Content uploaded by Suniya S. Luthar
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Suniya S. Luthar on Apr 20, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
ORIGINAL PAPER
Filling the Void: Spiritual Development Among
Adolescents of the Affluent
Samuel H. Barkin
1
•Lisa Miller
1
•Suniya S. Luthar
2
Published online: 11 April 2015
!Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015
Abstract Building on both the spiritual development and affluent youth literature, the
current study explores spiritual development and health outcomes in a sample of upper-
middle-class youth. Exploratory analyses indicate long-term stability in religiosity and
spirituality from late adolescence (mean age 18) well into emerging adulthood (mean age
24); specifically, a strong personal relationship with a Higher Power, that carries into the
broader arena of life, appears to be the primary source of spiritual life in adolescence that
transitions into young adulthood. Moreover, cross-sectional associations at age 24 suggest
spiritual development may have important implications for increased mental health and life
satisfaction, as well as decreased antisocial behaviors.
Keywords Spirituality !Religiosity !Development !Adolescents !Emerging adults !
Affluent youth
It is impossible to escape the impression that people commonly use false standards of
measurement—that they seek power, success, and wealth for themselves and admire
them in others, and that they underestimate what is of true value in life. And yet, in
making any general judgment of this sort, we are in danger of forgetting how var-
iegated the human world and its mental life are.
Opening lines to Civilization and Its Discontents, Frued (1930).
&Samuel H. Barkin
sam.barkin@gmail.com
&Lisa Miller
drlisamiller@gmail.com; lfm14@columbia.edu
1
Teachers College, Columbia University, 525 West 120th Street, New York, NY 10027, USA
2
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA
123
J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861
DOI 10.1007/s10943-015-0048-z
Introduction
Fifteen years ago, developmental researchers introduced a counterintuitive notion: that youth
growing up in affluent families and communities are more likely to be troubled than their less
well off counterparts(Luthar and D’Avanzo 1999). More than a decadelater, a wealth of studies
have supported these initial claims(for a review,see Luthar etal. 2013), and as Koplewicz and
colleagues assert in the Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry,
youth in upper-middle-class, white-collar families are a ‘‘newly identified at-risk group’’
(Koplewicz et al. 2009, p. 1053). Indeed, mounting evidence has confirmed affluent adoles-
cents’ elevated rates of substance use, depression, and anxiety, as well as various other inter-
nalizing and externalizing indices across diverse geographic areas (e.g., Botticello 2009;
Patrick et al. 2012; Reboussin et al. 2010; Song et al. 2009; Luthar and Barkin 2012). In
addition, the overvaluation of social status in an environment that often conflates power,
success, and wealth confers special risks for antisocial behaviors: Whereas empirical research
has documented affluent adolescents’ heighted delinquency (Luthar and Ansary 2005; Lund
and Dearing 2012) and aggressive behavior (Becker and Luthar 2007), media, and qualitative
reports have repeatedly documented widespread cheating (Pe
´rez-Pen
˜a and Bidgood 2012),
academic dishonesty (Anderson and Applebome 2011), and manipulatingothers for sex (Chase
2008). Reports from a recent Texas trial (Hayes 2013) involving a drunk driving affluent teen
who killed four bystanders all but galvanized the term ‘‘affluenza’’ in popular vernacular,
characterizing it as ‘‘a state of immense, amoral privilege’’ (McAuley, Dec 22, 2013).
Although the long-term risks facing affluent youth remain unclear, empirical efforts must
uncover specific mechanisms, or ‘‘conduits’’ of risk (and resilience) over time, targeting
specific areas of vulnerability within this population through emerging adulthood (a critical
period, indicative of future well-being). One such area of investigation left untouched, thus
far, is spirituality and religiosity—an important and understudied domain in emerging adult
development (Levenson et al. 2005), as well as particularly relevant to the affluent question:
How is it that so many individuals growing up with abundant material wealth show such
elevated rates of maladjustment? Perhaps the answer is in the immaterial.
Accordingly, in this paper, we present adolescent and emerging adulthood data from
participants in the New England Study of Suburban Youth (NESSY) cohort, who have been
assessed annually since grade six. This will be the first study to examine spirituality and
religiosity in an affluent population. Additionally, nearly every empirical study examining
spirituality and religiosity in emerging adulthood (roughly spanning the time between 18 and
25 years; Arnett 2007) is both cross-sectional and limited to college years (Yonker et al.
2012a,b), whereas the current study examines data from age 18 to 24. Moreover, the current
investigation represents the only study exploring spiritual and religious development across
both adolescent and emerging adult stages of development (Dew et al. 2008). As such, the
current study aims to contribute to two burgeoning fields (the study of affluent youth and the
study of spirituality and religiosity) and will focus on three core areas of concern: spiritual
and religious development, externalizing symptoms, and internalizing symptoms (the latter
two representing major domains of vulnerability in affluent populations; Luthar et al. 2013).
Each is discussed in turn below, along with a discussion of the broader framework of
spirituality/religiosity, emerging adulthood, and gender considerations.
Defining Spirituality and Religiosity
Although it has been asserted that, ‘‘more books have been written on this topic than any
other in the history of humanity’’ (p. 9, Spilka et al. 2003), there remains no consensus
J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861 845
123
surrounding a clear definition of spirituality and religiosity (Yonker et al. 2012a,b; for a
review, see Zinnbauer and Pargament 2005). Indeed, large-scale reviews of spirituality and
religion research emphasize the heterogeneity of operationalizations and measurement uti-
lized in empirical research (Dew et al. 2008). Some make the distinction that religiosity
indicates a rigorous devotion to particular systems of faith or activities therein (Davis et al.
2003), while spirituality suggests perceived deeper meaning of transcendence beyond logical
human discourse (Moreira-Almeda et al. 2006). Koenig et al. (2001) delineate spirituality as
‘‘an individualistic, open-ended, freeing, and subjective quest whereas the conceptualization
of religion has been gradually moving toward a more narrow characterization that represents
doctrinal, institutional, ritual, and authoritarian aspects of a specific creed’’ (p. 300, Yonker
et al. 2012a,b). For their comprehensive review, Dew and colleagues (2008) assert that,
‘‘religion will refer to an organized system of beliefs, rituals, practices, and community,
oriented toward the sacred; spirituality will refer to more personal experiences of or searches
for ultimate reality or the transcendent that are not necessarily institutionally connected’’ (p.
382). Still, other scholars have argued that spirituality and religion are more similar than they
are different (Emmons and Paloutzian 2003).
For the purpose of setting a framework for the current study, we adopt a more encom-
passing conceptualization of spirituality and religiosity (S/R), wherein ‘‘S/R is an active
personal devotion and passionate quest largely within the self-acknowledged framework of a
sacred theological community’’ (p. 300, Yonker et al. 2012a,b). While unable to capture
every discrepancy between spirituality and religiosity, such a definition serves a broader
scope and allows for greater parsimony in empirical discussion. Where applicable, however,
specific indices of spirituality and religiosity will be identified and discussed as such.
Spirituality and Religiosity in Emerging Adulthood: Domains of Positive
Adjustment
Beyond the absence of maladaptive behaviors (e.g., internalizing and externalizing
symptoms), internalizing one’s beliefs and values has been considered indicative of
flourishing during emerging adulthood (Barry et al. 2010). Indeed, spiritual identity may be
important in constructing one’s overall identity as an adult (Kiesling et al. 2006). Whereas
religiosity is not considered necessary for adaptive development in emerging adulthood, of
the many ways emerging adults flourish, the internalization of religious beliefs is widely
considered an indicator of adjustment during emerging adulthood (Nelson and Padilla-
Walker 2013). Thus, long considered important for life outcomes (McCullough and Wil-
loughby 2009), spirituality and religiosity must be considered positive outcomes in their
own right (see McNamara Barry and Abo-Zena 2014).
Gender: S/R and Children of the affluent
Research has consistently discovered that affluent girls show disturbance across a broader
swath of domains than do boys, manifesting elevations in the typically female internalizing
problems as well as the typically male problems of rule-breaking and substance use (Luthar
and Barkin 2012; Luthar and Goldstein 2008; Yates et al. 2008). Identifying gender-specific
risk and protective factors has therefore become a primary aim in the study of affluent youth
(Luthar et al. 2013) and must be considered in the current study. As spirituality and reli-
giosity research has largely documented gender differences (Loewenthal et al. 2001) or
statistically controlled for gender (Lefkowitz et al. 2004a,b), rarely examining the unique
846 J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861
123
outcomes associated with spirituality and religiosity across genders, the current study will
contribute to the field by examining both overall and gender-specific outcomes.
Indeed, religious beliefs vary by gender (David et al. 2007). In general, young women
are more likely than young men to incorporate religion into their emerging adult lives
(Barry and Nelson 2005,2008; Loewenthal et al. 2001), and studies have shown that young
women tend to benefit more from religiosity than do young men (Nkansah-Amankra et al.
2010; McCullough et al. 2000; Lewinsohn et al. 2001). Gender may differentially influence
the development of religious and spiritual beliefs, the importance placed on those beliefs,
and their associations with other outcomes (McNamara Barry et al. 2010). Barry and
Nelson (2008) found that religiosity played a more integral role in young women’s self-
development than in men’s. Similarly, after running latent class analyses with a large
sample of emerging adults, Nelson and Padilla-Walker (2013) found that the well-adjusted
group tended to be both female and religious.
Developmental Pathways: Spirituality and Religiosity Through Emerging
Adulthood
Boyatzis (2012) points out that, ‘‘if it is difficult to define ‘spirituality,’ it is even more
difficult to define ‘spiritual development’’’ (p. 152). As such, there exist a number of
definitions of religious and spiritual development. McNamara Barry and Abo-Zena (2014)
describe it as ‘‘a process of meaning-making designed to facilitate the search for the sacred
that may or may not involve connections to religious institutions’’ (p. 22). Johnson and
Boyatzis (2006) proposed that, ‘‘spiritual development proceeds from intuitive under-
standing to increasingly reflective thought’’ (p. 153, Boyatzis 2012).
To date, there is limited research examining the development of spirituality and reli-
giosity (Oser et al. 2006), and only a small fraction of this literature is focused on emerging
adulthood spiritual and religious development (McNamara Barry and Abo-Zena 2014). As
the study of emerging adulthood development expands, so will spiritual development
research (see McNamara Barry and Abo-Zena 2014); each developmental domain within
emerging adulthood (e.g., cognitive, emotional, behavioral) is intertwined with spiritual
development (Boyatzis 2012; Astin et al. 2011; Labouvie-Vief 2006).
Research has shown unique trends in religious beliefs and practices during emerging
adulthood, suggesting that religiosity apexes during late adolescence (Button et al. 2011)
and then declines over the course of emerging adulthood (Uecker et al. 2007). And whereas
religious practices tend to decline during emerging adulthood (Koenig et al. 2008), re-
search suggests that religious and spiritual beliefs increase during emerging adulthood
(McNamara Barry and Abo-Zena 2014). Whereas most Millennials in the USA identify as
spiritual, but not religious (Jones et al. 2012), theories of religious development are more
well established than those of spiritual development (McNamara Barry et al. 2010).
There are a number of developmental models (e.g., discrete stage models vs. continuous
models) that fit within broader conceptual frameworks (e.g., horizontal vs. vertical models
of development; Friedman et al. 2010). The most well-known stage theory of spiritual
development is Fowler and Dell’s (2006) structural theory of faith development, which
assumes a nearly invariant and culturally universal sequence of meaning-making across the
lifespan (McNamara Barry and Abo-Zena 2014). Non-stage models of development in-
clude cognitive cultural theories (Johnson and Boyatzis 2006), wherein spiritual devel-
opment occurs across intuitive ontologies as well as counterintuitive systems reflecting
cultural, religious, heritable, and other socialization factors (McNamara Barry and Abo-
Zena 2014). Trait approaches to spiritual development (Batson et al. 1993; Piedmont et al.
J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861 847
123
2009) explain spiritual development in relation to personality development, highlighting
individuals as extrinsically, intrinsically, or quest religiously oriented. Finally, person-
centered approaches to spiritual development (Kwilecki 1999; Tisdell 2003) emphasize
that life experiences quantitatively and qualitatively shape individual’s spiritual
development.
Adolescent religiosity has been found to be significantly associated with subsequent
religiousness and religious involvement during emerging adulthood (Gunnoe and Moore
2002; McCullough et al. 2003). Indeed, spirituality can promote religious development and
vice versa (King and Boyatzis 2004). In fact, it has been found that among college stu-
dents, intrinsic religious orientations are more predictive of religious identity achievement,
as compared to extrinsic religious orientations (De Haan and Schulenberg 1997). Tem-
pleton and Eccles (2006) echo such findings, noting that religious identity is one possible
avenue for achieving spiritual identity. Kass et al. (1991) highlight the importance of core
spiritual experiences for spiritual development, giving special attention to unique events
that are interpreted as spiritual, as well as a deeply personal relationship with a Higher
Power. Similarly, Levesque (2002) summarizes one such theory wherein individuals ac-
quire an internalized religious consciousness through daily activities such as prayer and
organized religious involvement. Notably, literature repeatedly emphasizes the importance
of parent and peer religious socialization during childhood and adolescence as an important
predictor of emerging adult religiosity and spirituality (Gunnoe and Moore 2002; Boyatzis
2012).
Externalizing: Adult Antisocial Personality Disorder
To date, there is no literature examining the relationship between S/R and antisocial
personality disorder (ASPD). Overall, S/R appears to be protective against antisocial be-
haviors (Knox et al. 1998) and has positive associations with prosocial tendencies and
values (Padilla-Walker et al. 2008). Research has shown positive associations between
religiosity and socio-emotional capacities such as empathy, sympathy, concern for others,
and other prosocial constructs (Furrow et al. 2004; Markstrom et al. 2010). Yonker and
colleague’s 2012 meta-analysis showed that S/R attendance showed the largest effect sizes
when predicting risk-taking behaviors, followed by S/R salience. They further showed a
moderately strong effect between increased church attendance and decreased deviant be-
havior. Whereas studies have examined relevant constructs involved in ASPD (e.g.,
specific risk-taking and antisocial behaviors), findings are inconclusive (Yonker et al.
2012a,b). A number of such constructs and their relationship with S/R are discussed
below.
Concerning risky sexual behaviors such as promiscuity and unprotected sex, research
tends to focus on measures of religiosity (Arnett 2000; Barkan 2006; Langer et al. 2001).
Overall, research suggests that religious emerging adults engage in fewer risky sexual
behaviors (Langer et al. 2001; Lefkowitz et al. 2004a,b; Murray-Swank et al. 2005).
However, while emerging adults who endorse high levels of S/R are more likely to discuss
abstinence with their peers (Lefkowitz et al. 2004a,b) and avoid premarital intercourse
(Halpern et al. 2006), those who do engage in premarital intercourse are less likely to
practice safe sex (Zaleski and Schiaffino 2000). Moreover, whereas religiosity may be an
important factor in determining physical and sexual engagement prior to entering a
committed relationship (Murray-Swank et al. 2005; Lefkowitz et al. 2004a,b), some
studies suggest that religious individuals are more likely to desire committed relationships
prior to sex (Taylor et al. 2013), while other studies have found few differences between
848 J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861
123
religious and non-religious individuals (Bogle 2008). Interestingly, Taylor and colleagues
(2013) found no differences across gender when examining the effects of religiosity on
dating behaviors. For children of the affluent during emerging adulthood, risky sexual
behaviors (e.g., promiscuity and unprotected sex) contribute to the exaggerated rates of
ASPD (Barkin et al., submitted for publication); thus, religiosity may be an important
direction in future research.
Likewise, rule-breaking behaviors have been repeatedly cited as an area of concern for
affluent youth (Luthar et al. 2013; Luthar and Barkin 2012). Religiosity has been identified
as an important protective factor against delinquency (Baier and Wright 2001; Non-
nemaker et al. 2003; Regnerus 2003; Smith and Faris 2002). Salas-Wright and colleagues
(2012) found less reported theft in a religiously devoted group as compared to a religiously
disengaged group. Whereas priming effects of religious thoughts have been found to
decrease cheating behaviors and increase general prosocial concern, trait religiosity has
found little support in the research as decreasing antisocial behaviors and increasing
prosocial behaviors (Newton and Mcintosh 2009 in Shariff and Norenzayan 2011; Picho
´n
et al. 2007). Similarly, trait religiosity has been found to be unrelated to honesty (Ran-
doplh-Seng and Nielsen 2007). Shariff and Norenzayan (2011) found that specific beliefs
about G-d were predictive of antisocial behaviors; specifically, those individuals who
believe in a punitive Higher Power, are less likely to cheat. They assert that, ‘‘how much
you believe in G-d matters less than what kind of G-d you believe in’’ (p. 92). Increasingly,
studies demonstrate that religion fosters prosocial behavior only under specific conditions
(Norenzayan and Shariff 2008).
Such findings highlight the important intersection of personality and S/R. Although the
direction of influence is a major limitation in the literature, both conscientiousness and
agreeableness have been associated with more religious individuals (Kosek 1999;
McCullough et al. 2003; Saroglou and Fiasse 2003), as well as less antisocial behavior
(Shiner et al. 2002) and deviance (Verona et al. 2001). Unfortunately, this intersection
between prosocial personality features, S/R, and antisocial behaviors is not well understood
(Yonker et al. 2012a,b). Indeed, the relationship between S/R and prosocial behavior is
complex and multifaceted (Midlarsky et al. 2012); furthermore, it has been argued that
prosocial behavior is not the corollary to antisocial behavior; rather, these two constructs
have been found have distinct origins and correlates (Krueger et al. 2001).
Internalizing: Distress and Depression
Given that the transition to adulthood is a particularly stressful developmental period, rife
with the growing pains of identity formation (Levenson et al. 2005), many emerging adults
have an increased need to utilize coping mechanisms such as spirituality and religiosity
(Young et al. 2000; McNamara Barry et al. 2010). However, due to the paucity of literature
examining emerging adulthood specifically, the relationship between S/R and internalizing
symptoms during this developmental stage remains ambiguous. Overall, S/R has shown
strong protective effects on depression in adolescents (Regnerus 2003; Regnerus and
Uecker 2006) and adults (Braam et al. 2004). Still these effects remain inconclusive, as the
complexity of measuring and differentiating both S/R domains and internalizing domains
makes it difficult to establish directionality of influence (Dew et al. 2008). Thus, there is
little consensus regarding the protective effects of S/R on internalizing symptomology
(Dew et al. 2008).
Yonker and colleagues (2012a,b) included 75 studies in their meta-analysis and found
significant overall protective effects of S/R on depression (S/R salience, a largely intrinsic
J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861 849
123
measure of S/R, having the largest effect). A similar meta-analysis of 147 studies by Smith
and colleagues (2003) showed similar inverse associations between S/R and depression.
Although 92 % of the 115 studies reviewed by Dew and colleagues (2008) reported at least
one significant relationship between S/R and depression, the authors warn against over-
arching claims of S/R’s protective influences, claiming much of the literature is incon-
clusive, and in some cases—depending on the domain—S/R may confer more depression
(Ano and Vasconcelles 2005). Indeed, religious doubt in individuals endorsing higher
levels of religious belief has been found to be positively associated with increased de-
pression (Kezdy et al. 2011). When interpreting negative associations, Dew et al. (2008)
further warn against drawing firm conclusions, as both religious involvement and the
ability to feel intrinsically religious may both be diminished by the symptoms of depres-
sion; similarly, positive associations between S/R and depression may be indicative of
developmental processes of identity formation expected during emerging adulthood
(Krause and Wulff 2004; Hunsberger et al. 2002).
Summary
To date, no study has explored religion and spirituality within the affluent context, and
there is little longitudinal research on religious and spiritual development through
emerging adulthood; thus, the current study represents the convergence of these two little
studied areas of clinical science and aims to contribute to both, focusing primarily on three
major areas of concern: spiritual and religious development, externalizing symptoms, and
internalizing symptoms.
The Current Study
The primary aims of this study are to (1) examine the potential impact of adolescent
religious and spiritual development on emerging adulthood health outcomes and (2) pro-
vide evidence for a developmental pathway of religiosity and spirituality spanning from
late adolescence well into emerging adulthood. Exploratory in nature, the current study
seeks to expand both the affluent youth literature, by building on previous findings showing
specific risks in this population, and the spiritual development literature, for which there is
little longitudinal research.
Method
Sample
As described in previous reports (Luthar and Latendresse 2005; Luthar and Barkin 2012),
students in the NESSY cohort were from upper-middle-class families, predominantly
Caucasian, with highly educated parents having median family incomes three times the
national level of about $50,000 in 2000 (United States Bureau of the Census 2000). The
current study is based on these students measured across two waves: the 2004–2005 and
2010–2011 academic years (mean age 18 and 24 years, respectively). By age 24, the
majority of the sample—89 %—had completed college (4 % of whom completed graduate
degrees), compared with 6 % having completed high school only.
850 J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861
123
At age 24 assessments, a total of 160 (79 female) subjects participated, representing
63 % of the sample assessed 6 years earlier during their senior year of high school, when
assessments had been conducted as part of the regular school day (n=252). These re-
tention rates compare well with other long-term follow-ups of high school students, such as
the national Monitoring the Future study (reporting retention rates of 54 % for equivalent
time-span; Johnston et al. 2013). To test for attrition biases, analyses of variance were
conducted (using age 18 and 24 samples) comparing dimensions of maladjustment (sub-
stance use and both self-reported and teacher-reported internalizing and externalizing
symptoms), as well as academic performance (GPA and SAT scores). With the exception
of GPA, results showed no differences across all indicators at the twelfth grade between
continuing and non-continuing subjects. Whereas GPA showed statistical differences in
univariate analyses (GPA, F(1, 244) =7.04, p=.008), actual mean differences do not
represent real-world significance (returning subjects had less than a grade point difference
in their GPA). Overall, these analyses suggest that the 2010–2011 sample is likely a valid
representation of the NESSY sample over time; if anything, some of the less academically
able youth were missing in the age 24 sample.
Procedures
Subjects were informed that their participation was voluntary, and on completion of data
collection, questionnaires and interview data were stored with subject numbers as identi-
fiers. Subjects completed a structured clinical interview conducted by a trained interviewer
over the telephone to assess psychiatric diagnoses (see Measures below) and completed
self-report questionnaires online, on their own. Upon completion of both parts of the
assessment, participants were sent $125 by mail.
Measures
Internalizing and Externalizing Symptoms
The Adult Self-Report (ASR; Achenbach and Rescorla 2003) contains 123 items (on a
3-point scale) encompassing Internalizing and Externalizing domains. Three subscales are
combined to create the Internalizing subscale: Anxious-depressed, Withdrawn-depressed,
and Somatic complaints. Each subscale showed excellent alpha coefficients (averaging
0.79 and 0.79 for females and males, respectively; .92 and .91 for overall Internalizing).
The Externalizing subscale from the ASR combines three subscales: Aggressive, Rule-
breaking, and Intrusive behaviors. Average alpha coefficients were 0.79 and 0.76 among
females and males, respectively; 0.91 and 0.87 for overall Externalizing).
Clinical Diagnoses
With appropriate training and supervision, research assistants administered the Comput-
erized Diagnostic Interview Schedule for the DSM-IV (CDIS-IV; Robins et al. 2000) to
subjects via telephone. The CDIS-IV program provides a structured clinical interview,
stores answers to each probe question, and scores data, making them available for data
analysis. The need for training interviewers is greatly reduced because all skip and query
instructions are built into the computer program. These features also increase the stan-
dardization of the administration, which reduces the effects of variation among
J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861 851
123
interviewers. Accuracy is improved because the computer does symptom counts and
checks ages of remission to be sure they fall between the occurrence of the first and last
symptom and rejects answers where the date of the last symptom is not later than the date
of the first symptom (Robins et al. 2000). Positive diagnoses represent 12-month diagnoses,
or lifetime diagnoses where applicable (for example, in the case of personality disorders
requiring occurrence of symptoms since age 15).
Satisfaction with Life
The five-item Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Diener et al. 1985) was used to measure the
degree participants are satisfied with their life choices, or whether they would choose to change
their previous life choices. Alpha coefficients were .91 and .86 for women and men, respectively.
Religiosity and Spirituality
Two separate measures were assessed at age 18 and 24, each encompassing multiple di-
mensions of religiosity and spirituality. At age 18 assessment, the five-item (five-point scale)
Duke University Religion Index (DUREL; Koenig et al. 1997) was used to measure orga-
nized religious involvement (e.g., ‘‘How often do you attend church, synagogue, or other
religious meetings?’’), non-organized religious involvement (e.g., ‘‘How often do you spend
time in private religious activities, such as prayer, meditation, or Bible study?’’), as well as a
three-item composite subscale representing ‘‘intrinsic religiosity’’ (e.g., ‘‘In my life, I ex-
perience the presence of the Divine’’ and ‘‘I try hard to carry my religion over into all other
dealings in life’’; alpha coefficients were .89 and .81 for women and men, respectively).
At age 24 assessment, the University of California at Los Angeles Higher Education
Research Institute (UCLA HERI) College Student’s Beliefs and Values Questionnaire
(CSBV; Liu et al. 2008) was used to measure a wide range of religious and spiritual con-
structs. In total, 255 items were used to create 17 subscales per HERI’s 2007 factor loadings
(Liu et al. 2008). Subscales represent various indices of religious involvement and spiritual
beliefs, as well as attitudes surrounding G-d, including moral and social ethics (see Table 1
for the individual subscale domains). Items for each subscale were drawn from different
sections of the questionnaire, each providing different prompts exploring unique op-
erationalizations of religious involvement and spirituality (e.g., personal goals, beliefs, self-
description, self-rating, reasons for prayer or involvement, frequency of engagement, and
numerous yes/no prompts endorsing specific beliefs and behaviors). As such, subscales are a
summation of items ranging from 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, and 6-point scales. This presents complica-
tions for reliability analyses, specifically measures of internal consistency such as Cronbach’s
alpha. Multiple studies have touted the reliability of this battery, however, and the CSBV has
been used in hundreds of settings across the USA over the last decade (see Astin et al. 2011).
Results
Spirituality and Religiosity: Overall Rates and Exploratory Factor Analyses
Table 1shows overall mean raw scores on the individual dimensions of the CSBV in the
sample of affluent youth at mean age 24 years, and mean raw scores of the DUREL at mean
age 18 years. Exploratory factor analyses utilizing Varimax rotation were conducted using all
852 J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861
123
seventeen dimensions of the CSBV. Results indicated a four-factor solution (all factors
showed eigenvalues above 1.00), representing four core dimensions: Spirituality, Religiosity,
Religious Struggle, and Compassion. The six subscales comprising the Spirituality dimen-
sion include: Spirituality, Spiritual Quest, Equanimity, Ethic of Caring, Ecumenical
Worldview, and Mystical G-d. The seven subscales comprising the Religiosity dimension
include: Religious Commitment, Religious Engagement, Social Conservatism, Religious
Skepticism, Personal G-d, All Powerful G-d, and Foreclosure. Both the Religious Struggle
and Compassion dimensions included two subscales (Religious Struggle and Conflict with
G-D, and Charitable Involvement and Compassionate Self-Concept, respectively).
Spiritual Development: Adolescent Versus Emerging Adulthood S/R
Table 2shows the correlation between each dimension of the DUREL at mean age
18 years and each core CSBV S/R dimension at mean age 24 years. Overall, organized
religious involvement at age 18 years is associated with sustained religiosity at age
Table 1 Mean scores on spirituality and religiosity measures at mean age 18 years and 24 years
Measure Minimum Maximum Mean SD
CSBV—2 years post-college (24 years)
Spirituality 6 41 22.23 6.25
Spiritual quest 10 32 20.67 4.07
Equanimity 6 15 11.46 2.12
Religious commitment 12 47 24.52 8.73
Religious struggle 7 21 10.88 2.67
Religious engagement 7 33 11.21 4.88
Social conservatism 5 15 7.22 1.67
Religious skepticism 11 32 21.32 4.13
Charitable involvement 3 9 6.07 1.26
Ethic of caring 2 8 4.58 1.28
Ecumenical worldview 14 35 27.04 4.39
Compassionate self-concept 10 20 15.73 2.42
Personal God 6 19 9.05 3.32
All powerful God 7 15 8.45 2.10
Mystical God 6 12 7.57 1.74
Conflict with God 3 10 7.58 1.58
Foreclosure 9 29 13.85 2.87
DUREL—twelfth grade
Organizational religious activity 1 6 2.42 1.43
Non-organizational religious activity 1 6 1.52 1.11
Intrinsic religiosity 3 15 7.27 3.49
Intrinsic religiosity item 3 1 5 2.78 1.38
Intrinsic religiosity item 4 1 5 2.38 1.35
Intrinsic religiosity item 5 1 5 2.15 1.27
Intrinsic religiosity item 4/5 2 10 4.51 2.46
Total religiosity 5 23 11.19 4.92
CSBV College Student’s Beliefs and Values Questionnaire, DUREL Duke University Religion Index
J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861 853
123
24 years as well as a personal sense of compassion for other people. Private religious
practice at age 18 years was associated with religiosity at mean age 24 years. Intrinsic
spirituality at age 18 years was associated with a personal spirituality, religiosity, and
compassion at age 24 years, representing stability and broadening from late adolescence
into emerging adulthood.
Health Outcomes: Correlations between S/R and Internalizing/Externalizing
Domains
Mean scores on internalizing and externalizing dimensions are presented across each of the
four CSBV core dimensions in Table 3. Among women: (1) degree of spirituality was
inversely associated with symptoms of a withdrawn depression, (2) religiosity was in-
versely associated with rule-breaking behavior, (3) religious struggle with inversely as-
sociated with satisfaction with life, and (4) compassion was inversely associated with
aggressiveness. Among men, religious struggle was associated with overall internalizing
and externalizing symptoms, anxious depression, somatic complaints, and aggression.
Among men, compassion was inversely associated with a broad range of mental health
variables, namely anxious depression, withdrawn depression, aggressive behavior, overall
Table 2 Correlations between twelfth grade DUREL and two years post-college CSBV dimensions
CSBV
dimensions
Organized religious
activity
Non-organized religious
involvement
Intrinsic
religiosity
DUREL
TOTAL
Spirituality 0.07 0.04 0.22* 0.20*
Religiosity 0.36** 0.26** 0.53** 0.54**
Religious
struggle
0.04 -0.04 -0.10 -0.07
Compassion 0.18* 0.10 0.23** 0.25**
*p\.05; ** p \.01
Table 3 Correlations between two years post-college CSBV and measures of adjustment
Spirituality Religiosity Religious Struggle Compassion
Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men
Anxious-Depressed -0.18 0.11 -0.14 0.06 0.05 .32** -0.14 -.28*
Withdrawn-Depressed -.27* -0.03 -0.20 0.11 -0.01 0.10 -0.24 -.40**
Somatic Complaints -0.05 .30* -0.15 0.12 0.05 .27* 0.00 -0.11
Intrusive Behavior -0.10 0.09 -0.09 0.05 0.00 0.11 -0.11 0.06
Rule-Breaking
Behavior
0.05 0.22 -.26* 0.08 0.08 0.22 -0.09 -0.13
Aggressive Behavior -0.06 0.03 -0.16 0.04 0.13 .26* -.26* -.36**
Overall Internalizing -0.16 0.14 -0.18 0.10 0.05 .30* -0.12 -.32**
Overall Externalizing -0.03 0.14 -0.21 0.06 0.10 .27* -0.18 -0.22
Satisfaction with Life 0.10 -0.01 0.08 -0.01 -.32* -0.10 0.11 .25*
*p\.05; ** p \.01
854 J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861
123
internalizing symptoms, a motive to use alcohol, but positively associated with satisfaction
with life.
Lastly, Table 4shows analyses of variance (ANOVA) comparing S/R levels across
Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD) diagnoses. Results indicate that emerging adults
who meet criteria for ASPD report lower levels of religiosity as compared to those who do
not meet ASPD diagnostic criteria.
Discussion
To date, very little research has examined the stability of spiritual life from adolescence
into emerging adulthood and its association with mental health. In this sample of youth
raised in a highly affluent community, a strong spiritual life developed within the family by
age 18 years was associated with spiritual life at age 24 years, once the vast majority of
these youth were ‘‘out of the house,’’ living independently from their family of origin.
More specifically, a very strong personal relationship with a Higher Power, that carries into
the broader arena of life, appears to be the primary source of spiritual life in adolescence
that persists into adulthood and then extends outward in its implications for health and
wellness. Adolescents who at age 18 years positively endorsed statements such as ‘‘In my
life, I experience the presence of the Divine’’ and ‘‘I try hard to carry my religion over into
all other dealings in life’’ continued to have a strong spirituality rooted in an ongoing sense
of relationship with a Higher Power and extending outward to include engagement in
religious community and greater compassion. These same youth at age 24 years demon-
strate a foundationally spiritual experience of life, endorsing ‘‘I gain spiritual strength by
trusting in a Higher Power’’ and ‘‘I believe in the sacredness of life.’’
Spirituality, Religion, and Mental Health
Overall, spirituality and religion had effects on mental health, with differential findings by
gender. Spirituality, religiosity, and compassion all were positively associated with mental
health, while religious struggle was inversely associated with mental health.
Among young men, spiritual dimensions of compassion appear to be the greatest source
of resilience against psychopathology, to include both decreased levels of internalizing
Table 4 ANOVAS comparing
CSBV dimensions across ASPD
diagnoses
ASPD antisocial personality
disorder; * p\.05
ASPD Diagnosis
Positive Negative
Mean Mean F
(SD) (SD) (g
2
)
Spirituality 93.44 93.85 0.01
(12.41) (15.99) (0.00)
Religiosity 42.33 55.82 4.39*
(8.16) (24.67) (0.04)
Religious struggle 4.31 3.16 1.20
(4.73) (3.84) (0.01)
Compassion 21.63 21.83 0.06
(1.67) (3.22) (0.00)
J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861 855
123
symptoms and externalizing symptoms. Compassion measured by statements such as ‘‘I try
to change things that are unfair in the world’’ was also associated with overall life satis-
faction for young men. In contrast, religious struggle was associated with aggressive
behavior, somatic complaints and internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Religious
struggle in young men measured by items such as ‘‘I feel disillusioned with my religious
upbringing’’ may reflect an unsupported or foreclosed process of spirituality individuation
during adolescence (Fowler and Dell 2006).
Among women to have been raised in this affluent community, spirituality was asso-
ciated with lower levels of withdrawn depression (consistent with a broad literature;
Yonker et al. 2012a,bfor a meta-analytic overview), religiosity was associated with lower
levels of rule-breaking, and compassion with less aggressive behavior. Religion seems to
set boundaries of conduct and perhaps a clear moral code and community (see McNamara
Barry and Abo-Zena 2014).
Luthar and colleagues (2013) have highlighted antisocial behaviors, including dishon-
estly, manipulating others for sex, and theft within affluent youth populations. The authors
attribute a culture overly consumed with maximizing personal status, as well as parenting
styles that convey a sense of ‘‘contingent love’’ based upon child performance. These
findings suggest that in emerging adults raised within a broader culture, where affection or
recognition is at times based largely upon performance or ability, a spiritual and religious
life may play a particularly important role in moral development. Religion, per se, pre-
vailed in attenuating antisocial tendencies. In exploring long-term stability, religion in
emerging adult was associated with adolescent religious practice and a personal rela-
tionship with a Higher Power that opens to a sense of living in a sacred world.
Limitations and Caveats
Dew et al. (2008) warn against drawing firm conclusions surrounding S/R and health
outcomes, as the direction of influence is unclear. Much of the present analyses linking
health outcomes to S/R are cross-sectional, and therefore, causality cannot be inferred.
Similarly, whereas it is common in the relatively new field of S/R studies to utilize simple
correlations, such analyses must be considered exploratory in nature and therefore must
call for further, more in-depth investigations utilizing multivariate analyses to be consid-
ered conclusive.
Implications
Although exploratory in nature, and not without its limitations, the current study suggests
spiritual development in adolescence is associated with emerging adult levels of spiritu-
ality and religiousness, which in turn shows associations with better mental health, life
satisfaction, and decreased antisocial behaviors. Importantly, Luthar and colleagues (2013)
assert that ‘‘thriving’’ must be defined via contextually relevant criteria, writing, ‘‘Among
teens assailed by ‘do more, acquire more’ subcultural messages …a first indicator of
thriving would be a balanced set of values, with behaviorally manifested commitment to
intrinsic goals, integrity, and low rule breaking’’ (p. 1538). While not necessarily the case
for every adolescent and emerging adult raised in upper-middle-class environments,
spiritual development may represent such balanced value systems based on intrinsic goals
and integrity and must therefore be considered a possible indicator ‘‘thriving’’ in itself. As
such, future research should build on these initial findings, broadening our knowledge of
856 J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861
123
risks facing affluent youth and emerging adults, as well as exploring possible solutions to
the mounting problems facing communities at risk.
References
Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2003). Manual for the ASEBA Adult Forms & Profiles. Burlington,
VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, and Families.
Anderson, J., & Applebome, P. (2011, December 1). Exam cheating on Long Island hardly a secret. New
York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/education/on-long-island-sat-
cheating-was-hardly-a-secret.html.
Ano, G. G., & Vasconcelles, E. B. (2005). Religious coping and psychological adjustment to stress: A meta-
analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 461–480.
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties.
American Psychologist, 55, 469–480.
Arnett, J. J. (2007). Emerging adulthood: What is it, and what is it good for? Child Development Per-
spectives, 1, 68–73.
Astin, A. W., Astin, H. S., & Lindholm, J. A. (2011). Assessing students’ spiritual and religious qualities.
Journal of College Student Development, 52, 39–61.
Baier, C. L., & Wright, B. R. E. (2001). If you love me, keep my commandments: A meta-analysis of the
effect of religion on crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38, 3–21.
Barkan, S. (2006). Religiosity and premarital sex in adulthood. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,
45, 407–417.
Barkin, S. H., Meier, M. H., Luthar, S. S. (submitted for publication). Childhood privilege and subsequent
psychiatric disorders: A six-year follow-up of affluent youth.
Barry, C. M., & Nelson, L. J. (2005). The role of religion in the transition to adulthood for young emerging
adults. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34, 245–255.
Barry, C. M., & Nelson, L. J. (2008). The role of religious beliefs and practices on emerging adults’
perceived competencies, perceived importance ratings, and global self-worth. International Journal of
Behavioral Development, 32, 509–521.
Barry, C., Nelson, L., Davarya, S., & Urry, S. (2010). Religiosity and spirituality during the transition to
adulthood. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 34, 311–324.
Batson, C., Schoenrade, P., & Ventis, W. (1993). Religion and the individual. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Becker, B. E., & Luthar, S. S. (2007). Peer-perceived admiration and social preference: Contextual cor-
relates of positive peer regard among suburban and urban adolescents. Journal of Research on Ado-
lescence, 17, 117–144.
Bogle, K. A. (2008). Hooking up: Sex, dating, and relationships on campus. New York: New York
University Press.
Botticello, A. L. (2009). School contextual influences on the risk for adolescent alcohol misuse. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 43, 85–97.
Boyatzis, C. J. (2012). Spiritual development during childhood and adolescence. In L. Miller (Ed.), The
Oxford handbook of psychology and spirituality (pp. 151–164). New York: Oxford University Press.
Braam, A. J., Hein, E., Deeg, D. H., Twisk, J. W. R., Beekman, A. T. F., & Van Tilburg, W. (2004).
Religious involvement and 6-year course of depressive symptoms in older Dutch citizens: Results from
the longitudinal aging study Amsterdam. Journal of Aging and Health, 16, 467–489.
Button, T. M. M., Stallings, M. C., Rhee, S. H., Corley, R. P., & Hewitt, J. K. (2011). The etiology of
stability and change in religious values and religious attendance. Behavior Genetics, 41, 201–210.
Chase, S. A. (2008). Perfectly prep: Gender extremes at a New England prep school. New York: Oxford
University Press.
David, J. A., Smith, T. W., & Marsden, P. V. (2007). General social surveys, 1972–2006: Cumulative
codebook (National Data Program for the Social Sciences Series, no. 18). Chicago, IL: National
Opinion Research Center.
Davis, T. L., Kerr, B. A., & Kerpius, S. E. R. (2003). Meaning, purpose, and religiosity in at risk youth: The
relationship between anxiety and spirituality. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 31, 356–365.
De Haan, L. G., & Schulenberg, J. (1997). The covariation of religion and politics during the transition to
young adulthood: Challenging global identity assumptions. Journal of Adolescence, 20, 537–552.
J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861 857
123
Dew, R. E., Daniel, S. S., Armstrong, T. D., Goldston, D. B., Triplett, M. F., & Koenig, H. G. (2008).
Religion/Spirituality and adolescent psychiatric symptoms: A review. Child Psychiatry and Human
Development, 39, 381–398.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.
Emmons, R., & Paloutzian, R. (2003). The psychology of religion. Annual Review of Psychology, 54,
377–402.
Fowler, J., & Dell, M. L. (2006). Stages of faith from infancy through adolescence: Reflections on three
decades of faith development theory. In E. C. Roehlkepartain, P. E. King, L. Wagener, & P. L. Benson
(Eds.), The handbook of spiritual development in children and adolescence (pp. 34–45). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Friedman, H., Krippnew, S., Riebel, L., & Johnson, C. (2010). Models of spiritual development. Interna-
tional Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 29, 53–70.
Furrow, J. L., King, P. E., & White, K. (2004). Religion and positive youth development: Identity, meaning,
and prosocial concerns. Applied Developmental Science, 8, 17–26.
Gunnoe, M. L., & Moore, K. A. (2002). Predictors of religiosity among youth aged 17–22: A longitudinal
study of the National Survey of Children. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41, 613–622.
Halpern, C. T., Waller, M. W., Spriggs, A., & Hallfors, D. D. (2006). Adolescent predictors of emerging
adult sexual patterns. Journal of Adolescent Health, 39, 1–10.
Hayes, A. (2013, December 13). ‘Affluenza’: Is it real? CNN. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/
12/health/affluenza-youth/.
Hunsberger, B., Pratt, M., & Pancer, S. M. (2002). A longitudinal study of religious doubts in high school
and beyond: Relationships, stability, and searching for answers. Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion, 41, 255–266.
Johnson, C. N., & Boyatzis, C. J. (2006). Cognitive-cultural foundations of spiritual development. In E.
C. Roehlkepartain, P. E. King, L. Wagener, & P. Benson (Eds.), Handbook of spiritual development in
childhood and adolescence (pp. 211–223). New York: Sage Publications.
Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2013). Monitoring the Future
national survey results on drug use, 1975–2012:Volume 2, College students and adults ages 19–50.
Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan.
Jones, R. P., Cox, D., & Banchoff, T. (2012). Generation in transition: Religion, values, and politics among
Millennials: Findings from the 2012 Millennial Values Survey. Retrieved February 25, 2015 from
http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Millennials-Survey-Report.pdf.
Kass, J. D., Friedman, R., Leserman, J., Zuttermeister, P., & Benson, H. (1991). Health outcomes and a new
measure of spiritual experience. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 30, 203–211.
Kezdy, A., Martos, T., Boland, V., & Horvath-Szabo, K. (2011). Religious doubts and mental health in
adolescence and young adulthood: The association with religious attitudes. Journal of Adolescence, 34,
39–47.
Kiesling, C., Sorell, G. T., Montgomery, M. J., & Colwell, R. K. (2006). Identity and spirituality: A
psychosocial exploration of the sense of spiritual self. Developmental Psychology, 4, 1269–1277.
King, P. E., & Boyatzis, C. J. (2004). Exploring adolescent spiritual and religious development: Current and
future theoretical and empirical perspectives. Applied Developmental Science, 8, 2–6.
Knox, D., Langehough, S. O., & Walters, C. (1998). Religiosity and spirituality among college students.
College Student Journal, 32, 430–432.
Koenig, H. G., McCullough, M. E., & Larson, D. B. (2001). Handbook of religion and health. New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Koenig, L. B., McGue, M., & Iacono, W. G. (2008). Stability and change in religiousness during emerging
adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 44, 532–543.
Koenig, H., Parkerson, G. R., & Meador, K. G. (1997). Religion index for psychiatric research. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 154(6), 885–886.
Koplewicz, H. S., Gurian, A., & Williams, K. (2009). The era of affluence and its discontents. Journal of the
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 48, 1053–1055.
Kosek, R. B. (1999). Adaptation of the big five at a hermeneutic instrument for religious constructs.
Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 229–237.
Krause, N., & Wulff, K. N. (2004). Religious doubt and health: Exploring the potential dark side of religion.
Sociology of Religion, 65, 35–56.
Krueger, R. F., Hicks, B. M., & McGue, M. (2001). Altruism and antisocial behavior: Independent ten-
dencies, unique personality correlates, distinct etiologies. Psychological Science, 12, 397–402.
Kwilecki, S. (1999). Becoming religious. Cranbury, NJ: Associated University Press.
858 J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861
123
Labouvie-Vief, G. (2006). Emerging structures of adult thought. In J. J. Arnett & J. L. Tanner (Eds.),
Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century (pp. 59–84). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Langer, L., Warheit, G., & McDonald, L. (2001). Correlates and predictors of risky sexual practices among a
multi-racial/ethnic sample of university students. Social Behavior and Personality: An International
Journal, 29, 133–144.
Lefkowitz, E. S., Boone, T. L., & Shearer, C. L. (2004a). Communication with best friends about sex-related
topics during emerging adulthood. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 33, 339–351.
Lefkowitz, E. S., Gillen, M. M., Shearer, C. L., & Boone, T. L. (2004b). Religiosity, sexual behaviors, and
sexual attitudes during emerging adulthood. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 150–159.
Levenson, M. R., Aldwin, C. M., & D’Mello, M. (2005). Religious development from adolescence to middle
adulthood. In R. F. Paloutzian & C. L. Park (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of religion and
spirituality (pp. 144–161). New York: Guilford Press.
Levesque, R. J. R. (2002). Not by faith alone: Religion, law, and adolescence. New York, NY: New York
University Press.
Lewinsohn, P. M., Rohde, P., Seeley, J. R., & Baldwin, C. L. (2001). Gender differences in suicide attempts
from adolescence to adulthood. Journal of American Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 427–434.
Liu, A., Sharkness, J., & Pryor, J.H. (2008). Findings from the 2007 Administration of your first college year
(YFCY): National Aggregates. Higher Education Research Institute, University of California, Los
Angeles. Retrieved February 25, 2015 from http://www.heri.ucla.edu/PDFS/YFCY_2007_Report05-
07-08.pdf.
Loewenthal, K. M., MacLeod, A. K., & Cinnirella, M. (2001). Are women more religious than men? Gender
differences in religious activity among different religious groups in the UK. Personality and Individual
Differences, 32, 133–139.
Lund, T. J., & Dearing, E. (2012). Is growing up affluent risky for adolescents or is the problem growing up
in an affluent neighborhood? Journal of Research on Adolescence. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2012.
00829.x.
Luthar, S. S., & Ansary, N. S. (2005). Dimensions of adolescent rebellion: Risks for academic failure among
high- and low-income youth. Development and Psychopathology,17, 231–250.
Luthar, S. S., & Barkin, S. H. (2012). Are affluent youth truly ‘‘at risk’’? Vulnerability and resilience across
three diverse samples. Development and Psychopathology, 24, 429–449.
Luthar, S. S., Barkin, S. H., & Crossman, E. J. (2013). ‘‘I can, therefore I must’’: Fragility in the upper-
middle classes. Development and Psychopathology, 25th Anniversary Special Issue, 25, 1529–1549.
Luthar, S. S., & D’Avanzo, K. (1999). Contextual factors in substance use: A study of suburban and inner-
city adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 11, 845–867.
Luthar, S. S., & Goldstein, A. S. (2008). Substance use and related behaviors among suburban late ado-
lescents: The importance of perceived parent containment. Development and Psychopathology, 20,
591–614.
Luthar, S. S., & Latendresse, S. J. (2005). Children of the affluent: Challenges to well-being. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 49–53.
Markstrom, C. A., Huey, E., Stiles, B. M., & Krause, A. L. (2010). Frameworks of caring and helping in
adolescents: Are empathy, religiosity, and spirituality related constructs? Youth Society, 42, 59–80.
McAuley, J. (2013). The affluenza society. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/
2013/12/23/opinion/the-affluenza-society.html?_r=0.
McCullough, M. E., Hoyt, W. T., Larson, D. B., Koenig, H. G., & Thoresen, C. (2000). Religious in-
volvement and mortality: A meta-analytic review. Health Psychology, 19, 211–222.
McCullough, M. E., Tsang, J. A., & Brion, S. (2003). Personality traits in adolescence as predictors of
religiousness in early adulthood: Findings from the Terman Longitudinal Study. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 29, 980–991.
McCullough, M. E., & Willoughby, B. L. B. (2009). Religion, self-regulation and self- control: Asso-
ciations, explanations, and implications. Psychiatry Bulletin, 135, 69–93.
McNamara Barry, C., & Abo-Zena, M. M. (2014). Emerging adults’ religious and spiritual development. In
C. McNamara & M. M. Abo-Zena (Eds.), Emerging adults religiousness and spirituality: Meaning
making in an age of transition. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Midlarsky, E., Mullen, A. S., & Barkin, S. H. (2012). Religion, altruism, and prosocial behavior: Conceptual
and empirical approaches. In L. Miller (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psychology and spirituality (pp.
138–148). New York: Oxford University Press.
Moreira-Almeda, A., Neto, F. L., & Koenig, H. G. (2006). Religiousness and mental health: A review.
Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria, 28, 242–250.
J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861 859
123
Murray-Swank, N., Pargament, K., & Mahoney, A. (2005). At the crossroads of sexuality and spirituality:
The sanctification of sex by college students. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion,
15, 199–219.
Nelson, L. J., & Padilla-Walker, L. M. (2013). Flourishing and floundering in emerging adult college
students. Emerging Adulthood, 1, 67–78.
Newton, A. T., & Mcintosh, D. (2009). Is the cookie good or is it *good*? The effect of religious im-
peratives on opting for virtue. Presented at the Society for Personality and Social Psychology meeting,
Tampa, FL.
Nkansah-Amankra, S., Diedhiou, A., Walker, A. D., Agbanu, H., & Clark, A. (2010). Adolescent suicidal
behaviors, self-rated health and multiple health risk behaviors: Exploring new perspectives in suicide
prevention research. Journal of Public Health Epidemiology, 2, 204–215.
Nonnemaker, J. M., McNeely, C. A., & Blum, R. W. (2003). Public and private domains of religiosity and
adolescent health risk behaviors: Evidence from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health.
Social Science and Medicine, 57, 2049–2054.
Norenzayan, A., & Shariff, A. F. (2008). The origin and evolution of religious prosociality. Science, 322,
58–62.
Oser, F. K., Scarlett, G., & Bucher, A. (2006). Religiousness and spiritual development throughout the
lifespan. In W. Damon, R. M. Lerner (Series Eds.), & R.M. Lerner (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child
psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (6th ed. pp. 942–998). Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley.
Padilla-Walker, L. M., Barry, C. M., Carroll, J. S., Madsen, S. D., & Nelson, L. J. (2008). Looking on the
bright side: The role of identity status and gender on risk behaviors and prosocial behaviors during
emerging adulthood. Journal of Adolescence, 31, 451–467.
Patrick, M. E., Wightman, P., Schoeni, R. F., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2012). Socioeconomic status and
substance use among young adults: A comparison across constructs and drugs. Journal of Studies on
Alcohol and Drugs, 73, 772–782.
Pe
´rez-Pen
˜a, R., & Bidgood, J. (2012, August 30). Harvard says 125 students may have cheated on a final
exam. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/31/education/harvard-says-
125-students-may-have-cheated-on-exam.html?_r1/40.
Picho
´n, I., Boccate, G., & Saroglou, V. (2007). Nonconscious influences of religion on prosociality: A
priming study. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 1032–1045.
Piedmont, R. L., Ciarrochi, J. W., Dy-Liacco, G. S., & Williams, J. E. G. (2009). The empirical and
conceptual value of the spiritual transcendence and religious involvement scales for personality re-
search. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 1, 162–179.
Randoplh-Seng, B., & Nielsen, M. E. (2007). Honesty: One effect of primed religious representations. The
International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 17, 303–315.
Reboussin, B. A., Preisser, J. S., Song, E. Y., & Wolfson, M. (2010). Geographic clustering of underage
drinking and the influence of community characteristics. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 106, 38–47.
Regnerus, M. E. (2003). Religion and positive adolescent outcomes: A review of research and theory.
Review of Religious Research, 44, 394–413.
Regnerus, M. D., & Uecker, J. E. (2006). Finding faith, losing faith: The prevalence and context of religious
transformations during adolescence. Review of Religious Research, 47, 217–237.
Robins, L. N., Cottler, L. B., Bucholz, K. K., Compton, W. M., North, C. S., & Rourke, K. (2000). The
diagnostic interview schedule for DSM-IV (DIS-IV). St. Louis, MO: Washington University School of
Medicine.
Salas-Wright, C. P., Vaughn, M. G., Hodge, D. R., & Perron, B. E. (2012). Religiosity profiles of American
youth in relation to substance use, violence, and delinquency. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41,
1560–1575.
Saroglou, V., & Fiasse, L. (2003). Birth order, personality, and religion: A study among young adults from a
three-sibling family. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 19–29.
Shariff, A. F., & Norenzayan, A. (2011). Mean gods make good people: Different views of god predict
cheating behavior. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 21, 85–96.
Shiner, R., Masten, A. S., & Tellegen, A. (2002). A developmental perspective on personality in emerging
adulthood: Childhood antecedents and concurrent adaptation. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 83, 1165–1177.
Smith, C., & Faris, R. (2002). Religion and American adolescent delinquency, risk behaviors, and con-
structive social activities. Chapel Hill, NC: NSYR.
Smith, T. B., McCullough, M. E., & Poll, J. (2003). Religiousness and depression: Evidence for a main
effect and the moderating influence of stressful life events. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 614–626.
860 J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861
123
Song, E. Y., Reboussin, B. A., Foley, K. L., Kaltenbach, L. A., Wagoner, K. G., & Wolfson, M. (2009).
Selected community characteristics and underage drinking. Substance Use and Misuse, 44, 179–194.
Spilka, B., Hood, R. W., Hunsberger, B., & Gorsuch, R. (2003). The psychology of religion: An empirical
approach (3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
Taylor, A. C., Rappleyea, D. L., Fang, X., & Cannon, D. (2013). Emerging adults’ perceptions of acceptable
behaviors prior to forming a committed, dating relationship. Journal of Adult Development, 20,
173–184.
Templeton, J. L., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). The relation between spiritual development and identity processes.
In E. C. Roehlkepartain, P. E. King, L. Wagener, & P. L. Benson (Eds.), The handbook of spiritual
development in childhood and adolescence (pp. 252–265). Thou- sand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tisdell, E. J. (2003). Exploring spirituality and culture in adult and higher education. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Uecker, J. E., Regnerus, M. D., & Vaaler, M. E. (2007). Losing my religion: The social sources of religious
decline in early adulthood. Social Forces, 85, 1667–1692.
United States Bureau of the Census (2000). American factfinder. Retrieved October 20, 2010, from http://
factfinder2.census.gov.
Verona, E., Patrick, C. J., & Joiner, T. E. (2001). Psychopathy, antisocial personality, and suicide risk.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 110, 462–470.
Yates, T. M., Tracy, A. J., & Luthar, S. S. (2008). Nonsuicidal self-injury among ‘‘privileged’’ youths:
Longitudinal and cross-sectional approaches to developmental process. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 76, 52–62.
Yonker, J. E., Schnabelrauch, C. A., & DeHaan, L. G. (2012a). The relationship between spirituality and
religiosity on psychological outcomes in adolescents and emerging adults: A meta-analytic review.
Journal of Adolescence, 35(2), 299–314.
Yonker, J. E., Schnabelrauch, C. A., & DeHaan, L. G. (2012b). The relationship between spirituality and
religiosity on psychological outcomes in adolescents and emerging adults: A meta-analytic review.
Journal of Adolescence, 35, 299–314.
Young, J. S., Cashwell, C. S., & Shcherbakova, J. (2000). The moderating relationship of spirituality on
negative life events and psychological adjustment. Counseling and Values, 45, 49–57.
Zaleski, E. H., & Schiaffino, K. M. (2000). Religiosity and sexual risk-taking behavior during the transition
to college. Journal of Adolescence, 23, 223–227.
Zinnbauer, B. J., & Pargament, K. I. (2005). Religiousness and spirituality. In R. F. Paloutzian & C. L. Park
(Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality (pp. 21–42). New York: Guilford Press.
J Relig Health (2015) 54:844–861 861
123
