sychology of eligion newsletter · example, the number of published arti- ... gious beliefs that...

The past decade has evidenced aremarkable resurgence of interestin the role of religion and spiritual-

ity in mental and physical health. Forexample, the number of published arti-cles referenced using the keywords reli-gion and health and spiritual/spiritualityand health in the Medline database in-creased five fold from 1994 to 2001 (Mills,2002, p. 1) and increases in the numberof books on religion/spirituality, indexedin PsycINFO, reflected a similar trend. In my review of the literature, only twobooks between 1982–1986 were citedwhereas in the most recent 5-year period,99 books appeared (See Figures 1 & 2 onthe following pages). Mills (2002) writingfrom the perspective of behavioral medi-cine noted that medical science “nowfinds it compelling and perhaps evennecessary to reexamine relationshipsamong spirit, mind, and body” and noted,“every major medical, psychiatric, andbehavioral medicine journal has pub-lished on the topic. [Further,] he cites, in 1999 the National Institutes of HealthOffice of Behavioral and Social SciencesResearch created an expert panel of sci-entists to critically examine this growingbody of literature” (p. 1). Within thisemerging literature are not only investiga-tions of the associations between religion,broadly defined, and health variables, butalso clinical guides discussing and offer-ing recommendations for the integrationof religious and spiritual resources in psychological treatment, reflecting eachmajor theoretical orientation (Fukuyama& Sevig, 1999; Genia, 1995; Griffith &Griffith, 2001; Kelly, 1995; Koenig, 1998;Koenig, McCullough & Larson, 2001;Lovinger, 1984, 1990, 1996; Nielson, Johnson & Ellis, 2001; Steere, 1977;Walsh, 1999). The American Psychologi-cal Association has made a significant

commitment to this effort in its publica-tion of Religion and the Clinical Practiceof Psychology (Shafranske, 1996), A Spiri-tual Strategy for Counseling and Psy-chotherapy (Richards & Bergin, 1997),Integrating Spirituality in Treatment:Resources for Practitioners (Miller, 1999),Handbook of Psychotherapy and ReligiousDiversity (Richards & Bergin, 2000), andthe forthcoming, Religion and Psycho-therapy: A Casebook (Richards & Bergin,in press) and Spiritually-Oriented Psy-chotherapy: Contemporary Approaches(Sperry & Shafranske, in preparation).

The development of an applied psychol-ogy in which the religious and spiritualdimensions of human experience areaddressed, and that may include theexplicit integration of resources derivedfrom spiritual traditions, is a major under-taking in the field. This is particularly thecase in light of the longstanding ambiva-lence towards religion within mainstreampsychology, the historic aim to distancepsychological treatment from its precur-sors in religio-magical healing and themoral treatment of the early 19th cen-tury as well by the continuing efforts by many to restrict consideration to nar-rowly defined, positivistic and technicalapproaches to psychological meaning,malady, and behavior. In this address, I

AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATIO

N

DIVISION 36

PSYCHOLOGY OF RELIGION

NEWSLETTERV O L U M E 2 7 , N O . 4 F A L L 2 0 0 2

INSIDE

Announcements . . . . . . . . . . 12Executive Committee . . . . . . . . 13Call for Papers . . . . . . . . . 14-15New President’s Greeting . . . . . . 16

The Necessaryand Sufficient

Conditions for an Applied Psychology of

Religion

Edward P. ShafranskePepperdine University

Presidential Address to Division 36 of the American

Psychological Association

August 24th, 2002Chicago, Illinois

This address is an abbreviatedversion of a paper underpreparation for publication.

Requests for the publicationversion may be requested [email protected] or at Pepperdine University18111 Von Karman AvenueRoom 209Irvine, CA 92612.

(Continued on page 2)

AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION DIVISION 36

introduce some preliminary considera-tions of the necessary and sufficient con-ditions1 for an applied psychology of religion. It is not my intent to present adefinitive explication but rather to directattention to the importance of identifyingsuch conditions in service of the develop-ment of collaborative research programsand applied theoretical scholarship uponwhich an empirically supported appliedpsychology of religion may be established.This discussion will also highlight thenecessity for broad-based, cross-disci-plinary efforts in which knowledgederived from the academic study of thepsychology of religion informs everystage of its eventual clinical application.Further this address intends to initiate a discussion of the role of APA Division36 in supporting the development of anapplied psychology of religion. Beforeturning to the consideration of the condi-tions, an initial question might surface:“Why an applied psychology of religion?”

There are four sources to draw upon inanswering this query. The first is what I refer to as “a priori or common sense”knowledge. Extant our scientific investi-

gations, naïve observation would leadmost to conclude that religion and spiritu-ality play salient roles in the lives ofmany, if not most, individuals. The reli-gious beliefs that people hold, the ritualsthey use to signify human milestonessuch as birth and death, their expressionof faith in private and public prayer, andthe religiously-derived moral prescrip-tions and proscriptions they follow, aswell as other spiritual practices, suggestthe important influence of religion andspirituality in Pargament’s (1997) words,“in the search for significance” (p. 30).The demographics of religious faith, e.g.,over 96% of Americans believe in God,over 90% pray, 43% have attendedchurch, synagogue, or temple within thepast 7 days (Princeton Religion ResearchCenter, 1996) and the finding that thepercentage of Americans who think reli-gion is increasing in influence (48%) hasbeen higher in recent years (cited inKoenig & Larson, 2001, p.67), point towhat Malony and Shafranske (1996)referred to as religion as “a cultural fact,”warranting its inclusion in considera-tions of mental health and psychologicaltreatment. Secondly, a historical andanthropological review finds that many of the essential features of contemporarypsychological therapeutics originated inreligious forms of healing, e.g., compas-sionate understanding, encouragement,confession, etc. (Jackson, 1999). The psy-chology of religion therefore is uniquelysituated to provide insights into the psy-chological mechanisms underlying healthand the relief of psychological distress,which have been and are supplied byreligious and spiritual practices. Next,experiences derived from clinical practiceillustrate that for many persons the centralrole religion/spirituality plays in the attri-butions and affects, which shape theirpsychological experiences and impact theprocess of treatment. Fourth, knowledgederived from scientific and scholarly in-vestigations in the psychology of religion,for example, the burgeoning empirical literature in religious coping (Pargament,

2

P S Y C H O L O G Y O F R E L I G I O N N E W S L E T T E R — A P A D I V I S I O N 3 6

Presidential Address

— Continued from page 1

1 I have appropriated Carl Rogers’ (1957) language to frame this discussion becausethe adjectives, necessary and sufficientclearly state the requirements for the condi-tions and the utility that such a modelserved in carrying forth his research intent.

# of

Cita

tions

Years

PsychInfo / Religion

PsychInfo / Religious & Spiritual

MedPub / Religious

MedPub / Religious & Spiritual

1977–1981 1982–1986 1987–1991 1992–1996 1997–20010

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

FIGURE 1. Citations including Religion or Spiritual in PsycINFO and PubMed Databases.

1997; Harrison, Koenig, Hays, Eme-Akwari & Pargament, 2001), point to therelevance of establishing an applied psy-chology of religion. One additional pref-acing remark, the choice of the phrase“an applied psychology of religion” isimportant as it means to signify that clini-cal applications are to be derived from ascholarly, research foundation rather thansolely from a posture of faith, whichmight be found in certain forms of reli-gious psychotherapy derived exclusivelyfrom a belief or values perspective.

The Necessary and SufficientConditions for an Applied Psychology of Religion

I propose that minimally there are fourconditions that are necessary and suffi-cient for the ongoing development of an applied psychology of religion. These are:

1. Establishment of Paradigmatic Breadth

2. Demonstration of Associations betweenReligion/Spirituality and Health

3. Demonstration of the Efficacy of Clinical Approaches and InterventionsConstituting the Applied Psychology of Religion

4. Establishment of Pedagogy and Train-ing in Applied Psychology of Religion.

Each of these conditions are presently ina state of development and each in turninfluences and is dependent upon theother. Such an applied psychology of reli-gion is related to a broadly consideredview of health as a condition of well-being, which is inclusive of psychologicaltreatment as well to positive psychology(Meyers, 2000; Seligman & Csikszentmi-halyi, 2000).

1. Establishment of ParadigmaticBreadth

As Kuhn (1970) argued, all scientificendeavors are conducted and delimitedby the paradigms in which the scholarshave been acculturated and for whomshare group commitments and values.Paradigms, as social inventions, promul-gate rules of engagement and investiga-

tion, define the subject and method ofinquiry, and establish the means by whichtruth claims are established. Embeddedwithin these structures are elemental faith statements concerning the nature of human values and metaphysics. Theapplication of knowledge, as well as the procedures to obtain knowledge, arelaid down in practices; practices whoseintrinsic assumptions often go criticallyunexamined. The establishment of para-digmatic breadth inevitably involvesbreaking through established barriers and allows for consideration of struc-tures of meaning derived from “foreignsources,” i.e., the world outside theparadigm, which then forwards a reap-praisal of the constituent assumptions of the paradigm (Margolis, 1993).

Paradigm Inclusive of Religion and Science. In keeping with Jones’ (1994)call for “a constructive relationshipbetween religion and the science andprofession of psychology,” an appliedpsychology of religion requires carefulattention to the assumptions upon whichscientific claims; scholarly practices andclinical applications are promulgated.

3



FIGURE 2. Books including Religion or Spiritual in PsycINFO Database.

# of

Boo

ks

Years

1977–1981 1982–1986 1987–1991 1992–1996 1997–20010

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Bringing clinical science and an appliedpsychology of religion into collaborationboldly counters the academy’s marginaliz-ing of religion and confronts the equiva-lence of epistemic claims concerning con-structions of meaning and the nature ofreality. Further, an integral aspect of thebreadth of the paradigm requires room to approach all of the linguistic forms bywhich personal signification occurs aswell as appreciation for the agentic rolethat meaning serves in human motivationand experience. The breadth of the para-digm, including its method, must be suffi-cient to allow for apprehending a widesweep of psychological phenomena,which are highly idiographic in expres-sion. The paradigm would necessarilyconsider the inescapable moral frame-works (Taylor, 1989), conceptions of well being (Christopher, 1999), and theultimate concerns (Emmons, 1999), insum one’s notions of what it means to be human, which orient human actionand contribute to constructions of signifi-cance. This would also encompass con-siderations of culture, the postmodern critique of positivism, including its affir-mative and skeptical voices, (Rorty, 1991;Rosenau, 1992) and the appreciation ofconstructivistic approaches to the self inculture (Foucault, 1999; Geertz, 1973).What I am suggesting is the need forparadigmatic breadth, which additivelyreshapes the philosophical landscapeupon which an applied psychology ofreligion could be uncompromisinglyundertaken. Mahrer (1998), in asking,“How can philosophy contribute to the advancement of psychotherapy?”responds in a manner that is relevant to the discussion at hand. He offers that research is “an esteemed resource,but there are probably others” (p. 229).He suggests that conceptualizations ofgreat theoreticians, intuitive insights ofgifted clinicians, advances in relatedfields, broad conceptual movements,advances in technology and sixth, shiftsin underlying philosophy and the philos-ophy of science may serve as resources(p. 229).

As for applied clinical practice, the para-digm would require accommodation toinclude, what Habermas (1971) definedas empirical-analytic sciences as well asthe historical-hermeneutic sciences. In the former, rules for the construction of

theories and for their critical testing arebased on the covariance of observableevents and allow for a correspondence toreality (cf., Habermas, 1971, p. 308). Theexemplar of this stance is found in bio-logical psychiatry in which the subjectivephenomenon of depression is understoodsolely in regards to its correspondence toserotonergic dysregulation. This is in con-trast with the historical-hermeneutic sci-ences, in which “[a]ccess to the facts isprovided by the understanding of mean-ing, not observation ” (Habermas, 1971,p. 309). Applied psychologists approachphenomena to some degree or anotherwith allegiance to one of these traditionswhich remarkably, although not alwayscomfortably, co-exist within the discipline.Paradigmatic breath may be required toacquire more comprehensive knowledgeof human psychology, as one scientistcommented, “What we seem to be learn-ing through neuroscientific research isthat biological accounts of the brain mayturn out to require such terms as beliefs,desires, and feelings, as well as neurons,synapses, and serotonin” (p. 613). Fromanother perspective, we may concludethat these data are obtained from inspec-tions of diverse levels of experience of agiven phenomenon through the applica-tion of a “multilevel theory” (Barbour,1990, p. 225). Psychology is a science,which includes within its complement ofpractices empirical-analytic and historical-hermeneutic methods of inquiry in itspursuit of meaning. This is in keepingwith Wulff’s (1997) comprehensive analy-sis of the classical and contemporary psy-chology of religion in which two distinc-tive traditions, the natural-scientific orobjective and the human-scientific or sub-jective approaches, have co-existed. Themeanings that are derived are outcomesof the method and the level of inquirythat is conducted. Paradigmatic breadth, I suggest, is necessary to bring into anapplied psychology full understanding of the religious and spiritual sources ofmeaning, motivation and behavior, in-cluding the contributions of cognition,affect and social psychological dynamics.The psychology of religion may havemuch to offer, particularly, if it is able to contribute, in Hill’s view (1999) “toknowledge of basic cognitive and affec-tive processes, to generate fresh insightinto some limited and tired perspectiveson personality functioning, and by pro-

4




viding a moral frame of reference as a situated context for examining certainsocial-psychological dynamics (cf.p. 233).

Defining the Subject(s) of Study. A cen-tral function of paradigms is generatingdefinitions, models, and theories uponwhich to set a research agenda, toadvance knowledge and to establishapplications. One longstanding challengewithin our field, and one, which is per-haps problematic to the development of a comprehensive applied psychology of religion, concerns the definition of itsubject. In the discipline, one finds manyunique definitions, to illustrate:

Religion as “the feelings, acts and experiences of individual menin their solitude, so far as theyapprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they mayconsider the divine.”

— WILLIAM JAMES

Religion can be viewed as “a sys-tem of symbols which acts toestablish powerful, persuasive, and long-lasting moods and moti-vations by formulating conceptionsof a general order of existence and clothing these conceptionswith such an aura of factuality thatthe moods and motivations seemuniquely realistic.”

— CLIFFORD GEERTZ

“Religion as a system of faith, worship, cumulative traditions,and prescribed rituals.”

— EVERETT WORTHINGTON

Religion: “a system of beliefs in a divine or superhuman power,and practices of worship or otherrituals directed towards such apower.”

— M. ARGYLE ANDB. BEIT-HALLAHMI

Religion as a process, a search for significance in ways related tothe sacred.

— KENNETH I. PARGAMENT

Bauman (1998) concludes, “ ‘Religion’belongs to the family of curious, andoften embarrassing concepts, which one

perfectly understands until one wants to define them.…More often then not,‘defining religion’ amounts to replacingone ineffable with another — to the substitution of the incomprehensible forthe unknown” (p. 55). Such may be thecase in the recent introduction of spiritu-ality as distinct from religion within popu-lar culture. Comprehensive texts, authoredby scholars, such as Wulff (1997) and Hood(1996) and his colleagues, have presentedarticulate discussions of the diversity ofapproaches within the psychology of reli-gion and although acknowledging theconsequences of such a condition, con-clude that this may be required. Hill, et al.(2001), in an excellent review and discus-sion of points of commonality and depar-ture, suggest:

Both spirituality and religion arecomplex phenomena, multidimen-sional in nature, and any singledefinition is likely to reflect a lim-ited perspective or interest. In factit will be argued that past attemptsto define these constructs are oftentoo narrow, resulting in opera-tional definitions that foster pro-grams of empirical research withlimited value, or too broad, result-ing in a loss of distinctive charac-teristics of religion and spirituality.Given our limited understandingof contemporary religion and spiri-tuality, it is perhaps premature toinsist on a single comprehensivedefinition of either term (p. 52).

Such diversity in approach has resulted in a lack of clarity and consensus regard-ing the construct or constructs and dis-courages efforts to establish collaborativeresearch programs, as noted by reviewersof this literature. The failure or the deci-sion, or perhaps, more accurately, the im-possibility of arriving at a mutually agreedupon a definition (or definitions — shouldwe consider religion and spirituality to bemutually exclusive constructs) has signifi-cantly impacted the field. No matter thewisdom in forestalling a premature col-lapsing of the phenomenon into cate-gories, which may over time be demon-strated either to be sufficient or not, nev-ertheless hinders the development of anapplied psychology of religion. [There are

5



of course exceptions, take for examplethe explosion of literature on religiouscoping and the impact it has had inbringing diverse scientific constituenciesinto meaning collaboration. This to agreat extent has occurred through KenPargament’s well-reasoned and disci-plined approach to scholarship. Perhaps,a similar opportunity exists in the area of positive psychology (when was the last time we had a former president ofAPA participate in a Division 36 conven-tion program — perhaps, Frank Farley).] I am not calling for an expedient, brashresolution of the definitional controversy.I agree with Pargament (1999), Zinnbauer,Pargament, and Scott (1999) and with Hillet al. (2001) who “warn against two moresubtle dangers [in the study of religionand spirituality], one which can be ex-pressed in two potential forms of polar-ization: either individual vs. institutionalor ‘good’ vs. ‘bad’ [religion], and] perhapsthe more serious: the danger of losing the field’s distinctive sacred core” (pp.63–64). Further, in light of the 100thanniversary of the publication of WilliamJames’s Varieties of Religious Experience,we are reminded that any consensually-validated definition must meet the require-ments of including the many varieties ofreligious experience.

Establishment of a Community of Scholars/Clinicians. A further require-ment is the establishment of a communityof scholars. As Vande Kemp (1996) clearlydelineated in her historical study, the psy-chology of religion includes such a com-munity and can be identified through for-mal organizations, such as APA Division36, and through a recognized literature,among other objective indicators. VandeKemp also finds a history of efforts atintegration with applied practice as wellas with other disciplines. I will not re-tracehere the details of her analysis or thecontributions of other scholars, whichdemonstrate a robust, although relativelysmall, community within the academy. I suggest however that the establishmentof a community of scholars/clinicians,necessary for the development of a broadbased and influential applied psychologyof religion has not been not fully attained.Also, the requisite status and institutional/professional support and infrastructurenecessary to forward a comprehensiveinitiative has not yet been achieved;

although I must say that the work in religion and coping is approaching a critical mass which is now beginning to be recognized throughout the field.Further, there are significant challenges in facilitating articulation between aca-demic and practice communities to forgea truly joint and commensurate venture in developing an applied psychology of religion. This requires knowledgederived from science and knowledgederived from practice to be brought intoa meaningful relationship.

The necessary and sufficient condition of paradigmatic breadth includes, but isnot limited to, establishment of a philo-sophical foundation and praxis inclusiveof religion and science of psychology,continued refinement of the subject ofstudy, and enhancement of the commu-nity of scholars.

2. Demonstration of an Associationbetween Religion/Spirituality and Health

An applied psychology of religion canonly be established following the demon-stration of an association between religion/spirituality and health. Clinical applica-tion necessarily follows and builds uponcausal relationships that have been identi-fied between associated variables, e.g.,the development of the technique of cognitive restructuring emanated fromknowledge, derived theoretically, clini-cally and experimentally of the causalrelationship between cognition and emo-tional states.

As in any developing field, there is a pro-gression in the processes and requirementsthat are utilized to acquire knowledge.Associations are first unintentionally hap-pened upon or discovered well beforehypotheses are formulated and organizedscientific study is initiated. Theories andconjectures based on commonplace andreadily available observations give rise tosystematic inquiry and scholarly theoriz-ing. Theoretical speculation is bolsteredthrough the accumulation of selectedillustrations and non-confirmatory dataare largely ignored (Type II errors are ini-tially more acceptable then Type I errorsin the exploratory phase of research). Hy-potheses are then developed and formal

6




investigations conducted, replicated, and critiqued with increasing sophistica-tion and scrutiny. It might be said that in the early stages considerable varianceexists in both the means by which scien-tific investigation is conducted and thequality of such investigation; however,once a body of the literature begins toemerge, the level of rigor rises and themethodological demands increase. Theaforementioned dramatic rise in publica-tions in religion and health demarks acritical phase in the field’s development.Associations between variables must nowbe demonstrated rather than simply illus-trated or hypothesized and the researchfocus is being encouraged to shift fromlooking at mere associations to investigat-ing causal relationships, which requirealternative methods of hypothesis testing.

In the past ten years significant attentionhas been placed on the associationsamong religious affiliation, beliefs, andpractices and physical and mental health.A sufficient body of research has beenaccumulated which has prompted system-atic reviews of empirical research. Thesereports have for the most part suggesteda positive correlation between religiouspractice and health status and a numberof publications have reported such gen-eral findings (Ellison & Levin, 1998; Fal-lot, 1998; Koenig, 1998; Koenig & Cohen,2002; Koenig & Larson, 2001; Koenig,McCullough & Larson, 2001; Larson &Larson, 1994; Plante & Sherman, 2001).Religious involvement has been shown to be associated with quality of life andserves as an epidemiological protectivefactor. Meta-analyses have found reli-gious commitment to be associated withreduced risk in factors important to men-tal health, such as, suicide, drug use,alcohol abuse, delinquency, marital satis-faction, and depression (Koenig & Lar-son, 2001). Koenig and Cohen (2002),conclude in The Link between Religionand Health: Psychoneuroimmunologyand the Faith Factor:

There is growing epidemiologicalevidence that religious beliefs andbehaviors are correlated with men-tal health and predict both betterphysical health outcomes andlonger survival. Exactly how reli-gious influence physical healthremains an enigma. Establishing

plausible biochemical and physio-logical mechanisms by which reli-gion conveys its health effects is ofutmost importance for advancingour knowledge about the religion-health relationship. Given thestring associations between reli-gious involvement, social support,and stress reduction, it seemsalmost natural that religious beliefsand practices might affect healththrough neuroendocrine andimmune pathways (p. 295).

The conclusions are not without their crit-ics. Sloan and Bagiella (2002) and Sloan,Bagiella and Powell (1999) for exampleargue that methodological flaws seriouslylimit many conclusions, which are drawn.Sloan and Bagiella:

To conclude, it is indeed true thatthere are many studies in whichreligious variables and health out-comes appear together. It is nottrue, however, that most of thesestudies are relevant to the putativebenefits derived from religiousinvolvement. In fact most are irrel-evant to this claim…to suggestotherwise is inconsistent with theliterature (pp. 19–20).

I will not attempt to reconcile these dis-parate conclusions in this address, rathermy intent was to illustrate the controver-sies brewing in these field as well as tosuggest that increased rigor is required atthis stage of development in this literature— the level of scrutiny is very high (asfor many fundamental ontological beliefsare at stake as well scientific claims). Thefindings of the OSSR/NIH Panel, whichwill be published in the American Psy-chologist (Miller & Thoresen, in press)and selected conclusions were reportedby Thoresen, Harris and Oman (2001),find that more information is requiredabout “just what those persons involvedin such studies are doing, thinking andfeeling” (p. 39) and that “the lack of ade-quate controls and designs in many stud-ies has seriously limited our understand-ing of these relationships” (p. 44). Thispoints to the necessity of utilizing researchprocedures which control confounds, co-variates, multiple statistical analysis

7



effects (Bonferroni procedures) etc.; in sum, to improve the quality of theresearch. They suggest, similar to the recommendations in this address, that “a broad perspective that spans thesocial, behavioral, and medical sciences is needed, with the collaboration of thosein the humanities, including theologiansand spiritual practitioners (e.g., clergy)”and for the inclusion of qualitative aswell as quantitative and experimentalprocedures (p. 45). The necessary andsufficient condition for an applied psy-chology of religion requires ongoing andincreasingly sophisticated demonstrationof causal as well as correlational associa-tions between religion, clearly defined,and health.

3. Demonstration of the Clinical Efficacy of an Applied Psychology of Religion

Following the demonstration of the associ-ations between religion and health, includ-ing a greater understanding of the mecha-nisms upon which the putative effects areproduced, the development of clinicalstrategies and techniques as well as thedemonstration of their clinical efficacy maybe undertaken. At present the majority ofthe clinical literature is based on clinicalcase illustration and small sample empiri-cal studies in which controls of confoundshave not been addressed nor the use ofcontrol groups. Recently, religious or spiri-tual problems have been formally recog-nized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Man-ual for Mental Disorders-IV (Turner,Lukoff, Barnhouse, & Lu, 1995); however,the field is still in its embryonic stage.Worthington and Sandage (2001), follow-ing their review of the literature, con-cluded: “most research has been unsophis-ticated relative to the general status ofpsychotherapy research” (2001, p. 473).Following an earlier review by Worthing-ton, Kurusu, McCullough, and Sandage(1996) these authors find that increasedspecificity is needed to advance researchin the area (1996) and “randomized, multi-site clinical trials are needed” (2001,p. 477; See also Worthington, 1988). Todevelop such research programs requirescollaboration with those involved in theextensive work in psychotherapy outcomestudies. Research protocols and principles,such as those developed by the Commit-

tee on Science and Practice of the Societyof Clinical Psychology (Weisz, Hawley,Pilkonis, Woody, Follette, 2000) may pro-vide useful models to base such investiga-tions. A necessary and sufficient conditionfor an applied clinical psychology will nec-essarily include developing research proto-cols consistent with standards for outcomeresearch in general, including empirically-supported approaches as well as methodsuniquely tailored to an emerging appliedpsychology of religion and going beyondthe constraints of the medical model(Wampold, Ahn & Coleman, 2001).

4. Establishment of Pedagogy and Training in Applied Psychology of Religion

Finally, a necessary and sufficient condi-tion includes the establishment of peda-gogy and training. Although the ethicalguidelines of the American PsychologicalAssociation (1992, 1993) and other pro-fessional bodies, American CounselingAssociation (1995), American PsychiatricAssociation (1994) require sensitivity andcompetence in addressing religiousnessas a cultural variable, the present status of the field finds that little attention isplaced on religious variables in graduateeducation and training. Survey researchconsistently finds that less than 10% ofclinical and counseling psychologistsreport that this domain was discussed ineducation (Shafranske, 1996; Shafranske,2000; Shafranske, 2001; Shafranske andMalony, 1990a, 1990b). Specialized pro-grams, which integrate religion and spiri-tuality into the curriculum, exist althoughthese are relatively few and typically con-cern the integration of particular religioustraditions (Brawer, Handal, Farbricatore,Roberts, & Wadja-Johnston, 2002). Thereis of course a reciprocal relationshipbetween the establishment of a researchand theoretical base and the degree ofattention placed in education. It is some-what of a chicken and an egg dilemma— if the research base established thenteaching would follow or if attentionwere placed in teaching then researchand application would follow. The emer-gence of the literature in coping and inpositive psychology may result in pro-ducing a synergy in which increasedresearch, clinical application and trainingmay take place. Innovation in graduation

8




and training would require exposure to the diversity of religious expressionwithin culture, consideration of the philosophical underpinnings of the field, development and supervision of empirically supported, culturally-sensitive and ethical intervention proto-cols and consultation with religious professionals (Edwards, Lim, McMinn, & Dominguez, 1999; Larimore, Parker, &Crowther, 2002; Plante, 1999; Shafranske& Malony, 1996; Tan, 1994, 1996, 1999;Yarhouse & VanOrman, 1999).

APA Division 36APA Division 36 has been instrumental in facilitating dialogue and encouragingresearch throughout a period in whichreligious and spiritual issues were rarelytaken up in the field. The Division mayenhance and sustain further developmentthrough proactive efforts, for example by establishing articulation between academic and applied psychologists,sponsoring research conferences andtraining institutes in the psychology ofreligion, actively participating and obtain-ing greater representation within APA and within other professional and publicvenues, encouraging contributions to APAjournals and promotion of establishedpublications dedicated to the psychologyof religion, formally supporting efforts atcollaboration with religious professionals,and encouraging and mentoring under-graduate and graduate students to con-sider the psychology of religion as aviable area for scholarship.

The Division has a unique opportunitynow, in the spirit of the growing appreci-ation of religion as a clinical variable andrelated to positive psychology, to take the lead and to initiate efforts to insurethat the necessary and sufficient condi-tions are achieved, upon which anapplied psychology of religion will bemore completely established to the bene-fit of the human community. It has beenan honor to serve as president of theDivision and I look forward to continuedinvolvement and collaboration as westrive together to contribute to the psy-chology of religion.

References

American Counseling Association. (1995).Code of ethics and standards for practice.Alexandria, VA: Author.

American Psychiatric Association. (1990).Guidelines regarding possible conflictbetween psychiatrists’ religiouscommitments and psychiatric practice.American Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 542.

American Psychological Association. (1992).Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 47,1597–1611.

American Psychological Association. (1993).Guidelines for providers of psychologicalservices to ethnic, linguistic, and culturallydiverse populations. American Psychologist,48, 45–48.

Bauman, Z. (1998). Postmodern religion? In P. Heelis (Ed.), Religion, modernity andpostmodernity. Oxford, UK: BlackwellPublishers.

Brawer, P. A., Handal, P. J., Fabricatore, A. N., Roberts, R. & Wadja-Johnston, V. A. (2002). Training and education inreligion/ spirituality within APA-Accreditedclinical psychology programs. ProfessionalPsychology: Research and Practice, 33(2),203–206.

Christopher, J. C. (1999). Situating psycho-logical well-being: Exploring cultural valuesand assumptions underlying theory andresearch on psychological well-being.Journal of Counseling Psychology andDevelopment, 77, 141–152.

Edwards, L. C., Lim, B. R. K. B., McMinn, M.R., Dominguez, A. W. (1999). Examples ofcollaboration between psychologists andclergy. Professional Psychology: Researchand Practice, 30(6), 547–551.

Ellison C.G., Levin, J.S. The religion-healthconnection: evidence, theory, and futuredirections. Health Education and Behavior,1998; 25(6):700–720.

Emmons, R. A. (1999). The psychology ofultimate concerns. New York: The GuilfordPress.

Fallot, R. D. (Ed.). (1998). Spirituality andreligion in recovery from mental illness.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Foucault, M. (Ed.. J. C. Carrette), (1999).Religion and culture. New York: Routledge,Inc.

Fukuyama, M. A. & Sevig, T. D. (1999).Integrating spirituality into multiculturalcounseling. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGEPublications.

Genia, V. (1995). Counseling and psycho-therapy of religious clients. Westport, CT:Praeger.

9



Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretations ofculture. New York: Basic Books.

Griffith, J. L. & Griffith, M. L. (2001).Encountering the sacred in psychotherapy.How to talk with people about their spirituallives. New York: Guilford.

Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and humaninterests (J. J. Shapiro, Trans.). Boston:Beacon Press (Original work published1968).

Harrison, M. O., Koenig, H. G., Hays, J. C.,Eme-Akwari, A. G., Pargament, K. I. (2001).The epidemiology of religious coping: Areview of recent research. InternationalReview of Psychiatry, 13, 86–93.

Hill, P. C. (1999). Giving religion away: Whatthe study of religion offers psychology. TheInternational Journal for the Psychology ofReligion, 9(4), 299–249.

Hill, P. C., Pargament, K. I., Hood, R. W., Jr.,McCullough, M. E., Swyers, J. P., Larson, D. B., Zinnbauer, B. J. (2001). Conceptual-izing religion and spirituality: Points ofcommonality, points of departure. Journalfor the theory of social behaviour, 30(1),51–77.

Hood, R. W., Jr., Spilka, B., Hunsberger, B., & Gorsuch, R. (1996). Psychology ofreligion: An empirical approach (2nd ed.).New York: Guilford.

Jackson, S. W. (1999). Care of the psyche. Ahistory of psychological healing. NewHaven: Yale University Press.

Jones, S. L. (1994). A constructive relationshipfor religion with the science and professionof psychology: Perhaps the boldest modelyet. American Psychologist, 49(3), 184–199.

Kelly, Jr., E. W. (1995). Spirituality andreligion in counseling and psychotherapy.Alexandria, VA: American CounselingAssociation.

Koenig, H. G. (Ed.). (1998). Handbook ofreligion and mental health. San Diego, CA:Academic Press.

Koenig, H. G., & Cohen, H. J. (Eds.). (2002).The link between religion and health:Psychoneuroimmunology and the faithfactor. New York: Oxford University Press.

Koenig, H. G., & Larson, D. B. (2001).Religion and mental health: Evidence for an association. International Review ofPsychiatry, 13, 67-78.

Koenig, H. G., McCullough, M. E., & Larson,D. B. (2001). Handbook of religion andhealth. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientificrevolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago.

Larson D.B. & Larson, S. (1994). The forgottenfactor in physical and mental health: Whatdoes the research show. Rockville, MD:National Institute for Healthcare Research.

Larimore, W. L., Parker, M., & Crowther, M.(2002). Should clinicians incorporatepositive spirituality into their practices?What does the evidence say? Annals ofbehavioral medicine, 24(1), 69–73.

Lovinger, R. J. (1984). Working with religiousissues in therapy. Northvale, NJ: JasonAronson.

Lovinger, R. J. (1990). Religion andcounseling: The psychological impact ofreligious belief. New York: Continuum.

Lovinger, R. J. (1996). Considering thereligious dimension in assessment andtreatment. In E. P. Shafranske (Ed.),Religion and the clinical practice ofpsychology (pp. 327–363). Washington:American Psychological Association.

Mahrer, A. R. (1998). How can philosophycontribute to the advancement ofpsychotherapy? An introduction. ClinicalPsychology. Science and Practice, 5(2),229–232.

Margolis, H. (1993). Paradigms and barriers.How habits of the mind govern scientificbeliefs. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Meyers, D. G. (2000). The funds, friends, and faith of happy people. AmericanPsychologist, 55(1), 56–67.

Miller, W. R. (1999). Integrating spiritualityinto treatment: Resources for practitioners.Washington: American PsychologicalAssociation.

Miller, W. R. & Thoresen, C. E. (in press).Spirituality, religion, and health: Anemerging research field. AmericanPsychologist.

Mills, P. J. (2002). Spirituality, religiousness,and health: From research to clinicalpractice. Annals of behavioral medicine,24(1), 1–2.

Nielsen, S. L., Johnson, W. B., & Ellis, A.(2001). Counseling and psychotherapy with religious persons: A rational emotivebehavior therapy approach. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Pargament K. I. (1997). The psychology ofreligion and coping. New York: Guilford.

Pargament, K. I. (1999). The psychology of religion and spirituality? Yes and no.International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 9(1), 3–16.

Plante, T. G. (1999). A collaborativerelationship between professionalpsychology and the Roman CatholicChurch: A case example and suggestedprinciples for success. ProfessionalPsychology: Research and Practice, 30,541–546.

Plante, T. & Sherman, A. (Eds.). (2002).Religion and health. New York: Guilford.

10




Princeton Religion Research Center (2001).Religion in America. Princeton, NJ: TheGallup Poll.

Richards, I. S. & Bergin, A. E. (1997). A spiritual strategy for counseling andpsychotherapy. Washington: AmericanPsychological Association.

Richards P.S., & Bergin, A. E. (Eds.). (2000).Handbook of psychotherapy and religiousdiversity. Washington, DC: AmericanPsychological Association.

Richards, S. & Bergin, A. E. (Eds.). (in press).Religion and psychotherapy: A casebook.Washington, DC: American PsychologicalAssociation.

Rogers, C. R. (1957). The necessary andsufficient conditions of therapeuticpersonality change. Journal of ConsultingPsychology, 21, 95–103.

Rorty, R. (1991). Objectivity, relativism, andtruth. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Roseneau, P. M. (1992). Post-modernism andthe social sciences. Princeton, NJ: PrincetonUniversity Press.

Schumaker, J. F. (Ed.). (1992). Religion andmental health. New York: Oxford UniversityPress.

Seligman, M. E. P. & Csikszentmihalyi, M.(2000). Positive psychology. An introduction.American Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14.

Shafranske, E. P. (Ed.). (1996). Religion and the clinical practice of psychology.Washington: American PsychologicalAssociation.

Shafranske, E. P. (2000). Religious involvementand professional practices of psychiatristsand other mental health professionals.Psychiatric Annals, 30(8), 525–532.

Shafranske, E. P. (2001). The ReligiousDimension of Patient Care withinRehabilitation Medicine. The role ofreligious beliefs, attitudes, and personal and professional practices. In T. G. Plante & A. C. Sherman (Eds.) Faith and health:Psychological perspectives ( pp. 311–335).New York: Guilford Press.

Shafranske, E. & Malony, H. N. (1990a).Clinical psychologists’ religious and spiritualorientations and their practice of psycho-therapy. Psychotherapy, 27(1), 72–78.

Shafranske, E. P. & Malony, H. N. (1990b).California psychologists’ religiosity andpsychotherapy. Journal of Religion andHealth, 29(3), 219–231.

Shafranske, E. P. & Malony, H. N. (1996).Religion and the clinical practice ofpsychology: A case for inclusion. In E. P.Shafranske (Ed.), Religion and the clinicalpractice of psychology (pp. 561–586).Washington: American PsychologicalAssociation.

Sloan, R. P. & Bagiella, E. (2002). Claimsabout religious involvement and healthoutcomes. Annals of behavioral medicine,24(1), 1–2.

Sloan, R. P., Bagiella, E., & Powell T. (1999).Religion, spirituality, and medicine. Lancet,353(9153), 664–7.

Sperry, L. & Shafranske, E. P., (Eds.), (inpreparation, 2003). Spiritually-orientedpsychotherapy: Contemporary approaches.Washington: American PsychologicalAssociation.

Steere, D. (1977). Spiritual presence in psycho-therapy: A guide for caregivers. New York:Brunner/Mazel.

Tan, S-Y. (1994). Ethical considerations inreligious psychotherapy: Potential pitfallsand unique resources. Journal of Psychol-ogy and Theology, 22, 389–394.

Tan, S-Y. (1996). Religion in clinical practice:Implicit and explicit integration. In E. P.Shafranske (Ed.), Religion and the clinicalpractice of psychology (pp. 365–387).Washington: American PsychologicalAssociation.

Tan, S-Y. (1999). Religion in psychologicaltherapy. Psychology of Religion Newsletter,24(3), 1–7.

Taylor, C. (1987). The moral topography of the self. In S. B. Messer, L. A. Saas, & R. L. Woolfolk (Eds.), Hermeneutics and psychological theory: Interpretiveperspectives on personality, psychotherapy,and psychopathology (pp. 288–320). NewBrunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Turner, R. P., Lukoff, D., Barnhouse, R. T., Lu, F. G. (1995). Religious or spiritualproblem. A culturally sensitive diagnosticcategory in the DSM-IV. Journal of Nervousand Mental Disorders, 183(7), 435–44.

Vande Kemp, H. (1996). Historical perspec-tive: Religion and clinical psychology in America. In E. P. Shafranske (Ed.). Religion and the clinical practice of psychology (pp. 71–112). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Walsh, F. (Ed.). (1999). Spiritual resources in family therapy. New York: GuilfordPress.

Wampold, B. E., Ahn, H., Coleman, H., L. K. (2001). Medical model as metaphor:Old habits die hard. Journal of CounselingPsychology, 48(3), 268–273.

Weisz, J. R., Hawley, K. M., Pilkonis, P. A.,Woody, S. R., & Follette, W. C. (2000).Stressing the (other) three r’s in the searchfor empirically supported treatments: Reviewprocedures, research quality, relevance topractice and the public interest. ClinicalPsychology. Science and Practice, 7(3),243–258.

11



Worthington, E. L., Jr. (1988). Understanding the values of religiousclients: A model and its application tocounseling. Journal of CounselingPsychology, 35(2), 166–174.

Worthington, E. L. Jr., Kurusu, T. A.,McCullough, & M. E., Sanders, S. J. (1996). Empirical research on religion and psychotherapeutic processes andoutcomes: a ten-year review and researchprospectus. Psychological Bulletin, 119,448–487.

Worthington, E. L., Jr., & Sandage, S. J. (2001).Religion and spirituality. Psychotherapy,38(4), 473–478.

Wulff, D. (1997). Psychology of religion:Classic and contemporary (2nd ed.). NewYork: Wiley.

Yarhouse, M. A. & VanOrman, B. T. (1999).When psychologists work with religiousclients: Applications of the general princi-ples of ethical conduct. Professional Psy-chology: Research and Practice, 30(6),557–562.

12




Nominations Invited for Division Offices

Nominations are now open for the following elected positions for Division 36:

• Division 36 President• Division 36 Secretary

Please send or e-mail nominations by January 1, 2003 to:

Edward ShafranskePepperdine University

18111 Von Karman Avenue, Room 209Irvine, CA 92612

Office: (949) 223-2521Email: Edward [email protected]

A N N O U N C E M E N T

Newsletter Editor

With the publication of this newsletter Mark Krejci ends his term as the editor of

the Psychology of Religion Newsletter.

The new editor is W. Paul Williamson who will take over the position with the

publication of the Winter, 2003 newsletter.

A N N O U N C E M E N T

13


American Psychological Association — Div. 36 — Executive Committee 2002–2003

Crystal L. ParkPresident University of Connecticut406 Babbidge Rd.Box 1020Storrs Mansfield, CT 06269Office: (860) 486-3520Fax: (860) 486-2760Email: [email protected]

Rod BassettTreasurerRoberts Wesleyan College2301 Westside DriveRochester, NY 14624Office: (585) 594-6468Email: [email protected]

Robert A. EmmonsPresident-ElectDepartment of PsychologyOne Shields Ave.University of California – DavisDavis, CA 95616-8686Office: 530-752-8844Email: [email protected]

P. Scott RichardsSecretaryDepartment of Counseling PsychologyBrigham Young University328 MCKBProvo, Utah 84602Office: (801) 378-4868Fax: (801) 378-3961Email: [email protected]

Edward ShafranskePast PresidentPepperdine University18111 Von Karman Avenue, Room 209Irvine, CA 92612Office: (949) 223-2521Fax: (949) 223-2575Email: [email protected]

David M. WulffFellows Chair and Member at LargeDepartment of PsychologyWheaton CollegeNorton, MA 02766Office: (508) 286-3691Fax: (508) 286-3640Email: [email protected]

Mark McMinnCouncil RepresentativeDepartment of PsychologyWheaton College501 College Ave.Wheaton, IL 60187Office: (630) 752-7034Fax: (630) 752-7033Email: [email protected]

Ralph L. PiedmontMembership ChairDepartment of Pastoral CounselingLoyola College7135 Minstrel WayColumbia, MD 21045Office: (410) 617-7625Fax: (410) 617-7644Email: [email protected]

William HathawayCouncil RepresentativeRegent University1000 Regent University DriveVirginia Beach, VA 23464Office: (757) 226-4294Fax: (757) 226-4303Email: [email protected]

Mark J. KrejciNewsletter Editor – outgoingDepartment of PsychologyConcordia CollegeMoorhead, MN 56562Office: (218) 299-3254Fax: (218) 299-4308Email: [email protected]

Lisa MillerMember-at-LargeBox 25525 W. 120th St.Teachers CollegeColumbia UniversityNew York, NY 10027Office: (212) 678-3852Fax: (203) 341-0756Email: [email protected]

W. Paul WilliamsonNewsletter Editor – incoming Winter2003Behavioral ScienceSterling CollegeSterling, KS 67579Office: (620) 278-4296Fax: (620) 278-4412Email: [email protected]

Ralph W. Hood, Jr.Awards ChairPsychology DepartmentThe University of Tennessee at Chattanooga350 Holt Hall 615 McCallie Avenue Chattanooga, Tennessee 37403-2598 Dept. Office: (423) 755-4262 Email: [email protected]

Jeremy S. HaskellHospitality Suite Chair501 E. College Avenue CPO 4174Wheaton, IL 60187-5593Office: 630-221-9668Email: [email protected]

Dates of the meeting: The meeting is scheduled

to be held on March 28–29, 2003.

Location: The meeting will be held at the

Timonium Graduate Center of Loyola College in

Maryland.

Format: will include Posters, Papers and

Symposia as well as a Friday evening Buffet

Dinner/Social ($10 extra with limited availability).

Meeting Registration: The early

registration fee for the conference is $40 for

Members of Division 36, $50 for Non-members

and $15 for Students. Fees must be received

by March 3, 2003. Registration at the door is

$45 for Members, $55 for Non-members and

$20 for Students.

Send Meeting Registration To:

Mid Winter Meeting

c/o Dr. Ralph Piedmont

Loyola College in Maryland

7135 Minstrel Way

Columbia, Maryland 21045

Hotel Reservations:Hotels adjacent to the Graduate Center are:

The Holiday Inn2004 Greenspring Drive

Timonium, Md. 21093

(410) 252-7373 x742

Loyola Rate $89 + tax

Red Roof InnGreenspring and West Timonium Rd

Timonium, Md. 21093

(410) 666-0380

Loyola Rate $69 + tax

14


Call for PapersDivision 36 Mid-Winter Conference

Hosted by Division 36 and The Institute for Religious and Psychological Research

Building Bridges through Theory, Research and Practice

The psychology of religion and spirituality involves basic psychological processes of interest to psy-chologists from many areas, including developmental, biological, clinical, counseling, social, andpersonality. A major purpose of the Mid-Winter conference is to build scholarly bridges with othersub-disciplines that will not only advance our understanding of religious and spiritual experiences,but will provide an applied framework to further investigate basic psychological processes.

Things you should know:

QUESTIONS: e-mail [email protected] or call 410-617-7628 for more information

15


Mid-Winter Meeting — Early Registration Form

Name _______________________________________________ ❑ Member $40

Address _______________________________________________ ❑ Non-member $50

_______________________________________________ ❑ Student $15

Phone ________________________________________________ ❑ Attending Dinner $10

Affiliation ______________________________________________ Amount $_________ Enclosed

E-Mail ________________________________________________

Abstract Submission Information

Please Read the Following Directions Carefully Before Submitting Your Proposals

1. Type the title in capital letters on the first line. Skip a line.

2. Type the author(s) and primary affiliation(s) with affiliations placed in parentheses. Skip a line.

3. Type the abstract.

a. Posters and Papers require a 1000 word abstract that includes the research question, methodology,results and interpretation along with any figures or tables

b. Symposia require a 300 word overall abstract, plus a 300 word abstract for each presentation, aswell as the name of each presenter.

4. Type the following information for the primary author at the bottom of the page.

a. Mailing address and phone number (with area code);

b. Fax number and e-mail address

c. Type of submission: Paper, Poster, Paper or Poster with Paper preferred, or Symposium.

d. For papers, indicate if the presenting author is willing to chair his/her paper session, which involvesintroducing the speakers in the session to which the paper is assigned.

e. Students are particularly encouraged to make submissions and should indicate their student status.

Deadline for Submissions is 12/15/02. Please indicate if you are a student in your cover letter.

Send Submissions to:

Call for PapersMid-Winter Meetingc/o Dr. Ralph PiedmontLoyola College in Maryland7135 Minstrel WayColumbia, Maryland 21045

P S Y C H O L O G Y O F R E L I G I O N N E W S L E T T E R — A P A D I V I S I O N . 3 6

A Message from Our

New President

Crystal L. Park

Greetings! I would like to introducemyself as the new president ofDivision 36. I am honored, and

am hoping that I can be of good serviceto our group. It is a very exciting time tobe a psychologist with interests in reli-gion and spirituality, and there is much to do in promoting our work and ourdivision. In my conversations with previ-ous presidents, I have been warned notto expect to accomplish too much, as theyear passes quickly However, I am hope-ful that I can at least be part of some ofthe larger currents here in the divisionand that I can facilitate making thingshappen.

Some of the projects now underwayinclude the website we hope to have upand running soon, a possible division-affiliated journal, and the MidwinterPsychology of Religion Conference thatwe are cosponsoring with Loyola Univer-sity. As you will see in the conferenceannouncement in this issue, we are hop-ing to promote our scholarship in thepsychology of religion and to highlightthe bridges between the psychology of

religion and other subdisciplines; webelieve we have much to offer and muchto gain in this cross-pollination.

One other project in which I am involvedis an effort to make improvements in mem-bership. This involves two things. First,we are planning to reach out more tothose who may have interests in aspectsof the psychology of religion or spiritual-ity who have not traditionally seen them-selves as belonging (e.g., meditation).Second, I would very much like to seemembers of the Division become moreactive, which might include creating moreopportunities for people to get involved aswell as providing more services to mem-bers. On these membership issues, andothers, I would be very interested inhearing from you. Are there things youcan think of that the division might beable to do for you? If you would like tomake suggestions or offer your ideas,please contact me at [email protected] orour Membership Chair, Ralph Piedmontat [email protected].

Here’s to a very good year!

AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATIONDIVISION 36750 First Street NEWashington, D.C. 20002–4242

RETURN REQUESTED

NON-PROFITORGANIZATIONU.S. POSTAGE

P A I DWASHINGTON, D.C.PERMIT NO. 6348

PSYCHOLOGY OF RELIGION NEWSLETTEREDITOR: Mark J. Krejci, Ph.D., Concordia College –Moorhead

The Newsletter is the official publication of the American Psychological Association Division 36, Psychology of Religion. The Newsletter invites articles,interviews, book reviews and announcements relevant to the interdisciplinary focus of psychology and religion. Individual and institutional subscrip-tions within North America are $5.00/yearly; outside of North America: $10.00/yearly. Editorial and subscription inquiries should be addressed to: Mark J. Krejci, Ph.D., Department of Psychology, Concordia College, 901 8th St. S., Moorhead, MN 56562.

sychology of eligion newsletter · example, the number of published arti- ... gious beliefs that...

Documents