Religion, Spirituality and Culture

Psychometrics

Secularization

Spirit possession

Spirituality

Well-being

Introduction

Many years ago, in the early 1970s, I was preparing a course in the psychology of religion. There was not nearly as much to talk about then as there is now! I noticed that most of the empirical work was done in Western countries, among people of Christian background. I wondered whether the findings would change when people from other backgrounds were studied.  For example, risk factors for anxiety and depression differ in different religious-cultural groups (e.g. Abdel-Khalek & Lester, 2007; Loewenthal et al, 1995).

Saroglou (2003), reviewing cross-cultural and cross-religious differences in psychological factors, puts the main issue into perspective.  There are some cross-cultural differences, but these differences are outnumbered by the impressive number of commonalities, including personality correlates, gender, social attitudes, identity and values (p.71). Tarakeshwar, Stanton and Pargament (2003) however note that religion has usually been overlooked in the study of cross-cultural differences, a deficiency that needs to be made up.

This chapter will explore work on the relations between religion, spirituality and culture, examining theoretical, methodological and interpretive issues.  Traditionally, both cross-cultural psychologists and psychologists of religion have compared members of different groups – cultural or religious – with respect to one or more psychological factors. Examples include the study of psychological correlates of individualism versus collectivism by cross-cultural psychologists, or the study of religious orientation in relation to measures of prejudice by psychologists of religion. How might these traditions – cross-cultural psychology, and the psychology of religion - merge? This chapter will explore the influences of culture and religion on each other. Theoretical and methodological developments and potential applications will be considered, adopting an integrative paradigm linking theory, research and practice, as described by Pargament, Mahoney, Exline, Jones and Shafranske (Volume 1).

Definitions

  As elsewhere in this volume, the term religion refers to beliefs, practices, relationships, or experiences having to do with the sacred that are explicitly and historically rooted in established institutionalized systems. Occasionally there will be reference to work on spirituality, rather than religion, where spirituality refers to beliefs, practices, relationships or experiences having to do with the sacred that are not necessarily linked to established institutionalized systems.Culture has been defined as “the beliefs, customs, habits and language shared by the people living in a particular time and place” (Kenrick, Neuberg &Cialdini, 1999, p.7). It is accepted practice to identify cultures by their geographic and ethnic labels, and where relevant, historical periods, as in “Cambodian”, “African-American”, or “medieval”.

Some Conceptual and Methodological Challenges

The psychological study of religion and culture raises some challenging issues. Firstly, methodological issues: many studies in the psychology of religion involve psychometric measurement of psychological and religious factors, and often the design is cross-sectional. There have been growing calls for greater use of experimental and quasi-experimental designs, and longitudinal studies, all of which allow for stronger causal inferences. There have also been calls for increased use of qualitative methodologies, allowing for the emergence of new research questions, and an enhanced understanding of the experiential aspects of the phenomena under investigation. And there have been calls to ensure that where psychometric measures are used, they are religiously and culturally appropriate, reliable, and valid, that religious sensitivities are not trampled on, and that translation and back-translation are appropriately done.

A second issue involves clarifying the direction of effects.  When researchers find interactions between religion and culture, it is sometimes hard to discern when religion is affecting culture, or culture affecting religion. Even if we can make reasonable assumptions about the direction of effects, it can be hard to tell whether mediation or moderation is occurring.  Culture may moderate the relationships between religiousness and human functioning, or may mediate between religiousness and the shaping of human functioning. The impacts of religion and spirituality on human functioning are examined extensively in this Handbook, and elsewhere, and here we focus on how some of these effects might be moderated and mediated by culture, and how religion might impact on culture.

Several broad aspects of culture are relevant here. First, leading the field in popularity and influence, is individualism-collectivism, a way of depicting characteristics of cultures developed by Hofstede (1980) and by Triandis and his colleagues (Triandis, Bontempo, Villareal, Asai & Lucca, 1988).  Individualism is a dimension of social organisation reflected in self-reliance, competitiveness, and low concern for ones in-group(s). Collectivism involves cooperativeness and concern for ones in-group(s). In this context, we can note current efforts to distinguish individual spirituality from collective religiousness (Heelas & Woodhead, 2005).  A second dimension of culture relevant to religiousness involves concepts of modernisation, secularisation and improved material prosperity. Secularisation theorists, led by Luckmann (1963), argued that in the processes of modernisation, religion becomes less relevant with the growth of prosperity, education, individualisation, pluralism and other aspects of modernity.  A third religiously-relevant cultural dimension has to do with the processes of acculturation, occurring when people live with and respond to a culture which differs from that of their upbringing (Berry, 1997). Acculturation involves both importation of beliefs and practices from surrounding cultures, and the development of distinct religious minority groups segregated from surrounding cultures. Here, we will attend to social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), which attributes crucial importance to social identity as the lens through which individuals view themselves, their world, and their relations with that world. Finally, we consider the effects of the political climate, including the relations between the state and religions, and relations between religions themselves including inter-group religious warfare (Roccas & Schwartz, 1997). 

These cultural dimensions are not independent of each other.  They are not water-tight compartments, but simply conceptual spectacles for viewing societies and cultures, and their relationships to religion. 

How does Culture Shape Religion?

There are many examples of ways in which religious beliefs and behaviour can be affected by culture. Thus, in Greeley’s 1972 study of American religion (The Denominational Society) Greeley notes: “For all the diversities among the three denominations (Protestant, Catholic and Jewish)…they are still fully American…with great similarities in their organisational structure, and in the behaviour of their religious functionaries” (p. 203). A vivid example of the influence of culture on religious behaviour is offered by Wikan (2002), comparing Muslim responses to bereavement in Egypt and in Bali. While Islam is an all-embracing religion, local interpretations differ. Social support in Egypt and Bali is very different, “accommodating to different culturally constructed notions of self, body and interpersonal obligation”. In Cairo, relatives and friends of the bereaved flock in with gifts of food or money, uttering mournful shrieks, hugging and kissing the bereaved and urging them to have trust and faith, everything is from G-d. In Bali, by contrast, relatives and friends laugh and joke with the bereaved, in an attempt to make their hearts happy. “We do all we can to make the family forget their sadness and be happy”. Wikan spoke to a smiling, apparently happy girl, who said she wanted to travel to the family of a “friend” who had died suddenly. She also said she was engaged, but did not indicate any connection. Eventually it transpired that the dead friend was her fiance. Initially, friends and relatives joked and laughed in an attempt to cheer her up. She saw this as mocking. Only after a year did they begin to express sympathy, now the tragedy was “safely behind”. “They were afraid I might kill myself due to sadness”. Wikan argues that sorrow is expressed in ways that are linked to popular conceptions of health and sanity, and which clearly indicate the influence of culture on religious practice and belief.

A major influence of culture open religion is explored in studies of the relations between individualism-collectivism and religious orientation. Briefly, in the 1960s, Gordon Allport (e.g. Allport & Ross, 1967) proposed a distinction between extrinsic and intrinsic religious orientations in an ingenious and influential attempt to explain the association between religion and racist prejudice. They suggested that the positive association between religion and racism is misleading.  In fact, the relationship between religion and prejudice varies according to the type of religion: extrinsic (“self-centered”) religiosity would be related to intolerance, while the intrinsically religious (the more sincere, and religiously active) would be more tolerant. In their review of empirical studies on religiousness and prejudice, Batson, Schoenrade, and Ventis (1993) concluded that intrinsic religiosity was associated with good mental health, with the reverse being true for extrinsic religiosity (see also Saroglou, Volume 1).

However, the findings reviewed by Batson et al. (1993) may be culturally limited. Khan, Watson and Habib (2005) assessed Muslims in Pakistan on the Muslim Attitudes towards Religion Scale (MARS), Intrinsic, Extrinsic-Social, Extrinsic-Personal and Quest religious orientation scales, and emotional empathy. Some of the relations between the measures differed from those found in American and British (Christian) samples, notably in suggesting that extrinsic religious motivations have some beneficial mental health implications. This suggests that the conclusions reached by Batson et al may apply only to predominantly Western/Christian samples (i.e., individualistic cultures). Khan et al’s work in a collectivist culture suggests the importance of extrinsic religious values in collectivist culture. This is further supported by Khan et al’s observation that extrinsic-personal religious orientation was higher than intrinsic religious orientation among Pakistani Muslims, with the reverse pattern among Iranian Muslims (Watson et al, 2002). Pakistan has had a turbulent history, but its raison d’etre is religion: Islam is central to its existence. Iranian culture, in contrast, carries a legacy of westernisation. Earlier westernisation in Iran may persist in higher levels of individualism in Iran compared to Pakistan, and in the differences in the relative balance of extrinsic and intrinsic religiosity. 

The suggestion that extrinsic religiosity flourishes in collectivist cultures is borne out by Cohen and Hill (2007). They compared Protestants, Catholics and Jews on intrinsic and extrinsic religious orientation, suggesting and finding that intrinsic orientation reflects the individualism of Protestant culture, which values personal religion. Extrinsic orientation reflects the collectivism of Jewish and Catholic cultures, which value community and ritual.. 

Duriez and Hutsebaut (2000) examined the relations between religion and racism in western European countries (Holland and Belgium), generally individualist. The relation between religion and racism was generally negative, as often previously reported. However neither frequency of church attendance nor belief salience related to racism. Cognitive-religious factors  - style of belief - were more important. Orthodoxy (literal, transcendent belief ) and External Critique  (literal, non-transcendent belief) related positively to racism, whereas relativism (symbolic, non-transcendent belief) and second naivete (symbolic, transcendent belief) related negatively to racism. Duriez and Hutsebaut suggest that the “privatisation of religion has reached new heights” (p.85). While they do not examine extrinsic and intrinsic religiosity, their work is an important development in the tradition of work examining the relations between prejudice and styles of religiosity. There are strong echoes of suggestions made by Adorno,  Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson and Sanford (1950), and Allport and Ross (1967), that a more tempered and flexible style of belief may help undo prejudice.

Still looking at individualism-collectivism, in a study of how religiousness relates to well-being, Okulicz-Kozaryn (2010) examined World Value Survey data from 79 countries. He looked at the differences between social and individual religiosity, roughly corresponding to extrinsic and intrinsic religiosity. Okulicz-Kozaryn asserts that religion’s relationship to life satisfaction is context-dependent, varying across countries and cultures: social religiosity promotes social capital and satisfies the need to belong, whereas individual religiosity facilitates individual experience. Religion appeared to facilitate life satisfaction when forms of religiosity promoted social capital. Religious people were also happier in religious nations. Forms of religiosity that did not enhance social capital did not promote life-satisfaction; in fact individual religiosity tended to make people unhappy. Okulicz-Kozaryn concluded: “Most of the happiness that religiosity brings about seems to come from the social setting it offers, satisfying the... need to belong, one of the fundamental conditions for human happiness” (p.166).

The work on religious orientation and belief style in individualist and collectivist cultures suggests that intrinsic religiosity is promoted in individualist cultures and extrinsic religiosity in collectivist culture.  The implications of intrinsic and extrinsic religiousness for health and religion then may vary as a function of culture. 

  Individualism relates to the rise of spirituality. Recall that spirituality relates to beliefs, practices, relationships or experiences having to do with the sacred that are, unlike religiousness, not necessarily linked to established institutionalized systems (Pargament et al.,Volume 1). Zinnbauer et al (1997) reported that a number of people in the USA defined themselves as spiritual but not religious. In their sample, 19% reported themselves as spiritual but not religious; 4% were religious but not spiritual, 74% were both religious and spiritual, and 3% were neither. Spiritual people reported that that they were likely to engage in New Age religious beliefs and practices, and unlikely to engage in the beliefs and practices of traditional religions.  

Heelas and Woodhead (2004) studied people in the UK who regarded themselves as spiritual rather than religious. In The Spiritual Revolution: Why Religion is Giving Way to Spirituality, they suggest that the emergence of spirituality is associated with post-modernity. Noting that increasing numbers of people now prefer to call themselves spiritual rather than religious, they ask whether this could be the last gasp of religion or a radical change in the contemporary sacred scene (p.2).They offer the subjectivisation thesis to explain changes in the forms of the sacred, relating these to the “massive subjective turn of modern culture” (Taylor, 1991, p.26) – a shift from objective roles and obligations, to living in relation to subjective experiences, relational as much as individualistic. The key distinction is between “life-as” religion, involving obligations, and subjective-life spirituality, involving experience (p.3). We do not know whether the proportions of spiritual-but-not-religious people will continue to rise, but it is possible to propose that the phenomenon is linked to individualism, and also to secularism, and may be a form of acculturation. There will be some discussion of both secularism and acculturation later.

Individualism is not the only by-product of complex industrial societies that has import for religion. Improved material prosperity, education, pluralism and other aspects of modernity may make religion less relevant to everyday needs and concerns. This was the argument put forward by secularisation theorists, headed  by Luckmann (1963). This traditional secularisation hypothesis needs some reformulation, given the links between religiousness and the growth of prosperity and other aspects of modernity, and post-modernity, as seen in the former Soviet-dominated Eastern bloc countries (Pollack, 2008). But we may still ask how do prosperity, materialism and religiosity relate to each other?

Materialism may be defined as the extent to which the acquisition of material property is valued. This may not always co-vary with prosperity. For example Lindridge (2005) found that both Indians and whites living in relatively prosperous Britain were less consumption-oriented than Asian Indians, living in low prosperity. Forms of materialism may vary with identity, including religious identity. Nevertheless, it has been successfully argued that there are conflicts between materialism and many religious values. Burroughs and Rindfleisch (2002) showed that on the individual level, materialist values are inversely related to religiosity. However materialist values are not clearly related to prosperity or other indices of secularisation. In spite of these somewhat paradoxical findings, we are left suspecting that the material prosperity of cultures may impact on religiosity. Is there truth in Luckman’s hypothesis, battered though it is by apparent counter-examples of post-communist development (Pollack, 2008)? Do we become less spiritual as we become more comfortable? Or do we start questing?

What about the effects of the political climate, particularly the relations between the state and religions, and relations among religious groups? Explicit legal enactments and political directives can have enormous impact, as in attempts to suppress the practice of some or all religions or to remove the adherents of selected religions from the country. 

Roccas and Schwartz (1997) examined how religion relates to individual values in different political climates. They noted that in early research, religiosity has been associated with valuing conformity, security, tradition and benevolence towards close others. Religiosity relates negatively to valuing stimulation, self-direction, power, universalism and achievement. Roccas and Schwartz suggest that opposition between church and state influences the social and psychological functions of religion in society, affecting relations between religiosity and values. They compared associations between religiosity and social values among Catholics from former Eastern bloc (European) countries with those from countries in which Catholicism is the dominant, politically-favoured religion. Consistent with their perspective, they found that in countries with a history of church-state opposition (Poland, Czech republic, Hungary), religiosity correlated less positively with valuing conformity and security, less negatively with valuing power and achievement, and more positively with valuing universalism, than in countries with good church-state relations (Italy, Spain,  Portugal). This study controlled for religious denomination (Catholicism) while examining the moderating influence of church-state relationships. The effects observed point to the important role religious counter-cultures serve in the face of political opposition to religion.  

Pargament, Tyler and Steele (1985) also looked at the interplay between social organisation and individual values, within religious communities.  They tested the hypothesis that members of churches and synagogues that were hierarchical and non-participatory, involving restrictive social control, would display more authoritarian religious beliefs, than would members of  horizontal, participatory churches and synagogues which enhanced individual social control. Measures of social control, authoritarian religious belief and individual psychosocial competence were used to categorise congregations into hierarchical and horizontal. Members of hierarchical congregations were relatively less self-critical, less trustful of others and reported a greater sense of control by a powerful G-d.  This study identified significant links between social organisational variables and religious and personality variables. The direction of effects is not certain – some types of individuals may be drawn towards compatible congregations, but congregational structure can also moderate individual religious values. This work suggests the potential importance of examining the relations between political structures within countries, for example democracy versus totalitarianism. What is the impact of these structures on religious organisations and the values of individuals within those organisations?

Closely tied to the cultural dimension of political climate is intergroup religious conflict.  Such conflicts do not bode well for psychological functioning. Francis, Robbins, Lewis and Barnes (2008) examined the relationship between prayer, neuroticism and psychoticism in 2,306 Northern Ireland 16-18 year-olds from seven Protestant and nine Catholic schools. Northern Ireland has two distinct religious communities, Protestant and Roman Catholic. Their relations are currently said to be peaceful, though they have been poor in the past. Participants who prayed more frequently had lower psychoticism scores on the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, an often-replicated finding for which there are postulated theoretical mechanisms. The unexpected finding in this study was that while prayer was not associated with neuroticism among the Protestant sample, it was associated with neuroticism among the Catholics. The direction of causality may be related to the history of Catholic-Protestant conflict in Northern Ireland, and to the position of Catholics as a relatively beleaguered and less prosperous minority. The difference between the two religious-cultural communities remains to be confirmed in further work, but the study exemplifies possible ways in which religious indicators and culture may influence each other. Another study illustrating similar impact of political/religious unrest (Williams, Francis & Village, 2010) analysed multi-wave data from five European countries: Great Britain, the Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Spain and Sweden. Overall, findings support Durkheim’s (1897/2002) analysis of the importance of the two institutions of marriage and religion for human flourishing.  Closer examination of their data indicates some variations by country and time period in the associations between indices of religiosity, and indices of happiness and life satisfaction. Notably, in the earlier waves of the study, religious affiliation and attendance were negatively or only weakly associated with happiness and satisfaction in Northern Ireland, compared to the other Western European countries studied, and to Northern Ireland in the latest wave of the study, where there were consistently positive and significant associations between religion and well-being. This suggests that during the 1980s and early 1990s, during the Northern Ireland troubles involving severe conflict between Protestant and Roman Catholics, religious affiliation and activity were mixed blessings compared to the period following the reasonably successful peace process begun in the late 1990s. When religious affiliation was likely to be associated with victimisation the association between religion and well being was weakened. Williams et al’s work is valuable in detailing the effects of  religious conflict, and highlighting the importance of historical change in affecting the relations between religious and psychological variables.

Before finishing this look at the impact of culture upon religious values, it is useful to consider the adoption of specific cultural values and practices. Some cultural values and practices may assume the sanctity of religious values.  One example is the practice of female “circumcision” (female genital mutilation), widespread in Africa (Dirie & Miller, 1998; Skaine, 2005). Another example is that wives often “belong” to their husband’s families throughout South Asia, and the practice may be seen as religious by Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and Christians from South Asia, even though disowned by these religious groups elsewhere. Yet another example is “binding”, a form of male sexual impotence, involving the perception by a man that his male organ has been bound, and he is unable to function sexually. This malign spiritual practice affecting male fertility is common in Iran, and transcends religious boundaries (Muslim, Jewish, Christian) (Margolin & Witztum, 1989). Such practices and beliefs are popularly perceived to have religious-spiritual bases, and have important effects on psychological functioning and well-being, but they are not known in the same religions in other cultural contexts. Even though scholars maintain that there are no religious sources for these and other culturally-carried beliefs and practices (Werbner, 2002), once they have been sanctified as religious by implicit popular consent, they become more difficult to question and change (see Pargament, Volume 1). 

In this section we have reviewed some ways in which aspects of culture impact on religiousness. For example, the study of collectivist cultures brings into question existing conclusions about the relations between styles of religiosity and well-being, which may apply only in individualist cultures. Material prosperity and materialist values have had mixed, and so far inadequately-studied, effects on religiosity. Political oppression, inter-group religious conflict, and warfare impact on religiosity, and again there is a need for further study and theory.

How does Religion Shape Culture?

Here we reverse directional focus to the impact of religion on culture.  More specifically, we will consider examples of specific religious practices that pervade surrounding society, and the enforced imposition of a religious system on an entire country.

An example of the first kind of impact relates to practices associated with feminine modesty. In many cultures and religions, it is considered modest for a woman to cover her hair. In Judaism, married orthodox women cover their hair with a scarf, hat or wig. However it was recently reported in Israel that some orthodox Jewish women had adopted the Muslim custom of the more enveloping Hijab, which covers part of the face and the shoulders (Tikkun Olam: Hijab for Jewish women? 2008). Another example, from the UK, is the report that mixed-sex hospital wards are to be abandoned. A major contributing factor has been campaigning by religious groups (Fleming, 2008).

Past and recent history offer examples of the political imposition of entire religious systems upon countries. Islam spread rapidly in the Middle East with the introduction of the Qur’an in the 6^th century by Mohamed and his followers.  As a result, the earlier polytheistic religions were overtaken by monotheism. Other examples include the introduction of Buddhism in the early centuries of the first millenium to Tibet and Mongolia, and the suppression of religious beliefs and practice in communist Eastern Europe and China during the 20^th century. Normatively, fear of the horrendous consequences of defying the law resulted in the mass adoption of the politically favoured style of religiousness. However underground counter-movements aimed at preserving the suppressed religions have been widely noted. Surviving vestiges of earlier religious practices have been absorbed into the dominant religion and culture. Thus pre-Christian customs involving mistletoe are common in Western Christian countries. Historians and other social scientists have noted that, conversely,  where religious groups continue in the teeth of suppression, they may absorb some of characteristics of the dominant religion. For example  Bon, the pre-Buddhist religion of Tibet, is now said to resemble schools of Buddhism, with relatively minor variations in beliefs and practices. Thus Bon traces its origins to Buddha, but to Buddha Tonpa Shenrab, not Buddha Shakyamuni as in “mainstream” Buddhism. In Bon, prayer mounds are walked around counter-clockwise, rather than clockwise as by Buddhists (Kværne, 1995)

The imposition and development of Protestantism during the Reformation in 16^th-century north-west Europe, involved the decline of Roman Catholic Christianity. This has been associated with the rise of individualism, as well as other values (Lukes, 1971; Weber, 1904-5/1958). Here it is important to remember Weber’s thesis that the spirit of capitalism was generated by the rise of Protestantism.  Building on this thesis, social psychologists identified the need to achieve as a pivotal psychological variable (e.g. McClelland, 1961). The need to achieve has been assessed using both scales and other measures based on stories, designs, fabric colouring and other sources. This work tested the idea that the need to achieve was higher in Protestant than in Catholic countries, and that rising levels of need achievement predict subsequent periods of economic growth. More recently, Furnham and his colleagues (e.g. Furnham, 1990) have pursued Weberian suggestions by assessing the Protestant Work Ethic (PWE) in different cultures and subgroups, and showing that PWE relates to a whole range of attitudes and beliefs such as cleanliness, obedience and politeness

The impact of Protestant Christianity on cultural values and psychological traits has been investigated more extensively than has the impact of other religions upon cultures. There is a need for further conceptual clarification, for instance in the definitions of the culturally-carried values said to be promoted by Protestantism – such as individualism, and work ethic. The inter-relations of these factors can be studied further, as well as the question of how culturally-value-loaded are such terms. And of course it is important to study cultural values promoted by other religions. 

Religion-as-Culture

Sometimes, religion and culture are indistinguishable. Cohen and Hill (2007) have promoted the useful concept of religion-as-culture, suggesting that religious values can persist through the process of modernisation in different cultures (Inglehart & Baker, 2000). Religion’s effects may be more resistant to cultural change than other aspects of culture. Cohen and Hill (2007) agree that religions may promote cultural differences, and vice versa, but they are concerned with the persistence of religious values as cultural values: religion-as-culture. One key question has to do with how religion-as-culture arises. Might this involve resistance to the impact of culture on religion? 

All societies contain sub-groups, based on occupation, status, age, religion or other factors. The complexity of society is often exacerbated by immigration. Migration has been reported throughout history, often because of adversity. For example, there are the biblical accounts of the Israelites moving to Egypt to escape famine conditions, and then leaving Egypt to escape slavery. The pilgrims left England for recently-discovered North America to escape religious persecution. Sometimes, as in the shameful histories of slavery, deportation and ethnic/religious cleansing, migration has been forced. As transport has improved in the last century, migration has become more feasible, not only to escape adversity, but sometimes to improve social or economic welfare, and religious freedom. Sub-groups in contemporary society are often based on ethnic lines, often with religion co-varying. Thus the Israelites leaving Egypt were monotheists, the pilgrims leaving England were Puritans (Calvinists), and in the UK, migrants from Bangladesh are Muslims. Contemporary societies are increasingly religiously and ethnically pluralist. Religious subgroups vary in their responses to the culture/s around them, and states vary in their responds to and legislation regarding religious and ethnic sub-groups.

Religious groups respond to the societies with which they have contact in a number of possible ways. Berry (1997) describes and discusses the processes involved. Acculturationhas been defined by Redfield, Linton, and Herskovits (1936) as “those phenomena which result when groups of individuals having different cultures come into continuous first-hand contact with subsequent changes in the original culture patterns of either or both groups” (p.149). Interculturation is (Clanet. 1990, p.70; Berry’s translation) “the set of processes by which individuals and groups interact when they identify themselves as culturally distinct”. Berry describes four varieties of acculturation strategy. These strategies are the result of the perceived importance of maintaining (good) relationships with wider society, and the perceived importance of own-group identity, values and customs.

Insert Table 1 about here

In practice, most attention has been given to separation/segregation (Douglas,1966; Turner; 1969; Martin, 1981). Douglas describes the boundaries put in place by religious and other groups as involving activities which maintain the distinction between the pure and the polluted. Boundary formation and maintenance are important processes affecting the functioning of religious groups, and thus mediating the impact of culture upon religion. Turner  points out that religious groups in complex societies a often involve an effort after communitas, a community of more or less equal individuals who accept the authority of ritual elders. Martin reminds us that the process of maintaining boundaries is not static, but involves dynamic tension.  Loewenthal et al (1997) offer examples of boundary maintenance in Jewish and Christian groups, examining the activities (such as Sabbath observance) involved in preserving the distinction between the “pure and the polluted”. The process of separation and segregation is an important example of how culture may affect religiousness. In this case, we see the establishment of segregated religious groups, with clear boundaries, as a reaction to the complexities and perceived spiritual laxity of modern complex societies. Important effects of separation and segregation are the establishment of a salient feature of identity, and empowerment: members of small segregated religious groups may feel valued in a world which is otherwise vast, unintelligible and alienating. 

In examining acculturation, the issue of social identity is growing in importance. Ysseldyk et al (2010) argue that religious identity offers a distinctive “sacred” worldview, and “eternal” group membership. This is not matched by other group identities. They suggest that religious identity may be a driving force for fundamentalism. Particularly when under threat, group boundaries are sharpened, and group identity and moral esteem are heightened. 

In a study of identity among British Muslims in the wake of the 2001 attacks in the USA, Cinnirella et al (2010) examined the association between ethnic, religious and national identities, and the degree to which these identities are linked with attitudes towards martyrdom and terrorism. Perpetrators of inter-group attacks are normally regarded as heroic/martyrs by those who share their group identity and aspirations – often for political and religious freedom. Attackers are regarded as villainous/terrorists particularly by those at whom the attacks are directed (Rogers et al, 2007). 53% of Cinnirella et al’s sample were UK-born, and 64% gave their ethnicity as Pakistani.  It was found that importance of and pride in Muslim identity were greater than in ethnic identity, which were greater than for  British identity.  High importance of and pride in Muslim identity and religiosity all related to favourable attitudes towards religious martyrdom (suicide bombing) and terrorism (jihad, acts of violence against non-Muslims. Conversely, importance of, and pride in British identity related to less favourable attitudes towards to jihad and related acts. Using Berry’s depiction of acculturation strategies, it appeared that the sample tended towards segregation/separation; own-group identity was important, host (British) identity less important. These findings suggest the relevance of the concept of identity to understanding reactions to terrorism, and also offer some evidence that a sense of host (British) national identity may mitigate support for religiously-motivated acts of violence.

This makes depressing reading for supporters of multiculturalism and religious tolerance, but two points are worth noting. One is that the separation response to multiculturalism is not the only one. Other strategies may also be followed, and their consequences for individual beliefs and values may be less unpleasant.  For example Berry (2001) observed higher self-esteem among those who followed the integration route. Moreover separation need not result in heightened intergroup hostility, and this deserves closer study particularly with respect to religious groups. Acculturation strategies and their consequences within religious groups deserve more attention from psychologists of religion, since the development of acculturation strategies is almost certainly a key mediating stage between culture and religion. This work also points to the importance of religious identity in the study of beliefs, values and behaviour and the impact of culture.

Turning now to look at specific values and practices within religious-cultural groups, what about the sheer strength of religious beliefs? Maeillo (2005) studied the religious beliefs of immigrant subgroups in Switzerland, as well as members of the “resident”, dominant culture. Western Europeans, Protestants and atheists had lower levels of belief in G-d than did Eastern and Southern Europeans, Roman and Orthodox Catholics, and Muslims. Members of the majority religious and cultural groups - Western Europeans and Protestants - reported lower levels of religiosity than the minority groups. Minority groups may show higher levels of religiosity as an aspect of valuing their minority-group identity and achieving a level of empowerment – separation/segregation as described in Berry’s (2001) discussion of acculturation, and Ysseldyk et al’s (2010) discussion of religious identity. Another complementary possibility is that those with stronger religious beliefs came from less prosperous countries, and were perhaps less materialistic, attaching more importance to spiritual values. Another example of this latter effect is offered by Abdel-Khalek and Lester (2007): higher levels of religiosity were reported in Kuwait than in the USA. 

Another set of religious group norms illustrates some effects of acculturation. Loewenthal et al (2003a, 2003b) examined the beliefs held by Jews and Protestants in the UK regarding alcohol use. Jews reported consuming less alcohol than did Protestants. They had less favourable attitudes to drinking, being drunk, and social and recreational drinking, in an assertion of Jewish identity. Jewish law and culture are negative about drunkenness, although alcohol use is prescribed in religious ritual. While Protestants saw social drinking as relaxing and helpful in forgetting worries, Jews saw drinking as leading to loss of control, and pubs as places of dangerous, wild behaviour. 

Albertsen, O’Connor and Berry (2006) looked at specific religious-cultural groups in the USA, asking whether interpersonal guilt might be higher in collectivist (religious) cultures. Collectivist religious groups were Buddhist and Catholic, individualist groups were Protestant and religious nones. Collectivist cultures were Asian-American and Latin-American, individualist culture was European-American. The religiously-affiliated, particularly the Catholics, showed higher interpersonal guilt than did the religious “nones”. Asian-Americans generally had higher levels of interpersonal guilt than Europeans and Latin-Americans. 

It has been widely concluded that there is a weak but consistent generally positive association between religion and wellbeing (Koenig, McCullough & Larson, 2001; Loewenthal, 2007) However, more work is needed to clarify these effects. The associations between religion and wellbeing are not always positive, and cultural factors are often important in modifying effects. Religiously-inspired caring obligations, promoted in collectivist religious-cultural groups, may sometimes have protective effects, and sometimes the reverse.  Caring and being cared for is often good for well-being, and protective against psychological disorder, particularly depression (Brown &Harris, 1978; Seligman, 2002). Social support has often been suggested and indeed found to be an importance stress-moderating effect of religion, resulting in greater wellbeing. Shams and Jackson (1993) for example noted that unemployed Muslim men were less depressed if religiously-active, probably the result of the social support they received from their mosque friendships.  However, sometimes caring responsibilities can be too heavy. Gillard and Patton’s (1999) studied different religious-cultural groups in Fiji following the disastrous hurricane Nigel.  All groups interviewed reported supportive effects of their religious beliefs in coping, but there were differences between the groups with respect to the amount of practical help – financial, housing, food - demanded and received after the hurricane. Both Indian Hindus and Muslims were required by their temples and mosques to give more assistance than were the Christian Fijians, and the Indian Hindus and Muslims received less such assistance. It was suggested that this may have had an impact on stress levels, as assessed by a general measure of stress and a trauma-specific measure. The Christian Fijians indicated less stress than the other groups. Here we see that the burden of care, obligatory in most or all religious cultures, may lower well-being, as was the case with the Fijian Hindus and Muslims. We also note the implications that, as claimed elsewhere, Islam and Hinduism have a more collectivist ethos than Christianity. Again, the directions of causal relations between religion and culture are hard to assess, and religious-cultural group membership appears to be a casual factor. 

The burdens and benefits of caring are illustrated by Loewenthal et al (1997), who noted that the caring responsibilities of religious Jewish and Christian women were associated with  higher numbers of life events, a product of family size. Numbers of life events were, in turn, associated with higher levels of anxiety.  However, the benefits of cohesive families were also noted among religious groups of both Protestants and Jews. Levels of depression were lowered in tandem with a characteristic of the religious life style, namely the lower number of severely disruptive life events such as marital violence.

Loewenthal and Brooke Rogers (2004) reported that strictly orthodox Jewish women were reluctant to use local religiously and culturally sensitive support services because they feared that it would be known in the community that they were not coping. Similarly Cinnirella and Loewenthal (1999) noted that there was reluctance in religious-cultural groups in the UK (Black Christian, Jewish, Muslim) to use psychological support and therapy from fear of stigmatisation. Once it is known in the community that there is mental illness in the family, reputation is spoiled, and marriage prospects for the whole family are damaged. 

These studies indicate that the collectivist ethos may be tied both to mental health benefits and to risks.

Empowering effects of religion and religious identity among otherwise disempowered and marginalised minority groups has been observed in a number of studies. Zar is a form of spirit possession experienced in several middle-Eastern countries, including Ethiopians immigrating to Israel. Zar is generally regarded as less serious than depression. (Grisaru, Budowski & Witztum, 1997). Al-Adawi, Martin, Al-Salmi and Ghassani (2001) suggest that three functions are fulfilled by Zar and its exorcism ceremonies: cosmology is reinforced, oppressed individuals - particularly women - may be psychologically manipulated, and exorcism may be a form of culturally defined group therapy. The relatively greater religiosity of women in most cultures may be a more general demonstration of the empowering effects of religious belief and activity among the disempowered gender (e.g. Beit-Hallahmi &Argyle, 1997). Somewhat paradoxically, Loewenthal, MacLeod and Cinnirella (2001) reported that among non-Christian minority groups in the UK (Hindus, Jews and Muslims) men emerged as more religiously-active than women. This may also reflect the empowering effects of religion for the otherwise disempowered, for whom when segregated, identity is salient and relations with the majority culture are less important. 

Religious influences on beliefs about the causes and cures of mental illnesses impact on the well-being of segregated groups in multicultural societies. Mallinckrod, Shigeoka and Suzuki (2005, cited in Chen & Mak, 2008, p. 443) found that people in collectivist cultures such as Asian Americans tended to attribute mental health problems to internal, personal causes, whereas those influenced by Western psychotherapeutic approaches perceived mental illness as arising from interactions between the person and the environment.  Yurkovich and Lattergrass (2008) explored Native American Indian concepts of healthiness and unhealthiness: healthiness involves balance and harmony, and being in control of the spiritual, cognitive, emotional and physical domains – these domains are perceived as one and the mind-body split of Western thought is not present in Native American Indian thought (see King and Trimble, Volume 1). Hence the distinction between psychological and physical illness is an alien one. Cultural-religious variations in conceptions of ill-health will often influence help-seeking and the types of help that may be seen as effective.  

Beliefs about spiritual factors in mental health and about spirit possession are important topics for those interested in culture and religion and their mental health implications. Close study has been made of beliefs in spirit possession by Dein (e.g. Dein, Alexander & Napier, 2008). In East London, belief in Jinn among Bangladeshi Muslim immigrants and their children is seen as traditional. Psychological disturbances and other unexplained misfortunes and physical symptoms are often regarded as caused by a Jinn or sometimes evil eye, and exorcism is often seen as effective. Imams and lay exorcists will advise the distressed on the necessity of seeking spiritual or biomedical interventions. A Jinn specialist will claim to recognise the presence of a Jinn by signs such as foaming at the mouth, and shaking in certain parts of the body.  The willingness of East London Bangladeshis to seek spiritual rather than psychiatric help may be compounded by language barriers, inadequate service provision, and the possibility of stigma. Fear of stigmatisation is an important barrier to help-seeking for psychological problems, particularly among religiously cohesive minority groups. This may be exacerbated when psychological problems such as depression are seen as a result of spiritual failings (Cinnirella & Loewenthal, 1999). A further deterrent to professional help-seeking is the fear of misjudgment by professionals. Religiously normative behaviour, it is feared, may be misjudged as a sign of psychiatric disturbance. Dein and Littlewood (2007) observed that hearing the voice of G-d is commonly reported by Pentecostal Christians, and is perceived as helpful in coping with difficulties and doubts. Dein and Littlewood say that hearing the voice of G-d cannot be ipso facto pathological, and this is confirmed by the work such as Peters, Day, McKenna and Orbach (1999)  and Davies, Griffiths and  Vice (2001) who  report that “visions” and “voices” are frequently reported by members of some religious groups – these experiences are reported to be less unpleasant and more controllable than the visions and voices experienced by individuals suffering from psychosis. The fear of misjudgment has been reported in the literature.  For example, Grady and Loewenthal (1997) noted that charismatic Christians who practised glossolalia (speaking in tongues) found the practice calming and helpful, but were cautious to do it discreetly in public, so that their behaviour would not seem bizarre or demented. 

These studies illustrate some of the ways in which religion as culture can influence beliefs and behaviour, including prejudice, beliefs about terrorism, alcohol use, beliefs about the causes of mental illness and help-seeking for mental illness.  Religious identity and collectivism are important factors. A question that lurks behind many of these findings is whether religious-cultural minority groups are inherently collectivist in ethos. There are strong arguments and some evidence that Protestantism is associated with individualism, so the question arises whether, when Protestants are a non-dominant minority, is collectivism enhanced?

Applications and Conclusions.

We are left with a number of conclusions, questions and potential applications. 

There are difficulties in interpreting causality, and distinguishing moderating and mediating effects in many of the studies. Although cross-sectional, correlational designs are practical and popular, conclusions about causal effects are more safely made from longitudinal and (where appropriate) experimental and quasi-experimental research designs. So, more work using these latter designs is needed. 

There is a need for more qualitative research. Belzen (2010) has argued for a cultural psychology of religion, in which a hermeneutic, generally qualitative methodological approach is taken, enabling a different level of interpretation than allowed by the individual-differences approach of cross-cultural psychology. Cultural psychology focuses on the products of culture, such as customs, religion, and language which are the results of the coordinated action of many individuals.  As a result, contextualised understanding of behaviours, thoughts and feeling are needed in different cultures and times. Belzen suggests drawing on a wide range of disciplines for methods and sources, such as works of art, architecture and other media.

We have seen that cultural values, including political values, and cultural change can impact on religious values. Individualism/collectivism, including the rise of spirituality, has received the lion’s share of research attention, indicating complex effects on values and wellbeing. In social and community work, recognition could be granted to the salience of collectivist values, reflected in the religious esteem accorded to supportive and helping behaviour. Both beneficial and distressing effects need to be monitored with a view to appropriate interventions. For example, role-related overload has been identified as a source of distress and psychiatric illness in women, particularly in religious communities where there are heavy collectivist-type helping obligations. The institution of practical and social support may play an important preventive role (Loewenthal & Brooke Rogers, 2004). 

Prosperity and other aspects of modernity such as materialism have not always impacted on religiosity in the ways suggested by secularization theory, and this area awaits further investigation.  

Segregation/separatism is a frequent consequence of migration and and the formation of minority collectivist cultures.  Here, religion functions as culture. There are important effects on values and well-being, with small group processes, belonging and identity factors playing important roles, all awaiting further investigation. 

Intergroup relations have been a hot topic in social psychology for many years, but the roles played by religion are still poorly understood. Some headway can be made by treating religious identity as a variable. However, religious identity has some special features which distinguish it from other forms of identity, notably the sacred character of religious beliefs and values. Many religious believers are encouraged to be willing to sacrifice their lives for religious principles, and some are encouraged to sacrifice the lives of others. There is more to be discovered about the varieties of resistance and conformity to political oppression of religion, how these come about, and their psychological consequences.  We need to know more about the conditions under which such decisions are encouraged, made and acted upon. Another phenomenon which needs to be more fully understood, is the way in which cultural values and practices can achieve the status and sanctity of spiritual values. These may make the values more resistant to change. This is of particular concern in cases where the values are damaging, as for instance female genital mutilation, or when brides are seen as the property of their husband’s family. 

In efforts to understand the role of religion in intergroup relations, there has been longstanding interest in religious orientation and its relations to prejudice and intergroup hostility. Recent work described in this chapter suggests that religious orientation and its impact can be affected by cultural values, notably individualism-collectivism. This topic is clearly waiting to be developed. This should also help to deepen understanding of the processes involved in the development of religious orientation.

In clinical work, training of cultural awareness and sensitivity must continue. Training initiatives must avoid the dangers of stereotyping clients from minority groups, and should enable mental health professionals to be more alert to the cultural framework in which individual experiences of illnesses are embedded. Good working relations between clinicians and religious leaders are important, as is awareness on the part of clinicians on the variations in the quality and effectiveness of religious and indigenous healing.

Our overall conclusion then is not a simple one.  There appears to be a reciprocal relationship between culture and religion. There are dynamic political and social change processes, interplaying with the adaptation and development of religious groups and their behaviour and values. To gain a deeper understanding of these issues, we may need to import understandings and concepts from other social sciences, particularly sociology, anthropology and history, as well as social psychology.