There are several coping measures that are highly used. Check out Carver's COPE, Folkman's Ways of Coping, and Vitaliano's Revised Ways of Coping Checklist.

In ours (Vitaliano, 1990), there is a measure of faith in the second revision (counting blessings, blaming others, and faith). The original version (1985) has five scales: Seeking Social Support, Wishful Thinking, Self-Blame, Problem-Focused Coping, and Avoidance. If you look in Google Scholar you can find the studies that have used the scales and there are several that examined spirituality.

Goof luck.

Following Peter answer, I think Ways of Coping Checklist (WCC) has one item about "Pray" which is against your question

Thank you, Peter - it sounds like yours might be a better candidate. Carver's COPE is that one that was initially suggested to me, but that has an entire scale devoted to religious belief. I'll have a look at WCC as well, Professor Ahmad, to see if it fits the theoretical model of resilience that I'm working with - although I'd prefer it to be completely secular, I think 'pray' is less problematic than an explicit reference to 'God' (singular, capital G).

Thank you both for taking the time to answer. Much appreciated.

Andrew

Dear Professor Ahmad,

I was referring to the Revised Ways of Coping Checklist (1985) in Multivariate Behavioral Research and the revision of that in 1991 in Psychology and Aging. I am not sure about the items in the WCC.

In the newer version of the WCCL there are 57 items.

The faith scale has three items, not one.

There is another scale, Counting One's Blessings, and one does not have to believe in God to do this, one has to be optimistic and thankful for what one has..... This has six items.

The only other scales with three items are the scales for Blame Others and Self Blame respectively.

The other coping scales can be contrasted with the scales for: Wishful Thinking, Problem-Focused Coping, Avoidance and Seeking Social Support.

Dear Andrew,

Please keep in mind that Seeking Social Support and having social social supports are very related, but not identical. Some people may not have good supports because they have driven them away (see extensive research on hostility and health). Others may need several people, while others will just need one confidante. This is also related to personality. You may want to check research on the NEO and coping. There are many interesting connections that you could make between Avoidance and Seeking Social Supports and the availability of supports.

Finally, are you doing this work in a country with a high percentage of Atheists? Obviously this will be a factor.

If you check work by Gail Ironson on spirituality in men with AIDs, this may be useful. She has coping data and she also has outcomes that are not tautological. She tracked spirituality and survival.

Good tidings.

Dear Professor Ahmad,

I was referring to the Revised Ways of Coping Checklist (1985) in Multivariate Behavioral Research and the revision of that in 1991 in Psychology and Aging. I am not sure about the items in the WCC.

In the newer version of the WCCL there are 57 items.

The faith scale has three items, not one.

There is another scale, Counting One's Blessings, and one does not have to believe in God to do this, one has to be optimistic and thankful for what one has..... This has six items.

The only other scales with three items are the scales for Blame Others and Self Blame respectively.

The other coping scales can be contrasted with the scales for: Wishful Thinking, Problem-Focused Coping, Avoidance and Seeking Social Support.

Dear Andrew,

Please keep in mind that Seeking Social Support and having social social supports are very related, but not identical. Some people may not have good supports because they have driven them away (see extensive research on hostility and health). Others may need several people, while others will just need one confidante. This is also related to personality. You may want to check research on the NEO and coping. There are many interesting connections that you could make between Avoidance and Seeking Social Supports and the availability of supports.

Finally, are you doing this work in a country with a high percentage of Atheists? Obviously this will be a factor.

If you check work by Gail Ironson on spirituality in men with AIDs, this may be useful. She has coping data and she also has outcomes that are not tautological. She tracked spirituality and survival.

Good tidings.

Thank you, Peter - yes, the UK 2011 census has 'no religion' or 'no religion given' at around 31%. In addition, of the 59% who identify as 'Christian' a great many will be culturally so: belonging to the Church of England (and believing yourself to be part of a Christian country) has very little connection to active religious belief here. Even the bishops - apart from the evangelicals - are rumoured not to take the existence of God too literally. Regular church attendance in the UK is around 6% of the population.

Thanks for the Gail Ironson lead; I'll follow that up. Thanks too for the thoughts on social support - there are many nuances to consider!

I note that your 1985 RWCC (is there a 1990 revision? I couldn't see it) concerns coping with specific events rather than styles or traits. I need to test for coping pre- & post-intervention (and hopefully a three month T3, if there's time) so will need to sit down and look at what is going to best measure the effect of the (9 week) intervention.

I very much appreciate your taking time (and interest) in this with me, so thank you!

(The intervention is a 9 week positive psychology programme developed by my supervisors to develop positive correlates of coping and resilience, including mindfulness, explanatory style, goal setting, gratitude et al.)

In my opinion a complete change in attitude to measure coping of the stress is necessary since the current practice is all empirical. In view of the current practice of devising a scale for coping of stress being largely empirical. An alternative method to quantify the Stress – Strain relationship is proposed.

Brief on Socio-Physicochemical theory is presented and it is concluded that it should be possible to develop the scale for variation of level of stress hormones for different stress situations.

The Theory holds that the aftermath of stress is behavioural response that may give rise to organic symptoms (physical factors) in the microenvironment and emotional symptoms in the sub-microenvironment i.e. the nano- and pico-environment. Physiological reactions such as tense muscles, rapid heartbeat and hysterical breathing are the result of stress induced strain. Emotional (CNS related factors) response results from stress triggering a mild or stressful stimulus that may give rise to energy changes in the nano- and pico-environment. The natural tendency of the brain then inflates or deflates the perceived frequency or severity of the stress and worry that are fueled by the skewed perception of events.

Emotions that are routinely felt enter an excited state at times a state of excitement, stimulation, arousal, and provocation in which the body, brain and the central nervous system (CNS) experience escalated physiological activity, commotion and emotion. States of excitement, stimulation, arousal and provocation can be positive and negative and include fear, anger, curiosity and love, which are felt with low and overpowering intensity that may drive an organism to act, often in an instinctive way. This can be both powerful and dangerous, for one and all.

Emotional excitement, stimulation, arousal and provocation starts in the brain, where the Reticular Activation System connects the primitive brain stem and the cortex and affects sleeping-waking transitions. In emotional excitement it acts to increase wakefulness and consequent alertness and attention. Emotional excitement caused by threat, triggers fight or flight reaction; it takes place typically when the body releases chemicals into the brain. The brain then acts to stimulate emotions, reduces cortical functioning and hence conscious control, and creates physical agitation and 'readiness for action'.

Stress on the endocrine system activates/stimulates different glands, particularly adrenal glands that release adrenaline which increases oxygen and glucose flow, dilates the pupils and suppresses non-urgent systems such as digestion and the immune system. Excitement spreads through the Sympathetic Nervous System, with effects such as increasing the heart rate and breathing to enable physical action and perspiration to cool the body. Excitement, stimulation and provocation are often triggered and channeled into one or the other senses, for example Touch, Vision, Hearing, Smell or Taste.

Stress disturbs the balance of adrenal hormones. Abnormal levels of adrenal hormones are a frequent undiagnosed cause of emotional and mental distress. Adrenal hormones exert a profound influence on the body's carbohydrate, protein, and fat metabolism, immune response, thyroid function, cardiovascular health, and overall resistance to stress.

Procedure for Measurement of Adrenocortex Hormones in different Coping Situations

Adrenocortex hormone tests using samples of saliva can be utilized for evaluation of levels of the stress hormones in the body. This profile can serve as a tool for uncovering hormone imbalances that can cause anxiety, depression, chronic fatigue, obesity, diabetes and a host of other clinical conditions. Although hormones can be tested through blood, research shows that free hormones can be accurately measured through saliva.  Free hormones are unattached molecules and hence act like worker bees. They easily pass through cell membranes, unlike bound hormones which do not. Traditional hormone testing from a standard medical laboratory does not differentiate between free and bound hormones. Assessment of salivary free hormones is expected to provide the profile under different sets of conditions. gives a more accurate picture of what is really going on. It is also a crucial tool for monitoring DHEA and/or cortisone therapy.

Procedure can therefore be developed for measurement of adrenocortex hormones in different coping situations, for example: i) Seeking Social Support, ii) Wishful Thinking, iii) Self-Blame, v) Problem-Focused Coping, and v) Avoidance. A scale could be developed with a record of variation of level of hormones under different coping conditions.

The hormone coping scales may then be contrasted with the scales for: Wishful Thinking, Problem-Focused Coping, Avoidance and Seeking Social Support. This suggestion leads to a gigantic project that may evolve a tool for quantifying the stress-strain relationship.

Dr. Mirza Arshad Ali Beg

Former Director General PCSIR, Karachi

 Professor Ahmed,

Would you agree on quantifying the Stress - Strain on Hormone level variation based Coping scale.   

Andrew, I am curious if you might find some answers in the work of Europeans addressing religiousness, coping, existential well-being, et al? For instance, Marianne Nilsen Kvande's work: "Religiousness and Social Support: A Study in Secular Norway." I believe you can link to her via ResearchGate.  --Best, Annette

Thank you, Mirza. Your research sound fascinating. 

For the purpose of my research though, self-report is the only practical method of measurement (it involves testing out an online intervention). Your research will help us understand better the relationships between self-report scores, hormonal levels, and where those relationships break down. It's an important question: how do biophysical changes map onto the what is consciously experienced?

Thanks, Annette - I've downloaded her study and will read later - it looks very interesting.

You might find it helpful to explore the role of leisure related to coping, especially work by Yoshitaka Iwasaki. Here is a link to a Google Scholar search: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=leisure+coping+model&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiKuM-QnLvLAhVE5iYKHVcZBbYQgQMIGjAA

Dear Andrew,

studying spiritual care in palliative care in a largely secular country as the Netherlands, we encounter some of the same challenges you mention. For my PhD study I have used a psychometric instrument from the Netherlands that is designed to measure non-theistic spiritual attitudes and interests: de Jager Meezenbroek, E., Garssen, B., van den Berg, M., Tuytel, G., van Dierendonck, D., Visser, A., Schaufeli, W.B. (2012). Measuring spirituality as a universal human experience: Development of the Spiritual Attitude and Involvement List (SAIL). Journal of Psychosocial Oncology , 30 (2), 141–167. Although I think now that measuring non-theistic spirituality is also a limitation of the instrument. Maybe the Oxford Textbook on spirituality and health can give you some ideas to study this field in a secular context. You are certainly not the only one with this challenge.

Thank you, Joep and Glenn (and Heather - my apologies for not responding sooner). It's an interesting point that explicitly theistic belief may form an irreducible component of coping, in the manner of a positive illusion (c.f. Tali Sharot's work on unrealistic optimism) that has an adaptive function, and the challenge that presents to an increasingly secular society (and to secular researchers).

Sharot, T., Korn, C., & Dolan, R. (2011). How unrealistic optimism is maintained in the face of reality. Nature Neuroscience, 14(11), 1475–1479. doi:10.1038/nn.2949.How

I'm afraid I'll have to disagree that theistic belief is necessary for coping with problems of most kinds, no matter what the hypotheses of researchers might be. What a generalization!

I'm a teacher of transcending, which is a family of meditation techniques that eliminates stored stresses and improves functioning in all areas of life (since all areas of life are adversely affected by our ubiquitous internal stresses). No form of transcending of which I am aware introduces or requires theistic ideas.

For more information on the nontheistic understanding of stress and its release, please see www.nsrusa.org/about-stress.php .

Thanks, David. I completely agree with you that theism isn't necessary for coping, and one can cope (and indeed flourish) without religious belief - personally I think flourishing is easier without gods, because there is less cognitive dissonance. That's not to say that there isn't a researchable benefit to the experience of theistic belief (however illusory), that may have to do with a sense of constancy, or guidance, or being loved, or being somehow protected from more than you can cope with (in my younger days, as a believer myself, I frequently heard the platitude 'God never gives you more than you can cope with')

I appreciate your remarks, Andrew. There is a third possibility, different from both theism and atheism, at least when using conventional definitions: a knowledge that we are a single, eternal, unbounded consciousness. This is sometimes called self-realization, although this natural state has other names as well.

While it is useful to consider both theism and atheism in relation to a fully functioning life (what you seem to call coping), I think, historically, self-realization has been the goal that provides an end to psychological problems.

The theory behind nonduality, or the direct path, might be used as an example of a teaching having self-realization or "enlightenment" as its goal.

In nonduality, we consider every aspect of our life and see clearly that these aspects are always changing. They don't last forever and therefore are not fundamental to life.

By attaching to (or identifying with) our body and/or thinking mind, both of which are unreliable and unsteady, we doom ourselves to periods of dysfunction and suffering.

Nonduality uses a technique called pointing to help us see reality, which is normally hidden by our identification as a separate self.

In just a few minutes of following such a teaching, we can become aware of our awareness itself, independent of thoughts, events, memory, objects, matter, energy, space, time, and everything else that is limited in time or space.

While this is just a start, continued practice leads us to become increasingly identified with our underlying awareness, which doesn't change, and less identified with limitations and problems.

To me reference of God in any matter depends on individual way of life & thinking .God is everywhere in our entire universe as it is not seen as an individual liking or any other form as it demands a faith , & our observation with our silent tuning of our mind.

With this the SUN , the MOON, the planetary location of stars in the sky can be considered as a creation of God but for certain individual with lay of thinking their development of mind they will not like to use GOD '' & in this line they agree that  it is the beauty of nature which appeal them .

It is in this line that whether the word God or any higher power can be related in their thinking or otherwise of the same . 

This is only my personal opinion