Islam, Iman, and Ihsan: The Role of Religiosity on Quality of Life and Mental Health of Muslim Undergraduate Students in Islamic University

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The current study examines the relationships between religiosity, quality of life, and positive mental health among Muslim students in an Islamic university in Malaysia. This study uses the operational definition of religiosity based on Hadith Jibril, which defined Islam into three elements: Islam, Iman, and Ihsan. Materials and Methods: One hundred and seventy-nine students participated in this cross-sectional study. Three measures were used to measure religiosity (IIUM Religiosity Scale), quality of life (WHO Quality of Life-BREF Scale), and positive mental health (Positive Mental Health Scale). Results: Significant relationships between religiosity, quality of life, and positive mental health were found. Further analysis found that i) Ihsan highly predicts the physical and psychological domains of quality of life and mental health; ii) Islam shows the highest prediction on social-based quality of life, and iii) Iman highly predicts the environmental-based quality of life. Conclusion: Religiosity plays a vital role in predicting an individual’s quality of life and mental health. These findings provide hope for future research and utilisation of Islamic elements as an intervention for psychological wellbeing among students.

Religiosity and its Predispositions among Post-Secondary Students in Malaysia: A Systematic Review

“…Additionally, this review also found confidence to the utility of religiosity specific to health services; where evidence was found to support the significance of Islamic input in improving the knowledge, skill, and attitude of future doctors who serves community within the same belief system (Musa et al, 2022). Moreover, Islamic elements was also concluded to be beneficial when integrated into psychological intervention and therapy as noted in Tajul Ariffin et al (2022); Misran et al (2021) studies.…”

“…Evidently, multiple studies included in this review suggested caution especially when generalizing information (Ariffin et al, 2022;Foo et al, 2014;Francis et al, 2019;Che Rahimi et al, 2021;Misran et al, 2021;Zakaria et al, 2020;Mohammadi et al, 2020;Katmon et al, 2020;Sallam et al, 2018; which could largely be accounted by the sampling strategies employed by the studies. In this regard, Musa et al (2022) highlighted the necessity to conduct studies in various context, such as comparative studies between different groups, such as religious and non-religious groups (Mokhtar & Bahari, 2021), as well as between Gen-Y and/or Gen-X groups (Zakaria et al, 2020).…”

“…Summarily, the studies included in this review highlighted the varied ways in which religiosity and/or other specific aspects of religiosity affects post-secondary students which could benefit mental health professionals (Foo et al, 2014;Che Rahimi et al, 2014), health services (Misran et al, 2021), university administration (Abdul Rashid et al, 2021;Mohammadi et al, 2020;Ishak et al, 2013;Katmon et al, 2020;Ismail & Omar, 2017;Achour et al, 2017), clinicians (Abdul Rashid et al, 2021), parents (Abdul Rashid et al, 2021, policymakers (Abdul Rashid et al, 2021;Mohammadi et al, 2020;Katmon et al, 2020), decision makers (Abdul Rashid et al, 2021), social media marketing communicators (Mokhtar & Bahari, 2021;Zakaria et al, 2020), prospective employers (Singh et al, 2020), governments, schools, students themselves (Mohammadi et al, 2020;Ariffin et al, 2022), as well as other actors in students' social ecologies (Hamzah et al, 2014).…”