Mental Health Dynamics of Interfaith Spirituality in Believers and Non-Believers: The Two Circuit Pathways Model of Coping with Adversities: Interfaith Spirituality and Will-to Exist, Live and Survive

Abstract

Objective: The study was designed to examine the differential effects of spirituality on the mental health of believers and non-believers coping with adversities. Method: Spirituality, "will to exist live and survive (WTELS)", cumulative traumas, perceived posttraumatic growth, psychopathology, existential anxieties, self-esteem, and reappraisal were measured in two samples of main believers (Egypt, Turkey, and Kuwait, N = 1210) and mostly nonbelievers (UK, N = 178). The study used path analysis supplemented by PROCESS macro and multigroup invariance to analyze the data. Results: identified two positive invariant coping paths for believers, one through WTELS and the other through spirituality. A similar positive path of WTELS, but not spirituality, was found in the non-believers. Conclusion: While believers and non-believers utilize their WTELS pathway to cope with adversities, the believers utilize the additional pathway of spirituality. The nonbelievers still utilize self-transcendence strategies of non-theistic or secular spirituality. The results have conceptual and clinical implications for developing differential prevention and intervention strategies.

Coping with COVID-19 continuous complex stressors: The “will-to-exist-live, and survive” and perfectionistic striving.

“…Its indirect effects were mediated by its effects on lower executive function deficits (Kira, Ayna, et al, 2021). Another study identified two circuit pathways in coping with cumulative adversities in believers and nonbelievers: Interfaith spirituality and WTELS, with WTELS, was the main coping pathway for nonbelievers compared to those who believe in a higher power (Kira, Özcan, et al, 2021).…”

Polish Adaptation and Psychometric Properties of the Long- and Short-Form Interfaith Spirituality Scale

“…This state of affairs is generating widespread interest in the construct among practitioners and researchers, and, as a result, is generating the need to develop accurate and comprehensive measures of spirituality. Unfortunately, most of the existing tools have been limited to specific belief systems and cannot be applied to broader communities [ 5 ]. In such a situation, we decided to conduct a Polish adaptation of the IFS, which is one of the first scales for assessing spirituality in an interfaith paradigm [ 46 ].…”

“…Religiosity manifests itself in external and institutional rituals of devotion or organised worship, while spirituality focuses more on the inner state of being and places a stronger emphasis on the individual and personal, as well as subjectively signifying the existential [ 3 , 4 ]. Such a subtle distinction is particularly important in scholarly discourse on the potential existence of a moderating relationship between spirituality and religion, since a person can simultaneously be religious and spiritual in their own way [ 5 ]. This indistinct overlap between religion and spirituality also makes it difficult to develop a precise and comprehensive measure of spirituality.…”

“…Such heuristics are created by people who believe in the existence of a sacred power, regardless of their different belief systems. The aforementioned heuristics are based on beliefs about the fundamental nature of human existence and involve a belief in a sacred higher power and the ability to self-transcend, i.e., to transcend oneself and be open to the world, namely the people one can approach and the senses it can fulfil [ 5 ]. Self-transcendence is “a constitutive characteristic of being human that [is] always point [ed], and is directed, to something other than itself.…”

Are torture survivors more resilient and develop higher PTG, than nontortured refugees?: The role of will to exist, live, and survive: A replication and extension.

“…Each question is scored from 0 to 5. The measure and its different versions proved to have robust psychometrics (e.g., Kira, Shuwiekh, et al, 2020; Kira, Özcan et al, 2021; Kira et al, 2022). Confirmatory factor analysis in previous data found three first-order factors and one second-order factor.…”