↓ Skip to main content

Spirit or Fleeting Apparition? Why Spirituality’s Link with Social Support Might Be Incrementally Invalid

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Religion and Health, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Spirit or Fleeting Apparition? Why Spirituality’s Link with Social Support Might Be Incrementally Invalid
Published in
Journal of Religion and Health, December 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10943-013-9801-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

James Benjamin Schuurmans-Stekhoven

Abstract

Previously published path models apparently confirm the belief-as-benefit perspective that spirituality boosts well-being via social support. The broad acceptance of such findings has motivated recommendations that clinical psychologists and psychiatrists routinely assess their patients' spiritual status. Skeptics retort that past findings are statistically confounded and that numinous beliefs and well-being are unrelated. A multivariate regression analysis testing whether spirituality explains variance in social support after personality traits are simultaneously included is reported. Although spirituality displays a significant positive correlation and partial correlation (after controlling for socio-demographics) with social support, regression analysis specifying agreeableness and conscientiousness-individual differences related to both spirituality and social support-as predictors renders spirituality nonsignificant. In summary, spirituality's correlation with social support appears spurious; demonstrating the hazards of relying on simple associations and highlighting the urgent need for researchers to utilize statistical methods capable of establishing cause and parsing effects across rival theoretical explanations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 30%
Student > Master 3 15%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Lecturer 1 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 4 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 25%
Social Sciences 3 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Unknown 4 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 October 2021.
All research outputs
#2,415,570
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Religion and Health
#127
of 1,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,291
of 314,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Religion and Health
#4
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,353 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.