Perceived Religious Pressures as an Antecedent to Self-Reported Religious/Spiritual Development and Well-Being for Christians

Abstract

Past research has confirmed the utility of environmental variables, and perceptions of religious pressure (RP) in particular, in predicting faith maturity and religious schema scores for participants from Christian environments. Whether environmental variables predict religious development and whether religious development, in turn, leads to greater well-being for individuals from broader environments remain unknown. Utilizing participants from both Christian and non-Christian environments, the current study measures religious development variables that were constructed based on self-determination theory (SDT). We used structural equation modeling (SEM) to evaluate our hypothesis that religious pressures RP and autonomy supportive environment (ASE) are antecedents to religious/spiritual relatedness (R/S-R) and self-mastery (R/S-S), which in turn lead to greater well-being, as determined by the presence of meaning in life (MIL). Results indicate that both environmental variables of RP and ASE predicted higher scores on religious/spiritual relatedness and self-mastery, and this led to self-reports of greater well-being for both samples. Therefore, members of the broader religious environment of Christianity responded to RP similarly, implying that certain commonalities may shape Christians’ cognitions around obedience to God and authority across settings, although this result should be interpreted with caution. Further implications of these findings are explored and recommendations for future research provided.

Religious Doubts and the Problem with Religious Pressures for Christian Students

“…As a measure of perceived consequences, religious pressures by definition measure contingencies and, according to SDT, constitute controllers that would undermine internalization. Contrary to what SDT predicts, recent research with Christian students linked greater religious pressures with higher scores on faith maturity, certain religious schemas, and two variables specifically constructed based on SDT concepts: spiritual/religious relatedness and self-mastery [1,9,10,13]. It is possible that Christian students in these studies had already internalized the religious values and behaviors to which they were being pressured to adhere, though some open-ended responses suggested otherwise [9,10].…”

“…The results of these studies have confirmed that support for autonomy, measured in higher education environments, unwaveringly leads to Christian religious development, an unsurprising finding given that environmental support for autonomy has positively predicted development in a myriad of studies measuring learning, parenting, and religiosity [2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. Surprisingly, this same bed of educational and religiosity research also found that perceptions of religious pressures in the broader environment, which would seem to act as a controller, positively predicts religious development for many Christian students as well [1,9,10]. The finding that a presumed controller predicts higher scores on religious development variables appears to contradict the empirically validated tenets of Self-Determination Theory (SDT), which have repeatedly found controllers to undermine development [2][3][4]6,11].…”

“…In addition to subjective well-being, prior research has found environmental factors to significantly influence religious development [1,9,10]. Some religious environments reinforce the notion that doubt about God is an enemy of faith, dangerous, and potentially destructive [15].…”

“…Recent educational and religiosity research has begun investigating opportunities for improving environmental and social factors in religious development for Christian students [1]. The results of these studies have confirmed that support for autonomy, measured in higher education environments, unwaveringly leads to Christian religious development, an unsurprising finding given that environmental support for autonomy has positively predicted development in a myriad of studies measuring learning, parenting, and religiosity [2][3][4][5][6][7][8].…”

“…Those who do not have support within their social contexts to help facilitate their questions and doubts around the grief loss are thought to be less likely to experience growth [35]. Moreover, when the uncomfortable state of having religious doubt is not reinforced through environmental support, Christians may not be able to tolerate the experience alone and retreat from the process altogether [1]. According to research, retreating from doubt may unwittingly result in Christians' failure to progress in their own religious development [15,25].…”