Abstract
Deeply rooted in Western and Eastern civilization, reverence is a cardinal virtue that embraces meaning and purpose in life. It is also a self-transcending positive emotion, associated with specific worldviews that may determine the context in which an individual senses it. To date, few psychological studies have addressed this concept. To address the gap, we drew two different study samples to validate a contextualized Sense of Reverence scale (SOR). Capitalizing on the cardiac data of older patients, Study I extended the validation of the twofold scale, reverence in religious and secular contexts (R- and S-reverence), by correlating it with measures of general religiousness and positive attitudes. Study II confirmed the structure and further validated the scale in healthy Canadian and U.S. students. Using structural equation modeling, Study II evaluated differential associations of R- and S- reverence. S-reverence was related to spiritual support from nontraditional sources, a belief in death as a natural end, and psychological functioning connected with growth, as indicated by openness, creativity, and personal growth. R-reverence was associated with spiritual support from traditional sources, a belief in a rewarding afterlife, and psychological functioning connected with adjustment, as indicated by agreeableness, conscientiousness, and personal adjustment. Both forms of reverence were positively related to self-transcendence.
Keywords
Reverence is a cardinal virtue characterized by the capacity of feeling deep respect, love, and humility for something sacred or transcendent (Woodruff, 2001). Rooted in ancient Western and Eastern cultures, the concept of reverence gains in prominence today because of its emphasis on diverse ways of comprehending the sacred in both religious and secular settings, and of its documented impact on health outcomes (Ai, Park, & Shearer, 2008; Ai, Wink, et al., 2009; Ai, Wink, & Shearer, 2011). This study further validates the Sense of Reverence (SOR) scale by providing new information on the differential implications of reverence in religious and secular contexts for coping and values using data from the original validation sample of middle-aged and older cardiac patients who underwent heart surgery (Study I). We also extend the validation process by investigating the relationship between the two types of reverence and an array of self-report measures of psychosocial functioning in a combined sample of young healthy American and Canadian students (Study II).
Modern interest in reverence can be traced to Otto (1928) who described an aspect of reverence marked by a thrilling feeling of over-abounding that constitutes a vital part of “all truly felt states of religious beatitude” (p. 37). Reverence regained scholarly attention in the mid-20th century through the writings of Albert Schweitzer (1965), the German recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize who, based on his medical missionary work in Africa, considered reverence to be a core guiding principle in life reflecting a profound respect for all living beings and for human existence. Others have emphasized the element of deep respect associated with reverence as a response to excellence or to an entity deemed superior to the self (Guralnick, 1978; Woodruff, 2001). Maslow (1970) conceived of reverence along with wonder and humility as vital components of peak experiences (hallmarks of a full life). More recently, Ai, Wink, Tice, and collaborators published the initial form of the SOR scale (Ai, Wink, et al., 2011). Expanding previous humanistic or existential conceptualization, they posited that reverence is a psychologically measurable and self-transcending positive emotion.
Our conceptualization of reverence departs from Maslow’s (1970) depiction of it as a mere component of peak experiences. Instead, we highlight the sense of deep connection associated with reverence that bestows purpose in life and that can be experienced in a variety of settings (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). This sense of interconnectedness with the world at large can be experienced in either religious or secular contexts (e.g., Elkins, Hedestrom, Hughes, Leaf, & Saunders, 1988; Otto, 1928; Woodruff, 2001). According to Woodruff (2001), the ability to merge one’s sense of self with the object of awe or wonder is a defining feature of reverence. Reverence entails the experience of a positive emotion linked with an injection of the sacred into the observer’s profound connectedness with the object (Buber, 1958). We, therefore, view reverence as requiring a high level of cognitive appraisal of one’s connection with the outside world. Underlying the thrilling sensation of this positive emotion is one’s interpretation or perception of what in the greater world is uniquely meaningful for life, be it gods, the universe, or their artistic representation (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011; Elkins et al., 1988; Otto, 1928; Woodruff, 2001).
Reverence belongs to an overarching category of positive emotions that are linked to the exemplary actions or behaviors of others (Algoe & Haidt, 2009; see Table 1 for the definitional differentiation of reverence from awe and other relevant positive emotions). This shared characteristic may partly explain why Maslow (1970) conceived of reverence, wonder, awe, and humility as vital components of peak experiences. Positive psychologists (e.g., Peterson & Seligman, 2003) stressed the significance of feelings of awe, wonder, and elevation in human life. Adler and Fagley (2005) subsumed both gratitude and awe under appreciation, while Keltner and Haidt (2003) incorporated reverence into their construct of awe, reflecting the dictionary definition of reverence as a “profound and adoring awed respect” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2013). While the positive emotions listed by Algoe and Haidt (2009) are observer-centered (i.e., arising from one’s observations of events, objects, or persons from a distance), reverence involves a subjective perception of union with a sacred being or a meaningful surrounding reality (e.g., nature or its abstraction in artwork; Elkins, et al., 1988). Yet reverence remains connected to the emotions of elevation, admiration, and gratitude through shared common features, notably: (a) an inspiring or triggering event or context that is appraised on the basis of one’s outlook, (b) a specific bodily sensation, and (c) a motivational outcome. Clearly, more conceptual clarification and empirical testing are necessary to distinguish these concepts.
Reverence and Other Related Positive Emotions.
It is particularly important to distinguish reverence from the closely related feeling of awe as both have been linked with religious beliefs and can be considered self-transcending in nature (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011; Keltner & Haidt. 2003). In addition, in God-centered religious worldviews both awe and reverence tend to reflect the experience of being in the presence of a powerful entity (Keltner & Haidt, 2003; Ai et al., 2014). In principle, awe, however, cannot be classified as a completely positive emotion, in contrast to reverence. Both Otto (1928) and Woodruff (2001) noted that, under certain religious circumstances, a sense of awe can be frightening. Keltner and Haidt (2003) argue that awe is experienced within the presence of something vast (e.g., a natural event), unfathomable, and mysterious; in essence something beyond the current comprehension of the individual, leading one to experience a sense of surprise, wonder, confusion and, at times, fear. In contrast, reverence is primarily experienced as a respectful feeling toward what is perceived as profoundly meaningful but not necessarily fearful (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). For example, reverence could be experienced while contemplating on a piece of art, listening to music, or receiving altruistic support from unknown others that may empower rather than overpower the individual. We, therefore, conceive of reverence as a feeling that is similar to, but emotionally more positive than, a sense of awe.
It is also important to distinguish the concept of reverence from that of a human quest for meaning because a sense of self-transcendence is associated with both constructs (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). As argued by Frankl (1946/1984), both self-transcendence and the quest for meaning are manifestations of the uniquely human attribute of spirituality. Notwithstanding the similarity, meaning making is a much broader endeavor. According to a recent systematic review (Heintzelman & King, 2014), it entails three primary components: making sense of the world, imposing purpose, and establishing predictability and order in everyday life. In contrast, reverence is restricted to the experience of self-transcendence in specific contexts. Furthermore, whereas meaning making is largely a cognitive process (e.g., Heintzelman & King, 2014), reverence is largely an emotional enterprise though it also involves cognitive appraisal (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). Empirical evidence has shown that enhancing positive affect can promote higher meaning in life (Heintzelman & King, 2014). What unites the process of meaning making and the experience of reverence is that both meaning making and reverence stem from the uniquely human capacity for self-transcendence; that is, the human capacity of stepping out of oneself to connect with something or someone much bigger than oneself (see Wong, 1998, 2014, for differences between positive and humanistic psychologists in construing the relation between quest for meaning and satisfaction). In particular, as argued in Study II, the experience of reverence in secular settings is much more closely tied to eudaimonic than hedonic well-being.
The study of reverence, with its broad conceptualization of the sacred spanning religious and secular settings, gains in importance in the contemporary American religious landscape. Although there has been an exponential increase in the proportion of religiously unaffiliated Americans (approximately 20%), the majority of the unaffiliated, nonetheless, continue to experience spiritual fulfillment outside of traditional religious settings and believe and participate in various forms of spirituality (Pew Forum, 2009, 2012). Additionally, many religiously affiliated Americans adhere simultaneously to traditional church beliefs and practices as well as to forms of nonchurch spirituality (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). This highly differentiated religious and spiritual landscape highlights the need for psychological measures of concepts reflecting different spiritual worldviews. In response, we have developed the Connection of Soul (COS) scale that measures God-centered, Cosmic-spiritual, and Secular views of the afterlife (Ai et al., 2014), and the SOR scale (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). Studies I and II were principally aimed at further validation for the SOR.
Study I: Additional Validation of Reverence in a Sample of Cardiac Patients
Study I focused on providing additional information regarding the convergent and divergent validity of the SOR’s subscales assessing reverence in religious and secular settings. As indicated, reverence, a positive feeling of deep respect arising from a deep connection between the observer and surrounding context (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011), can be experienced in a variety of settings. Furthermore, the experience of reverence depends on the individual’s worldview that determines the meaning assigned to particular experiences. A faithful individual can sense reverence toward God when, for example, entering a historically important religious site, whereas a secular tourist, placed in the same context, may feel appreciation only for the building’s architecture. Conversely, a scientist can experience reverence for life in front of a computer screen, peering through a microscope, or even in pure theoretical contemplation removed from any religious context. Given the shroud of mystery awarded toward god(s) in both polytheist and monotheist religions, it has been long accepted that the faithful would experience reverence and the sublime in religious settings (Grant, 1928; Keltner & Haidt, 2003; Otto, 1928; Samuels & Lester, 1985). In contrast, feeling reverence in secular contexts (sociomoralistic, naturalistic, and aesthetic settings) has drawn less attention from psychologists.
Following the French sociologist Emile Durkheim (1912/2001), Elkins et al. (1988), Keltner and Haidt (2003), and Otto (1928) argued that collective emotions akin to feelings of the sublime or reverence can be experienced in either traditional religious or secular contexts. Maslow (1970) conceived of reverence occurring in both settings. With respect to social and moral contexts, Woodruff (2001) stated that both Eastern and Western traditions acknowledge social and interpersonal relationships as a vital source of reverence. Plato proposed the cardinal virtue of joyful reverence as promoting justice and social harmony among humans. Confucius’ well-known humanist writing, Analects, emphasized interpersonal ritualistic reverence in the form of Li or a set of respectful actions in the human society (e.g., filial piety involving reverence in the family and loyalty involving reverence of friends; Munro, 1985, 2005; Woodruff, 2001). Schweitzer (1965) also highlighted the life bestowing and liberating power of reverence sensed in everyday human interactions. Concerning naturalistic settings, reverence can also be experienced independent of sociomoral charges. Respect for nature’s laws and the environment is deeply entrenched in the Daoist fundamental belief in energy as the primary force that permeates all living creatures (Ai, 2010; Ai, Bjorck, Huang, & Appel, 2013). Such reverence is echoed in Native Americans’ beliefs (Ai, Ardelt, & Wink, 2010) and can be found in the hunting culture dating back millennia to the Paleolithic (Old Stone Age) time in Africa (Rudgley, 1999). The centrality of feeling reverence in nature for American Transcendentalists, including Emerson, Thoreau, and Whitman is aptly captured in Santayana’s observations that “spirituality likes to say—Behold the lilies of the field” (cited in Schmidt, 2005, p. 5). Today, such respect is particularly exemplified in the worldview of environmentalists.
Reverence can also be experienced in aesthetic contexts. Woodruff (2001) provides an account of how the performance of a Mozart piece by a quartet of amateur musicians results in reverence springing from shared feelings of harmony, connectedness, and self-transcendence, a human virtue (Peterson & Seligman, 2003). In East Asia, Li-related classical music, a ceremonial ritual, was especially performed to promote family reverence (Rosemont & Ames, 2009). Furthermore, Pugmire (2006) pointed out that religious music can exercise power over both believers and nonbelievers resulting in feelings of awe and transcendence. Exposure to art, in general, with its power to remind humans of their existence, meaning in suffering, and purpose in life can in many instances elicit a sense of reverence more readily than philosophical speculation or participation in routine religious rituals (Woodruff, 2001). A divine figure–centered (e.g., Jesus, Mary, saints) portrait art in the West inspires religious reverence among the faithful. By placing the finite small human figure within the infinite nature, Daoist landscape art was meant to invoke secular reverence and surrender to the universal law without the use of language (Cohen, 1997; Hammer, 1990a, 1990b). Despite the potential of reverence for crafting a good and rewarding life, researchers have rarely examined reverence empirically, whether in religious or secular settings.
Using a prospective design, we developed and initially validated the SOR scale in a large study on the psychosocial recovery of cardiac surgery patients (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). An exploratory factor analysis supported the hypothesized two-factor structure of the SOR scale with items measuring reverence in religious settings loading on one factor and those associated with secular settings loading on the other. Furthermore, analyses demonstrated the predictive validity of the SOR scale shown, for example, by a positive relationship between reverence in secular settings (S-reverence), assessed preoperatively, and indicators of postoperative recovery, including a shorter hospital length of stay (Ai, Wink, et al., 2011) and fewer postoperative complications in coronary bypass patients (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009). S-reverence also had a positive effect on end-of-life planning (Ai et al., 2008), implying an acceptance of the risks associated with the surgery. These findings were significant even after controlling for objective medical indices, mental health symptoms, positive psychological attitudes, and sociodemographics. In contrast, R-reverence, but not S-reverence, predicted poor long-term adjustment at 30 months following open-heart surgery, whereas private prayer coping and subjective religiousness had desirable effects (Ai, Ladd, et al., 2010). Previous findings, thus, clearly revealed that R- and S-reverence can uniquely predict differential medical outcomes.
More research, however, is needed to establish the validity of the SOR and its two subscales measuring reverence in religious and secular settings. For example, it is important to establish that the correlates of the two reverence subscales differ from those associated with conventional religiousness and nonreligious beliefs, and other constructs associated with positive psychosocial functioning, including optimism and coping strategies. In Study I, we conducted such additional analyses, using data from the same sample of cardiac patients that was originally employed to develop the SOR scale (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). We specifically investigated the correlations of the R- and S-reverence subscales with conceptually relevant variables, such as measures of religiousness and spirituality, attitudes, affects, coping, and indicators of illness-related functioning. We hypothesized that R-reverence would be more strongly related than S-reverence to measures of religious and spiritual involvement. We also expected null or low correlations between the SOR subscales and such constructs as optimism, hope, personal control, fear, and happiness.
Method
Participants
With the approval of the University of Michigan’s Institutional Review Board, the initial sample of about 480 patients was recruited from the Heart Center. The majority of the sample was male (58%), Caucasian (92%), Judeo-Christian (88%), and currently married (73%). The average age was 62 years (range = 35-89 years) and average years of education was 14 (range = 5-28 years). Eligibility criteria were (a) age >35 years; (b) scheduled for nonemergent, nontransplant open-heart surgery; (c) English proficiency; (d) cognitively and physically capable of providing consent; (e) informed consent actually provided; and (f) permission of the surgeon.
Procedure
Around 2 weeks prior to the scheduled surgery, a nurse screened the patient for availability and eligibility on the date of the preoperative medical assessment. A face-to-face interview was conducted by trained interviewers at the clinic after the consent form was signed. Each patient was asked about (a) preoperative demographic and socioeconomic factors, (b) religious affiliation, (c) general religiousness, (d) conditions of feeling reverence, (e) mental health and functioning, and (f) medical comorbidities. The study was designed before the development of most other-praising positive emotions, which, unfortunately, were not included. Yet two single items, reflecting happiness and fearfulness (a component of awe), were assessed with a depression scale. Optimism, hope, health locus of control, coping strategies, and social support were assessed via telephone two days before surgery. Two measures published after the study began, spiritual support and love, were assessed at the 30-month follow-up survey, alongside one question that addressed happiness.
Measures
Sense of Reverence was assessed using a Yes or No checklist of different religious (attending religious services, reading the Bible or watching religious programs, private prayer, meditation) and secular (sightseeing or being in nature, enjoying music or art, being loved or supported, and serving others) contexts (see Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011 for details). Religiousness was assessed with the 11-item Religiosity Scale (Chatters, Levin, & Taylor, 1992) which measures public, private and subjective religiosity.
Happiness and fearfulness were assessed with single items from the Center for Epidemiological Studies–Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977). Optimism was assessed with the 12-item Life Orientation Test (LOT; Scheier & Carver, 1985). Hope was assessed with the 12-item Hope scale (Snyder et al., 1991). Health locus of control was assessed with the 18-item Multidimensional Health Locus of Control scale (Form A), which measures control beliefs: internality, powerful others, externality, and chance externality (Wallston, Wallston, & DeVellis, 1978). Coping strategies was assessed with the 5-point Multidimensional Coping Scale (M-Cope; Wills, 1996). Perceived social support was assessed with the 12-item Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS; Zimet, Powell, Farley, Werkman, & Berkoff, 1990). Perceived spiritual support was assessed with the 12-item Spiritual Support Scale (SSS; Ai et al., 2005). Divine Love was assessed with the 4-item subscale of the Sorokin Multidimensional Inventory of Love (Levin & Kaplan, 2010).
Impacted subjective health, impacted functioning status, and impacted psychological well-being were assessed using items of the RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0 (Hays, Sherbourne, & Mazel, 1993). Religious coping was assessed with the 14-item Brief Religious/Spiritual Coping scale Brief RCOPE; Pargament, Smith, Koenig, & Perez, 1998).
Results
In terms of convergent validity, as hypothesized, R-reverence was correlated moderately with measures of religiosity (private, public, and subjective) and positive religious coping (see Table 2). The magnitude of these correlations, though relatively high, nonetheless makes the R-reverence subscale separable from other religious constructs. In contrast, S-reverence was related to religiosity only at a low level. The two subscales were both correlated prospectively with perceived spiritual support and divine love. Although significant, these relationships were higher for R-reverence than for S-reverence.
Correlations Between Two Forms of Reverence and Other Constructs.
p < .05. **p < .01.
In terms of discriminant validity, we did not expect either type of reverence to be correlated strongly with general or specific positive attitudes including optimism, hope, or health locus of control. In support of this hypothesis, although both R- and S-reverence were positively related with the perception of powerful others’ control, these relationships were rather weak. S-reverence but not R-reverence showed a modest but significant association with happiness. In interpreting the magnitude of these relationships, it needs to be kept in mind that the use of single indicators for most of the outcome measures is likely to have decreased the magnitude of the correlations. Given this caveat, neither R- nor S-reverence was correlated with fearfulness, a core aspect of the concept of awe, consistent with our argument above. For other positive psychosocial factors, S-reverence was correlated with cognitive coping and social support. Neither form of reverence was related to behavioral or anger coping, but both were related to avoidant coping. Finally, both forms of reverence were not correlated with measures of impacted functioning except for a slight positive correlation of S-reverence with impacted health.
Discussion
The findings from Study I provided further validity of the two-dimensional SOR scale, beyond the previously reported predictive value of S-reverence regarding the medical outcomes of open-heart surgery (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). Several aspects should be further elaborated. First, it could be argued that, due to the moderately high correlation of R-reverence, this subscale is redundant with published measures of religious or spiritual factors. However, preoperative R-reverence predicted anxiety at the long-term follow-up of cardiac patients, whereas subjective religiousness and prayer coping had a positive effect, while almost all other religious or spiritual measures showed no effect (Ai, Ladd, et al., 2010). Second, despite a few low correlations with indicators of certain positive psychosocial constructs, only S-reverence among the preoperative positive factors contributed to medical outcomes (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). The findings suggest that the differential role of R- and S-reverence cannot be attributable to other positive characteristics and coping strategies.
Finally, the sense of powerful control by others, but not personal control, was related to both R and S-reverence. This finding adds weight to the contention that individuals experiencing reverence, irrespective of setting and outlook, tend to derive significance in their lives from a connection with an omnipotent external force (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011; Elkins et al., 1988; Frankl, 1946/1984; Otto, 1928; Woodruff, 2001). Although meanings related to sacred religious and secular contexts can differ from each other, an important topic beyond the scope of this study, this intriguing finding certainly warrants further in-depth investigation.
Study II: Further Validation of the SOR Scale
Differential Associations With Psychological Functioning in a Sample of College Students
To further validate the SOR scale, in Study II we extended the finding concerning convergent and discriminant validity to a nonclinical student sample. The first objective was to confirm the structure of the SOR scale and to extend findings regarding construct validity through including new domains of functioning such as sources of spiritual support (Ai et al., 2005), self-transcendence (Levenson, Jennings, Aldwin, & Shiraishi, 2005), and death anxiety (Spilka, Stout, Minton, & Sizemore, 1977). Despite the similar relationship of the two SOR subscales to overall spiritual support, we, first, hypothesized that the constructs of spiritual support undergirding the two subscales would manifest different types of sacred interconnectedness (Ai, Wink et al., 2009; 2011; Ai, Tice, Peterson, & Huang, 2005). In the case of R-reverence, reflecting its link with traditional forms of religious belief and practice, the sacred relation was likely to center on perceived support from a personal God. As for S-reverence, the sense of support was more likely to come from less traditional but equally transcendent sources.
Second, following the argument by Elkins et al. (1988) and based on our findings using the Connection of Soul scale (Ai et al., 2014), we expected that R- and S-reverence would be associated with different sources of spirituality though both should be linked with a sense of self-transcendence. Third, Maslow (1970) linked the ability to experience reverence with self-actualization or high levels of personal integration. Accordingly, we anticipated that both forms of reverence should help fend off potential death anxiety (e.g., perception of death as failure or forsaking; see Spilka et al., 1977). In the case of R-reverence, the buffer against death anxiety should be provided by the belief in a rewarding afterlife. For S-reverence, in contrast, it should be associated with this-worldly factors (e.g., the perception of death as a natural end to life and diminished concern about a painful death).
Another objective was to test a conceptual model relating reverence in two contexts with two configurations of psychosocial functioning associated with adjustment versus growth (Staudinger & Kunzmann, 2005). Both adjustment and growth as types of psychosocial functioning are related to survival needs in coping with health-related life-altering challenges (Ai, Hopp, Tice, & Koenig, et al., 2013; Lechner & Weaver, 2009). Individuals high in adjustment tend to regard subjective happiness as an important end goal in life and hence this type of psychological functioning is closely associated with hedonic well-being (e.g., free of pain; Ai, Hopp, et al., 2013; Ryan & Deci, 2001; Staudinger & Kunzmann, 2005). By contrast, the growth configuration of personal functioning centers on challenging the status quo and finding new and creative solutions to health and psychosocial problems (Ai, Hall, Pargament, & Tice, 2013; Ai, Hopp, et al., 2013; Dillon & Wink, 2007). An emphasis on personal growth makes this type of psychological functioning congruent with a central theme of eudaimonic well-being (e.g., Ai, Hall, et al., 2013; Ryan & Deci, 2001; Waterman, 1993).
Furthermore, individuals high in adjustment tend to focus on the importance of functioning effectively within social norms (Staudinger & Kunzmann, 2005). They emphasize upholding existing social conventions, including the maintenance of smooth interpersonal relationships and deference to commonly accepted standards of conduct. They are also more likely to perceive success as the ability to adjust and cope with life’s circumstances. On the other hand, growth is associated with self-transformation (Staudinger & Kessler, 2009). Individuals high in personal growth are more likely to pursue the achievement of insight, integrity, cognitive complexity, and self-transformation in encountering adversity (Staudinger & Kunzmann, 2005). Research suggests that most adults adhere to the adjustment configuration of functioning as it promotes social stability and cohesion, and it reinforces the values endorsed by societal institutions (Dillon & Wink, 2007; Staudinger & Kunzmann, 2005). However, the potential for societal change hinges, in part, on the presence of individuals who dare to pursue personal growth and innovation, and who challenge the status quo.
Given that Study I linked R-reverence more strongly with religiousness indicators than S-reverence, we hypothesized that R-reverence would be associated with psychological functioning marked by adjustment and an emphasis on hedonic well-being whereas S-reverence would be related to a focus on growth, a hallmark of eudaimonic well-being (Dillon & Wink, 2007; Staudinger & Kunzmann, 2005; Wink & Staudinger, 2016). Previous findings suggest that individuals who emphasize traditional religious beliefs and practices have good control of impulses associated with adjustment and share many of the key characteristics (e.g., they tend to be agreeable, warm, conscientious, dependable; Saroglou, 2002; Wink, Ciciolla, Dillon, & Tracy, 2007). Additionally, highly religious individuals tend to derive their well-being from engagement in close personal relationships, having a sense of control over the surrounding environment, and experiencing self-acceptance (Dillon & Wink, 2007). Accordingly, we expected that the same pattern of relationships would characterize individuals high in R-reverence because of the evident link of this type of positive emotion with traditional religious practices (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011).
In contrast to the correlates of traditional religious involvement, Dillon and Wink (2007) found many parallels between spiritual seeking or nontraditional forms of spirituality and the pattern of psychosocial functioning associated with personal growth. Spiritual seekers tended to be open to new experiences and innovation (Batson, Schoenrade, & Ventis, 1993; Saroglou, 2002; Wink et al., 2007). They also tended to be creative, to have purpose in life, to derive their sense of well-being in late adulthood from a continued sense of growth, and to experience a sense of personal autonomy (Dillon & Wink, 2007). Accordingly, we hypothesized a positive relationship between S-reverence and spiritual seeking because of their joint emphasis on experiencing the sacred in nonchurch settings such as nature, human relations, and artistic events (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011).
To test the above hypotheses and models, in Study II we conducted confirmatory factor analyses to investigate the SOR’s factor structure and construct validity (Objective I). We then conducted a series of structural equation models (SEMs) to assess the relationship between reverence and adjustment and growth (Objective II). First, to verify the two substructures of the Reverence scale we hypothesized that our self-report measure would consist of two distinct factors, R- and S-reverence. Second, in seeking divergent and convergent validity, we hypothesized that R-reverence would be associated with spiritual support from traditional religious entities (e.g., Jesus, Jehovah, or Allah) and an absence of death anxiety associated with belief in a rewarding afterlife. By contrast, S-reverence would be related to nontraditional transcending sources (e.g., Nature and Mother Earth) and to the perception of death as part of a natural life cycle. Because reverence involves the capacity to form a union (the extension of self-boundaries) with either a divine or mundane entity, we assumed both forms would be positively related to self-transcendence.
Finally, in the SEM, we expected R-reverence to be associated with a latent measure of psychosocial functioning associated with adjustment (i.e., agreeableness, conscientiousness, and well-being from positive relations with others). In contrast, we expected that S-reverence would be linked to indicators of psychological functioning associated with personal growth (i.e., openness to experience, engagement in creative activities, well-being from autonomy, and purpose in life).
Method
Participants
Participants at the University of New Hampshire (UNH) were undergraduate students enrolled in introductory and intermediate sociology courses open to majors and nonmajors. The majority were under the age of 30 (99%), female (55%), Caucasian (81%), and U.S. born (92%). Fifty-six percent self-identified as Catholic, 8% as Protestant, 26% as agnostic, and the remaining 10% as other. Participants at Saint Paul University (SPU) were students enrolled in programs related to the faculties of Human Sciences (54%) and Theology (24%) with the remainder representing Philosophy (12%) and Canon Law (10%). Roughly 38% were enrolled in undergraduate programs, 55% in an MA, and 6% in a PhD program. The majority of participants were Caucasian (68%), born in Canada (74%), female (70%), and between the age of 18 and 30 years (66%). Forty-six percent of the sample identified as Catholic, 27% as Protestant, and the rest as Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, or other.
Procedure
The authors collectively designed the study questionnaire that received approval from the UNH Institutional Review Board and the SPU Research Ethics Board. The questionnaire was administered at the two campuses in fall, 2012. UNH is a public university, while SPU is a small Catholic university with a pontifical charter. At both sites, participants were recruited through a verbal advertisement and sign-up sheet circulated at the beginning of classes. Those who consented to participate attended one of several sessions on campus to complete the questionnaire anonymously. Their completion of the study served as their consent for participation. Each student was asked about (a) reverence in two contexts, (b) spiritual relationships, (c) self-transcendence, (d) attitudes toward death, and (e) personal adjustment versus growth. Pizza and $10 per student were provided as compensation.
Measures
Reverence-revised was assessed with the same items as in Study I. To improve the sensitivity of the SOR scale (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011), we increased levels of response to each context from a Yes/No choice to a 5-point scale. Participants indicated on a 5-point scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very strongly) how strongly they had experienced reverence in six settings: (a) attending religious services, (b) reading the Bible or watching religious television programs, (c) private prayer, (d) being in nature, (e) enjoying music or art, and (f) being loved or supported by, or serving, others. We reduced the number of contexts from eight (in Study I) to six (in Study II). Under R-reverence, we dropped the item regarding meditation because of its surging popularity and thereby its lack of utility in distinguishing the two contexts. Under S-reverence, we kept the two items assessing naturalistic and aesthetic settings but combined the two items assessing reverence in social settings (serving others and receiving support from others) into one item. This allowed us to maintain a balance of three items in R-reverence and S-reverence, respectively.
In relation to our first hypothesis under Objective I, we performed two separate confirmatory factor analyses to evaluate the viability of our two-factor specification of reverence, using principal axis factoring with oblique rotation and eigenvalue set at 1.0 (see Results for more details). The two-factor structure was confirmed and was almost identical for both samples with each factor consisted of three items. The three R-reverence items loaded on the first factor, R-reverence, accounting for 38% of the cumulative variance in the UNH sample and 45% of the cumulative variance in the SPU sample. The second factor, S-reverence, accounting for 26% of the variance in the UNH sample and 21% of the variance in the SPU sample. In view of the almost identical factor structure of the reverence scale in both the UNH and SPU samples, we combined the samples for further analyses. In the combined sample, Cronbach’s alpha of the R-reverence scale was .86, and of the S-reverence scale was .60.
Self-transcendence was assessed with the 10-item (4-point Likert-type scale) Adult Self-Transcendence Inventory (ASTI; Levenson et al., 2005; M = 2.84, SD = 0.34, α = .67).
Spiritual relationship was assessed with one item from the 12-item checklist of answers specifying one item in the Spiritual Support Scale (i.e., “I have an inner resource from my spiritual relationship with God that helps me face difficulties”; Ai et al., 2005). Participants indicate Yes or No to indicate from which higher powers or sacred entities they receive support. For the purpose of this study, we selected the following sources of spiritual support: the Divine, God (including Jesus, Jehovah, or Allah), Nature, and Mother Earth, as they were particularly relevant to the hypothesis.
Attitudes toward death were assessed with five of eight subscales of the Death Perspective Scale (Spilka et al., 1977). Participants responded on a 6-point scale for the 5-item death as failure (M = 1.22, SD = 1.07, α = .83), the 5-item death as forsaking dependents plus guilt (M = 1.90, SD = 1.05, α = .70), the 6-item death as an afterlife-reward (M = 1.87, SD = 1.27, α = .90), the 4-item death as a natural end (M = 4.16, SD = 0.67, α = .69), and the 6-item death as pain (M = 2.17, SD = 0.87). We selected the Spiritual relationship checklist and Death Perspective Scale as particularly relevant to the second and third hypotheses under our Objective I.
In relation to our hypotheses under Objective II, a latent factor, Personal Adjustment, in SEM, was assessed with three indicators, including two measures of personality functioning and a well-being scale. The eight-item personality characteristics of Agreeableness (M = 3.94, SD = 0.58, α = .69) and the nine-item Conscientiousness (M = 3.64, SD = 0.51, α = .76) were measured with scales of the self-report Big Five Inventory (John, Donahue, & Kentle, 1991). Well-Being from Adjustment was assessed using a 5-point Likert-type scale with the sum of the unweighted scores on three 9-item subscales of the Psychological Well-Being Questionnaire (Ryff, 1989). The Environmental Mastery subscale assesses a sense of competence in managing the environment and effective use of surrounding opportunities; the Positive Relations with Others subscale reflects a sense of well-being from warm, satisfying, and trusting relationships with others; and the Self-Acceptance subscale measures a positive attitude toward the self (Ryff, 1989). Cronbach’s alpha reliability of the unweighted composite of these subscales was .81 (M = 13.97; SD = 2.35).
Another latent factor, Personal Growth, was also assessed with three indicators for personality functioning, well-being, and involvement in everyday life tasks. The personality characteristic of Openness to Experience was assessed with a subscale of the Big Five Inventory (John et al., 1991). Participants responded to 10 statements, using a 5-point scale (M = 3.71, SD = 0.62, α = .78). Well-Being from Growth was assessed by summing up the unweighted scores on the remaining three of the six Ryff subscales (M = 14.13, SD = 1.78, α = .78). High scorers on the Personal Growth subscales see the self as growing, open to experience, and evolving over time. High scorers on the Purpose in Life subscale hold beliefs that give life a sense of direction and meaning. High scorers on the Autonomy subscale are independent, self-determining, and able to resist social pressures to think and act (Ryff, 1989). Creative activities were assessed on a 4-point subscale of Harlow and Cantor’s (1996) Everyday Life Tasks scale. The Creative Activity subscale consists of three items (M = 2.02, SD = 0.78, α = .63).
Data Analyses
All data were analyzed using the Mplus software program (version 5.1, Muthén & Muthén, 1998-2010). Reverence was modeled using six indicators, five of which were single item indicators that used a Likert-type scale with only five categories, and the sixth indicator (reverence in interpersonal settings) consisted of the mean of two single items. Therefore, the models were fit to polychoric correlations using the robust weighted least squares mean and variance adjusted estimator appropriate for ordinal data (Beauducel & Herzberg, 2006). Several goodness-of-fit statistics representing different classes of fit indices are reported, including the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA; Steiger, 1990), the comparative fit index (CFI; Bentler, 1990), the Tucker–Lewis index, also known as nonnormed fit index (TLI; Tucker & Lewis, 1973), and the weighted root mean square residual (WRMR; Muthén & Muthén, 1998-2010).We adopted the cutoffs of CFI ≥ .95, TLI ≥ .95, RMSEA ≤ .07 (Browne & Cudeck, 1993), and WRMR ≤ .95 (Yu, 2002), indicating adequate model fit.
Results
Factor Structure
Regarding Hypothesis 1 under Objective I, we performed a confirmatory factor analysis to replicate the hypothesized item structure across the UNH and SPU samples. Items measuring the experience of reverence while engaged in private prayer, attending religious services, reading the bible or watching religious television programs, sightseeing or being in nature, and enjoying music or art were modeled as single-item indicators. In addition, the average of being loved or supported and serving others was computed to form a social reverence indicator. First, we evaluated a one-factor model with all reverence indicators loading onto a single factor. All the goodness-of-fit indices suggested poor model fit, χ2(6) = 72.07, CFI = .92, TLI = .92, RMSEA = .21, and WRMR = 1.20. Next, we evaluated a two-factor model with items measuring reverence. Engaging in private prayer, attending religious services, and reading the bible or watching religious programs were loaded onto a religious reverence latent variable, whereas sightseeing or being in nature and enjoying music or art were loaded onto a secular reverence latent variable. An adequate model fit was achieved only after the social indicator (i.e., the average of items being loved or supported and serving others), one that we assumed to be associated with secular reverence, was allowed to cross load on religious reverence. We, therefore, specified paths from both reverence latent variables to this indicator (see the discussion section for an elaboration of this issue). All of the fit indices indicated very good model fit, χ2(6) = 10.35, CFI = .99, TLI = .99, RMSEA = .07, and WRMR = .39. As shown in Table 3, all the factor loadings exceeded .40 with the exception of being loved/serving others cross-loading on R-reverence factors. A nested chi-square difference test indicated that the two-factor model fit the data significantly better, χ2(2) = 50.07, p < .001.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Reverence Items.
Note. Item assessing interpersonal context is a composite of reverence experienced while serving others and while being loved or supported.
Construct Validity: Associations of R- and S-Reverence With Other Variables
As for Hypotheses 2 and 3 under Objective I, the second set of analyses provided information for convergent and divergent validity of R- and S-reverence using their zero-order correlations with measures of spiritual support, self-transcendence, and death anxiety. The two forms of reverence were assessed with latent variables but the outcome variables were not. Results were presented as beta weights from regressions predicting each of the outcomes with R- and S-Reverence entered simultaneously into the equation and, therefore, controlling for their overlap. As shown in Table 4, both R- and S-reverence were associated with an overall measure of spiritual support. However, the relationship between spiritual support and S-reverence was no longer significant once the overlap between S-reverence and R-reverence was statistically controlled using a regression equation. In terms of specific sources of spiritual support, both R- and S-reverence correlated positively with the Divine relation both at the level of zero order correlations and beta weights from regressions controlling for overlap between R- and S-reverence. As hypothesized, only R-reverence was positively related to a sense of support from God, and only S-reverence related positively to support from Nature and Mother Earth. R-reverence proved to be significantly negatively related to support from Nature and Mother Earth.
Relationship Between Latent Measures of Religious and Secular Reverence and Sources of Spiritual Support (ns = 231-233).
Note. R- and S-reverence are measures with latent variables and measures of sources of spiritual support with single items. Beta coefficients are derived from regressing each of the spiritual items simultaneously on R- and S-Reverence.
p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
In Table 5, both R- and S-reverence were correlated with self-transcendence with and without controlling for their overlap, as hypothesized. In terms of death anxiety, three patterns were discerned. First, R-reverence, but not S-reverence, was positively related to the perception of death as an afterlife of reward. Second, both R- and S-reverence were negatively correlated with death as failure and as forsaking, but the relationships for S-reverence lacked significance once the overlap with R-reverence was controlled. Third, only S-reverence correlated positively with perception of death as a natural end and negatively with death as pain, with and without controlling for overlap with R-reverence.
Relationship Between Latent Measures of R- and S-Reverence and Self-Transcendence and Death Attitudes (n = 233).
Note. n ranges from 231 to 233. R- and S-reverence are measures with latent variables and measures of sources of spiritual support with single items. Beta coefficients are derived from regressing each of the spiritual items simultaneously on R- and S-Reverence.
p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Differential Associations of R- and S-Reverence With Adjustment and Growth
Finally, concerning Objective II, in estimating our hypothetical model, the initial estimation did not show the best fit of the SEM. Modification indices suggested that the addition of a path from R-reverence to interpersonal contact would considerably improve the model fitness. After this additional path was entered in the model, the fitness became appropriate, as detailed below. Without further suggestion from modification index, we finalized our model as shown in Figure 1.
Structural equations model of the relationship between R- and S-reverence and personality adjustment and growth (n = 233).
A measurement model with four latent variables was evaluated in order to test the relationship between R- and S-reverence and psychosocial functioning (adjustment and growth). R- and S-reverence were modeled as two factors (as described above). Indicators of adjustment consisted of the agreeableness and conscientiousness subscales of the Big Five Inventory and the adjustment scale created from the Ryff Well-Being Scales. Indicators of growth consisted of the openness subscale of the Big Five Inventory, the growth scale created from the Ryff Well-Being Scale, and engagement in creative activities from the Everyday Life Tasks scale. To set the metric of latent variables, the first factor loading was fixed to 1 (Brown, 2006). The residuals of indicators that were derived from the same self-report measure (e.g., Big Five Inventory subscales, adjustment and growth, see Ryff, 1989) were allowed to covary (Brown, 2006). Goodness-of-fit indices showed adequate model fit, χ2(22) = 63.54, CFI = .95, TLI = .95, RMSEA = .09, and WRMR = .84.
The bivariate associations between the four latent variables are presented in Table 6. At the level of zero-order correlations R-reverence was positively correlated with both adjustment and growth, whereas S-reverence was related to growth but not adjustment. As expected, R-and S-reverence were moderately positively correlated (r = .39). It should be noted that because we correlated latent measures with measure error accounted for, the magnitude of the correlations presented in Table 6 is inflated compared to correlations of nonlatent variables.
Bivariate Associations Between the Study’s Latent Variables (n = 233).
p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
A structural model specifying directional paths from each of the two reverence latent variables to each of the well-being latent variables was tested next. Figure 1 displays standardized regression coefficients for all relationships among the latent variables. When the adjustment and growth latent variables were simultaneously regressed on both of the reverence latent variables, religious reverence was significantly associated with adjustment but not growth, and secular reverence was significantly associated with growth but not adjustment.
Discussion
Despite considerable demographic differences between the samples in Studies I and II, the dual structure of the SOR scale replicated across both studies, meeting our Objective I. In other words, our findings confirm the fact that the tendency to experience reverence in traditional religious settings is distinct from reverence in secular settings. The twofold structure of the SOR scale captures this positive emotion in relation to different ways of experiencing the sacred. Expanding the construct validity of the SOR scale, the findings from Study I support our hypothesis regarding the differential associations between R- or S-reverences and various types of sacred interconnectedness that may undergird spiritual resources (Ai et al., 2005). Our findings also demonstrate the divergent associations of the two subscales with primarily different sets of measures regarding attitudes toward death (Spilka et al., 1977). Despite a shared positive association with self-transcendence (Levenson et al., 2005), the no more than moderate zero-order correlation r > .40) between the two subscales further confirms the distinctiveness of religious and secular reverence.
The SEM confirms our hypothetical model, meeting our Objective II. Namely, individuals who reported experiencing reverence in religious settings tended to be characterized as agreeable and conscientious, to derive their sense of well-being from positive relations with others, to have self-acceptance, and to deal effectively with the surrounding environment. This set of characteristics have been related to traditional religious beliefs and practices (e.g., Dillon & Wink, 2007) and with psychosocial functioning characterized by adjustment to social convention and a focus on hedonic well-being (Staudinger & Kessler, 2009). On the other hand, the SEM also shows that participants who scored high on S-reverence tended to be characterized by openness to experience, deriving their sense of well-being from personal growth, having purpose in life, and personal autonomy. They tended to engage in creative activities such as playing music, painting, or sculpting, deriving spiritual support from sources such as Nature and Mother Earth, and viewing death as a natural end and part of the life cycle (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011; Elkins et al., 1988; Maslow, 1970; Munro, 1985, 2005; Schweitzer, 1965; Woodruff, 2001). The correlates of S-reverence confirm its link with psychological functioning indicated by growth.
Furthermore, it is important to note that although at the level of zero-order correlations, R-reverence correlated positively with measures of both adjustment and growth, this association became non-significant in the structural equations model where the overlap between R- and S-reverence is statistically controlled. Thus, the relationship between R-reverence and characteristics such as openness to experience and engagement in creative activities can be attributed to the moderate overlap between the two types of reverence. Extending our previous findings (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011), the fact that R-reverence was positively related to adjustment, but not to growth, and that the reverse was true for S-reverence in the SEM adds to the construct validity of our two-factor model of reverence. The latter finding adds to the construct validity differentiating R- and S-reverence.
Finally, we should acknowledge that in the confirmatory factor analysis, the two-factor model converged only when the item assessing reverence in interpersonal settings was allowed to load on both factors. Although we did not initially expect that the item measuring reverence in the context of being supported or serving others would cross-load on both factors, it is understandable that interpersonal experiences such as serving others can elicit reverent feelings irrespective of whether they take place in religious or secular contexts. Clearly, the psychometric location of the item measuring interpersonal reverence needs further inquiry because while prior exploratory factor analyses (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011) located it on the secular factor, the findings from the present study suggest a greater degree of overlap with the religious factor.
Not unexpectedly, the R-reverence subscale exhibited a much higher alpha reliability than the measure of S-reverence in Study II, unlike in the older cardiac patient sample (Ai, Wink, et al., 2011). This is the case because the items assessing R-reverence are confined to a narrower range of experiences that are typically highly related to each other, especially in a younger sample. It is reasonable to expect that participants who experience a sense of deep respect toward the divine while praying would also tend to have the same feelings while attending a religious service (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011; Grant, 1928; Keltner & Haidt, 2003; Otto, 1928; Rudgley, 1999; Samuels & Lester, 1985). In contrast, the items of the S-reverence scale tap into a much broader range of experiences ranging from nature, the arts, and sacred interactions with others (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011; Elkins et al., 1988; Maslow, 1970; Munro, 1985, 2005; Schweitzer, 1965; Woodruff, 2001). Notwithstanding these heterogeneous contexts, the three items assessing reverence in secular settings are interrelated indicating the general tendency of individuals who experience this positive emotion in one setting to also experience it in the other contexts.
General Discussion
Overall, the present study yielded three new findings. First, using different research designs, we confirmed the bidimensional structure of the Reverence scale in two very different samples. Study I provides additional properties of the SOR, beyond the previous report on its predictive validity of differentiating between reverence in religious and secular settings in older cardiac patients (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 211). Both forms of reference are not related to other established positive psychological traits, such as optimism, hope, personal control, nor are they linked to fearfulness. These findings suggest that the role of reverence in previous medical studies may not be attributable to other protective factor. Also, our finding makes reverence distinguishable from the related to it construct of awe. Study II supports the twofold structure and extends the scope of Study I to a healthy student population. Concerning this significant finding, it is worth remphasizing that the cardiac samples used to initially validate our reverence scale had an average age of more than 60 years (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). In contrast, participants in Study II, were significantly younger (vast majority younger than 30 years) and were drawn from a cross-national sample of young Americans and Canadians who were physically much healthier than the surgical patients with advanced cardiac conditions. Whereas participants in Study I were all facing their life-altering surgery and existential crisis (Ai, Hopp, et al., 2013), Study II participants were enrolled in college and preparing to launch their future careers.
The second major finding is new information regarding the similarities and differences in the relationships of R- and S-reverence with measures of religiousness, religious coping, spiritual support, self-transcendence, death anxiety, and other psychosocial dimensions. In support of the divergent validity of our two subscales, participants who experienced reverence in religious settings derived spiritual support from traditional sources (e.g., a belief in a personalized God; Ai, Wink, et al., 2009; Grant, 1928; Keltner & Haidt, 2003; Otto, 1928; Rudgley, 1999; Samuels & Lester, 1985), in Study II, and had a more positive perception of death as leading to a rewarding afterlife (Spilka et al., 1977), in Studies I and II. Not surprisingly, Study I participants also used negative religious coping or experienced spiritual struggle (Pagament et al., 1998). In contrast, those who experienced reverence in secular settings were more likely to derive spiritual support from nontraditional sources (e.g., a belief in a natural force or entity) and also to accept death as leading to a natural end without undue concern regarding pain. They were also slightly more likely to use cognitive coping, be happier, and receive social support, in Study I, and were more socially engaged, in Study II. This differentiation may help provide insight into worldview differences concerning individuals’ attitudes toward death-related challenges and the resources from which they draw strength.
In support of their convergent validity, both measures of reverence were positively related to measures of self-transcendence (Levenson et al., 2005), an overall sense of spiritual support (Ai et al., 2005), positive religious coping (Pargament et al., 1998), divine love (Levin & Kaplan, 2010), and religiosity (Chatters et al., 1992), though, as expected, R-reverence displays a stronger association with all these measures. These similarities indicate that high scorers on both measures of reverence acknowledge the importance of the sacred in their lives. Individuals high on either R- or S-reverence appeared to be buffered against death anxiety as they did not see death as a failure or as leading to a feeling of being forsaken by others, although this relationship was not significant for S-reverence after controlling for the effects of R-reverence (Spilka et al., 1977). These findings support the hypothesis that the ability to inject a sense of sacred interconnection into one’s life, irrespective of whether it involves religious or secular settings, is associated with a sense of meaning and purpose in life (Ai et al., 2008; Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011; Elkins et al., 1988; Maslow, 1970). In sum, the presence of shared characteristics in R- and S-reverence supports the construct validity of the Reverence scale and fits with previous findings demonstrating commonalities between traditionally religious individuals and non-traditional, spiritual seekers (Dillon & Wink, 2007). If both contexts generate the same positive spiritual feeling, the SOR scale can be a useful tool for behavioral research assessing meaningful experiences in life and in identifying how aging Boomers and young people with diverse beliefs negotiate health crises.
Finally, enriching previous medical research, R- and S-reverence are further distinguished with two fundamentally distinct patterns of psychosocial functioning (adjustment and growth), in Study II. Advancing the literature (Ai, Hall, et al., 2013; Ai, Hopp, et al., 2013; Batson et al., 1993; Dillon & Wink, 2007; Saroglou, 2002; Staudinger & Kunzmann, 2005), the SEM analysis supports our theoretical model regarding the differential associations between the ability to inject reverence in two contexts and the quality of psychosocial functioning, indicated by adjustment and growth. Given the differential predictive value of the SOR subscales, the new finding may promote cross-disciplinary behavioral health research and intervention among currently aging Americans. While this generation has been known for its innovative and unconventional attitudes toward life (Roof, 1999), its members are currently encountering new challenges with age-related diseases, painful disabilities, and deeply ingrained societal ageism (Osborn, 2012). Accordingly, the SOR scale can be a valuable means of studying the aging population.
The theoretical implications of the study for humanistic psychology are threefold. First, our conceptualization of reverence expands Maslow’s (1970) notion of it as a mere component of peak experiences. Rather, reverence on its own can provide the individual with meaning in life through the sense of deep connection with outside reality (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). Second, we demonstrated that reverence is a psychologically measurable positive emotion that can be experienced in different contexts including religious and secular settings. Third, in doing so, we offer a worldview-related tool for psychologists to study different forms of human well-being, which go beyond mere life satisfaction. Our findings thus bear clinical implications, especially for the inquiry into eudaimonic well-being, as evidenced by the association of S-reverence with personal growth in various adult populations.
Recent behavioral health research has begun to shed light on the merit of diverse spiritual ways of coping with life-altering illnesses. Bellizzi et al. (2010) found that Black breast cancer survivors reported higher levels of personal growth than did White survivors, partly due to the inspiration of African American spirituality. Likewise, private positive spiritual coping, but not many other religious constructs, predicted long-term stress-related growth in open-heart surgery patients (Ai, Hall, et al., 2013). The present study adds fresh evidence regarding the potentially beneficial role played by two different modes of experiencing spirituality (R-reverence and S-reverence) for coping with health issues. If replicated, our findings might encourage health care providers to help patients experience reverence in their daily life, as a way of easing psychological distress despite suffering and pain, and help individuals grow personally even when dealing with chronic health conditions.
The present study is limited by the focus on a highly vulnerable clinical population that restricted the use of extensive psychological measures in Study I (Ai, Wink, et al., 2009, 2011). It is also limited by the reliance on self-report data and a cross-sectional design in Study II, which does not allow us to disentangle the causality in the relationship shown in the SEM. While it may be the case that reverence leads to the ability to inject meaning in life, the possibility exists that reverence is the offspring of a firm sense of self and/or purpose in life. Longitudinal data are needed to further support the revised Reverence scale’s predictive validity and to determine the causal relationship between R- and S-reverence and psychological functioning indicated by adjustment and growth. Although it is likely that the context in which reverence is experienced is the outgrowth of differences in psychological functioning, the reverse causal sequence cannot be ruled out given the cross-sectional nature of our data. Compared with the prospective medical research in Study I, we truncated the Reverence scale by eliminating one item (experiencing reverence while meditating) and combined two other items (reverence when being loved and supported, and when serving others) into one item in Study II. Future investigation is necessary to fully elucidate the substructure of the revised Reverence scale and, in particular, to determine the role played by traditional and nontraditional religious beliefs and practices, and the experience of reverence in social contexts such as when being loved or helping others. In particular, the present study invites further investigation of the distinction between awe and reverence, as listed in Table 1, which at present remains hypothetical without empirical support.
In conclusion, our study contributed additional evidence to the concurrent and construct validity of the recently developed Reverence scale that assesses feelings of deep respect, a long-standing positive emotion acknowledged by different cultures throughout their written history but rarely examined by social scientists. We also extended previous research on understanding the relationship between psychological adjustment and growth and, by extension, the related constructs of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Further information is needed to understand the prospective relationship of the two forms of reverence with both well-being outcomes and biophysiological mechanisms in various patient populations. Future research should also investigate the divergence of reverence and other worldview-based positive emotions. The significance of reverence lies not only in the fact that it involves the ability to extend the boundaries of the self but that it also encompasses diverse human contexts. Identifying the protective relevance of reverence as a positive emotion may advance longitudinal investigations of health outcomes and enhance the understanding of mechanisms linking positive emotions and positive coping with adversity, life-threatening illness, and issues of mortality.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
We gratefully thank Marshall Shearers, MD’s initiative on assessment of the Sense of Reverence.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: We gratefully acknowledge the support from the National Institute on Aging Grant 1 RO3 AGO 15686-01, National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine Grant P50 AT00011, and grants from the John Templeton Foundation and Hartford Geriatric Faculty Scholars Program to Amy L. Ai, which enabled the data collection for Study I, and a grant from Wellesley College to Paul Wink, PhD, which enabled the international collaboration for Study II.