This article was downloaded by: [Moskow State Univ Bibliote] On: 08 December 2013, At: 07:11 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Mental Health, Religion & Culture Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cmhr20 Religiosity and its association with positive and negative emotions among college students from Algeria Ahmed M. Abdel-Khalek a & Farida Naceur a a Kuwait University, Kuwait and Baskara University , Algeria Published online: 14 Feb 2007. To cite this article: Ahmed M. Abdel-Khalek & Farida Naceur (2007) Religiosity and its association with positive and negative emotions among college students from Algeria, Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 10:2, 159-170, DOI: 10.1080/13694670500497197 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13694670500497197 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms- and-conditions
Transcript
This article was downloaded by: [Moskow State Univ Bibliote]On: 08 December 2013, At: 07:11Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Mental Health, Religion & CulturePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cmhr20
Religiosity and its association withpositive and negative emotions amongcollege students from AlgeriaAhmed M. Abdel-Khalek a & Farida Naceur aa Kuwait University, Kuwait and Baskara University , AlgeriaPublished online: 14 Feb 2007.
To cite this article: Ahmed M. Abdel-Khalek & Farida Naceur (2007) Religiosity and its associationwith positive and negative emotions among college students from Algeria, Mental Health, Religion& Culture, 10:2, 159-170, DOI: 10.1080/13694670500497197
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13694670500497197
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Religiosity and its association with positiveand negative emotions among college studentsfrom Algeria
AHMED M. ABDEL-KHALEK & FARIDA NACEUR
Kuwait University, Kuwait and Baskara University, Algeria
AbstractTo explore the associations between religiosity and both positive and negative emotionsand traits, a sample of 244 volunteer Muslim college students from Algeria was recruited.The students responded to five self-rating scales to assess religiosity, physical health,mental health, happiness, and satisfaction with life, in addition to the Arabic Scaleof Optimism and Pessimism, and the Kuwait University Anxiety Scale. Religiosityand satisfaction with life were higher among women than men. Among men, reli-giosity was significantly correlated only with mental health. However, in women,religiosity was significantly and positively correlated with physical health, mental health,happiness, satisfaction with life, and optimism, whereas religiosity correlated negativelywith both anxiety and pessimism. Factor analysis yielded a single bipolar factorlabelled positive emotions and religiosity vs. neurotic tendency (anxiety and pessimism)in women. Two orthogonal factors were extracted in men: positive vs. negative traitsof mental health, and religiosity. The present results are compatible with the widerliterature on the association between religion and positive variables among a Muslimcontext.
Introduction
A growing number of research papers and books have examined the differentaspects of psychology of religion (see, e.g., Pargament, 1997; Wulff, 1997).Under this heading, two main research trends, among others, are prominent.The first trend aims to explore the associations between religiosity and theso-called positive emotions and traits: mental and physical health, emotional
Correspondence: Ahmed M. Abdel-Khalek, Department of Psychology, College of SocialSciences, Kuwait University, PO Box 68168 Kaifan, Code No. 71962, Kuwait.E-mail: [email protected]
On the other hand, the purpose of the second trend is to examine therelationships between religiosity and psychopathology, or the so-called ‘‘negativeemotions’’ (see, e.g., Al-Issa, 2000; Thorson, 1998). In general, the relationshipbetween religious feeling and both positive and negative emotions has beenthe subject of manifold studies, from over a century ago until recently.
Despite the multitude of studies, the relationship between religiosity andboth positive and negative emotions remains an intriguing area of investigation.Many studies have provided evidence that religious and committed persons(but not extremists) tend to enjoy better physical and mental health (Koenig,1997; Larson & Larson, 1994; Richards & Bergin, 1997). A number ofresearch projects have found that ‘‘religion may suppress symptoms andresocialize the individual, encouraging more conventional and socially acceptableforms of thought and behavior. It may provide sources for the development ofbroader perspectives and the fuller realization of individual capabilities’’ (Wulff,1997, p. 244). Wulff added that, ‘‘intrinsic religious orientation has proved tobe positively associated with life satisfaction, psychological adjustment, self-control, better personality functioning, self-esteem, and purpose-in-life,while negative association with intrinsic orientation has been found for anxiety,death anxiety, neuroticism, depression, impulsivity etc.’’ (p. 248). Followinga similar pattern, there has been a significant negative correlation betweenanxiety and religiosity among a large sample (N¼ 2453) of Kuwaiti adolescents(Abdel-Khalek, 2002). However, the literature in this area has yieldedmixed results.
To take happiness as a prominent component in positive emotions, theresults of studies on its relation with religiosity have been equivocal. Eightsamples have demonstrated a significant positive association between happinessand attitude toward Christianity (for a review, see Lewis, 2002; compare also:Argyle, 1986; French & Joseph, 1999; Myers & Diener, 1995). Similarly, Francis,Jones and Wilcox (2000) found a small positive correlation between happinessand religiosity among three samples of adolescents, young adults, and adultsin later life. Using 1000 Pakistani Muslims, Suhail and Chaudhry (2004) foundthat religious affiliation was among the better predictors of subjective well-being.
In other respects, different samples have demonstrated no significant associa-tion between happiness and attitude toward Christianity (Lewis, 2002; Lewis,Maltby, & Burkinshaw, 2000; Lewis, Lanigan, Joseph, & de Fockert, 1997).The same result applied to German students (Francis, Ziebertz, & Lewis, 2003).More recently, Lewis, Maltby and Day (2005) found no significant associationbetween religiosity scores and happiness scores among UK adults. However,both higher intrinsic orientation scores and positive religious coping weresignificantly associated with higher scores on happiness scale. The authorssuggested that when religiosity is related to happiness, it is related to psychologicalwell-being (not to subjective well-being), which is thought to reflect humandevelopment, positive functioning, and existential life challenges.
160 Ahmed M. Abdel-Khalek & Farida Naceur
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
07:
11 0
8 D
ecem
ber
2013
Numerous studies have found a small, positive association between religiosityand satisfaction with life. Diener and Clifton (2002), using broad probabilitysamples, found significant but small correlations between religiosity andsatisfaction with life. They commented on these small correlations as follows:‘‘These correlations should not surprise us when we realize the diversemotivations and outcomes that religion might serve. A person might becomereligious to conform, to cope with problems, or to become enlightened, and thesevarying motives might have very different concomitants in terms of satisfac-tion with life’’ (p. 208). Likewise, Eungi Kim (2003) indicated that Koreanswith religious faith generally have a higher level of satisfaction than thosewithout religious faith with respect to such quality-of-life indicators as incomelevel, interpersonal relationships, job satisfaction, marital life, and health.Similarly, Fife (2005) found a significant relationship between salience ofreligious commitment and life satisfaction for European Americans, but notAfrican Americans.
In contrast to the aforementioned results, Lewis, Joseph and Noble (1996)did not find any evidence for association between religiosity and life satisfactionamong a sample of undergraduate students in Northern Ireland. In a similar vein,Dorahy et al. (1998) found no significant association between religiosity andlife satisfaction for women in four samples of university students fromGhana, Nigeria, Northern Ireland, and Swaziland. However, there was asignificant association between religiosity and life satisfaction for men in threeof the four samples.
As for the association between religiosity and mental health, Hackneyand Sanders (2003) carried out a meta-analysis of recent studies. They included35 studies, and the final data set consisted of 264 correlations. An overallrelationship was found between religiosity and mental health across all condi-tions (r¼ 0.10). This indicates that religiosity may be said to have a salutaryrelationship with psychological adjustment. More recently, Peltzer (2005) useda large sample of black students in South Africa. He found that some religiousvariables were positively associated with mental health, while others wereinversely or not related.
Regarding the relationship between religiosity and physical health, the evidencesupporting this association has increased substantially in the recent decades(Hill & Pargament, 2003). Moreover, in healthy participants, there is a strong,consistent, prospective, and often graded reduction in risk of mortality inchurch/service attenders. This reduction is approximately 25% after adjustmentfor cofounders. Religiosity or spirituality protects against cardiovascular disease,largely mediated by the healthy lifestyle it encourages (Powell, Shahabi, &Thoresen, 2003). Again, negative results have been reached: Wink and Dillon(2001) stated that there was no evidence for a direct relationship betweenreligiosity and physical health.
The literature on the association between religiosity and anxiety has yieldedmixed results. On the one hand, Davis, Kerr and Kurpius (2003) found thatthe higher the spiritual well-being, existential well-being, religious well-being,
Religiosity and emotions 161
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
07:
11 0
8 D
ecem
ber
2013
and intrinsic religious orientation were among males, the lower the anxiety.Fatimah El-Jamil (2003) found that higher religiosity served as a protection againstdepression and anxiety in Lebanese and American participants. In a similar vein,Harris, Schoneman and Carrera (2002) indicated a significant negative relation-ship between religiosity and trait anxiety. On the other hand, a number of studiesindicated non-significant association between religiosity and anxiety (Francis &Jackson, 2003), social anxiety (Storch, Storch, & Adams, 2002), and psychologicaldistress in general (O’Connor, Cobb, & O’Connor, 2003).
An emerging body of research indicates that religiosity is positively associatedwith optimism and negatively with pessimism (Ai, Peterson, & Huang, 2003;Rudski, 2004; Salsman, Brown, Brechting, & Carlson, 2005). Mattis, Fontenot,Hatcher-Kay, Grayman and Beale (2004) studied 307 African Americans. Theyfound that age, subjective spirituality, and a positive relationship with God werepositive independent predictors of optimism. A negative relationship with God wasa positive predictor of pessimism. Subjective religiosity and early and currentorganizational religious involvement did not predict optimism or pessimism.However, Moller and Reimann (2004) indicated that optimistic perception ofone’s own future was unrelated to any of the religious well-being items.
What is the reason(s) for these conflicting findings? There are differences on thesamples, cultures, assessment instruments, as well as the definition of constructs,especially religiosity. Religion is a multifaceted construct, incorporating cognitive,emotional, motivational, and behavioral aspects. It is possible that differentaspects of religiosity are differentially related to mental health. Moreover someforms of religiosity affect some forms of mental health more strongly than othercombinations of conceptualizations (Hackney & Sanders, 2003).
It is important to define the terminology as used in the current investigation.Religiosity is operationalized in terms of the self-rating of the respondent.Furthermore, the positive emotions and traits mean the self-rating of theparticipant of their physical and mental health, happiness, satisfaction with life,as well as their responses to a questionnaire of optimism. Finally, it meant withnegative emotions and traits, the participant’s responses to two questionnaires ofpessimism and anxiety.
Therefore, the aim of the present study was to explore the association betweenreligiosity and both positive and negative emotions and traits among a sampleof Algerian college students.
Algeria is an Arabic, North African, Mediterranean country. It was occupiedby France from 1848. After its independence in 1962, Algeria endured a difficultpolitical period during the last decade; a bloody and murderous period due to therise of terrorism. Nowadays, the security is gradually assured by the quasi-totalityof the territory. The Algerian population today has more than 30 millioninhabitants; however, the rate of unemployment is very high, especially amongthe young. The recently elected population government is facing manyother urgent problems: the question of water supply, delays accumulated in thenew information technologies, the slow evolution of the financial and bankingsystem, and others associated with modern society.
162 Ahmed M. Abdel-Khalek & Farida Naceur
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
07:
11 0
8 D
ecem
ber
2013
What is unique about the present study? By and large, psychological researchamong Algerian people is scarce. Moreover, all the participants in the currentinvestigation are Muslims, and few studies in the present field were carried outamong Muslim samples. The greater portion of studies on the associationbetween religiosity and subjective well-being has been conducted with WesternJudeo-Christian participants. Finally, the present study used alternate measuresof psychological variables than those traditionally employed in the field.
Method
Participants
A sample of 244 (109 men and 135 women) volunteer Algerian college students,enrolled in different colleges, was recruited. All of them were Muslims. Their agesranged from 17 to 35. The mean age for men was 21.96 (SD ¼ 3.02), and thatfor women was 20.81 (SD¼ 2.66) (t¼ 3.07, p< 0.002).
Scales
Self-rating scales. Five separate self-rating scales were used to assess religiosity,physical health, mental health, happiness, and satisfaction with life. These areas follows:
(1) What is your level of religiosity in general?(2) What is your estimation of your physical health is general?(3) What is your estimation of your mental health in general?(4) To what degree do you feel happy in general?(5) To what degree do you feel satisfied with your life in general?
Each question was followed by a string of numbers from 0 to 10. The researchparticipants were requested (a) to respond according to their global estimationand general feeling (not their present states); (b) to know that the zero is theminimum, and that 10 is the maximum score; and (c) to circle a number whichseems to them to accurately describe the actual feelings. A high score denotes therating of the trait or the attribute to a high degree.
In previous preliminary studies carried out by the first author, a graphic devicecontaining an 11-point scale, anchored by 0 (No), to 10 (highest degree), inwhich 5 was the average point on the scale was used. However, it was found thatwriting the anchors as No, Average, and the Highest degrees vis-a-vis 0, 5, and 10,respectively, may imply probable response styles. Foremost among them is thecentral tendency, i.e., numerous persons, more than expected, endorse number 5.Therefore, it was found that writing the series of numbers (from 0 to 10) withoutanchors, but including a general instruction, was a good plan. Moreover, on thebasis of the compatible response alternatives, the present design permits thecomparison between the five rating scales, despite their different content.
Religiosity and emotions 163
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
07:
11 0
8 D
ecem
ber
2013
The Arabic Scale of Optimism and Pessimism (ASOP; Abdel-Khalek, 1996,1998). The author of the ASOP decided, from the beginning, to constructtwo separate scales for optimism and pessimism. As Dember (2001) states,‘‘having a separate measure of each construct turns out to be not onlypsychometrically indicated, because optimism and pessimism scores are usuallyonly moderately correlated, but also to offer additional predictive use becausethe two measures often correlate differentially with other variables’’ (p. 295).The ASOP consists of two subscales in comparable Arabic and English formsto assess optimism and pessimism (Abdel-Khalek & Lester, 2006). Each subscalecontains 15 statements to be answered on a 5-point Likert-type intensity scaleas follows: 1: No, 2: A little, 3: Moderate, 4: Much, and 5: Very much. The totalscore can range from 15 to 75 for each subscale, with high scores denotinghigh optimism/or pessimism. Cronbach’s alpha reliabilities were 0.92, 0.93, and0.93 for optimism, and 0.91, 0.95, and 0.94 for pessimism among men, women,and the combined sample of Kuwaiti undergraduates, respectively. Criterion-related validity against scores on the Life Orientation Test by Scheier andCarver (1985) for the total scores on the two scales of optimism and pessimismwere þ0.78, and �0.69 (df¼ 110, p< 0.0001), respectively, denoting goodconvergent and divergent validity for the two subscales.
The Kuwait University Anxiety Scale (KUAS; Abdel-Khalek, 2000, 2003, 2004).This consists of 20 brief statements. The scale has three comparable Arabic,English, and Spanish versions. Each statement is answered on a 4-point intensityscale, anchored as follows: 1, Rarely and 4, Always. In previous research,reliabilities of the scale ranged from 0.88 to 0.92 (alpha) and between 0.70 and0.93 (test–retest), denoting good internal consistency and stability. The criterion-related validity of the scale ranged between 0.70 and 0.88 (five criteria), whilethe loadings of the scale on a general factor of anxiety were 0.93 and 0.95 in twofactor analyses, demonstrating the scale’s criterion-related and factorial validity.Discriminant validity of the scale has also been demonstrated. Factor analysisof the scale items yielded three factors labelled Cognitive/Affective, Subjective,and Somatic anxiety. The scale has displayed good psychometric properties ina large Kuwaiti sample of undergraduates, as well as good internal consistencyin 10 Arab countries (Alansari, 2002, 2004), in Spanish samples (Abdel-Khalek,Tomas-Sabado, & Gomez-Benito, 2004), in Saudi and Syrian samples (Abdel-Khalek & Rudwan, 2001; Abdel-Khalek & Al-Damaty, 2003), and Americansamples (Abdel-Khalek & Lester, 2003).
Procedure
The five self-rating scales along with the ASOP and KUAS in Arabic wereadministered anonymously to students during group testing sessions in theirclassrooms. Each session contained 30–40 students. The return rate was 100%.SPSS (1990) was used for the statistical analysis of the data.
164 Ahmed M. Abdel-Khalek & Farida Naceur
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
07:
11 0
8 D
ecem
ber
2013
Results
Table I presents the descriptive statistics of the self-rating scales and question-naires among men and women. Inspection of this table reveals that the self-ratingof both religiosity and satisfaction with life among women was significantly higherthan among their men counterparts.
Table II shows the Pearson inter-correlations between the scales. It isimportant to examine the religiosity self-rating scale correlates. As can be seenfrom this table, religiosity was significantly and positively correlated with mentalhealth in men. However, in women, religiosity was significantly correlated with allthe variables, i.e., physical health, mental health, happiness, satisfaction with life,and optimism (positive), whereas the correlations between religiosity and bothanxiety and pessimism were negative.
A Pearson inter-correlation matrix was computed using the self-rating scalescores and the total scores on optimism, pessimism, and anxiety questionnairesfor men and women separately. Each matrix was factored using principlecomponents analysis, employing the Kaiser criterion, i.e., the eigenvalue >1.0,to select the number of factors to extract from each matrix. Then, if there was
Table I. Mean (M), standard deviation (SD), and t values in Algerian men (N¼ 109) and women(N¼ 135).
more than one factor, the unrotated factors were rotated to a simple structureusing the varimax method of orthogonal rotation (SPSS, 1990).
Table III sets out the two factorial matrices for men and women. As can beseen from this table, the correlational matrix among men yielded two factors.The first factor can be labelled positive vs. negative traits of mental health.All the scales had salient (>0.56) loadings onto this factor except the rating scaleof religiosity, whereas the single salient loading (0.889) onto the second factorwas for religiosity, and thus labelled the religiosity factor.
On the other hand, a single factor was extracted in the women group. This wasa bipolar factor, incorporating all the scales including religiosity. This factorcan be labelled positive emotions and religiosity vs. neurotic tendency. It isparticularly worth noting that the loading of the self-rating scale of religiosity ontothis factor was not low (0.485). Notwithstanding this, religiosity had the lowestloading onto that factor.
Discussion
As far as the present study is concerned in the field of psychology of religion, themost salient findings among Algerian participants came from the female sample.That is, they had a significantly higher mean score on the self-rating scale ofreligiosity than their men counterparts. Among women, the correlations betweenreligiosity and all the positive and negative emotions and traits were statisticallysignificant. That is, religiosity was positively correlated with the self-rating scalesof physical health, mental health, happiness, and satisfaction with life, in additionto the Arabic scale of optimism. On the other hand, religiosity was correlatednegatively with both scales of anxiety and pessimism. It is noteworthy that anxietyhad the highest correlation with religiosity; namely �0.43.
On the basis of these results, it can be concluded that the religious womenin the present study tend to enjoy good physical and mental health, happiness,more satisfaction with their lives, and optimism. Inversely they are less anxious
and less pessimistic. Consistent with these results in women, the factor analysisof the correlational matrix yielded single bipolar factor labelled positive emotionsand religiosity vs. neurotic tendency, i.e., anxiety and pessimism.
The present findings among Algerian women are congruent with a number ofprevious studies which showed positive correlations between religiosity andmental health, as well as a series of positive emotions and traits (see, e.g., Diener& Clifton, 2002; Fife, 2005; Francis et al., 2000; Hackney & Sanders, 2003; Hill& Pargament, 2003). On the other hand, the present findings among Algerianwomen are compatible with several studies that reached negative associationsbetween religiosity and both anxiety and pessimism (see, e.g., Ai et al., 2003;Davis et al., 2003; El-Jamil, 2003; Harris et al., 2002; Rudski, 2004; Salsmanet al., 2005).
Meanwhile, the current results are compatible with both a study conductedon Pakistani Muslims (Suhail & Chaudhry, 2004) and a recent study carriedout on a large sample of Kuwaiti college students (Abdel-Khalek, 2006), inwhich women had a significantly higher religiosity mean score than their mencounterparts. Furthermore, the correlational matrix of the self-rating scales ofhappiness, physical health, mental health, and religiosity yielded one high-loadedfactor. Moreover, religiosity accounted for around 15 percent of the variance inpredicting happiness. It is important to note that all the participants in thatprevious Kuwaiti study were Muslims, as in the present Algerian sample. Do thereligiosity correlates differ according to different religions of the study samples?This is a question for further investigation.
As for the male sample, they had a significantly lower mean score of religiositythan among their female peers. Among men, the only significant correlateof religiosity was with the self-rating scale of mental health. The correlationalmatrix in men gave rise to two factors—positive vs. negative traits of mentalhealth, and religiosity—so religiosity was not significantly loaded on the firstfactor like that in the female group. Why do these discrepancies in results emergebetween the two sexes?
One probable aspect to elucidate these differences is the significantly highermean score of religiosity among women than their men counterparts. On the basisof our personal impression regarding the present sample of college students,the Arabic woman tends to be more traditional, whereas the Arabic man isinclined to be more westernized in general.
There are specific limitations on the present study. Foremost among themis the limited age range of the present sample. Thus, an important next step inthis endeavor would be to replicate and extend the present investigation in otherage groups of Algerian participants.
Notwithstanding these limitations, current findings indicate that religiosityis an important element in the lives of the majority of the present sample becauseof its associations with positive emotions particularly among women. Theseresults have practical implications, given the recent rise in emphasis on psycho-therapeutic use of religiosity or religious involvement (Seybold & Hill, 2001;
Religiosity and emotions 167
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
07:
11 0
8 D
ecem
ber
2013
Shafranske, 1996). It is our contention that this implication would be quitesuccessful when applied to Muslim clients.
Acknowledgements
We thank the Editors of the journal as well as two anonymous reviewers for theirinvaluable and constructive comments on the manuscript.
References
Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (1996). Manual for the Arabic Scale of Optimism and Pessimism. Alexandria,Egypt: Dar Al-Maarifa Al-Jamiiyah (in Arabic).
Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (1998). Optimism and physical health: A factorial study. Journal of the
Social Sciences, 26(2), 45–62 (in Arabic).Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2000). The Kuwait University Anxiety Scale: Psychometric properties.
Psychological Reports, 87, 478–492.Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2002). Age and sex differences for anxiety in relation to family size,
birth order, and religiosity among Kuwaiti adolescents. Psychological Reports, 90,1031–1036.
Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2003). Adequacy of an English version of the Kuwait UniversityAnxiety Scale based on back translation and testing bilingual subjects. Psychological Reports,93, 1101–1104.
Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2004). Divergent, criterion-related, and discriminant validities for theKuwait University Anxiety Scale. Psychological Reports, 94, 572–576.
Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2006). Happiness, health and religiosity: Significant relations. Mental Health,
Religion and Culture, 9, 85–97.Abdel-Khalek, A. M., & Rudwan, S. (2001). The Kuwait University Anxiety Scale: Reliability
and criterion-related validity in Syrian college students. Psychological Reports, 89, 718.Abdel-Khalek, A. M., & Al-Damaty, A. A. (2003). The Kuwait University Anxiety Scale:
Results for 9031 Saudi students. Psychological Reports, 93, 203–212.Abdel-Khalek, A. M., & Lester, D. (2003). The Kuwait University Anxiety Scale: A cross-cultural
evaluation in Kuwait and United States. Psychological Reports, 93, 1109–1114.Abdel-Khalek, A. M., & Lester, D. (2006). Optimism and pessimism in Kuwaiti and
American college students. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 52, 111–127.Abdel-Khalek, A. M., Tomas-Sabado, J., & Gomez-Benito, J. (2004). Psychometric parameters
of the Spanish version of the Kuwait University Anxiety Scale (S-KUAS). European Journal of
Psychological Assessment, 20, 349–357.Ai, A. L., Peterson, C., & Huang, B. (2003). The effect of religious–spiritual coping on positive
attitudes of adult Muslim refugees from Kosovo and Bosnia. International Journal for the
Psychology of Religion, 13, 29–47.Alansari, B. M. (2002). The Kuwait University Anxiety Scale: A study of its validity, reliability,
and correlates among samples from Kuwait University undergraduates. Alexandria University
Bulletin of the Faculty of Arts, 45, 1–47.Alansari, B. M. (2004). Internal consistency of the Kuwait University Anxiety Scale in ten
Arab countries. Social Behavior and Personality, 32, 221–224.Al-Issa, I. (2000). Religion and psychopathology. In I. Al-Issa (Ed.), Al-Junun: Mental illness
in the Islamic World (pp. 3–42). Madison, CT: International Universities Press.Argyle, M. (1986). The psychology of happiness. London: Metheun.
168 Ahmed M. Abdel-Khalek & Farida Naceur
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
07:
11 0
8 D
ecem
ber
2013
Davis, T. L., Kerr, B. A., & Kurpius, S. E. (2003). Meaning, purpose, and religiosity inat-risk youth: The relationship between anxiety and spirituality. Journal of Psychology and
Theology, 31, 356–365.Dember, W. N. (2001). The Optimism–Pessimism Instrument: Personal and social correlates.
In C. E. Chang (Ed.), Optimism and pessimism: Implications for theory, research, and practice
(pp. 281–299). Washington, DC: APA.Diener, E., & Clifton, D. (2002). Life satisfaction and religiosity in broad probability samples.
Psychological Inquiry, 13, 206–209.Dorahy, M. J., Lewis, C. A., Schumaker, J. F., Akuamoah-Boateng, R., Duze, M. C., &
Sibiya, T. E. (1998). A cross cultural analysis of religion and life satisfaction.Mental Health, Religion, and Culture, 1, 37–43.
El-Jamil, F. M. (2003). Shame, guilt, and mental health: A study on the impact of cultural andreligious orientation. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering,64, 1487.
Eungi Kim, A. (2003). Religious influences on personal and societal well-being. Social IndicatorsResearch, 62–63, 149–170.
Fife, J. E. (2005). The relationship between religious commitment, self-identification, andlife satisfaction among African Americans and European Americans. Dissertation Abstracts
International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 65, 3704.Francis, L. J., & Jackson, C. J. (2003). Eysenck’s dimensional model of personality and religion:
Are religious people more neurotic? Mental Health, Religion, and Culture, 6, 87–100.Francis, L. J., Jones, S. H., & Wilcox, C. (2000). Religiosity and happiness: During adolescence,
young adulthood, and later life. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 19, 245–257.Francis, L. J., Ziebertz, H. G., & Lewis, C. A. (2003). The relationship between religion and
happiness among German students. Pastoral Psychology, 51, 273–281.French, S., & Joseph, S. (1999). Religiousness and its association with happiness, purpose in life,
and self actualization. Mental Health, Religion, and Culture, 2, 117–120.Hackney, C. H., & Sanders, G. S. (2003). Religiosity and mental health: A meta analysis of recent
studies. Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion, 42, 43–55.Harris, J. I., Schoneman, S. W., & Carrera, S. R. (2002). Approaches to religiosity related
to anxiety among college students. Mental Health, Religion, and Culture, 5, 253–265.Hill, P. C., & Pargament, K. I. (2003). Advances in the conceptualization and measurement
of religion and spirituality: Implications for physical and mental health research.American Psychologist, 58, 64–74.
Koenig, H. G. (1997). Is religion good for your health? The effects of religion on physical and
mental health. New York: Haworth Press.Koenig, H. G. (Ed.) (1998). Handbook of religion and mental health. San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.Larson, D., & Larson, S. (1994). The forgotten factor: Review of research on religion and health.
Rockville, MD: National Institute for Health Research.Levin, J. S., & Chatters, L. M. (1998). Research on religion and mental health: An overview
of empirical findings and theoretical issues. In H. G. Koenig (Ed.), Handbook of religion and
mental health (pp. 33–50). New York: Academic Press.Lewis, C. A. (2002). Church attendance and happiness among Northern Irish undergraduate
students: No association. Pastoral Psychology, 50, 191–195.Lewis, C. A., Joseph, S., & Noble, K. E. (1996). Is religiosity associated with life satisfaction?
Psychological Reports, 79, 429–430.Lewis, C. A., Lanigan, C., Joseph, S., & de Fockert, J. (1997). Religiosity and happiness:
No evidence for an association among undergraduates. Personality and Individual Differences,22, 119–121.
Lewis, C. A., Maltby, J., & Day, L. (2005). Religious orientation, religious coping and happinessamong UK adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1193–1202.
Religiosity and emotions 169
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
07:
11 0
8 D
ecem
ber
2013
Lewis, C. A., Maltby, J., & Burkinshaw, S. (2000). Religion and happiness: Still no association.Journal of Beliefs and Values, 21, 233–236.
Maltby, J., Lewis, C. A., & Day, L. (1999). Religious orientation and psychologicalwell-being: The role of the frequency of personal prayer. British Journal of Health Psychology,4, 363–378.
Mattis, J. S., Fontenot, D. L., Hatcher-Kay, C. A., Grayman, N. A., & Beale, R. L. (2004).Religiosity, optimism, and pessimism among African Americans. Journal of Black Psychology,30, 187–207.
Moller, A., & Reimann, S. (2004). Religiose Einstellung und Zukunftssicht in einer studentischenUntersuchungsgruppe [Religious dimensions and optimistic perception of the future in a sampleof students]. Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie, 54, 383–386.
Myers, D. G., & Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Science, 6, 10–19.O’Connor, D. B., Cobb, J., & O’Connor, R. C. (2003). Religiosity, stress and psychological
distress: No evidence for an association among undergraduate students. Personality and
Individual Differences, 34, 211–217.Pargament, K. I. (1997). The psychology of religion and coping: Theory, research, practice. New York:
Guilford Press.Peltzer, K. (2005). Religiosity, personal distress and minor psychiatric morbidity among black
students in South Africa. Social Behavior and Personality, 33, 723–734.Powell, L. H., Shahabi, L., & Thoresen, C. E. (2003). Religion and spirituality: Linkages to
physical health. American Psychologist, 58, 36–52.Richards, P. S., & Bergin, A. E. (1997). A spiritual strategy for counseling and psychotherapy.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Rudski, J. (2004). The illusion of control, superstitious belief, and optimism. Current Psychology:
Developmental, Learning, Personality, Social, 22, 306–315.Salsman, J. M., Brown, T. L., Brechting, E. H., & Carlson, C. R. (2005). The link between religion
and spirituality and psychological adjustment: The mediating role of optimism and socialsupport. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 522–535.
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and implicationsof generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219–247.
Seybold, K. S., & Hill, P. C. (2001). The role of religion and spirituality in mental and physicalhealth. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 21–24.
Shafranske, E. P. (Ed.) (1996). Religion and the clinical practice of psychology. Washington, DC:American Psychological Association.
SPSS, Inc. (1990). SPSS: Statistical data analysis. Chicago, IL: SPSS.Storch, E. A., Storch, J. B., & Adams, B. G. (2002). Intrinsic religiosity and social anxiety of
intercollegiate athletes. Psychological Reports, 91, 1041–1042.Suhail, K., & Chaudhry, H. R. (2004). Predictors of subjective well-being in an Eastern
Muslim culture. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 359–376.Thorson, J. A. (1998). Religion and anxiety: Which anxiety? Which religion?. In H. G. Koenig
(Ed.), Handbook of religion and mental health (pp. 147–160). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Wink, P., & Dillon, M. (2001). Religious involvement and health outcomes in late adulthood:
Findings from a longitudinal study of women and men. In T. G. Plante & A. C. Sherman (Eds),Faith and health: Psychological perspectives (pp. 75–106). New York: Guilford Press.
Wulff, D. M. (1997). Psychology of religion: Classic and contemporary (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
