Keywords

Most people identify with a religious group--approximately 80% worldwide—and of the remaining 20% who are unaffiliated, many hold religious or spiritual beliefs (Hackett et al., 2012). The vast majority of people in the United States attend religious services at least monthly, pray at least daily, state that religion is a very important part of their lives, and believe in heaven, hell, angels, demons, and miracles (e.g., Pew Forum, 2009; see Table 24.1). Studies conducted in other countries report lower levels of religion than those reported in the US, but figures are still fairly high (e.g., Hank & Schaan, 2008; Williams & Sternthal, 2007). In fact, as Table 24.2 shows, people hold fairly high beliefs in a personal God in countries around the world. Only 15% of people worldwide describe themselves as atheist, agnostic, or nonreligious (Zuckerman, 2009). Clearly, although not all individuals are religious, religion is central to the lives of many individuals (Park, 2013).

Table 24.1 Beliefs reported in recent US nationally representative polls
Full size table
Table 24.2 Believing in a personal god (i.e., a God “who concerns himself with every human being personally”) from the National Opinion Research Center (2008)
Full size table

A tremendous amount of research has been conducted on associations between religion and well-being in recent decades (for reviews, see, Koenig, King, & Carson, 2012; Lee & Newberg, 2005). However, religiousness is a complex phenomenon with many aspects. For example, an expert panel convened by the Fetzer Institute and the National Institute on Aging identified 12 unique dimensions of religiousness and spirituality important to health. Other schemes have divided religiousness into cognitive, behavioral and emotional features (Salsman, Fitchett, Merluzzi, Sherman, & Park, 2015) or into beliefs, knowledge, experiences, practice and consequences (Stark & Glock, 1968).

These categorization schemes vary widely, but generally recognize cognition or belief as a core aspect of religiousness. In fact, some researchers have asserted that belief comprises its central feature (e.g., Idler, 1999, p. 31). Although acknowledged to be a central part of religiousness, beliefs tend to be relatively under-examined by social scientists even though beliefs are highly important in individuals’ understanding of themselves and the world and may strongly relate to overall well-being (Ellison et al., 2001). Instead, the vast majority of research on the topic of religion and well-being has focused on behaviors (e.g., service attendance, prayer), motivation (e.g., intrinsic religiousness), or inner experiences (e.g., transcendence). The present chapter focuses on the important and understudied intersection of religious beliefs and well-being. First, religious beliefs are defined and described within a meaning making system. Relevant literature linking religious beliefs and well-being is reviewed, and a more comprehensive model is proposed. Future research directions conclude this chapter.

Defining Religious Beliefs

Lay dictionaries typically define beliefs as statements that a person accepts or is convicted of as being true. Concordantly, religious beliefs have been defined as “Propositional statements a person considers to be true about religion” (Macavei & Miclea, 2008, p.2). Jervis (2006) used the phrase “reality appraisal” (p. 652) to describe belief, a definition consistent with lay use of the term “belief” as well as with those of most behavioral scientists. A more specific definition such as that proffered by Barrett and Lanman (2008) brings additional clarity: “the state of a cognitive system holding information (not necessarily in propositional or explicit form) as true in the generation of further thought and behavior” (p. 110).

There is no widely-used taxonomy of religious beliefs. The most widely studied are probably the belief in the existence of God and belief in the existence of an afterlife (Idler, 1999), but there are many others, including beliefs about God’s nature (God image), theodicies (beliefs about God’s role in suffering), beliefs in a soul, beliefs about evil, beliefs about sin, and so on (Slattery and Park, 2012).

Religious Beliefs: A Meaning Systems Perspective

Meaning systems refer to individuals’ understanding of themselves and the world as well as their system of goals and values. Religious beliefs often form a large part of the foundation of individuals’ meaning systems (Newton & McIntosh, 2013; Park, 2013) and may thereby influence other basic beliefs such as those regarding locus of control or a just world (Moreira-Almeida et al., 2006). By influencing perceptions of themselves and the world, individuals’ religious beliefs may also influence other aspects of their meaning systems, such as their values (i.e., things on which people place subjective importance) and behaviors (i.e., whether and why they act in particular ways). Thus, understanding the role of religious beliefs on psychological functioning is essential for understanding people and for promoting well-being.

Religious beliefs exist on a continuum, ranging from very broad global beliefs (e.g., in the existence and nature of God) to situation-specific appraisals based, in part, on one’s global beliefs (e.g., attributions for a specific occurrence; Park, 2013). Global religious beliefs are part of one’s global meaning system (Newton & McIntosh, 2013), and, along with the context of a given situation, influence situational beliefs. Situational religious beliefs involve the meanings that people assign to the specific events or experiences in their lives; these are the level of beliefs with which most people concern themselves (e.g., not why does God allow bad things to happen to good people , a global existential problem, but why did God allow this specific experience to happen to me?). From a meaning perspective, both global and situational beliefs are important determinants of subsequent feelings and behaviors (Park & Folkman, 1997; Park, 2010).

Religious meaning, as reflected in beliefs about the nature of God and the universe, as well as the many other beliefs that follow from these fundamental beliefs (e.g., life is fair, people can be trusted), have been the focus of theologians and philosophers for millennia. Beliefs are a central component of every religious system (Hood, Hill, & Spilka, 2009), and evidence from a variety of disciplines, including neuroscience, anthropology, evolutionary biology, and cognitive science, converges on the notion that religious beliefs are universal aspects of human beings (e.g., Barrett & Lanman, 2008; Sanderson, 2008). Importantly, from a psychological perspective, every person can be considered to have some level of religious beliefs, even if the level of belief is zero. That is, the total lack of a belief is useful to know and understand. Thus, for example, assessing an atheist’s belief in God (i.e., someone scoring 0) still yields a meaningful score for inclusion in studies of relationships between levels of a given belief and some other construct, such as well-being. Indeed, given the large numbers of people who score high in strength of various religious beliefs, scores of 0 are highly useful pieces of data.

Linking Religious Beliefs and Well-Being: The Meaning-Making Model

Religious beliefs may influence well-being both directly, reflected in a general sense of well-being, and as mediated through interpretations of specific experiences (see Fig. 24.1). In keeping with the spirit of this book, this chapter focuses specifically on the positive aspects of well-being such as happiness and life satisfaction; however, negative aspects, including distress and psychopathology, are included in the model to present a more complete picture. Positive and negative aspects of well-being may influence one another, and thus this model includes both, although little empirical research has directly examined this issue. Interestingly, most researchers who have examined religious cognitions and functioning have done so in the context of distress or maladjustment. Thus, there is a much larger literature focused on relations of religious beliefs with psychopathology than with well-being (e.g., Koenig et al., 2012).

Fig. 24.1
figure 1

Model of religious beliefs and well-being

Full size image

As to the direct influences of religious beliefs on well-being shown in Fig. 24.1, religious beliefs have been theorized to have the ability to provide an abiding sense of well-being. For example a belief in God may reinforce the notion that one is not alone in a cold and uncaring universe, but instead, lives in a world overseen by a benevolent loving parental figure who cares without end and ceaselessly attends to one’s personal experiences. Such a notion is thought to generate a deep sense of comfort that may carry through one’s daily life (Ellison, Burdette, & Hill, 2009). Similarly, given humanity’s foreknowledge of our own impending deaths, the belief in a literal afterlife can lead to a feeling of general peace and contentment. That is, firmly believing that regardless of what happens to one’s mortal body, one’s (more important) aspect of self, the soul, will continue in perpetuity relieves existential dread and frees a person to be happy and unworried (Ellison et al., 2009). Of course, the specific effects of beliefs in an afterlife would be expected to depend on how positive one views that afterlife (Bradshaw, Ellison, & Flannelly, 2008).

In addition to beliefs in God and an afterlife, there are many other beliefs that may influence an individual’s ongoing sense of well-being and happiness, including the extent to which there is ultimate divine or cosmic justice, the image one holds of God (e.g., as infinitely loving or punitive), the extent to which one’s sacred scriptures are the literal word of God, and the nature of humanity (e.g., as inherently flawed and sinful, as ultimately redeemable). Each individual’s global belief system is a unique and complex matrix of such religious beliefs (again, even if they score zero on all supernatural beliefs) and secular beliefs, shaped by received knowledge and their own experience across the lifespan.

Although beliefs may have a substantial general effect on well-being, they may also exert strong effects on well-being by affecting how individuals interact with and make meaning of the world (Ellison et al., 2009). Making meaning involves interpreting specific experiences, expecially potentially stressful ones (Park, 2010). Thus, global religious beliefs may lead individuals to make more benign interpretations of difficult situations, buffering them from the stresses of daily living and promoting more happiness and satisfaction with life (Park, 2012a, 2012b). For example, religious beliefs may enable individuals to reappraise adverse or highly stressful experience in more positive ways (e.g., Vishkin et al., 2016).

Current Research Findings Regarding Religious Beliefs and Well-Being

Although rich theoretical linkages between religious beliefs and well-being have long been posited, empirical investigation of these linkages has been slow to develop. In large part, this lack of attention is due to the general tendencies of psychology of religion researchers to ignore cognitive aspects of religiousness as well as to focus on negative aspects of physical and mental health. The studies focusing on religious belief-well-being links generally indicate salutary associations, although the findings are inconsistent and the different methods used across studies, especially with regard to samples and measures, make aggregation difficult.

Global Religious Beliefs

Belief in God

Perhaps the most basic religious belief – belief in God – may be related to well-being by providing a sense of comfort and protection that is unmatched by other sources, a supernatural parent always available to listen and help. In spite of the high prevalence of a belief in God noted above, surprisingly few studies have specifically focused on the associations between beliefs in God and well-being, especially with regard to positive aspects of well-being. Those few studies have generally found that beliefs in God are favorably, but weakly, linked to positive well-being. For example, in a study of undergraduates who had experienced a major life trauma within the past five years, belief in God positively related to happiness but not to life satisfaction (Park & Gutierrez, 2013). A random sample of 989 adults in an Australian community survey completed the Bradburn Balanced Affect Scale and three measures of Christian faith and practice: belief in God, personal prayer, and church attendance. While all three religious measures were positively correlated with positive affect and affective balance, belief in God had the highest relationship (Francis & Kaldor, 2002).

Belief in God may even promote well-being by serving as a resource for recovery from mental illness. In a prospective study of patients in a day-treatment program at a psychiatric hospital, belief in God predicted positive treatment response and greater increases in psychological well-being over the course of treatment (Rosmarin, Bigda-Peyton, Kertz, Smith, Rauch, & Björgvinsson, 2013). A belief in God may have served as a resource on which patients could draw for strength and support as they worked through their psychological difficulties.

Beliefs in Afterlife

As noted earlier, believing in an afterlife relieves a sense of existential worry over the mortality of the physical body, which may allow individuals to be more open to and accepting of their unfolding lives. Several studies have examined relations between belief in an afterlife and well-being in large representative samples in the US. For example, among US adults in a national probability sample, stronger beliefs in an afterlife were associated with higher feelings of tranquility (Ellison et al., 2009). In a large study of older adults in North Carolina, belief in afterlife was correlated with well-being, but only for Protestants (and the correlation was small) (Cohen & Hall, 2009). In data from the 1995 Detroit Area Study, belief in eternal life was related to a composite measure of well-being (Ellison, Boardman, Williams, & Jackson, 2001).

Similar findings have been reported in smaller more select samples. Among young adults drawn from high schools, youth groups, and colleges, belief in afterlife was correlated with life satisfaction for both Catholics and Protestants (Cohen, Pierce, Chambers, Meade, Gorvine, & Koenig, 2005). However, in a sample of older adults with chronic heart failure, belief in an afterlife was not related to life satisfaction (Park, Lim, Newlon, Suresh, & Bliss, 2014).

Studies have also been conducted in countries besides the US. Two studies of older adults in Japan found that beliefs in a good afterlife are related to life satisfaction (Imamura et al., 2015; Krause et al., 2002). A study conducted in Thailand illustrated the importance of context: in a sample of Buddhists, for those who had recently meditated, belief in afterlife was strongly related to life satisfaction, but was unrelated for those who had not meditated recently. However, for Christians, beliefs in afterlife were unrelated to well-being in a sample surveyed right after church services but were related in a sample surveyed at another time (Chaiwutikornwanich, 2014).

In addition to these studies focusing explicitly on belief in an afterlife, Diener and Clifton (2002) reported associations using a measure combining belief in God/higher power and afterlife. They found that in a probability sample in one US city, the correlation was small but stable; similarly, in a broad probability sample of over 40 countries, this belief measure correlated with both life satisfaction and happiness. Again, the correlations were small, but the authors noted the lack of variance in the measures as well as a notably larger correlation between this combined set of beliefs and well-being for older adults.

God Image/Concept

One’s concept of God, often termed God image, is a frequently studied aspect of religious beliefs. How individuals conceptualize God’s character and behavior can be foundational for their global meaning system. For this reason, one’s view of God may exert a strong influence on well-being. Many different God images have been studied, including understanding God as Benevolent, Wrathful, Purposeful, Punishing, Guiding, and Caring (Wong-McDonald & Gorsuch, 2004).

Typically, holding stronger beliefs in more benevolent or positive images of God are generally associated with better well-being, but the findings are complicated. For example, nationwide survey of adults in the US found that having a belief in a loving and protecting God was associated with higher levels of general well-being (Bradshaw, Ellison, & Flannelly, 2008). Similarly studies of undergraduates found that higher beliefs in a loving God, and lower beliefs in a controlling God, were associated with positive mood and higher life satisfaction (Wiegand & Weiss, 2006) and that traditional benevolent conceptualizations of God was positively correlated with greater spiritual well-being (Wong-McDonald & Gorsuch, 2004). In another large random nationally representative survey, the 2007 Baylor Religion Survey (BRS), holding a loving God image was positively and significantly correlated with a sense of purpose in life (Stroope, Draper, & Whitehead, 2013). Further analysis of the BRS indicated that having a belief in a God who is directly concerned and involved in one’s life (divine involvement) was positively associated with a sense of meaning in life. However, religious affiliation modified this association such that the positive relationship was true only for evangelical Protestants, mainline Protestants, and Catholics, and not for other religionists or religious nones (Jung, 2015).

In addition to possible moderation of effects by denomination, race might also moderate the linkage. A sample of university students in the US reported their endorsement of different types of religious beliefs: that (a) God loves me and considers me special (b) God is in control of everything that happens and (c) God has a reason for all of the bad things that happen. Only the beliefs that God loves me (esteem-enhancing) were associated with a composite measure of well-being. In addition, for African-American students only, beliefs that God has a reason were also correlated with well-being (Blaine & Crocker, 1995).

The studies on relations between God image beliefs and well-being are few in number and yield complicated findings, often with only a few image beliefs related to well-being. In a small sample of Canadian women who had been diagnosed with cancer five years prior, among six specific God images assessed, only conceptualizing God as provident (in control of their lives) was correlated with life satisfaction, a moderately strong relationship (Gall, Renart, & Boonstra, 2000). Further, strength of effects may be more or less strong depending on other factors. In addition, strength of relations between God image beliefs and well-being may depend on whether analyses control for other variables. For example, a study of chronic pain patients in Belgium found that positive God images were associated with happiness, both directly and indirectly through positive interpretation of their disease, while angry God images were inversely associated with happiness. However, the effects of angry God image disappeared after controlling for pain severity (Dezutter et al., 2010). Clearly, much more work is needed in order to make understand how different God image beliefs relate to well-being.

Orthodoxy

Orthodoxy refers to a belief in the basic tenets of one’s religion. Orthodoxy may promote well-being by giving reassurance that one is following the proper path in life and alleviate uncertainty and doubt. Only a handful of studies have examined whether orthodoxy relates to well-being. In a randomly selected sample from the greater Akron Ohio area of the U.S., Christian Orthodoxy was found to be unrelated to life satisfaction or positive affect (Poloma & Pendleton, 1990). However, in a sample of Christian young adults in the U.S. and the U.K, Christian orthodoxy was modestly correlated with life satisfaction (Zahl & Gibson, 2012) and in a sample of Jewish Israeli students, Jewish orthodoxy was related to a composite measure of well-being (happiness, lack of distress) (Vilchinsky & Kravetz, 2005).

Fundamentalism

Fundamentalism refers to the belief that there exists one set of religious teachings that clearly contains the inerrant truth about deity and humanity that must be followed; unlike orthodoxy, fundamentalism is typically assessed without reference to any particular set of beliefs, rather referring specifically to the belief that there is one source of truth (Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 1992). Fundamentalism, like orthodoxy, may influence well-being by promoting a sense of certainty. Only a few studies, all conducted with college students, have examined links between fundamentalism and psychological well-being. In one study of students at a South African University, religious fundamentalism correlated positively with the presence of meaning in life but was not related to life satisfaction (Nell, 2014). In a sample of Catholic Italian university undergraduate students, religious fundamentalism was positively associated with high life satisfaction (Carlucci, Tommasi, Balsamo, Furnham, & Saggino, 2015). In a sample of U.S. college students, religious fundamentalism was related to religious well-being but not existential well-being (i.e., meaning in life). However, among the subsample of religious undergraduates, religious fundamentalism was moderately strongly related to both religious and existential well-being (Genia, 1996).

Divine Control/Religious Fatalism

Beliefs regarding God’s control over the world generally—or over one’s own life in particular—may be related to well-being by providing reinforcement and encouragement to persevere in the pursuit of difficulties. Alternately, such beliefs could lead to a sense of fatalism or helplessness. A large study of older adults in the greater Washington, DC (US) area, studied the belief that God exerts a commanding authority over the course and direction of his or her life (divine control). This study found that belief in divine control was positively related to a sense of mattering. These associations were particularly strong among African Americans, individuals with no college degree, and women (Schieman, Bierman, & Ellison, 2010).

However, beliefs in God as having control over one’s life are not universally positive. Studies of religious fatalism indicate that in the context of health, such beliefs are often associated with poorer health behaviors. For example, in a diverse urban sample of people living with HIV, holding perceptions of God as the locus of control over their health predicted much poorer adherence with antiretroval HIV medications (Finocchario-Kessler, Catley, Berkley-Patton, Gerkovich, Williams, Banderas, & Goggin, 2011).

Situational Religious Beliefs

Although a fair amount of research has examined the role of religious attributions in adjusting to negative life events such as floods or cancer, most of this research has focused on distress and other negative outcomes. Only a few studies have examined how attributions for negative life events relate to positive aspects of well-being. The above-mentioned study of college students who had experienced a major life event found that attributions that God was responsible for their event were positively related to happiness but not to life satisfaction (Park & Gutierrez, 2013). Similarly, in a study of adults in the U.K. who had experienced recent major life stress, attributions of God as in control of the event correlated positively with positive affect (Loewenthal, MacLeod, Goldblatt, Lubitsh, & Valentine, 2000). And in a study of college students bereaved from the loss of a close loved one within the past year, attributions that God caused the death were unrelated to life satisfaction but positively related to stress-related growth (Park, 2005).

A More Comprehensive Meaning Model of Religious Beliefs and Well-Being

As discussed earlier, the available research indicates that global religious beliefs are associated with well-being (e.g., Ellison et al., 2009). Further, there is some suggestion that these associations may be mediated through situational appraisals of specific stressful experiences. Thus, results of empirical work to date are consistent with the model shown in Fig. 24.1. However, given the centrality of religious beliefs in individuals’ global meaning systems, a more comprehensive model is needed to more fully delineate relationships between religious beliefs and well-being and guide future empirical inquiry. A more comprehensive model with additional mediators and pathways is shown in Fig. 24.2. These mediators have been described in theoretical literature. For example, psychologists have proposed that religious beliefs can influence cognitive processing styles. Religious beliefs have been posited to lead to a reliance on heuristics (e.g., What does our creed say?) to quickly form judgments rather than engaging in reflective inquiry (Carone & Barone, 2001, p. 990).

Fig. 24.2
figure 2

More comprehensive model of religious cognitions and well-being

Full size image

More broadly, others have proposed that religious beliefs pervasively influence perceptions and interpretations by serving as schemas that filter experience (Silberman, 2005). Thus, religious beliefs influence what people notice, experience, and remember (Barrett, 2013). The extent to which religious beliefs are salient and available determines the extent to which they are drawn upon to form perceptions and attributions (Ozorak, 2005). For example, a study of attention to visual stimuli found that, regardless of current religious affiliation, those who were raised as Calvinist (emphasizing individual responsibility) compared to those raised as Catholic or Jewish (emphasizing social solidarity) exhibited the global precedence effect (greater attention to global than to local features) (Colzato et al., 2010). These functions of religious beliefs may result in confirmatory bias, a process by which selectively noting and recalling information that is consistent with one’s pre-existing beliefs about the world. One’s global meaning system is a powerful influence in such top-down processing, and religious beliefs facilitate this concept-driven processing (Newton & McIntosh, 2013; Ozorak, 2005).

In addition to these general influences, religious beliefs influence how individuals appraise situations and may allow individuals with stronger positively-toned religious beliefs to make more benign appraisals of their encounters. These positive appraisals will minimize stress exposures and promote well-being on an ongoing basis (Park, 2012a, 2012b).

Finally, according to Fig. 24.2, both appraisals and cognitive processing that derive from religious beliefs may have not only direct effects on well-being, but may also exert influence on well-being by promoting intermediary positive states, including lower levels of stress and negative affect and higher levels of positive affect, hope, optimism and meaning in life, which will in turn promote well-being. That is, religious beliefs—at least some of them—may lead people to experience situations as less stressful, find more purpose in life, feel confident and certain in their way of life, worry less, and generally experience a more positive and happy life.

Limitations of Current Research and Future Directions

Research on religious beliefs and well-being, such as that reviewed here, typically suffers from a number of limitations. First, researchers often purport to study beliefs, but use assessment tools that confound beliefs with other aspects of religiousness such as practices and subjective experiences (Hill, 2005; Park, 2012a, 2012b). Even the measure produced by the Fetzer/NIA panel mentioned earlier contains a “beliefs” subscale that unfortunately confounds questions about belief (e.g., “Do you believe there is a life after death?”) with other aspects of religiousness (e.g., How much is religion a source of strength and comfort to you?) (Fetzer/NIA, 1999). Unfortunately, there are no well-designed measures of “religious beliefs”; instead, investigators must select a measure designed specifically for each belief in which they are interested. For example, measures of afterlife beliefs (Osarchuk & Tatz, 1973) and theodicies (Hale-Smith, Park, & Edmondson, 2012) are available.

Most studies examined only a single religious belief rather than examining an array of beliefs and their potential interplay. Further, I was unable to locate any research linking a number of important religious beliefs (e.g., in sin, in karma) with well-being. Future researchers aiming to assess religious specific belief domains must choose measures appropriate to the task. Researchers should scrutinize candidate measures to determine whether they truly capture the belief construct of interest. Religious beliefs should also be assessed in terms of both their content and their strength.

Another obvious limitation in this area of study is the reliance on weak study designs: nearly all of the research on the topic of religious beliefs and well-being was conducted cross-sectionally, and very little of it took into account potential confounding variables. Thus, no directionality or causality can be assumed. Further, the noted associations reported may be strongly influenced by underlying third variables. For example, such beliefs may be associated with belonging to social networks, which could account for the effects of belief (Galen, 2015). In addition, specific to beliefs, findings could be due to the certainty with which one holds one’s beliefs rather than the content of those beliefs. In fact, some research has demonstrated that certainty may underlie the effects of beliefs. A study of adults in a local community yielded a curvilinear relationship such that those with higher belief certainty (both confidently religious and atheists) reported greater well-being relative to those with low certainty (unsure and agnostics). The authors concluded that the effects of beliefs may be due to “a confident worldview rather than religious beliefs themselves” (Galen & Kloet, 2011, p. 673).

Further, very little of this research has been conducted with representative samples—most research is conducted in the United States, often with college students. This limitation is true of most areas of research, but may be especially important to consider in the context of religious beliefs. Not only do religious beliefs vary greatly across demographic characteristics, but religious beliefs may exert very different influences depending on that demographic. In the research reviewed here, the few studies that looked for moderator effects reported them, often to the effect that the results were especially weak for some and strong for other groups. Religious beliefs may be especially related to well-being among older adults, those from specific religious groups, minorities, and those with less education. It has been suggest that the benefits of at least some religious beliefs may be greater for persons who lack a sense of direct mastery or control (Schieman et al., 2010).

Another important direction for this research area to attend a to the role of lack of belief, including examining how having no belief in God or an afterlife might constitute more than simply a non-existent belief, but may constitute an important end of the belief continuum. Those who do not have religious beliefs may substitute other secular beliefs or supernatural ones that help them to frame their experiences and thereby influence their well-being. In addition, very little is currently known about the interplay between secular and religious belief systems; they are not necessarily mutually exclusive and for many people, appear to work in concert.

In summary, the current research on the links between religious beliefs and well-being is, at best, suggestive of generally salutary relationships, but a new generation of research using stronger methods and analytic strategies is needed. Further, research will be much more illuminating if it examines mediational pathways to examine the mechanisms through which beliefs exert their effects. The model in Fig. 24.2 provides many possible pathways to test. Research findings to date, while limited in both scope and conclusiveness, are consistent with the notion that religious beliefs are related to well-being, but indicate that this is a complex issue. Beliefs in God and afterlife are generally related to life satisfaction, positive emotions, and other aspects of well-being, but the content of these beliefs likely matters as well. That is, the influence of belief in God may depend on what type of God one or what type of afterlife in which one believes. At present, many intriguing issues await better measurement and testing. With studies based on more sophisticated conceptualizations and using sound methods, we will be able to learn much more about how beliefs influence well-being.