Attachment to God and Quest as Moderators of the Relationship between Religious Doubt and Mental Health

Abstract

The present study examined attachment to God and quest as potential moderators of the relationship between religious doubt and mental health. A sample of Christian participants (N = 235) completed a survey which included measures of attachment to God, quest, religious doubt, and mental health. As hypothesized, attachment to God and quest significantly moderated an individual’s experience of religious doubt. Low avoidant attachment to God (i.e., a more secure attachment) was associated with a more negative relationship between cognitive religious doubt and positive mental health than high avoidant attachment. In contrast, low avoidant attachment to God also ameliorated the positive relationship between affective religious doubt and mental health problems. Low anxious attachment was associated with a stronger negative relationship between both measures of religious doubt (i.e., cognitive and affective) and positive mental health. In addition, high soft quest weakened all four of the relationships between measures of religious doubt and mental health. High hard quest ameliorated the positive relationship between both measures of religious doubt and mental health problems. These results indicate that an individual’s attachment to God and the way an individual is oriented toward religion each play a role in the mental health outcomes associated with religious doubt.

Keywords

God concepts/God image psychology of religion

Many studies have examined the relationship between religion and mental health, most commonly finding a positive relationship between the two (Galen & Kloet, 2011; Garssen et al., 2020; Haney & Rollock, 2020). However, significant negative relationships between religion and mental health have also been found (Hodapp & Zwingmann, 2019). As Western society has become increasingly secular and overall religious participation has declined, religious doubt (RD) has become an increasingly relevant topic of study. RD occurs when an individual encounters new ideas and is presented with multiple seemingly valid, conflicting worldviews and accordingly begins to question the validity of their religious beliefs. Fisher (2017) conceptualized a model wherein experience of RD can lead to either a reconfiguration of belief or to some degree of disaffiliation with the group whose beliefs are being doubted. These experiences can cause affective or cognitive distress and, accordingly, a number of studies have found that RD is related to negative mental health outcomes (Abu-Raiya et al., 2016; Ellison & Lee, 2010; Galek et al., 2007; Galen & Kloet, 2011; Haney & Rollock, 2020; Henrie & Patrick, 2014; Hodapp & Zwingmann, 2019; Krause, 2012; Krause et al., 1999; Krause & Wulff, 2004).

A significant body of work on RD has developed over recent years, yet many questions about the factors that contribute to RD and how these might influence mental health outcomes remain unanswered. Most studies on RD either focus on factors that predict RD or on mental health outcomes associated with RD, but less research is available on the factors that can influence an individual’s experience of RD, that is, on the moderators and mediators of the relationship between RD and mental health. The present study investigates whether, in an online sample of Christians, the relationship between RD and mental health is moderated by attachment to God (AG) and quest religious orientation. Below we examine the literature regarding RD and mental health, factors that influence RD, and relationships between our proposed moderators (i.e., avoidant attachment, anxious attachment, soft quest, and hard quest [HQ]) and doubt.

RD has been found to have a relationship to mental health in previous research (Hodapp & Zwingmann, 2019). Stronger certainty of beliefs is associated with greater mental well-being (Galen & Kloet, 2011), while individuals who experience RD are more likely to experience general anxiety, interpersonal sensitivity, paranoia, hostility, and obsessive-compulsive symptoms (Abu-Raiya et al., 2016; Galek et al., 2007; Haney & Rollock, 2020; Henrie & Patrick, 2014). Other studies have found RD to be positively associated with psychological distress (Ellison & Lee, 2010), a loss of emotional well-being, anxiety, aggression and more depressive cognition along with depressive symptoms (Abu-Raiya et al., 2016; Haney & Rollock, 2020; Henrie & Patrick, 2014; Krause, 2012; Krause et al., 1999; Krause & Wulff, 2004).

Demographic factors and life experiences have been found to be associated with RD. Galek et al. (2007) found that experience of RD tends to be less common among older adults, indicating that RD declines as one ages and becomes more fixed in one’s beliefs. Kooistra and Pargament (1999) found that students who experienced higher amounts of adverse life events, emotional distress, and who had more authoritarian parents were more likely to experience RD. In addition, RD has been studied with respect to two religious variables: church experiences and fundamentalism. Krause and Ellison (2009) found that people who have more positive experiences in church and with other religious adherents are less prone to experience RD, and, conversely, that those who have had negative interactions with faith-based communities are more likely to experience RD. Hunsberger et al. (1996) categorized a portion of their participants as either high or low in fundamentalism and found that those in the high fundamentalism group reported significantly less experience of general RD than those in the low fundamentalism group. It was also found that high fundamentalists tend to use the content of their religious beliefs to cope with doubt, whereas low fundamentalists more often respond to doubt by changing beliefs. Low fundamentalists were found to interact with RD in a more complex and critical manner. Given the religious nature of RD, the study of additional religious variables that influence its expression seems warranted. We propose two: AG, and quest.

Attachment to God and Doubt

Rowatt & Kirkpatrick (2002) found significant correlations between AG and various religious, emotional, and personality variables, indicating that AG plays a substantial role in the psychological experience of religious people. However, to date, no studies have examined RD in relationship to AG. However, two studies on RD and God concept have been conducted. Exline et al. (2015) found that perceiving God as distant correlated positively with RD. Similarly, Abu-Raiya et al. (2016) found that perceiving God as cruel or as distant were positively correlated with RD. These studies indicate that an individual’s perception of God and of the relationship with God is related to their experience of RD. More specifically, these studies suggest that RD may also be associated with AG.

AG describes the degree to which one’s AG is experienced as either secure or insecure. Drawing on Bowlby’s (1969/1982, 1988) theory of attachment as it applies to an individual’s perceived AG, Rowatt and Kirkpatrick (2002) noted that the experience of God as a secure base corresponds with more confidence and a greater sense of security while confronting novel experiences, perhaps even at an existential level. In contrast, an insecure AG involves the degree to which an individual is anxious about abandonment by God or avoids intimacy with God. Avoidant attachment involves the perception of God as distant and impersonal, while anxious attachment involves the degree to which God, even if viewed as loving, is perceived as inconsistent or unreliable. It stands to reason that an individual with a secure AG (i.e., low avoidance and low anxious attachment) would experience RD as a less threatening experience than would an individual with an avoidant or anxious attachment. Therefore, it may be the case that secure God attachment moderates the relationship between RD and mental health, buffering against the negative effects that RD has on mental health.

Quest and Doubt

A second potential religious variable that could influence the experience of RD is quest. The quest construct was developed by Batson (1976; Batson et al., 1993; Batson & Ventis, 1982) as an addition to Allport and Ross’s (1967) conceptualization of extrinsic and intrinsic religiosity. General quest religiosity is characterized by openness to new ideas, doubt in previously held or conventionally held ideas, and an acknowledgment that many existential/religious questions are difficult or impossible to fully answer (Edwards et al., 2011).

Beck and Jessup (2004) found that various distinct dimensions of quest play important roles in mature religious functioning, indicating that different aspects quest ought to be studied as separate but related constructs. The present study builds on the work of Beck and Jessup (2004) and Edwards et al. (2011), both of whom ran factorial analyses on previously existing measures of quest and found two distinct factors with different correlates. Though some conceptual and measurement differences are noted (see Crosby, 2013, comparing the different results), both studies drew a distinction between what they called soft and HQ as distinct attitudes toward religion and religious experience. In general, soft quest religiosity involves an openness to changing one’s beliefs and a valuation of RDs as good. HQ religiosity involves conceiving of reason and faith as opposing epistemological attitudes and perceiving religion as an ongoing quest that may or may not lead to truth. This characterization of soft and HQ suggests that they may influence the experience of RD and its relationship to mental health differently. It is possible that individuals whose approach to religion is characterized by soft quest are less likely to experience the negative mental health outcomes that are associated with RD, given that soft quest religiosity perceives RD as a valuable and important part of religious experience. Conversely, individuals whose approach to religion is characterized by HQ may be more likely to experience the negative mental health outcomes associated with RD, as RD would be experienced as an indicator of an irreconcilable conflict between reason and religion.

Present Study

In this present study we hypothesized that (1) the experience of RD would be negatively correlated with positive mental health and positively correlated with mental health problems (MHPs). We also hypothesized that (2) avoidant attachment and anxious attachment would moderate the relationship between RD and mental health, in that they would potentiate the negative consequences of RD on mental health. Finally, we hypothesized that (3) soft and HQ would moderate the relationship between RD and mental health, in that soft quest would ameliorate the negative consequences of RD on mental health and HQ would have the opposite effect.

Method

Participants and procedure

Participants were recruited through MTurk. To ensure quality, participants were recruited from the United States, had a 95% approval rating, and had previously completed at least 100 successful tasks on MTurk (Peer et al., 2013). After removing participants with a religious affiliation other than Christianity, who failed an attention check question, or who did not meet a minimum time requirement for completing the survey, a total of 235 respondents remained. The resulting sample was comprised of 120 men (51.1%) and 114 women (48.5%) (1 participant did not indicate gender). Participants’ ages ranged from 20 to 80 years of age (M = 34.94; standard deviation [SD] = 10.55). With respect to ethnicity, 147 (62.6%) were European American (non-Hispanic), 38 (16.2%) were Black/African American, 22 (9.4%) were Hispanic/Latino/a, 19 (8.1%) were Asian/Asian American, 3 (1.3%) were American Indian or Alaska Native, and 6 (2.6%) reported being biracial/multiracial. With respect to religion, 142 (60.4%) were Protestant, 87 (37%) were Catholic, and 6 (2.6%) were Orthodox.

Measures

Attachment to God

The Attachment to God Scale (Rowatt & Kirkpatrick, 2002) is a 9-item measure measuring two facets of insecure AG; avoidant attachment (α = .86) and anxious attachment (α = .75). Scores were recorded on a 7-point Likert-type scale with 1(strongly disagree) and 7 (strongly agree). Total scores for each subscale are found by reverse-scoring the necessary items and calculating the average. A high score on either subscale indicates a more avoidant or anxious AG. The Avoidant subscale includes six items used to assess the degree to which someone believes God to be distant and impersonal, and depicts the way someone moves toward or away from a secure attachment with God. Sample items from the Avoidant subscale include “God seems impersonal to me” and “God seems to have little or no interest in my personal problems.” The Anxious subscale includes three items which assess how an individual believes God to be inconsistent and is unsure of God’s love. Example items from the Anxious subscale include “God’s reactions to me seem to be inconsistent” and “God sometimes seems very warm and other times very cold to me.”

Quest

Quest is a measure of religious orientation that accounts for religious factors such as openness to change, flexibility of belief, and attitude toward RD (Edwards et al., 2011). Edwards et al. (2011) synthesized and ran analyses on three previously existing Quest measures and developed two subscales of the Quest construct: Soft quest (α = .88) and HQ (α = .78). Scores were recorded on a 6-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree) with high scores indicating a greater experience of soft or HQ.

The Soft Quest subscale (SQS) includes 17 items used to assess the degree to which religion is experienced as a constantly developing process, as opposed to a set of beliefs to which one must intellectually assent. Soft quest religiosity represents a tendency to embrace RDs and remain open to change in ways consistent with satisfying belief. In particular, the SQS measures the degree to which the religious journey is experienced as something malleable wherein new information is perceived as non-threatening to one’s worldview. Sample items from the SQS include “As I grow and change, I expect my religion also to grow and change” and “Religious doubts allow us to learn.”

The Hard Quest subscale (HQS) includes eight items used to assess the degree to which religion is experienced as a journey toward truth with no particular endpoint or goal. HQ religiosity represents a more polarized approach to faith and truth than soft quest religiosity. Sample items from the HQS include “Religion should just be an aspect of a more basic quest to discover truth about everything, without prejudice and taking nothing on faith” and “The real goal of religion ought to be to make us wonder, think, and search, NOT take the word of some earlier teachings.”

Religious doubt

RD was measured using two different scales, one focusing on the cognitive experience of doubt, and one on the affective experience of doubt. The Religious Doubt Scale (Altemeyer, 1988) is a 10-item measure designed to measure an individual’s degree of RD, specifically as it pertains to the doubter’s cognitive experience. Items are scored on a 6-point Likert-type scale that ranges from 0 (none at all) to 5 (a great deal), based upon the extent to which the respondent has experienced the specific instance of doubt. Sample items include, “Doubts about the existence of a benevolent, good God, caused by the suffering or death of someone I knew”; “The feeling that religion makes people do stupid things and give up perfectly wholesome pleasures for no good reason”; “The feeling that today’s religions are based on a collection of superstitions from the past developed to ‘explain’ things primitive people did not understand.” High scores on this measure indicate a high degree of doubt in the respondent’s religious life. Cronbach’s alpha for the current sample was .94.

The Religious and Spiritual Struggles Scale (RSSS) is a 26-item measure developed by Exline et al. (2014) to assess interpersonal, intrapersonal and supernatural struggles. The RSSS consists of six subscales with only the doubt subscale in the present study. This subscale consists of four items that assess the affective dimension of doubt, such as feeling troubled by doubts or questions about one’s religious beliefs. The items are rated 1 (not at all) to 5 (a great deal) with higher scores reflecting higher amounts of RD. Cronbach’s alpha for the doubt subscale in the current sample is .91.

Mental health problems

The Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) is a 34-item measure developed by Evans et al. (2000, 2002) used to assess MHPs. The CORE-OM consists of four subscales: Subjective Well-Being (e.g., “I have felt like crying”), Life Functioning (e.g., “I have felt terribly alone and isolated”), Problems/Symptoms (e.g., “I have felt panic or terror”), and Risk to Self and Others. For ethical reasons, the Risk to Self and Others subscale was not included. The items were rated on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (most or all of the time) with higher scores reflecting more MHPs. Cronbach’s alpha in the current sample was .96.

Positive mental health

The Mental Health Continuum—Short Form (MHC-SF; Keyes, 2005) is a three-factor measure of positive mental health that assesses a respondent’s level of emotional (3 items), social (5 items), and psychological (6 items) well-being. Participants are asked to respond to items on a 6-point scale based on the events of the past month (never, once or twice, about once a week, 2 or 3 times a week, almost every day, or every day). High scores on this measure indicate high levels of positive mental health and holistic well-being. Cronbach’s alpha in the current sample was .93.

Results

Preliminary analyses

The data were analyzed using SPSS. The intercorrelations for all measures can be found in Table 1. The non-transformed means and standard deviations for all measures are displayed in Table 2. All measures were tested for normality and homoscedasticity. The measure of positive mental health was found to be negatively skewed. Before a transformation was performed, the measure was reflected by subtracting the mean of each score from the highest score, then adding one. This corrected the measure to be positively skewed which allowed the measure to be transformed. A square root transformation then corrected the skewness of the positive mental health measure. The results were then re-reflected to avoid confusion. In addition, the measures of cognitive doubt and MHPs were found to be positively skewed. Cognitive doubt was transformed with a square root transformation which corrected the skewness. We attempted to transform MHPs with the square root, log, and the inverse transformations; however, it continued to remain either slightly skewed or with high levels of kurtosis. The Mental Health Problem Scale was therefore not transformed from the original, as it was a very slight skew of only 3.63. The transformed scores for positive mental health and cognitive doubt were used in the following analyses.

Table 1.

Correlations between All Continuous Variables.

Measures	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1. AG_Avoid	–
2. AG_Anx	.48**	–
3. SoftQ	.31**	.20**	–
4. HardQ	.52**	.17**	.47**	–
5. RD	.55**	.41**	.53**	.50**	–
6. RSSDbt	.48**	.47**	.39**	.26**	.69**	–
7. MHP	.46**	.44**	.16*	.03	.49**	.51**	–
8. PMH	–.29**	–.23**	–.02	–.10	–.27**	–.29**	–.65**	–

AG_Avoid: attachment to God- avoidant subscale; AG_Anx- attachment to God- anxious subscale; SoftQ: soft quest; HardQ: hard quest; RD: religious doubt; RSSDbt: religious spiritual struggles- doubt subscale; MHP: mental health problems; PMH: positive mental health.

p < .05, **p < .01.

Table 2.

Means, Standard Deviations, and Alphas for all Non-transformed Measures.

Measures	a	M	SD
Attachment to God-avoidant	.86	2.45	1.37
Attachment to God-anxious	.75	3.43	1.50
Religious doubt	.94	1.50	.38
Religious spiritual struggles	.91	2.30	1.16
Soft quest	.88	3.67	.90
Hard quest	.78	3.14	.99
Mental health problems	.96	2.04	.80
Positive mental health	.93	1.75	.27

SD: standard deviation.

Hypothesis 1

Zero-order correlations confirmed Hypothesis 1. MHPs correlated positively with both cognitive RD (r = .49, p < .001) and affective RD (r = .51, p < .001). Conversely, positive mental health correlated negatively with both cognitive RD (RDS; r = -.27, p < .001) and affective RD (RSSS-D; r = -.29, p < .001).

Hypothesis 2

The PROCESS macro for SPSS was used to test the moderating role of both AG subscales on the relationship between RD (cognitive and affective doubt) and mental health (MHPs and positive mental health); a series of eight moderation analyses was run. AG was found to be a significant moderator in four of the eight relationships between the measures of well-being and RD (see Table 3). Thus, hypothesis 2 was partially confirmed though not always as expected.

Table 3.

Summary of Regression Results Showing Attachment to God, Soft Quest, and Hard Quest Moderating the Relationship between Religious Doubt and Measures of Mental Health.

Criterion	Predictors	B	SE	t	p	R ²	F(df)	p
Mental health problems						.29	33.03 (3, 240)	.000
	RD	.81	.25	3.27	.00
	AG_Avoid	.22	.15	1.50	.13
	RD x AG_Avoid	–.04	.09	–.45	.66
						.36	45.13 (3, 240)	.000
	RSSDbt	.02	.08	.24	.81
	AG_Avoid	–.10	.08	–1.24	.22
	RSSDbt x AG_Avoid	.10	.03	3.62	.00
Positive mental health						.12	10.87 (3, 238)	.000
	RD	–.29	.09	–3.09	.00
	AG_Avoid	–.16	.06	–2.91	.00
	RD x AG_Avoid	.08	.03	2.27	.02
						.11	10.28 (3, 238)	.000
	RSSDbt	–.06	.03	–1.94	.54
	AG_Avoid	–.06	.03	–1.75	.08
	RSSDbt x AG_Avoid	.01	.01	.58	.56
Mental health problems						.31	35.94 (3, 240)	.000
	RD	.56	.28	2.00	.05
	AG_Anx	.05	.12	.44	.66
	RD x AG_Anx	.06	.07	.87	.38
						.32	38.47 (3, 240)	.000
	RSSDbt	.13	.10	1.32	.19
	AG_Anx	.04	.07	.53	.59
	RSSDbt x AG_Anx	.04	.02	1.72	.09
Positive mental health						.12	10.64 (3, 238)	.000
	RD	–.43	.11	–3.94	.00
	AG_Anx	–.15	.05	–3.26	.00
	RD x AG_Anx	.08	.03	2.81	.01
						.12	10.38 (3, 238)	.000
	RSSDbt	–.14	.04	–3.66	.00
	AG_Anx	–.08	.03	–2.93	.00
	RSSDbt x AG_Anx	.02	.01	2.42	.02
Mental health problems						.29	32.93 (3, 241)	.000
	RD	2.99	.50	5.99	.00
	SQ	.52	.18	2.94	.00
	RD x SQ	–.46	.12	–3.79	.00
						.27	30.30 (3, 241)	.000
	RSSDbt	.71	.18	4.06	.00
	SQ	.12	.10	1.27	.21
	RSSDbt x SQ	–.09	.04	–2.05	.04
Positive mental health						.11	10.18 (3, 239)	.000
	RD	–.67	.19	–3.50	.00
	SQ	–.10	.07	–1.30	.19
	RD x SQ	.10	.05	2.21	.03
						.12	10.41 (3, 239)	.000
	RSSDbt	–.24	.10	–3.53	.00
	SQ	–.04	.04	–1.01	.31
	RSSDbt x SQ	.04	.02	2.41	.02
Mental health problems						.36	44.40 (3, 241)	.000
	RD	2.76	.32	8.54	.00
	HQ	.45	.15	3.09	.00
	RD x HQ	–.44	.09	–4.88	.00
						.28	31.90 (3, 241)	.000
	RSSDbt	.62	.12	5.11	.00
	HQ	.08	.09	.90	.37
	RSSDbt x HQ	–.08	.04	–2.18	.03
Positive mental health						.08	6.72 (3, 239)	.000
	RD	–.33	.13	–2.50	.01
	HQ	–.05	.06	–.76	.45
	RD x HQ	.04	.04	1.01	.32
						.08	7.23 (3, 239)	.000
	RSSDbt	–.08	.05	–1.69	.09
	HQ	–.02	.03	–.50	.62
	RSSDbt x HQ	.00	.01	.32	.75

SE: standard error; RSSDbt: religious spiritual struggles-doubt subscale; RD: religious doubt; AG: attachment to God; SoftQ: soft quest; HardQ: hard quest.

Avoidant attachment

Avoidant attachment was found to significantly moderate the relationships between cognitive doubt and positive mental health (B = .08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [.01, .14], t = 2.27, p = .02) and between affective doubt and MHPs (B = .10, 95% CI = [.05, .16], t = 3.62, p = .00). However, avoidant attachment did not moderate the relationships between cognitive doubt and MHPs, nor the relationship between affective doubt and positive mental health. It should be noted that high scores on the avoidant attachment measure indicate a more insecure attachment.

While overall low avoidant attachment was associated with higher positive mental health, there was an unexpected negative relationship between cognitive doubt and positive mental health when avoidant attachment was low. In contrast, there was not a significant relationship between cognitive doubt and positive mental health when avoidant attachment was high (Figure 1). In addition, confirming what was hypothesized, avoidant attachment was found to potentiate the relationship between affective doubt and MHPs. There was a small, positive relationship between affective doubt and MHPs when avoidant attachment was low, and a stronger relationship between affective doubt and MHPs when avoidant attachment was high (Figure 2).

Figure 1.

Avoidant attachment to God as moderator of the relationship between cognitive religious doubt and positive mental health.

Figure 2.

Avoidant attachment to God as moderator of the relationship between affective religious doubt and mental health problems.

Anxious attachment

Anxious attachment was found to significantly moderate the relationships between cognitive doubt and positive mental health (B = .08, 95% CI = [.02, .14], t = 2.81, p = .01) and between affective doubt and positive mental health (B = .02, 95% CI = [.00, .04], t = 2.42, p = .02). However, anxious attachment did not moderate the relationships between cognitive and affective doubt and MHPs. Note that high scores on the anxious attachment measure indicate a more insecure attachment.

Both significant relationships between the anxious attachment, RD, and positive mental health were contrary to what was expected. When anxious attachment was high there was a slight negative relationship between cognitive doubt and positive mental health; when anxious attachment was low there was a significantly more negative relationship between cognitive doubt and positive mental health (Figure 3). The same was true for affective doubt and positive mental health (Figure 4).

Figure 3.

Anxious attachment to God as moderator of the relationship between cognitive religious doubt and positive mental health.

Figure 4.

Anxious attachment to God as moderator of the relationship between affective religious doubt and positive mental health.

Hypothesis 3

The moderating role of both soft and HQ on the relationship between RD (cognitive and affective doubt) and mental health (both MHPs and positive mental health) was tested by a series of eight moderation analyses, four for soft quest and four for HQ. Our hypothesis was fully confirmed with respect to soft quest and partially confirmed with respect to HQ. Soft quest was found to be a significant moderator in all four relationships between the measures of well-being and RD (see Table 3). HQ was found to be a significant moderator in two of the four relationships between the measures of well-being and RD (see Table 3).

Soft quest

Soft quest was found to significantly moderate the relationship between cognitive doubt and MHPs (B = -.46, 95% CI = [-.70, -.22], t = -3.79, p = .00), cognitive doubt and positive mental health (B = .10, 95% CI = [.01, .20], t = 2.21, p = .03), affective doubt and MHPs (B = -.09, 95% CI = [-.18, -.00], t = -2.05, p = .04), and affective doubt and positive mental health (B = .04, 95% CI = [.01, .07], t = 2.41, p = .02).

Soft quest was found to ameliorate both the relationship between cognitive doubt and MHPs and between affective doubt and MHPs. There was a positive relationship between cognitive doubt and MHPs when soft quest was low (Figure 4), and a significantly less positive relationship between cognitive doubt and MHPs when soft quest was high (Figure 5). The same type of relationship was found for soft quest, affective doubt, and MHPs (Figure 6).

Figure 5.

Soft quest as moderator of the relationship between cognitive religious doubt and mental health problems.

Figure 6.

Soft quest as moderator of the relationship between affective religious doubt and mental health problems.

In addition, soft quest was found to ameliorate both the relationship between cognitive doubt and positive mental health and between affective doubt and positive mental health. There was a negative relationship between cognitive doubt and positive mental health when soft quest was low, and a significantly less negative relationship between cognitive doubt and positive mental health when soft quest was high (Figure 7). The same moderating role of soft quest was found in the relationship between affective doubt and positive mental health (Figure 8).

Figure 7.

Soft quest as moderator of the relationship between cognitive religious doubt and positive mental health.

Figure 8.

Soft quest as moderator of the relationship between affective religious doubt and positive mental health.

Hard quest

Of the four analyses run, it was found that HQ does not moderate the relationships between cognitive doubt and positive mental health nor between affective doubt and positive mental health. However, HQ was found to significantly moderate the relationship between cognitive doubt and MHPs (B = -.44, 95% CI = [-.62, -.26], t = -4.88, p = .00) and between affective doubt and MHPs (B = -.08, 95% CI = [-.15, -.01], t = -2.18, p = .03).

HQ was unexpectedly found to ameliorate both the relationship between cognitive doubt and MHPs and the relationship between affective doubt and MHPs. There was a positive relationship between cognitive doubt and MHPs when HQ was low, and a significantly less positive relationship between cognitive doubt and MHPs when HQ was high (Figure 9). The same moderating role of HQ was found in the relationship between affective doubt and MHPs (Figure 10).

Figure 9.

Hard quest as moderator of the relationship between cognitive religious doubt and mental health problems.

Figure 10.

Hard quest as moderator of the relationship between affective religious doubt and mental health problems.

Discussion

The main purpose of the present study was to examine two variables (i.e., AG, quest religiosity) as possible moderators of the previously documented relationship between RD and mental health. As expected, we found RD to be associated with overall worse mental health, regardless of whether mental health was measured positively or in terms of problems. It is also worth noting that MHP correlated positively with both cognitive and affective doubt to a similar degree (see Table 1). Likewise, positive mental health correlated negatively with both cognitive and affective doubt also to a similar degree, thus suggesting that cognitive and affective doubt measures, which capture different dimensions of doubt, are similarly associated with mental health variables. In addition, we established that both AG and quest religiosity, and their corresponding subscales, are moderators of the relationship between RD and mental health. Avoidant attachment only partially moderated the relationship between RD and mental health in the direction we expected, but anxious attachment moderated this relationship differently than we expected. Soft quest moderated the relationship between RD and mental health in the manner we hypothesized, and we unexpectedly found that HQ also moderated this relationship in the same direction as soft quest.

While previous literature has established a relationship between RD and mental health, the current study sheds light on two variables which moderate this relationship. Past research has identified several factors that influence the relationship between RD and mental health such as age, adverse life events, and positive experiences in church (Galek et al., 2007; Kooistra & Pargament, 1999; Krause & Ellison, 2009) but no studies to date have examined the relationship between AG or quest religiosity and RD. Both AG subscales had strong positive correlations with the presence of RD.

As predicted, we found that avoidant attachment moderated the relationship between cognitive doubt and positive mental health and between affective doubt and MHPs. However, contrary to the notion that a more secure AG would buffer against MHPs experienced in relation to RD, a less avoidant attachment seemed to exacerbate the negative relationship between cognitive doubt and positive mental health. Only those with low avoidance attachment together with little cognitive doubt reported more positive mental health than their high avoidance attachment counterparts. Those with low avoidance attachment but with high cognitive doubt reported far less positive mental health differentiation from those with high avoidance attachment. It appears that the mental health benefits associated with a more secure attachment (i.e., less avoidance attachment) are reduced by the experience of cognitive RD. That is, even those with low avoidance attachment find the experience of cognitive RD contrary to positive mental health.

However, more secure attachment (i.e., less avoidant attachment) did ameliorate the negative relationship between affective doubt and MHPs. The MHPs associated with affective RD are greater for less securely attached individuals (i.e., high avoidance attachment) than for those with low avoidance attachment. Taken together, it appears that though cognitive doubt is negatively associated with mental health regardless of the degree of avoidance attachment, those with a more secure (low avoidance) attachment may experience a buffering effect that keeps troubling MHPs at bay. It may also be the case that secure AG buffers more effectively against negative mental health outcomes related to affective doubt because secure AG is experienced primarily on the affective level. The “safe haven” created by a secure AG could be associated with positive affect in a similar manner to that which has been found in relationships between persons (Collins & Feeney, 2000). It is clear that further research regarding AG’s role as a moderator in the relationship between RD and mental health is warranted.

It is worth noting that only the relationship between avoidant attachment, affective doubt, and MHPs was as hypothesized. The relationships between the AG subscales, RD, and positive mental health were opposite than hypothesized. Both AG subscales were correlated negatively with positive mental health, and for all significant relationships between the AG subscales, RD, and positive mental health it should be noted that positive mental health scores were higher when AG was secure. However, the higher degree of positive mental health that is associated with secure AG may be compromised by the presence of RD, as RD could erode one’s confidence in the nature of their AG. It may be the case that the benefits of secure AG are lost when RD is experienced.

Both quest subscales were positively correlated with RD (see Table 1). It is worth noting that quest was more strongly correlated with cognitive doubt than with affective doubt, suggesting that doubt is experienced primarily as a cognitive rather than an affective aspect of religious experience. The present study also demonstrated that SQ and HQ are substantial moderators of this relationship. Of the moderators studied, SQ’s tendency to perceive RD as something beneficial for furthering one’s journey toward truth and religious fulfillment was found to be the most substantial buffer against the negative relationship between RD and mental health. These findings indicate that religious leaders or communities could benefit from programs or teachings that encourage attitudes and beliefs associated with SQ, as this could lead to a decrease in RD-related MHPs. The negative relationship between RD and mental health could be ameliorated in communities that normalize the experience of RD and the ongoing development of religious beliefs and convictions. In particular, religious communities or leaders could develop programs designed to highlight stories of successful interactions with RD from members within their communities, or could distribute resources (e.g., books, sermons, online videos) that introduce their members to the concept of religious orientation and how it is related to mental health and well-being.

HQ unexpectedly moderated the relationship between both cognitive and affective doubt and MHPs much like SQ in that it reduced the negative relationship between both measures of RD and MHPs. HQ includes the attitude that belief change is a normal, non-threatening part of religious experience which may predict fewer MHPs associated with RD. Notably, HQ did not moderate the relationship between RD and positive mental health. This lack of a relationship warrants further study, especially in light of the fact that SQ and HQ seem to have similar effects on RD and MHPs.

For future research, there is a need to study how SQ and HQ differ in relating to other variables. Edwards et al. (2011) identified a number of other religious variables, such as religious fundamentalism and spiritual maturity that correlate with SQ and HQ. These variables were not included in the present study. Exploring these other variables may lead to insight as to why, for example, SQ significantly interacted with RD and positive mental health, whereas HQ had no such relationship.

While not the focus of the present study, the relationship between AG and quest religiosity are worth mentioning. In our study both avoidant and anxious AG were found to correlate positively and moderately with both SQ and HQ (see Table 1). Beck (2006) noted that the attachment function of God as secure base may facilitate the kind of theological questioning involved in the quest construct, and tested this in an undergraduate sample. He found that secure attachment was related to quest with similar effect sizes to those found in the current study. While clearly related, less than 10% of the variance in these constructs is shared, suggesting that, while related, they are distinct constructs. This relationship warrants further study, as the relationship between AG and quest religiosity has not been extensively studied, and connections between these constructs, especially in relationship to the hard and soft versions of quest, could provide further insight regarding the psychological impact of various religious orientations in general.

While the manner in which the present study builds on past research has been discussed above, there are some important limitations to note. First, we used cross-sectional survey data, which means that there is no ground for establishing causality. Future studies could consider implementing character interventions designed to cultivate the salience of AG, SQ, and HQ in a longitudinal design to examine whether such interventions have power to change attitudes toward and experiences of RD. Another caveat to note is that the results of this study were mixed. Therefore, we can only make the qualified claim that AG and HQ moderate the relationship between certain kinds of RD and mental health.

The present study suggests that the presence of secure AG and quest in an individual, or practices that encourage these variables, could ameliorate other negative relationships with mental health and lead to better overall mental health outcomes for religious people who experience RD.

Footnotes

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: Support for this research was provided to Peter Hill by the John Templeton Foundation, Grant No. 60622, Developing Humility in Leaders and by a grant given to Liz Hall, Bridging the Two Cultures of Science and the Humanities II, a project run by Scholarship and Christianity in Oxford, the UK subsidiary of the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities, with funding by Templeton Religion Trust and The Blankemeyer Foundation.

ORCID iDs

Noah S. Love

M. Elizabeth Lewis Hall

Author Biographies

Noah S. Love, B.A. (Psychology, Biola University), is a graduate of Biola University. His current research focuses on religious doubt, intellectual humility, and the psychological conditions of Medieval Europe.

Cassidy A. Merlo, B.A. (Psychology, Biola University), is a graduate of Biola University. Her current research focuses on religious doubt, and intellectual humility.

M. Elizabeth Lewis Hall, Ph.D. (Clinical Psychology, Biola University), is a Professor of Psychology at Rosemead School of Psychology at Biola University. Her specialties include meaning-making in suffering, integration of psychology and theology, and women’s issues in an evangelical context.

Peter C. Hill. Address: Office of Academic Research and Grants, Biola University, 13800 Biola Ave., La Mirada, CA 90639. Title: Director, Office of Academic Research and Grants. Degrees: Ph.D. (Social Psychology), University of Houston. Specializations: Measurement in the psychology of religion, positive psychology, integration of psychology and theology.

References

Abu-Raiya

Pargament

K. I.

Weissberger

Exline

(2016). An empirical examination of religious/spiritual struggle among Israeli Jews. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 26(1), 61–79. https://doi-org.ezproxy.biola.edu/10.1080/10508619.2014.1003519

Allport

G. W.

Ross

J. M.

(1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 432–443.

Altemeyer

(1988). Enemies of freedom: Understanding right-wing authoritarianism. Jossey-Bass.

Batson

C. D.

(1976). Religion as prosocial: Agent or double agent? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 15, 29–45.

Batson

C. D.

Schoenrade

P. A.

Ventis

W. L.

(1993). Religion and the individual: A social-psychological perspective. Oxford University Press.

Batson

C. D.

Ventis

W. L.

(1982). The religious experience: A social-psychological perspective. Oxford University Press.

Beck

(2006). God as a secure base: Attachment to God and theological exploration. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 34(2), 125–132. https://doi.org/0091-6471/410-730

Beck

Jessup

R. K.

(2004). The multidimensional nature of quest motivation. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 32, 283–294.

Bowlby

(1982). Attachment and loss: Attachment (2nd ed., Vol. 1). Basic Books. (Original work published 1969)

10.

Bowlby

(1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. Basic Books.

11.

Collins

N. L.

Feeney

B. C.

(2000). A safe haven: An attachment theory perspective on support seeking and caregiving in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(6), 1053–1073. https://doi-org.ezproxy.biola.edu/10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1053

12.

Crosby

J. W.

(2013). Making sense of quest’s multidimensionality: The search for a higher order structure. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 41(3), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164711304100304

13.

Edwards

K. J.

Hall

T. W.

Slater

Hill

(2011). The multidimensional structure of the quest construct. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 39(2), 87–110. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F009164711103900201

14.

Ellison

C. G.

Lee

(2010). Spiritual struggles and psychological distress: Is there a dark side of religion? Social Indicators Research, 98, 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-0099553-3

15.

Evans

Connell

Barkham

Margison

McGrath

Mellor-Clark

Autin

(2002). Towards a standardised brief outcome measure: Psychometric properties and utility of the CORE-OM. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 180, 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.180.1.51

16.

Evans

Mellor-Clark

Margison

Barkham

Audin

Connell

McGrath

(2000). CORE: Clinical outcomes in routine evaluation. Journal of Mental Health, 9, 247–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/jmh.9.3.247.255

17.

Exline

J. J.

Grubbs

J. B.

Homolka

S. J.

(2015). Seeing God as cruel or distant: Links with divine struggles involving anger, doubt, and fear of God’s disapproval. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 25(1), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2013.857255

18.

Exline

J. J.

Pargament

K. I.

Grubbs

J. B.

Yali

A. M.

(2014). The Religious and Spiritual Struggles Scale: Development and initial validation. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 6(3), 208–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036465

19.

Fisher

A. R.

(2017). A review and conceptual model of the research on doubt, disaffiliation, and related religious changes. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 9(4), 358–367. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000088

20.

Galek

Krause

Ellison

C. G.

Kudler

Flannelly

K. J.

(2007). Religious doubt and mental health across the lifespan. Journal of Adult Development, 14, 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-007-9027-2

21.

Galen

L. W.

Kloet

J. D.

(2011). Mental well-being in the religious and the non-religious: Evidence for a curvilinear relationship. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 14, 673–689. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2010.510829

22.

Garssen

Visser

Pool

(2020). Does spirituality or religion positively affect mental health? Meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 1–17 https://doi-org.ezproxy.biola.edu/10.1080/10508619.2020.1729570

23.

Haney

A. M.

Rollock

(2020). A matter of faith: The role of religion, doubt, and personality in emerging adult mental health. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 12(2), 247–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000231

24.

Henrie

Patrick

J. H.

(2014). Religiousness, religious doubt, and death anxiety. The International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 78(3), 203–227. https://doi.org/10.2190/AG.78.3.a

25.

Hodapp

Zwingmann

(2019). Religiosity/spirituality and mental health: A meta-analysis of studies from the German-speaking area. Journal of Religion and Health, 58, 1970–1998. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-019-00759-0

26.

Hunsberger

Alisat

Pancer

S. M.

Pratt

(1996). Religious fundamentalism and religious doubts: Content, connections, and complexity of thinking. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 6(3), 201–220. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327582ijpr0603_7

27.

Keyes

C. L. M.

(2005). Mental illness and/or mental health? Investigating axioms of the complete state model of health. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 539–548. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006x.73.3.539

28.

Kooistra

W. P.

Pargament

K. I.

(1999). Religious doubting in parochial school adolescents. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 27(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F009164719902700103

29.

Krause

(2012). Religious doubt, financial strain, and depressive symptoms among older Mexican Americans. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 15(4), 335–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2011.574272

30.

Krause

Ellison

C. G.

(2009). The doubting process: A longitudinal study of the precipitants and consequences of religious doubt in older adults. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 48(2), 293–312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2009.01448.x

31.

Krause

Ingersoll-Dayton

Ellison

C. G.

Wulff

K. M.

(1999). Aging, religious doubt, and psychological well-being. The Gerontologist, 39(5), 525–533. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/39.5.525

32.

Krause

Wulff

K. M.

(2004). Religious doubt and health: Exploring the potential dark side of religion. Sociology of Religion, 65(1), 35–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/3712506

33.

Peer

Vosgerau

Acquisti

(2013). Reputation as a sufficient condition for data quality on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods, 46(1), 1023–1031. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0434-y

34.

Rowatt

W. C.

Kirkpatrick

L. A.

(2002). Two dimensions of attachment to God and their relation to affect, religiosity, and personality constructs. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41(4), 637–651. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5906.00143