CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 480Religion, Spirituality, and PsychologyStudy and Philosophy of ReligionWorkplace Spirituality and Leadership

Advances in the conceptualization and measurement of religion and spirituality: implications for physical and mental health research

Hill, Peter C., Pargament, Kenneth I.·2008·Psychology of Religion and Spirituality
DOI 10.1037/1941-1022.s.1.3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Empirical studies have identified significant links between religion and spirituality and health. The reasons for these associations, however, are unclear. Typically, religion and spirituality have been measured by global indices (e.g., frequency of church attendance, self-rated religiousness and spirituality) that do not specify how or why religion and spirituality affect health. The authors highlight recent advances in the delineation of religion and spirituality concepts and measures theoretically and functionally connected to health. They also point to areas for areas for growth in religion and spirituality conceptualization and measurement. Through measures of religion and spirituality more conceptually related to physical and mental health (e.g., closeness to God, religious orientation and motivation, religious support, religious struggle), psychologists are discovering more about the distinctive contributions of religiousness and spirituality to health and well-being.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/1941-1022.s.1.3

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Medical and health-related sciences need a structure and relative consensus, since most instruments attempt to quantify its intangible construct in order to evaluate its impact and propose health-related interventions.

    “While for the social sciences there is no major concerns for the lack of an universal definition of spirituality, medical and health-related sciences need a structure and relative consensus, since most instruments attempt to quantify its intangible construct in order to evaluate its impact and propose health-related interventions (Macdonald and Friedman, 2002; Hill and Pargament, 2008).”

    From Defining spirituality in healthcare: a systematic review and conceptual framework. (2021) · cites this paper as Hill and Pargament, 2008

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hill, P. C., & Pargament, K. I.
ORCID
Hill, Peter C.
Venue
Psychology of Religion and Spirituality
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2008-08
Volume
S
Issue
1
Pages
3-17
ISSN
  • 1941-1022 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-1562
DOI
10.1037/1941-1022.s.1.3
OpenAlex
W2793239383
Cited by
480
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 41
FWCI
44.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Psychology of Religion and Spirituality (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Workplace Spirituality and Leadership
Keywords
religion, spirituality, concept of religion, measurement of religion, religiosity, intimacy with God, religious orientation, religious motivation, religious support, religious struggle, physical health, mental health, well-being

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review