Religious Doubt and Mental Well-Being in Later Life: Is Humility a Protective Resource?

Abstract

This study sought to integrate the study of virtue into the study of religious doubt and mental health by considering how a salient virtue, humility, may moderate the relationship between religious doubt and lower mental well-being. Drawing on data from a national sample of midlife and older adults (N = 1,443) from the United States, regression results suggest that religious doubts were associated with greater depression and lower life satisfaction, and that humility was independently associated with lower depression and greater life satisfaction. Humility was also found to buffer the pernicious association between religious doubt and both indicators of mental well-being. Taken together, our study makes an important contribution by adding the study of the virtue of humility to a growing body of work on religious doubt. The process of dealing with religious doubt is complex and difficult, but the attempt to develop the virtue of humility may be efficacious in thwarting the deleterious consequences of managing the ebbs and flows of faith.

Keywords

psychology of religion virtues positive psychology

A growing body of literature has revealed that religious doubts, defined as uncertainties or struggles with faith, are not uncommon in the American population and are strongly interconnected with greater mental health problems (Ellison & Lee, 2010; Krause & Ellison, 2009; Upenieks, 2021). People may have doubts about their faith in response to trauma or stressful events (Currier et al., 2018), or a serious life-threatening experience (Magyar-Russell et al., 2014; Park et al., 2011). Religious doubt is in turn associated with emotional distress (Exline & Rose, 2005), such as anxiety (Zarzycka & Zietek, 2019) and depression (Ellison & Lee, 2010; Upenieks, 2021) and lower life satisfaction (Zarzycka & Zietek, 2019).

Religious doubts denote hypothetically challenging aspects of religious/spiritual (R/S) life (Sedlar et al., 2018). This phenomenon encompasses the experience of pressure or confusion about the sacred, spiritual, or apprehension about relationships with the divine, or others (Gutierrez et al., 2017; Pargament et al., 2005). Doubt may take the form of uncertainties about one’s faith (Ellison et al., 2010) or be temporary blips in an otherwise strong faith (Upenieks, 2021). Doubts are known to threaten important characteristics of personal identity, can be a source of confusion, and tend to be associated with poorer mental well-being (Ellison et al., 2010; Krause & Ellison, 2009; Upenieks, 2021, 2022).

When faced with religious doubts, religious individuals may draw on religious resources in ways that may be helpful for well-being, but may also do so in ways that undermine adjustment and even correlate with worse mental health (Dew et al., 2010; Paine & Sandage, 2017). In what follows, we try to explain the complex relationship between religious doubt and psychological functioning by pointing to moderating factors (Sternthal et al., 2010) found in the virtue of humility. Some researchers assert that virtue lies at the heart of religion (Krause, 2022). Key components of humility include an accurate assessment of one’s own characteristics, acknowledging one’s limitations, viewing one’s achievements and abilities in perspective, and appreciating other people and ideas (Tangney, 2002). A focus on the virtue of humility, therefore, may help to explain how the relationship between religious doubt and mental well-being may be altered in important ways, as humility may address the capacities necessary to overcome the noxious consequences of religious doubt. A central tenet of the Christian faith places a significant emphasis on being humble as one traverses their life circumstances. Humility is also a virtue with strong roots in diverse spiritual traditions (Lundberg, 2010; Paine et al., 2015). Individuals who report more humility tend to experience fewer symptoms of depression (Jankowski et al., 2013) and tend to rate their health more favorably (Krause, 2012). Humility may be a more effective resource in confronting religious doubt, as individuals may humble themselves to the fact that they do not possess all the answers about their faith and recognize doubt as a natural part of the faith journey.

This study, therefore, is guided by the following two research questions:

Research Question 1 (RQ1): Are religious doubt and humility associated with psychological well-being?

Research Question 2 (RQ2): And more centrally, in the face of religious doubt, is the virtue of humility a protective or detrimental resource to the well-being of middle-aged and older adults?

To answer these questions, we draw on a nationally representative sample of midlife and older adults from the United States collected in 2013.

Religious doubt and mental well-being

A long line of theory and empirical research has called attention to the possible negative effects of certain facets of religious/spiritual life for the well-being of believers. The most significant body of work in this area falls under the umbrella of “spiritual struggles.” Although this work has covered broad terrain, three types of spiritual struggles have captured most of the attention of scholars: (a) divine struggles, that is, troubled relationships with God, (b) intrapsychic struggles, or chronic doubts about religious or spiritual matters; and (c) interpersonal struggles, defined as conflicts that occur within religious communities (Ellison & Lee, 2010; Exline et al., 2014).

In this study, we focus on one form of intrapsychic struggle, which refer to nagging doubts about religious beliefs (doctrine) or personal faith commitment (Krause & Ellison, 2009; Krause et al., 1999). Some theologians, most notably Paul Tillich, have argued that a healthy questioning of one’s beliefs are inevitable and may be helpful in enriching one’s faith (Ellison et al., 2013). However, the empirical research has largely not supported this conclusion. Indeed, social psychologists of religion have documented that chronic, doubts about one’s faith is linked with higher depression, anxiety, and distress (Upenieks, 2021). From this perspective, doubts can create a sense of cognitive dissonance stemming from an internal conflict between possessing doubts and falling short of the broader norms of the religious community to which they belong (Ellison & Lee, 2010). Such cognitive dissonance is likely to be highly stressful (Krause & Ellison, 2009), as distressing worries can arise from the challenges presented by doubts concerning religious doctrines or the tenets of one’s faith, which can leave believers feeling a loss of life meaning and purpose and a lack of coherence in how their faith integrates with their life (Zarzycka & Puchalska-Wasyl, 2020).

Perhaps the most accurate description of the role of religious doubt in the lives of believers is offered by Pargament et al. (2005). These authors note that in Judeo-Christian faith traditions, religious doubt denotes an essential “fork in the road” that can lead to faith development and a renewal of hopelessness, or a sense of desperation. Resolved or adaptive doubt can be evidence of a secure bond with God, based on the overall conviction of being unconditionally loved by God (Desai & Pargament, 2015). There is some research which shows that a positive pattern of religious coping is associated with better mental health and greater life satisfaction generated by the capacity to make meaning out of religious doubt (Ellison et al., 2013; Zarzycka & Zietek, 2019). By contrast, however, maladaptive religious doubt may be characterized by a vulnerable or conditional relationship with God (Ellison et al., 2013). In the sections that follow, we outline a virtue that may aid or detract from the process of using one’s religion/spirituality to cope: humility. We outline the theoretical possibilities to help us understand how these virtues may operate for middle-aged and older adults experiencing religious doubt and whether they serve to buffer or exacerbate the subsequent mental health consequences.

Humility

In recent decades, humility has been recognized as a virtue or “character strength” worthy of further attention (Peterson & Seligman, 2004; Wright, 2019). A recent explosion of work within the tradition of positive psychology has shown that humility is associated with better physical health (Krause, 2012), lower levels of depression (Jankowski et al., 2013), greater life satisfaction (Krause et al., 2016), better interpersonal relationships (Davis et al., 2013), and even greater resilience to trauma (Krause & Hayward, 2012). A recent review article by Van Tongeren and colleagues (2019) put forth three reasons why humility may be related to well-being: (a) humble individuals tend to have better social relationships, which are a protective factor for health; (b) willingness to engage in things that are beyond the self, including the beliefs and practices of others, could enrich a sense of meaning in life, and (c) humble individuals can engage in processes of personal growth because they acknowledge their own limitations and demonstrate a willingness to learn.

Many religious and cultural traditions value humility as a crucial virtue for spiritual, social, and moral well-being as well as constitutive of human flourishing (Wolfteich et al., 2016). Indeed, humility is woven throughout the Christian vision of flourishing (Lundberg, 2010), and humility is seen as one of the primary virtues necessary for spiritual formation. Christ spoke of humility as the best measure of a person’s spiritual maturity, encapsulated the following words: “Whoever becomes humble like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:4).

As St. Augustine, a great Roman Catholic theologian argued, humility is the basis of all other virtues and good acts (Sparrow-Simpson, 2019). Augustine’s Confessions is perhaps the seminal account of humility, because Augustine’s central concern in that book is how his life was changed dramatically when he became a Christian. Augustine’s general account of humility was the ability to hold the posture of a “glad dependence on God” in contrast to a quest for independence (P. C. Hill et al., 2018). Tangney (2005) outlined five factors that comprise humility: acknowledging one’s limitations, being open to new ideas, keeping one’s accomplishments and abilities in check by viewing them from a broader perspective, having a low focus on the self, and valuing all things. Especially crucial to the current study is that a more humble person realizes that they are flawed and weak by nature, and that they are not perfect, nor can they have a perfect faith.

In this way, the motivations behind humility for Christians are also theistic, grounded in a relationship of glad dependence on an omniscient, omnipotent, and loving God. In Christian theology, humans were created as finite creatures by a loving God. Human finitude, including the finite nature of human power and knowledge, is understood to be part of God’ good creation. Our finitude is therefore something to be embraced rather than transcended. Theologian Reinhold Niebuhr (1943) considered it sinful for humans to attempt to overcome their creaturely limits. Humility is therefore a common theme in Christian religious sources and should serve as a guiding principle to religiously faithful adherents, just as it was to St. Augustine.

Within a Christian worldview, then, the call to humility is first and foremost a vertical one that involves one’s relationship to God. Micah 6:8 states: “And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God” (NIV). Humility is therefore a right-sized sense of self before God and others, and it is central to the right relationship between human and God and between humans and others (LaMothe, 2014; Van Tongerent et al., 2023). As we outline in the next section, the recognition of one’s finitude and cognitive limitations could make tensions—such as experiencing religious doubt—less threatening.

Humility as a protective factor for religious doubt

We posit humility as a protective moderator for individuals experiencing religious doubt. In recent years, humility has begun to be acknowledged as an effective stress buffer (Krause & Hayward, 2012). Humility may address the capacities necessary to “doubt well.” A person who has higher humility can evaluate counterarguments, even about one’s faith without being overly threatened by them. According to stress and coping theory put forth by Lazarus and Folkman (1984), the effects of stress on outcomes related to well-being are conditional on how stress is appraised and the various coping resources drawn from. In recent years, the virtue of humility has been posited to mitigate the links between stress and negative outcomes. Acknowledging one’s limitations is an important first step in seeking assistance from others.

We put forth several reasons grounded in existing literature that might make humility a crucial resource for those experiencing religious doubt. First, the humble person tends to recognize that all people are flawed and have limitations (Krause & Hayward, 2014). Humility is the opposite of intellectual arrogance or improper pride and should foster a disposition to show a low concern for one’s status and entitlements (Roberts & Wood, 2007). Acknowledging one’s limitations, especially during a deep crisis in faith, could lead believers to seek out help from others or from God. Humble people tend to accept support more readily than less humble people (Exline, 2012), and are more likely to be open to new ideas and advice (Tangney, 2000). This could be especially important when grappling with doubts or uncertainties about faith, since it may be more efficacious to seek out help from co-congregants, spiritual mentors, or God than to attempt to overcome such challenges alone.

Second, humble people also tend to adopt different worldviews, which may also promote effective stress-coping in the face of religious doubt. People with greater humility are able to develop a more profound appreciation and value for the things in life that transcend the self (Tangney, 2000). Theologian John Swinton, writing about the conflict between the cultural values of intellectual autonomy alongside the Christian idea of submission to God stated neatly: “[i]n a culture based on such assumptions [of intellectual autonomy], the ideas that mystery may be significant, that all problems may not be solvable through the use of reason alone, and that an important dimension of fruitful human living may involve learning to live with unanswered questions, sounds alien, disturbing, and foolish” (Swinton, 2007, p. 33). During times of doubt and uncertainty, humble people may be able to remove a focus purely on the self and focus on larger, more meaningful values, including the desire to find growth in the midst of adversity (Roepke & Seligman, 2015). Because religious doubts also tend to undermine a sense of self-esteem (Szcześniak & Timoszyk-Tomczak, 2020), if the humble person has abandoned the notion of maintaining a strong sense of self, then humble individuals should be less likely to suffer the negative consequences to well-being of religious doubt.

Third, recognizing that matters of faith and religious beliefs are complex matters, humble people are also more likely to forgive themselves over time (Krause, 2015). Rather than leading to self-deprecation or anger toward God for allowing doubt to creep in, humble people may express more self-compassion to themselves and others. Humble people tend to accept the weaknesses and shortcomings of humans as fundamental to the human condition. Humble people may also be more likely to forgive themselves for having doubts about faith, which should be a health-protective pathway (Krause & Hayward, 2014; Macaskill, 2012). Previous research, though unspecific to religious doubt, found that humility offset the effects of 12 stressful life events (e.g., death of a close friend and illness of a family member) across a range of mental health outcomes, including depression, life satisfaction, and happiness (Krause & Hayward, 2012). Altogether, then, humility is posited as a valuable virtue that may act as a resource to help people cope more effectively with stress.

Fourth, work by Clifton-Soderstrom (2009) provides some insight into the issue of how humility can be helpful in times of trial. He maintains that trials that are encountered by a humble person are essential for his or her spiritual development because the loss of self is a crucial step in grasping the “true” function of religion. The humble person may use the experience of religious doubt as an opportunity to be open to new coping responses. One can imagine a humble person positively engaging with their environment in ways that are adaptive. From the perspective of coping with religious doubt, it could be that those who have a more accurate self-understanding, an orientation toward others, and the ability to regulate shame and pride may be better equipped to draw on spiritual resources, especially community resources, to support better coping. So instead of fostering greater doubt and uncertainty, the humble person may take the opportunities afforded by a struggle in faith to arrive at a deeper understanding of their faith (Krause & Hayward, 2012). Because the humble person is aware of and accepts the limits of their own intellect and understanding, they may be more willing to rely on their faith when their own intellectual ability falls short of being able to grapple with the uncertainty in faith. This fits squarely within the assertion made by St. Thomas Aquinas that, “. . .humility is said to be the foundation for the spiritual edifice” (Kellenberger, 2010, p. 325).

Finally, some scholars have also specified that humility could help mitigate the risks to well-being of spiritual grandiosity (Moore, 2003; Ruffing et al., 2021), while others have theorized that humility promotes a sense of spiritual maturity (Bollinger & Hill, 2012; Worthington & Sandage, 2016). Humility also helps guard against detrimental aspects of relational spirituality and is negatively associated with spiritual instability and divine struggles (Grubbs & Exline, 2014; Jankowski & Sandage, 2014). Based on this evidence reviewed above, it is possible that those with higher religious doubt but lacking in humility might find it difficult to connect with God or other members of their religious communities. Thus, they may not be in a position to receive consolation or support during stressful times. Those low in humility tend to report problematic styles of relating to God, and this could be especially detrimental if they are also experiencing religious doubt (Jankowski & Sandage, 2014). Altogether, humble people may have a more mature orientation to reconciling uncertainties or contradictions in religious life (Krause & Ellison, 2007). Instead of wallowing in a sense of confusion and frustration, they may be more inclined to take steps to humbly ask for help or take other prudent steps necessary to resolve the struggle.

While we have thus far considered humility as a protective resource for those with religious doubt, it is also important to acknowledge that humility might have a “dark side” (Van Tongerent et al., 2023), especially for those dealing with uncertainties in their faith. A series of studies conducted by Van Tongeren and colleagues found there to be intrapsychic costs that are incurred by holding existential beliefs (e.g., about the afterlife) humbly. Humble perspectives that leave more room for doubt can be accompanied by greater anxiety and may prevent people from establishing a clear sense of existential meaning. According to these authors, humility in one’s religious beliefs served the opposite function of a coping resource and exacted a greater emotional toll. However, the balance of evidence indicates that greater humility in the face of religious doubt will be a valuable resource insofar as it is protective for mental well-being.

The importance of humility in later life

The data for this study were provided by a national sample of White and Black older adults. There are two main reasons why it is important to study humility in samples of older Americans. In a developmental stage theory offered by Kohlberg (1973), a seventh stage of development involved “self-transcendence, which Kohlberg stated was “a contemplative experience of the non-egoistic or non-individual variety” (pp. 500–501). Later life therefore involves accepting the impermanence of the self and developing egolessness. Accordingly, feelings of humility are likely to be greatest among older adults. If humility is thought to provide an important stress-buffering function for those facing religious doubt, it makes sense to test the effectiveness of this resources among older adults who are more likely to be humble. Our sample of older adults thus provides a unique opportunity to assess humility among at a life course stage then this virtue might be especially crucial.

Summary of hypotheses

On the basis of our literature review, we put forth the following two study hypotheses that will be tested using regression techniques in a national survey of Black and White older adults in the United States:

Hypothesis 1 (H1): Religious doubt will be associated with greater depressive symptoms and lower life satisfaction.

Hypothesis 2 (H2): Greater humility will attenuate the association between religious doubt and greater depressive symptoms and lower life satisfaction.

Data and Methods

Participants

The data for this study come from a nationwide survey of White and Black older adults. Altogether, five waves of interviews have been conducted. The study population for the baseline survey was defined as all household residents who self-identified as either Black or White, were non-institutionalized, English-speaking, and at least 66 years of age. Geographically, the study population was restricted to all eligible persons residing in the coterminous United States (i.e., residents of Alaska and Hawaii were excluded). Finally, our study population was comprised of the following groups: (a) currently practicing Christians, (b) individuals who were Christian in the past but no longer practice any religion, and (c) people who were not affiliated with any faith at any point in their lifetime.

The baseline survey took place in 2001. The data collection for all waves of interviews was conducted by the Harris Interactive (New York). A total of 1,500 interviews were completed, face-to-face, in the homes of the study participants. Black older adults were oversampled so that sufficient statistical power would be available to assess racial cultural differences in religion. The overall response rate for the baseline survey was 62%. Sampling information for Waves 2 to 4 is as follows: Wave 2 (2004), n = 1,024 (re-interview rate = 80%), Wave 3 (2007), n = 969, (re-interview rate = 75%), Wave 4 (2008), n = 718 (re-interview rate = 88%).

A fifth wave of interviews was completed in June 2013. However, the sampling strategy for this round of interviews was complex. By the time the Wave 5 interviews were conducted, only 229 study participants were re-interviewed successfully. Many former study participants experienced significant health problems that were associated with their advanced age (M = 83.2 years). Moreover, a number of former study participants died (n = 611). Therefore, to have sufficient statistical power to conduct meaningful analyses, the following two-part sampling strategy was employed. First, we re-interviewed as many of the original study participants as possible (n = 229). The re-interview rate for people who had participated in the study previously was 63%. Second, this group was supplemented with a new sample of individuals who had not participated in the study previously (n = 1,306). In the process of fielding the sample of new study participants, we lowered the age of eligibility from 66 to 50. This was done to make it possible to evaluate issues involving religious involvement to midlife, which is not the focus of the current study. The re-interview rate for prior study participants was 63%. The response rate for people in the new supplementary sample was 45%.

The sample of individuals who had not participated previously in the study was obtained in the following manner. Based on data in the 2010 Census, 50 geographic areas (i.e., Census tracts) were selected to proportionately represent the population aged 50 and above who were either White or Black. All households within each Census tract were enumerated. One eligible person within each household was selected at random to participate in the study. The response rate for the individuals who had not participated in the study previously was 45%. Ethical approval was obtained by an Institutional Review Board and informed consent was provided by all respondents.

Altogether, a total of 1,535 individuals participated in the Wave 5 interviews. The analyses presented below are based on the Wave 5 data only because this was the first time that questions on wisdom were administered. After eliminating those respondents who had missing data on our study variables, we are left with an analytic sample of n = 1,443.

Dependent variables

Depressive Symptoms: Four items that measure a depressed affect were taken from the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (Radloff, 1977). These indicators were as follows: (1) “I felt like I could not shake off the blues, even with the help of my family and friends,” (2) “I felt depressed,” (3) “I had crying spells,” and (4) “I felt sad.” Responses were scored where 1 = “Strongly Disagree,” 2 = “Disagree,” 3 = “Agree,” and 4 = “Strongly Agree” and summed across all four items. A higher score on these items denotes a more depressed affect (α = .85).

Life Satisfaction: Life satisfaction was assessed with three items that come from the scale that was devised by Neugarten et al. (1961) as well as one additional item. The items were (1) “These are the best years of my life,” (2) “As I look back on my life, I am fairly well satisfied,” and (3) “I would not change the past even if I could.” These first three items were scored where 1 = “Strongly Disagree,” 2 = “Disagree,” 3 = “Agree,” and 4 = “Strongly Agree.” A final item asked, (4) “Now please think about your life as a whole. How satisfied are you with it?” Responses to this last item were scored in the following manner: 1 = “not very satisfied,” 2 = “not very satisfied,” 3 = “somewhat satisfied,” 4 = “very satisfied,” and 5 = “completely satisfied.” Scores were summed, creating a variable ranging from 4 to 17 where high scores denote greater life satisfaction (α = .73).

Focal independent variables

Religious Doubts: Religious doubts were gauged by a sum of the following five items, developed through extensive procedures described by Krause (2002): (1) “How often do you have doubts about your religious or spiritual beliefs?” (2) “How often do you have doubts about the things you’ve been taught in church?” (3) “How often do you doubt whether solutions to your problems can be found in the Bible?” (4) “How often do you doubt whether your prayers make a difference in your life?” (5)” How often do you doubt that God is directly involved in your life?” Response options for each question were coded 1 = “Never,” 2 = “Once in a while,” 3 = “Fairly often,” and 4 = “Very often,” where higher scores indicate greater religious doubt. Scores on the religious doubt scale ranged from 5 to 20 (α = .83) and has been employed extensively in previous research (Galek et al., 2007; Krause & Ellison, 2009).

Humility: Six items were used to measure humility, which were developed by Peterson and Seligman (2004). These items were: (1) “I always admit when I am wrong, (2) “I am always humble about the good things that happen to me,” (3) “I do not act as if I am a special person,” (4) “I am honest with myself when I assess my own faults and limitations,” (5) “I am honest with myself when I assess my own abilities and accomplishments, and (6) “Other people have talents, abilities, and accomplishments that are just as important as mine.” Responses were scored on the following scale: (1) “strongly disagree,” (2) “disagree,” (3) “agree,” and (4) “strongly agree.” Answers to these six questions were summed, where higher scores represent greater humility (α = .78) (see Krause & Hayward, 2015a, 2015b, for a similar approach).

Covariates

The relationship between religious doubt, humility, and psychological well-being was evaluated after the effects of gender, marital status, education, and age were controlled. This was to ensure that any relationship between our focal variables of interest and depressive symptoms and life satisfaction is not confounded by these common demographic predictors of well-being. We control for the gender (male = 1) and marital status (married = 1; 0 = otherwise) of the respondent. We also adjust for the number of years of education the respondent had attained over their life course (coded continuously in years), respondent age (measured in years) and race/ethnicity (0 = White, 1 = Black). In additional analyses, we controlled for religious denominational affiliation (Protestant, Catholic, Other, religiously unaffiliated). Our main pattern of results was unchanged. We also considered whether our focal associations between religious doubts and depressive symptoms/life satisfaction and the religious doubt*humilitywell-being were different among these four groups, but we found no evidence.

Analyses

A series of ordinary least squares regression models with robust standard errors were used to test our hypotheses. All analyses were performed using Stata 15. A Shapiro–Wilk test for normality was non-significant, indicating that our data are likely drawn from a normal distribution. We did not find evidence of heteroskedasticity as determined by a nonsignificant Cook–Weisberg test for heteroskedasticity in Stata 15. We also reviewed the variance inflation factor for all models to test for the possible of multicollinearity, none of which exceeded the standard threshold of VIF = 2.00 (Allison, 1999). Finally, we also checked for outliers in the data to see if they had an impact of our results, and we did not identify any concerns.

Removing respondents with missing data on at least one study variable through listwise deletion (the preferred method if missing cases are less than 5%), we are left with a total analytic sample of 1,443. We would note that results remained consistent if multiple imputation with chained equations was the method used to handle missing data.

We considered a series of three models for each outcome of depression and life satisfaction. Model 1 regressed religious doubt on each dependent variable, depressive symptoms and life satisfaction, controlling for all demographic covariates. Models 2 and 3 regress both religious doubt and humility, adding humility in Model 2. Finally, the last model tests our focal relationship, that is, whether humility (Model 3) moderates the relationship between religious doubt and each outcome of well-being. Where we find evidence of a significant statistical interaction, we use the margins command in Stata 15 to show predicted depressive symptoms or life satisfaction scores at three levels of religious doubt, low doubt (−1SD below the mean), mean doubt, and high doubt (+1SD above the mean) at three levels of humility: low humility (−1SD below the mean), mean humility, and high humility (+1SD above the mean).

Results

Table 1 presents descriptive statistics for all study variables. As seen there, respondents average 6.90 depressive symptoms (SD = 7.41). Meanwhile, average life satisfaction scores were 12.55 (SD = 2.56). On our main independent variables, we see that sample respondents reported average religious doubt scores of 8.09 (SD = 2.81), as well as average humility scores of 18.89 (SD = 2.47). Demographically, the average age of respondents in our sample was 63.28 (SD = 11.65), over 60% of the sample was female, and 35.58% of the sample was Black.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics, 2013 Religion, Aging, and Health Survey (N = 1,443).

	Mean/%	SD	Minimum	Maximum
Dependent Variables
Depressive Symptoms	6.90	7.41	0	32
Life Satisfaction	12.55	2.56	4	17
Focal Independent Variables
Religious Doubt	8.09	3.81	5	20
Humility	18.89	2.47	9	24
Control Variables
Education (years)	13.08	2.24	3	20
Black	35.58
Age	63.28	11.65	50	102
Male	39.35
Married	41.55

Standard deviations are omitted for categorical variables.

Multivariable regression analyses

Depressive symptoms

Table 2 presents results pertaining to our first outcome of mental well-being, depressive symptoms. As we see in Model 1, religious doubt was associated with greater depressive symptoms (b = 0.21, p < .001), providing support for Hypothesis 1. In Model 2, where humility was introduced, religious doubt was significantly associated with greater depressive symptoms (b = 0.20, p < .001), while humility was associated with fewer depressive symptoms (b = −0.18, p < .01). We see that adding the main effect of humility did little to alter the observed positive association between religious doubt and depressive symptoms, but our central research interest was in the moderating role of humility, which we turn to next.

Table 2.

Religious Doubt and Depressive Symptoms: Contingencies by Humility, 2013 Religion, Health, and Aging Survey (N = 1,443).

	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3
Religious Doubt	0.21***(0.04)	0.20***(0.04)	0.83**(0.26)
Humility		-0.18**(0.06)	0.10(0.13)
Religious Doubt*Humility			-0.03*(0.01)
Education (years)	-0.13*(0.05)	-0.13*(0.06)	-0.13*(0.06)
Black	-0.58*(0.29)	-0.45(0.31)	-0.43(0.31)
Age	-0.02(0.01)	-0.02(0.01)	-0.02(0.01)
Male	-0.80*(0.39)	-0.97**(0.31)	-0.99**(0.30)
Married	-1.31***(0.29)	-1.22***(0.30)	-1.21***(0.30)

Unstandardized regression coefficients shown. Robust standard errors shown in parentheses.

p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001.

Model 3 tested an interaction effect to determine whether the relationship between religious doubt and depressive symptoms was moderated by humility. Results from Model 3 of Table 2 show that the interaction between religious doubt and humility attained statistical significance in the negative direction (b = −0.03, df = 1,435, t = −2.46, p = .014). As shown in Figure 1, the relationship between greater religious doubt and depressive symptoms is weaker for those respondents who simultaneously report moderate or higher humility. This provides evidence in support of Hypothesis 2.

Figure 1.

Religious Doubt and depressive symptoms: Humility as moderator.

Life satisfaction

Table 3 presents results from an identical series of models, this time taking life satisfaction as the outcome. As shown in Model 1, religious doubt is inversely associated with life satisfaction (b = −0.09, p < .001), consistent with Hypothesis 1. In Model 2, a similar pattern of results was observed in Model 3, where religious doubt remained associated with lower life satisfaction (b = −0.07, p < .001), and greater humility was positively associated with life satisfaction (b = 0.31, p < .001).

Table 3.

Religious Doubt and Life Satisfaction: Contingencies by Humility, 2013 Religion, Health, and Aging Survey (N = 1,443).

	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3
Religious Doubt	-0.09***(0.02)	-0.07***(0.02)	-0.24*(0.12)
Humility		0.31***(0.03)	0.24***(0.06)
Religious Doubt*Humility			0.02*(0.01)
Education (years)	0.20*(0.09)	0.21*(0.09)	0.22*(0.09)
Black	0.91***(0.15)	0.80***(0.14)	0.79***(0.14)
Age	0.02*(0.01)	0.02*(0.01)	0.02*(0.01)
Male	-0.23(0.15)	-0.14(0.14)	-0.13(0.14)
Married	0.98***(0.45)	0.92***(0.14)	0.92***(0.14)

Unstandardized regression coefficients shown. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. Robust standard errors shown in parentheses.

As for depressive symptoms, we also observe evidence in Model 3 of a significant (and positive) interaction coefficient between religious doubt and humility (b = 0.02, df = 1,435, t = −2.42, p = .021). As we see in Figure 2, the relationship between greater religious doubt and lower life satisfaction is weaker (attenuated) among respondents with greater humility, as shown by the black line. This is consistent with the expectations of Hypothesis 2. Indeed, respondent who had high religious doubt accompanied by high humility had average life satisfaction scores that were almost a full point higher than those with high doubt and only moderate humility (dark gray line), and life satisfaction scores almost two points higher than those with high doubt and low humility (light gray line). For both depressive symptoms and life satisfaction, using the pwcompare command in Stata 15 revealed the pairwise differences in slope in the religious doubt and depressive symptoms/life satisfaction relationship was found to be significant at low versus high levels of humility (p < .05).

Figure 2.

Religious doubt and life satisfaction: Humility as moderator.

Supplemental analyses

Given that our sample contains a large number of both Black and White older Americans, a series of additional analyses considered whether (a) the relationship between humility and mental well-being was conditioned by race, and (b) if the multiplicative relationship between religious doubt and humility on mental well-being is further moderated by race. There is some empirical evidence that racial minorities tend to report higher levels of humility (Krause & Hayward, 2015a, 2015b; Webster et al., 2018), and these studies have suggested that such racial differences in humility could be a response to the experience of discrimination and unfair treatment. Since resilience has been linked to greater humility (Dwiwardani et al., 2014), racial groups that have experienced more hardship and discrimination might be more humble. Black older adults are also more likely than Whites to ascribe greater importance to religion in their lives (Levin et al., 1994) and to cope with religious doubt more effectively than Whites (Krause et al., 2018; Upenieks et al., 2023).

Additional analyses did not provide evidence that the relationship between humility and depressive symptoms and life satisfaction was greater for Black older adults compared to White older adults. Test of three-way interaction terms likewise revealed that the relationship between religious doubt and humility was not further dependent on race. Despite the nonsignificant findings found in our sample, we would encourage future research to test the relationship between race, humility, religion, and well-being in other samples.

Discussion

One of the most significant advances in the social scientific study of religion over the past few decades has been increasing attention to the “dark side” of religion (Ellison & Lee, 2010), including the study of religious doubt and its consequences for mental and physical well-being (T. D. Hill et al., 2021; Krause & Ellison, 2009; Upenieks, 2021). Picking up on this theme, the current study sought to integrate the study of virtue into the study of religious doubt and mental health by considering how a salient virtue, humility, may moderate the relationship between religious doubt and lower mental well-being. Religious doubts represent a challenging aspect of spiritual life that almost all believers confront at some point on their spiritual journey (Sedlar et al., 2018), and the ability to draw on resources may be helpful for well-being to the extent that it promotes positive coping (Sternthal et al., 2010). Drawing on a nationally representative sample of middle-aged and older adults, the results of our study revealed several important findings.

Our first key finding was that greater religious doubt was associated with greater depressive symptoms and lower life satisfaction. This result aligns with previous research on this topic (see also Ellison & Lee, 2010; T. D. Hill et al., 2021; Krause & Ellison, 2009). It was notable that these associations held even when humility was included in the analytic models, which was itself associated with lower depressive symptoms and greater life satisfaction.

Our moderation analyses represented the main contribution of the current study. We found evidence that humility was a more consistent moderator of the relationship between religious doubt and both outcomes of mental well-being, depressive symptoms and life satisfaction. For both outcomes, the relationship between greater religious doubt and mental well-being was weaker (attenuated) among people with greater humility. These observed results invite further reflection. Christian faith traditions have long held humility as a crucial religious virtue (Lundberg, 2010), the basis of all other good acts (Tangney, 2005). Our findings dovetail with research suggesting that humility is an effective stress buffer (Krause & Hayward, 2012), especially for those confronting religious doubt.

Religious doubts might represent a challenge on a faith journey, and make one realize that they do not have perfect faith. A humble person may be more likely to seek out help from others to resolve this doubt (Exline, 2012), whether they may co-congregants, pastors, or even God. As St. Thomas Aquinas noted, “humility makes us honor others and esteem them better than ourselves, in so far as we see some of God’s gifts in them” (Aquinas, quoted in Klancer, 2012, p. 665). Although we could not empirically test this, the spiritual experiences of others, including in one’s congregation, could assist people harboring doubts to overcome them through prayer and reflection or with support. During periods of doubt, humble people may be less likely to hold a unitary focus on the self (Tangney, 2000), seeking out transcendent experiences, whether inside or outside the auspices of religion, that may help them gain a new perspective. Acknowledging that one does not have perfect faith, accomplished by being more humble, might also make believers more likely to forgive themselves for having doubts of faith (Krause, 2015). Instead of allowing anger toward God to set in, further accelerating the doubting process, the acceptance of shortcomings might lead humble people to be more compassionate toward themselves and address doubt head on. Humility, even in the face of religious doubt, may be a sign of spiritual maturity because it forces an admission of weakness (Worthington & Sandage, 2016) and those who possess it may be more effective at reconciling uncertainties of faith, or at least minimizing the toll on mental health in the process.

The buffering role of humility for those facing religious doubt and uncertainty also suggests also speaks to the idea of having a “glad dependence on God” (P. C. Hill et al., 2018). As Hill and colleagues note, the type of humility espoused by the Christian tradition begins with a recognition of God’s omnipotence, the intellectual finitude of humans, and the reality of mystery of faith. The humble who struggle with their faith may be more prone to turn to God in the midst of struggle. Alternatively, individuals lacking humility could find it challenging to draw on religious and spiritual resources, including one’s relationship with God, in times of trouble. Simone Weil (1970), for instance, identified self-compassion as synonymous with the true meaning of humility (p. 104). If people with low humility also lack reasonable self-compassion, they may despair when they do not live up to the standards of their religious faith and may feel shame for feeling doubt or uncertainty rather than seeking spiritual support or turning to God. The willingness to accept personal limitations, a hallmark of humility, could help humble individuals to avoid moral shame for experiencing doubts in faith, which could also help buffer its negative effect on psychological functioning.

Despite the novelty of our findings, several limitations of the current study must be acknowledged. First, since we relied on cross-sectional data, we could not determine causal order. Though there is prior longitudinal research which establishes a connection between religious doubt mental well-being, it is also possible that those suffering from worse mental well-being may have more struggles with their faith. Likewise, reported levels of humility may likewise influence religious doubt (e.g., Krause & Hayward, 2012). Given these concerns, we would suggest future work replicate our findings with longitudinal data.

Second, more research is needed to determine how humility may arise in the first place. This may provide insight into exactly how these virtues interact with religious doubt to shape mental health outcomes. For example, is humility a function of attendance at religious services or reading scripture passages outlining its importance in religious/spiritual life? Trusted spiritual companions may also help believers resolve doubts. Likewise, is humility toward a certain source (e.g., co-congregants, pastors, and God) more important for helping middle-aged and older adults deal with religious doubt? With the importance of humility in helping (or harming) those with religious doubt, more attention to the mechanistic processes of how these virtues develop and how they are used to confront doubt would be fruitful.

Finally, we would note that our sample came from a sample of middle-aged and older adults who were Christian. Although humility is extolled by Christian faith traditions (e.g., Protestant branches and Catholicism) as important virtues, these are nevertheless also important in other faith traditions. Therefore, we would caution generalizing the findings of the current study to other faith traditions, as religious doubt and virtue might operate differently for mental well-being.

Conclusion

The vast majority of existing studies have evaluated the potential beneficial ways that religiosity may promote better mental health (Koenig et al., 2012). A smaller cluster of studies have documented the dark side of religious involvement (Ellison & Lee, 2010). The findings of the current study straddle boundaries of both literatures. We find that religious doubt is associated with both greater depressive symptoms and lower life satisfaction. We also find that humility helps people minimize the costs to mental health of high religious doubt. Taken together, our study makes an important contribution by adding the study of the virtue of humility to a growing body of work on religious doubt. Our clear take-home point is this: the process of dealing with religious doubt is complex and difficult, but the attempt to develop the virtue of humility may be efficacious in thwarting the deleterious consequences of managing the ebbs and flows of faith.

Footnotes

Data Availability Statement

Data will not be deposited as it is restricted.

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: This study was supported by John Templeton Foundation and National Institute on Aging (Grant No. RO1 AG009221).

ORCID iD

Laura Upenieks

Author biographies

Laura Upenieks is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at Baylor University. Her research interests lie in health inequalities over the life course, aging and health and the sociology of religion. Her recent research is published in Journal of Health and Social Behavior, Social Psychology Quarterly, Society and Mental Health, Sociology of Religion and Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.

Christopher G. Ellison is Dean’s Distinguished Professor of Sociology at the University of Texas at San Antonio. His long-term research interests include: (a) the links between religion and mental health, physical health, and mortality risk; (b) religious variations in family life, with particular attention to intimate relationships and childrearing; (c) racial and ethnic variations in the social role of religion; and (d) contemporary American public opinion, especially regarding race/ethnicity, politics, and Second Amendment issues.

References

Allison

P. D.

(1999). Multiple regression: A primer. Pine Forge Press.

Bollinger

R. A.

Hill

P. C.

(2012). Humility. In Plante

(Ed.), Religion, spirituality, and positive psychology (pp. 31–47). Praeger.

Clifton-Soderstrom

(2009). The phenomenology of religious humility in Heidegger’s reading of Luther. Continental Philosophy Review, 42, 171–200.

Currier

J. M.

Farnsworth

J. K.

Drescher

K. D.

McDermott

R. C.

Sims

B. M.

Albright

D. L.

(2018). Development and evaluation of the Expressions of Moral Injury Scale—Military Version. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 25(3), 474–488.

Davis

D. E.

Worthington

E. L.

JR. Hook

J. N.

Emmons

R. A.

Hill

P. C.

Bollinger

R. A.

Van Tongeren

D. R.

(2013). Humility and the development and repair of social bonds: Two longitudinal studies. Self and Identity, 12(1), 58–77.

Desai

K. M.

Pargament

K. I.

(2015). Predictors of growth and decline following spiritual struggles. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 25(1), 42–56.

Dew

R. E.

Daniel

S. S.

Goldston

D. B.

McCall

W. V.

Kuchibhatla

Schleifer

Koenig

H. G.

(2010). A prospective study of religion/spirituality and depressive symptoms among adolescent psychiatric patients. Journal of Affective Disorders, 120(1–3), 149–157.

Dwiwardani

Hill

P. C.

Bollinger

R. A.

Marks

L. E.

Steele

J. R.

Doolin

H. N.

Davis

D. E.

(2014). Virtues develop from a secure base: Attachment and resilience as predictors of humility, gratitude, and forgiveness. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 42(1), 83–90.

Ellison

C. G.

Fang

Flannelly

K. J.

Steckler

R. A.

(2013). Spiritual struggles and mental health: Exploring the moderating effects of religious identity. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 23(3), 214–229.

10.

Ellison

C. G.

Lee

(2010). Spiritual struggles and psychological distress: Is there a dark side of religion? Social Indicators Research, 98, 501–517.

11.

Ellison

C. G.

Roalson

L. A.

Guillory

J. M.

Flannelly

K. J.

Marcum

J. P.

(2010). Religious resources, spiritual struggles, and mental health in a nationwide sample of PCUSA clergy. Pastoral Psychology, 59, 287–304.

12.

Exline

J. J.

(2012). Humility and the ability to receive from others. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 31(1), 40–50.

13.

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.

14.

Exline

J. J.

Rose

(2005). Religious and spiritual struggles. In Paloutzian

R. F.

Park

C. L.

(Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality (pp. 315–330). Guilford Press.

15.

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.

16.

Grubbs

J. B.

Exline

J. J.

(2014). Humbling yourself before God: Humility as a reliable predictor of lower divine struggle. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 42(1), 41–49.

17.

Gutierrez

I. A.

Park

C. L.

Wright

B. R.

(2017). When the divine defaults: Religious struggle mediates the impact of financial stressors on psychological distress. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 9(4), 387–398.

18.

Hill

P. C.

Dunnington

Hall

M. E. L.

(2018). Glad intellectual dependence on God: A theistic account of intellectual humility. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 37(3), 195–204.

19.

Hill

T. D.

Zeng

Rambotti

Mossakowski

K. N.

Johnson

R. J.

(2021). Sad eyes, crooked crosses: Religious struggles, psychological distress and the mediating role of psychosocial resources. Journal of Religion and Health, 60(4), 2573–2591.

20.

Jankowski

P. J.

Sandage

S. J.

(2014). Attachment to God and humility: Indirect effect and conditional effects models. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 42(1), 70–82.

21.

Jankowski

P. J.

Sandage

S. J.

Hill

P. C.

(2013). Differentiation-based models of forgivingness, mental health and social justice commitment: Mediator effects for differentiation of self and humility. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 8(5), 412–424.

22.

Kellenberger

(2010). Humility. American Philosophical Quarterly, 47(4), 321–336.

23.

Klancer

C. H.

(2012). How opposites (should) attract: Humility as a virtue for the strong. The Heythrop Journal, 53(4), 662–677.

24.

Koenig

H. G.

King

Carson

V. B.

(2012). Handbook of religion and health. Oxford University Press.

25.

Kohlberg

(1973). Stages and aging in moral development—Some speculations. The Gerontologist, 13(4), 497–502.

26.

Krause

(2002). A comprehensive strategy for developing closed-ended survey items for use in studies of older adults. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 57(5), S263–S274.

27.

Krause

(2012). Religious involvement, humility, and change in self-rated health over time. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 40(3), 199–210.

28.

Krause

(2015). Assessing the relationships among race, religion, humility, and self-forgiveness: A longitudinal investigation. Advances in Life Course Research, 24, 66–74.

29.

Krause

Ellison

C. G.

(2007). Parental religious socialization practices and self-esteem in late life. Review of Religious Research, 49(2), 109–127.

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.

31.

Krause

Hayward

R. D.

(2012). Humility, lifetime trauma, and change in religious doubt among older adults. Journal of Religion and Health, 51, 1002–1016.

32.

Krause

Hayward

R. D.

(2014). Religious involvement and humility. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 9(3), 254–265.

33.

Krause

Hayward

R. D.

(2015a). Humility, compassion, and gratitude to God: Assessing the relationships among key religious virtues. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 7(3), 192–204.

34.

Krause

Hayward

R. D.

(2015b). Race, religion, and virtues. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 25(2), 152–169.

35.

Krause

Ingersoll-Dayton

Ellison

C. G.

Wulff

K. M.

(1999). Aging, religious doubt, and psychological well-being. The Gerontologist, 39(5), 525–533.

36.

Krause

Pargament

K. I.

Hill

P. C.

Ironson

(2016). Humility, stressful life events, and psychological well-being: Findings from the landmark spirituality and health survey. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 11(5), 499–510.

37.

Krause

Pargament

K. I.

Hill

P. C.

Ironson

(2018). Assessing the role of race/ethnicity in the relationships among spiritual struggles, health, and well-being. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 88(2), 132–141.

38.

Krause

N. M.

(2022). Religion, virtues, and health: New directions in theory construction and model development. Oxford University Press.

39.

LaMothe

(2014). A modest proposal: A pastoral political theology. Pastoral Psychology, 63(4), 375–391.

40.

Lazarus

R. S.

Folkman

(1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.

41.

Levin

J. S.

Taylor

R. J.

Chatters

L. M.

(1994). Race and gender differences in religiosity among older adults: Findings from four national surveys. Journal of Gerontology, 49(3), S137–S145.

42.

Lundberg

C. D.

(2010). Unifying truths of the world’s religions. Heavenlight Press.

43.

Macaskill

(2012). Differentiating dispositional self-forgiveness from other-forgiveness: Associations with mental health and life satisfaction. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 31(1), 28–50.

44.

Magyar-Russell

Brown

I. T.

Edara

I. R.

Smith

M. T.

Marine

J. E.

Ziegelstein

R. C.

(2014). In search of serenity: Religious struggle among patients hospitalized for suspected acute coronary syndrome. Journal of Religion and Health, 53, 562–578.

45.

Moore

(2003). Facing the dragon: Confronting personal and spiritual grandiosity. Chiron Publications.

46.

Neugarten

B. L.

Havighurst

R. J.

Tobin

S. S.

(1961). The measurement of the life satisfaction. Journal of Gerontology, 16(2), 134–143.

47.

Niebuhr

(1943). The nature and destiny of man. A Christian interpretation. Scribner’s Sons.

48.

Paine

D. R.

Sandage

S. J.

(2017). Religious involvement and depression: The mediating effect of relational spirituality. Journal of Religion and Health, 56, 269–283.

49.

Paine

D. R.

Sandage

S. J.

Rupert

Devor

N. G.

Bronstein

(2015). Humility as a psychotherapeutic virtue: Spiritual, philosophical, and psychological foundations. Journal of Spirituality in Mental Health, 17(1), 3–25.

50.

Pargament

K. I.

Magyar-Russell

G. M.

Murray-Swank

N. A.

(2005). The sacred and the search for significance: Religion as a unique process. Journal of Social Issues, 61(4), 665–687.

51.

Park

C. L.

Wortmann

J. H.

Edmondson

(2011). Religious struggle as a predictor of subsequent mental and physical well-being in advanced heart failure patients. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 34, 426–436.

52.

Peterson

Seligman

M. E. P.

(2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. American Psychological Association; Oxford University Press.

53.

Radloff

L. S.

(1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1(3), 385–401.

54.

Roberts

R. C.

Wood

W. J.

(2007). Intellectual virtues: An essay in regulative epistemology. Oxford University Press.

55.

Roepke

A. M.

Seligman

M. E.

(2015). Doors opening: A mechanism for growth after adversity. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(2), 107–115.

56.

Ruffing

E. G.

Oleson

Tomlinson

Park

S. H.

Sandage

S. J.

(2021). Humility and relational spirituality as predictors of well-being among Christian seminary students. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 49(4), 419–435.

57.

Sedlar

A. E.

Stauner

Pargament

K. I.

Exline

J. J.

Grubbs

J. B.

Bradley

D. F.

(2018). Spiritual struggles among atheists: Links to psychological distress and well-being. Religions, 9(8), 242.

58.

Sparrow-Simpson

W. J.

(1919). The letters of St. Augustine. Macmillan.

59.

Sternthal

M. J.

Williams

D. R.

Musick

M. A.

Buck

A. C.

(2010). Depression, anxiety, and religious life: A search for mediators. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 51(3), 343–359.

60.

Swinton

(2007). Researching spirituality and mental health: A perspective from the research. In Coyte

M. E.

Gilbert

Nicholls

(Eds.), Spirituality, values and mental health: Jewels for the journey (pp. 292–305). Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

61.

Szcześniak

Timoszyk-Tomczak

(2020). Religious struggle and life satisfaction among adult Christians: Self-esteem as a mediator. Journal of Religion and Health, 59(6), 2833–2856.

62.

Tangney

J. P.

(2000). Humility: Theoretical perspectives, empirical findings and directions for future research. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19(1), 70–82.

63.

Tangney

J. P.

(2002). Humility. In Snyder

C. R.

Lopez

S. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 411–419). Oxford University Press.

64.

Tangney

J. P.

(2005). Humility. In Snyder

C. R.

Lopez

S. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 411–419). Oxford University Press.

65.

Upenieks

(2021). Changes in religious doubt and physical and mental health in emerging adulthood. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 60(2), 332–361.

66.

Upenieks

(2022). Religious/spiritual struggles and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: Does “talking religion” help or hurt? Review of Religious Research, 64(2), 249–278.

67.

Upenieks

Louie

Hill

T. D.

(2023). Welcome to the dark side: The role of religious/spiritual struggles in the Black-White mental health paradox. Society and Mental Health, 13(2), 151–168.

68.

Van Tongeren

D. R.

Hook

J. N.

Ramos

M. J.

Edwards

Worthington

E. L.

Jr. Davis

D. E.

Ruiz

J. M.

Reid

C. A.

Garthe

R. C.

Nonterah

C. W.

Cowden

R. G.

Opare-Henaku

Connelly

Omoruyi

Nkomo

T. S.

Osae-Larbi

J. A.

(2019). The complementarity of humility hypothesis: Individual, relational, and physiological effects of mutually humble partners. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 14(2), 178–187.

69.

Van Tongeren

D. R.

Hickman

Tay

(2023). Behavioral measures of humility: Part 2. Conceptual mapping and charting ways forward. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 18(5), 722–732.

70.

Webster

N. J.

Ajrouch

K. J.

Antonucci

T. C.

(2018). Sociodemographic differences in humility: The role of social relations. Research in Human Development, 15(1), 50–71.

71.

Weil

(1970). First and last notebooks. Oxford University Press.

72.

Wolfteich

C. E.

Keefe-Perry

Sandage

Paine

D. R.

(2016). Humility: Empirical Psychological research in dialogue with practical theology–Part II: Part I of this research report is published in volume 20.1 of the IJPT. International Journal of Practical Theology, 20(2), 184–202.

73.

Worthington

E. L.

Jr. Sandage

S. J.

(2016). Forgiveness and spirituality: A relational approach. American Psychological Association.

74.

Wright

J. C.

(2019). Humility. Oxford University Press.

75.

Zarzycka

Puchalska-Wasyl

M. M.

(2020). Can religious and spiritual struggle enhance well-being? Exploring the mediating effects of internal dialogues. Journal of Religion and Health, 59, 1897–1912.

76.

Zarzycka

Zietek

(2019). Spiritual growth or decline and meaning-making as mediators of anxiety and satisfaction with life during religious struggle. Journal of Religion and Health, 58, 1072–1086.