Perceptions of parental caretaking in childhood and religiosity/spirituality status in adulthood.
ABSTRACT Relationships between parental caretaking quality in childhood and religiosity/spirituality in adulthood, which are the focus of the present study, have undergone limited study. Using a cross-sectional sample of consecutive internal medicine outpatients, we examined in 308 participants three aspects of their parenting experience (i.e., number of different caretakers, whether caretakers were biological parents or not, perceived quality of parental caretaking) and level of religiosity/spirituality over the past 12 months using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-being Scale (FACIT-Sp-12). Current level of religiosity/spirituality did not correlate with the number of different caretakers or whether caretakers were biological parents or not. However, 6 of 12 FACIT-Sp-12 scales and the overall FACIT-Sp-12 score statistically significantly correlated with perceived quality of parental caretaking, with better parenting ratings associated with higher levels of self-reported religiosity/spirituality. Findings suggest that better parenting in childhood is associated with higher levels of certain aspects of current religiosity/spirituality in adulthood.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We examined the influence of religious denomination (RD) and religiosity/spirituality on licit and illicit substance use beyond the potential impact of parental variables. Data from a representative sample of Swiss men (n = 5,387) approximately 20 years old were collected between August 2010 and November 2011. We asked single item questions about RD and religious self-description (RSD) (including aspects of spirituality). Alcohol use, smoking, and illicit drug use was measured as outcome variables. Logistic regressions (adjusting for parenting and socioeconomic background) revealed that religiosity/spirituality was inversely associated with substance use and that it was more strongly associated than denomination. RD, particularly having no denomination, was independently associated with the use of most substances. The study's limitations, and the implications for future work are noted.Substance Use & Misuse 09/2013; 48(12):1085-98. · 1.23 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: Studies about beverage preferences in a country in which wine drinking is relatively widespread (like Switzerland) are scarce. Therefore, the main aims of the present study were to examine the associations between beverage preferences and drinking patterns, alcohol-related consequences and the use of other substances among Swiss young men. Methods: The analytical sample consisted of 5399 Swiss men who participated in the Cohort Study on Substance Use Risk Factors (C-SURF) and had been drinking alcohol over the preceding 12 months. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to study the associations between preference for a particular beverage and (i) drinking patterns, (ii) negative alcohol-related consequences and (iii) the (at-risk) use of cigarettes, cannabis and other illicit drugs. Results: Preference for beer was associated with risky drinking patterns and, comparable with a preference for strong alcohol, with the use of illicit substances (cannabis and other illicit drugs). In contrast, a preference for wine was associated with low-risk alcohol consumption and a reduced likelihood of experiencing at least four negative alcohol-related consequences or of daily cigarette smoking. Furthermore, the likelihood of negative outcomes (alcohol-related consequences; use of other substances) increased among people with risky drinking behaviours, independent of beverage preference. Conclusions: In our survey, beer preference was associated with risky drinking patterns and illicit drug use. Alcohol polices to prevent large quantities of alcohol consumption, especially of cheaper spirits like beer, should be considered to reduce total alcohol consumption and the negative consequences associated with these beverage types.The European Journal of Public Health 08/2013; · 2.52 Impact Factor