to select a sample
that is representative of the population in terms of religious beliefs. Another limitation of the
study involved the measurement of stress. Life event checklists (such as the CARS used in this
study) are limited in their ability to accurately and precisely measure the stressful nature of life
events; interview-based methods are considered to be a much more effective form of stress
measurement (Monroe, 2008). Because this study was limited by time constraints, a checklist
measure was used. However, future research should assess life stress using an interview-based
method in order to get a more thorough understanding of stressful life events.
Future Directions
Because research using the VOSS is fairly scarce due to the scale’s youth, future
research should focus on assessing the relationships between views of suffering and other
potentially related constructs. The scale’s novelty also calls for further exploration of its validity
and reliability. In addition, although much research has been done regarding religiosity and its
relationships with psychological constructs, most research on the relationship between wellbeing and religion has centered on behaviors (e.g. prayer), motivation (e.g. intrinsic religiosity),
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
21
or inner experience (e.g. transcendence), and much less research has focused on the specific
beliefs themselves (Park, 2012). Preliminary research on specific religious beliefs indicates that
they may be important for a number of psychological realms, including health, personality, and
social, because they may inform specific attributions and influence patient coping mechanisms
(Newton & McIntosh, 2009). Given the importance of beliefs for psychological realms, more
belief-related research should be conducted in the future. Specifically, use of the new Views of
Suffering Scale should be used to assess beliefs about the nature of suffering. Overall, this
research as well as previous research demonstrates the importance of religious beliefs for
psychological functioning. Thus, more research should be conducted in order to expand upon
our understanding of religious beliefs and how they operate in relation to psychological
functioning.
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
22
References
Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2009). Religiosity, subjective well-being, and depression in saudi children
and adolescents. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 12(8), 803-815.
Antony, M. M., Bieling, P. J., Cox, B. J., Enns, M. W., & Swinson, R. P. (1998). Psychometric
properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in
clinical groups and a community sample. Psychological Assessment, 10(2), 176-181.
doi:10.1037/1040-3590.10.2.176
Aukst-Margeti!, B., Jakovljevi!, M., Margeti!, B., Bi"!an, M., & #amija, M. (2005). Religiosity,
depression and pain in patients with breast cancer. General Hospital Psychiatry, 27(4),
250-255.
Avison, W. R., & Turner, R. J. (1988). Stressful life events and depressive symptoms:
Disaggregating the effects of acute stressors and chronic strains. Journal of Health and
Social Behavior, 29(3), 253-264. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/617569954?accountid=12874
Bjorck, J. P., & Thurman, J. W. (2007). Negative life events, patterns of positive and negative
religious coping, and psychological functioning. Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion, 46(2), 159-167. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2007.00348.x
Bryd, K. R., Hageman, A., & Isle, D. B. (2007). Intrinsic motivation and subjective well-being:
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
23
The unique contribution of intrinsic religious motivation. International Journal for the
Psychology of Religion, 17(2), 141-156.
Chio, C., Shih, F., Chiou, J., Lin, H., Hsiao, F., & Chen, Y. (2008). The lived experiences of
spiritual suffering and the healing process among taiwanese patients with terminal cancer.
Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17(6), 735-743. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.13652702.2006.01854.x
Cohen, A. B., Hall, D. E., Koenig, H. G., & Meador, K. G. (2005). Social versus individual
motivation: Implications for normative definitions of religious orientation. Personality and
Social Psychology Review, 9(1), 48-61.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress.
Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385-396. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/616924949?accountid=12874
Ellison, C. G., & George, L. K. (1994). Religious involvement, social ties, and social support in a
southeastern community. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 33(1), 46-61.
Exline, J. J., Park, C. L., Smyth, J. M., & Carey, M. P. (2011). Anger toward god: Socialcognitive predictors, prevalence, and links with adjustment to bereavement and cancer.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(1), 129-148.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021716x
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
24
Francis, L. J., Gibson, H. M., & Robbins, M. (2001). God images and self-worth among
adolescents in scotland. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 4(2), 103-108.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13674670110048327
Francis, L. J., Katz, Y. J., Yablon, Y., & Robbins, M. (2004). Religiosity, personality, and
happiness: A study among Israeli male undergraduates. Journal of Happiness Studies,
5(4), 315-333.
Green, R. M. (2005). In L. Jones (Ed.), Encyclopedia of religion (2nd ed. ed., pp. 9111-9121).
Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA.
Hale-Smith, A., Park, C. L., & Edmondson, D. (2012). Measuring beliefs about suffering:
Development of the views of suffering scale. Psychological Assessment, 24(4), 855-866.
Hartley, T. A., Violanti, J. M., Fekedulegn, D., Andrew, M. E., & Burchfiel, C. M. (2007).
Associations between major life events, traumatic incidents, and depression among
buffalo police officers. International Journal of Emergency Mental Health, 9(1), 25-35.
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/621747581?accountid=12874
Holmes, T. H., & Rahe, R. H. (1967). The Social Readjustment Rating Scale. Journal of
Psychosomatic Research, 11(2), 213-218. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/615522164?accountid=12874
Johansen, V. A., Eilertsen, D. E., Nordanger, D., & Weisaeth, L. (2013). Prevalence,
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
25
comorbidity and stability of post-traumatic stress disorder and anxiety and depression
symptoms after exposure to physical assault: An 8-year prospective longitudinal study.
Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 67(1), 69-80.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/08039488.2012.732112
Johnson, K. A., Li, Y. J., Cohen, A. B., & Okun, M. A. (2013). Friends in high places: The
influence of authoritarian and benevolent god-concepts on social attitudes and behaviors.
Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 5(1), 15-22.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030138
Joseph, S. (2009). Growth following adversity: Positive psychological perspectives on
posttraumatic stress. Psihologijske Teme, 18(2), 335-344. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/847286474?accountid=12874
Kasen, S., Chen, H., Sneed, J. R., & Cohen, P. (2010). Earlier stress exposure and subsequent
major depression in aging women. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 25(1),
91-99. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/742975767?accountid=12874
Koenig, H. G., George, L. K., & Siegler, I. C. (1988). The use of religion and other emotionregulating coping strategies among older adults. The Gerontologist, 28(3), 303-310.
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/617534727?accountid=12874
Krause, N. (2005). God-mediated control and psychological well-being in late life. Research on
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
26
Aging, 27(2), 136-164. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0164027504270475
Krause, N., Ellison, C. G., Shaw, B. A., Marcum, J. P., & Boardman, J. D. (2001). Church-based
social support and religious coping. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 40(4),
637-656.
Lawrence, R. T. (1997). Measuring the image of god: The god image inventory and the god
image scales. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 25(2), 214-226. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/619119040?accountid=12874
Levin, J. (2002). Is depressed affect a function of one's relationship with god?: Findings from a
study of primary care patients. International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine, 32(4),
379-393. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/3183-WPYV-3KYY-K3V7
Linley, P. A., Joseph, S., & Goodfellow, B. (2008). Positive changes in outlook following
trauma and their relationship to subsequent posttraumatic stress, depression, and anxiety.
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 27(8), 877-891.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2008.27.8.877
Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states:
Comparison of the depression anxiety stress scales (DASS) with the beck depression and
anxiety inventories. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33(3), 335-343. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/618681839?accountid=12874
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
27
Luo, W., Sun, Y., & Wang, B. (2007). Relationship among college students' life events, coping
styles and subjective well-being. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 15(4), 405-406,
429. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/621910788?accountid=12874
Macavei, B., & Miclea, M. (2008). An empirical investigation of the relationship between
religious beliefs, irrational beliefs, and negative emotions. Journal of Cognitive and
Behavioral Psychotherapies, 8(1), 1-16.
Mann, J. R., McKeown, R. E., Bacon, J., Vesselinov, R., & Bush, F. (2008). Religiosity,
spirituality and antenatal anxiety in southern U.S. women. Archives of Women's Mental
Health, 11(1), 19-26.
Miller, L., Warner, V., Wickramaratne, P., & Weissman, M. (1997). Religiosity and depression:
Ten-year follow-up of depressed mothers and offspring. Journal of the American Academy
of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 36(10), 1416-1425.
Mitchell, S. J., & Ronzio, C. R. (2011). Violence and other stressful life events as triggers of
depression and anxiety: What psychosocial resources protect african american mothers?
Maternal and Child Health Journal, 15(8), 1272-1281.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10995-010-0668-6
Monroe, S. M. (2008). Modern approaches to conceptualizing and measuring human life stress.
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
28
Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4, 33-52.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.4.022007.141207
Newton, A. T., & McIntosh, D. N. (2009). Associations of general religiousness and specific
religious beliefs with coping appraisals in response to hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 12(2), 129-146.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13674670802380400
Pargament, K.I. (1997). The Psychology of Religion and Coping: Theory, Research and
Practice. New York, Guilford.
Pargament, K. I., Ensing, D. S., Falgout, K., Olsen, H., Reilly, B., Haitsma, K., & Warren, R.
(1990). God help me: I. religious coping efforts as predictors of the outcomes to
significant negative life events. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18(6), 793824. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/617939488?accountid=12874
Park, C. L. (2012). Attending to the construct of beliefs in research on religion/spirituality and
health: Commentary on ‘beyond belief’. Journal of Health Psychology, 17(7), 969-973.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1359105312448868
Patrick, J. H., & Kinney, J. M. (2003). Why believe? the effects of religious beliefs on emotional
well being. Journal of Religious Gerontology, 14(2-3), 153-170.
Peteet, J. R. (2001). Putting suffering into perspective: Implications of the patient's world view.
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
29
Journal of Psychotherapy Practice & Research, 10(3), 187-192. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/619624259?accountid=12874s
Phillips, Russell E., I.,II, Pargament, K. I., Lynn, Q. K., & Crossley, C. D. (2004). Self-directing
religious coping: A deistic god, abandoning god, or no god at all? Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, 43(3), 409-418. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.14685906.2004.00243.x
Rosmarin, D. H., Bigda-Peyton, J., Kertz, S. J., Smith, N., Rauch, S. L., & Björgvinsson, T.
(2013). A test of faith in god and treatment: The relationship of belief in god to
psychiatric treatment outcomes. Journal of Affective Disorders, 146(3), 441-446.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2012.08.030
Samuels-Dennis, J. (2006). Relationship among employment status, stressful life events, and
depression in single mothers. CJNR: Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 38(1), 5980. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/621406781?accountid=12874
Saunders C (ed): The Management of Terminal Illness. Chicago, Yearbook Medical
Publishers, 1978.
Smith, T. B., McCullough, M. E., & Poll, J. (2003). Religiousness and depression: Evidence for
a main effect and the moderating influence of stressful life events. Psychological Bulletin,
129(4), 614-636. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.614
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
30
Strawbridge, W. J., Shema, S. J., Cohen, R. D., & Kaplan, G. A. (2001). Religious attendance
increases survival by improving and maintaining good health behaviors, mental health, and
social relationships. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 23(1), 68-74.
Vetter GB, Green M (1932-1933). Personality and group factors in the making of atheists. J
Abnorm Soc Psychology. 27, 179–194.
Walker, D. F., Gorsuch, R. L., & Tan, S. (2005). Therapists' use of religious and spiritual
interventions in christian counseling: A preliminary report. Counseling and Values, 49(2),
107-119.
Young, J. S., Cashwell, C. S., & Shcherbakova, J. (2000). The moderating relationship of
spirituality on negative life events and psychological adjustment. Counseling and Values,
45(1), 49-57. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/619450737?accountid=12874
Zitzow, D. (1984). The college adjustment rating scale. Journal of College Student Personnel,
25(2), 160-164. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/616944654?accountid=12874
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
31
Appendix
Subscale items in the Views of Suffering Scale from Hale-Smith, Park, & Edmondson (2012)
1. Divine Responsibility: Free Will perspectives
2. Suffering God: beliefs about God suffering with people
3. Overcoming: beliefs about overcoming suffering through prayer and/or faith
4. Encounter: beliefs about suffering as a divine encounter
5. Soul-Building: beliefs about suffering as a divinely intended personal growth experience
6. Providence: beliefs about God's control over suffering
7. Unorthodox: unorthodox theistic views
8. Limited Knowledge: Open Theistic views reflecting God's limited foreknowledge
9. Retribution: beliefs related to suffering as retribution or karma
10. Random: beliefs about suffering as being random or purposeless!
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
32
Table 1. Correlation Matrix
1
Views of
Suffering
1. Unorthodox
2. Divine
Responsibility
3. Random
4. Encounter
5. Limited
Knowledge
6. Retribution
7. Overcoming
8. Suffering
God
9. SoulBuilding
10. Providence
11. College
Adjustment
Rating Scale
God Image
Scales
12. Acceptance
13. Challenge
14. Presence
DASS-21
15. Stress
16. Depression
17. Anxiety
18. Religiosity
19. Spirituality
20. Belief in God
21. Level of
religious
involvement
22. Age
Mean
SD
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
—
–.19
—
.26
–.22
–.11
.62
—
–.12
—
.46
–.02
.22
.05
—
.38
–.15
.05
.56
–.07
–.18
–.06
.60
.28
.16
––
.16
—
–.39
.56
–.12
.68
.03
–.16
.55
—
–.14
.59
–.21
.57
.06
.08
.49
.45
—
–.04
.48
–.22
.50
.03
.11
.50
.38
.62
—
.14
.05
–.03
.03
.08
.12
.01
.03
.04
.08
—
–.51
–.47
–.45
.40
.52
.49
–.12
–.21
–.27
.41
.56
.56
–.18
–.16
–.10
–.31
–.23
–.14
.34
.42
.51
.53
.62
.62
.28
.45
.36
.19
.32
.36
–.14
–.06
–.08
—
.71
.70
—
.75
––
.06
.14
.19
–.39
–.22
–.38
.07
.08
.03
.49
.36
.53
.02
.05
.00
–.19
–.19
–.17
.11
.03
.03
.55
.41
.64
–.01
.03
.14
–.13
–.10
.00
.01
.14
.18
–.17
–.05
–.13
.03
.00
.01
.48
.27
.57
.06
–.02
–.06
.57
.42
.67
.04
.03
–.04
.36
.24
.45
.11
.10
.05
.36
.22
.41
.21
.24
.20
.03
.07
–.02
–.19
–.28
–.24
.48
.37
.60
–.03
–.11
–.12
.59
.51
.66
–.06
–.14
–.10
.62
.50
.73
—
.52
.51
.05
.05
.03
—
.57
.00
.00
–.02
—
–.06
.02
–.02
––
.52
.70
––
.47
—
–.36
.42
–.15
.54
–.15
–.17
.43
.55
.31
.30
.06
.45
.54
.56
.06
.01
–.08
.78
.51
–.61
—
.02
5.05
2.92
–.04
11.12
3.34
.14
10.10
3.41
–.06
11.28
3.70
–.03
5.83
2.94
.01
6.89
3.32
–.08
9.20
3.58
–.04
11.58
4.20
–.10
11.47
4.11
–.11
8.76
3.84
–.19
183.69
101.98
.01
38.67
6.59
–.06
38.13
5.89
–.07
33.30
8.20
.02
7.22
4.39
–.01
3.84
4.12
.00
2.23
2.98
–.11
2.60
0.92
.03
2.86
0.87
.09
2.00
1.15
–.01
5.35
2.77
Note: All correlations of magnitude greater than or equal to .1 are significant at p < .05.
!
15
––
19.76
1.24
VIEWS OF SUFFERING
33
Table 2. Factor loading for VOSS and GIS
Standard
Error
Z-value
P(>|z|)
1.00
1.24
0.99
1.34
0.10
0.08
0.10
12.67
12.39
12.93
.00
.00
.00
1.00
0.72
0.72
14.24
.77
0.03
0.04
1.81
0.03
22.89
19.76
7.86
26.16
.00
.00
.00
.00
Estimate
Latent Variables:
Views of Suffering
Soul-Building
Encounter
Overcoming
Suffering God
God Image
Presence
Challenge
Acceptance
Covariance:
Standardized Solution: