Belief in God correlated with better mental health outcomes

[TimothyC]

Belief in God Can Improve Mental Health Outcomes
By Rick Nauert PhD Senior News Editor
Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on April 26, 2013

A new study suggests belief in God may significantly improve the outcome of those receiving short-term treatment for psychiatric illness.

Researchers followed patients receiving care from a hospital-based behavioral health program to investigate the relationship between patients’ level of belief in God, expectations for treatment and actual treatment outcomes.

In the study, published in the current issue of Journal of Affective Disorders, researchers comment that people with a moderate to high level of belief in a higher power do significantly better in short-term psychiatric treatment than those without.

“Belief was associated with not only improved psychological well-being, but decreases in depression and intention to self-harm,” says David H. Rosmarin, Ph.D., an instructor in the Department of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School.

The study looked at 159 patients, recruited over a one-year period. Each participant was asked to gauge their belief in God as well as their expectations for treatment outcome and emotion regulation, each on a five-point scale.

Levels of depression, well-being, and self-harm were assessed at the beginning and end of their treatment program.

Of the patients sampled, more than 30 percent claimed no specific religious affiliation yet still saw the same benefits in treatment if their belief in a higher power was rated as moderately or very high.

Patients with “no” or only “slight” belief in God were twice as likely not to respond to treatment as patients with higher levels of belief.

Investigators believe the study demonstrates that a belief in God is associated with improved treatment outcomes in psychiatric care.

“More centrally, our results suggest that belief in the credibility of psychiatric treatment and increased expectations to gain from treatment might be mechanisms by which belief in God can impact treatment outcomes.”

Investigators hope that the study will lead to additional investigation on the clinical implication of spirtual life as more than 90 percent of the U.S. population hold religious beliefs.

Source: McLean Hospital

The original journal article is found here.

No big surprise, although it is nice to see it shown statistically.

[Steel]

Having no legs found to decrease risk of foot problems?

This study ignores the fact that serious belief in magic is a mental health problem.

[Simon_Jester]

Does believing in magic automatically make you unable to function in society? Does it make you a danger to yourself, or others? Sure, someone who believes in the supernatural might be any or all of those things, but it's hardly a universal feature.

At the very least, we have to recognize a difference between being wrong and being insane. Otherwise we have no business commenting on mental health at all.

[Broomstick]

I have long maintained that religion serves emotional needs that reason and logic do not. This study would seem to support that. I realize that many atheists see religion as a form of insanity but if there is proof that at least in some cases it is useful and results in better functioning then perhaps said atheists need to rethink their position.

Of course, what intrigues me most is why religion seems beneficial - is it social bonds? Illusion of greater control? Something else?

[Terralthra]

This could also indicate that willing belief in a deity is evidence of willingness to give credit to things unproven, which would increase the halo and placebo effects of any active treatment.

[Broomstick]

Perhaps, but if there is no other viable treatment then a placebo effect that actually produces positive results isn't a bad thing. It's not an ideal situation, true, but better than absolutely nothing at all. Placebo effects can run as high as 30% (or more), and if it helps 1/3 of people for whom there is otherwise no viable treatment then until we have better let's use it.

[TimothyC]

This study ignores the fact that serious belief in magic is a mental health problem.

The goal of mental health treatment is often to help people function in society (at least in my experience). I would like your source for how having a belief in God decreases societal functioning.

[Ralin]

Having no legs found to decrease risk of foot problems?

This study ignores the fact that serious belief in magic is a mental health problem.

Yeah, uh, I'm as anti-religion as anyone, but you really should take a minute to think things through before you go down the path of declaring beliefs and ways of thinking you don't like as mental health issues. Because that's not going to lead to good places.

[Simon_Jester]

This could also indicate that willing belief in a deity is evidence of willingness to give credit to things unproven, which would increase the halo and placebo effects of any active treatment.

Perhaps, but if there is no other viable treatment then a placebo effect that actually produces positive results isn't a bad thing. It's not an ideal situation, true, but better than absolutely nothing at all. Placebo effects can run as high as 30% (or more), and if it helps 1/3 of people for whom there is otherwise no viable treatment then until we have better let's use it.

Ah, Broomstick, I think his point is that the heightened placebo effect will also benefit people taking something that really does work.

In other words, if I give you a sugar pill and tell you it's aspirin, the placebo effect may make you feel less pain- but you'll feel even less if the pill really is aspirin. And either way, heightened credulity will make the placebo-bonus more powerful...

[General Zod]

This might work as a short term solution, but I think it's just a way for people to tell themselves that what they do matters to someone, somewhere. You could replace God with pretty much anything else that gives them a sense of purpose and positive reinforcement and I have a feeling you'd get the same effect.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Considering how trying to help people dealing with mental health issues through the "logical and rational" kind of talk often seen in vocal atheists often does nothing but make things worse, it shouldn't be surprising at all that it correlates to making it harder to help yourself when you're more likely to think in that way, too.

[Jub]

I wonder if the same effect would be achieved in a country where Atheism is the default and there are strong secular alternatives to churches/temples? I also wonder what would happen in a nation with better mental health care and more access to free counseling? Basically, would you get the same results over in Scandinavia as you do in the US?

[General Zod]

I wonder if the same effect would be achieved in a country where Atheism is the default and there are strong secular alternatives to churches/temples? I also wonder what would happen in a nation with better mental health care and more access to free counseling? Basically, would you get the same results over in Scandinavia as you do in the US?

I think you'd need more research into why belief in a higher power works. Just saying "Sure, we get positive results if you believe in God." and refusing to dig any deeper is disingenuous.

[Zwinmar]

So a pastafarian has a placebo effect going, cool.

[Alyeska]

I have long maintained that religion serves emotional needs that reason and logic do not.

I call BULLSHIT. I find the pursuit of knowledge to be quite emotionally rewarding. Thats the core behind science and logic.

I realize that many atheists see religion as a form of insanity but if there is proof that at least in some cases it is useful and results in better functioning then perhaps said atheists need to rethink their position.

I do not think religion is insanity. But you are arguing that I am emotionally damaged for not having religion. Pot calling the kettle black.

[Covenant]

I'm not surprised or offended by these results. Even the stated results, that increased credulity towards treatment is a mechanism by which belief in a higher power (but not religion itself) aids short-term treatment, sound reasonable. Entirely reasonable.

And because specific religion wasn't a major factor in the success of this (specifically that religion itself was unimportant, only a rating of strong belief), it opens the door to many people's personal interpretations of a divine hereafter all having the same effect. That's not an argument for religion, since religion itself didn't seem to matter much. People were non-religious but still spiritual and they still got the effect, if I read the data right. That, to me, speaks more for having a "comfortable" view of the world where you're confident in the major life questions. This is still a society where religion is the norm, and a lot of people who would rate themselves as having "low" or "no" faith are people who would be firmer believers if they weren't in such a shitty place.

What may not have been asked during this study was "If you answered 'little' or 'none' for your Belief in God, do you describe yourself as Atheist or Agnostic?" and "If you answered yes to describing yourself as an Atheist or Agnostic, how do you 'feel' about life, humanity, and the future in a godless existence?" Questions like that, to ferret out if the person is a lapsed or angry believer who rejects a god out of spite (for a lost loved one, terrible bullying, rebellion, etc) or a comfortable, happy non-theist who thinks the Universe is a wonderful, beautiful place even so.

It'd also be interesting to try the study in a society where strong religious belief is a minority opinion, or where it is not socially valued as a sign of mental health and wellbeing. I would also like a less headline-grabbing examination of the data, since they asked people how likely they think success will be. If people are saying they have "low" belief and "no" faith in the treatment, then yeah, okay, I'm not surprised those people don't do well. If people are saying they're comfortable atheists with a high degree of confidence in the treatment, but no improvement, then that would be odd. But I don't believe that's actually what the data would show us, were it not behind a paywall.

Also, again, these were specifically short-term improvements. We don't know the rate of long-term gain. I believe other mental/emotional control programs, like AA and such 12-step programs, use faith and see strong short-term successes despite a rate of long-term success on-par with non-faith self control measures. Would it surprise anyone that a "Jesus Take The Wheel" approach from a strongly faithful person would see greater "improvements" to their mental health when they strongly believe, from the outset, that they will have great improvements? What would be more interesting is to examine if their long-term gains over a significant period are better than someone who has a positive attitude about treatment but no belief in the supernatural. Ideally someone who is merrily without god and not doubtful or regretful about that.

[Covenant]

I have long maintained that religion serves emotional needs that reason and logic do not.

I call BULLSHIT. I find the pursuit of knowledge to be quite emotionally rewarding. Thats the core behind science and logic.

Well, but which emotional needs are being talked about here? I think it's not entirely bullshit to say that there are some purely emotional needs that religion addresses that reason does not, but I think those emotional needs are manufactured rather than entirely inherent.

I'd love to see my grandmother again, but alas, she died a few years back. My mom still pines for hers, and feels she's been visited in her dreams by the spirit of her own grandmother many times. Clearly my mother has a different emotional need for that continued presence than I do, and even though she has lost faith in nearly all other areas, this one thing (the need to feel a continued presence of her mother and grandmother in her life) is served better by faith than logic... but that's because the logical, rational response is not what she wants. She knows her mother is dead, she's comfortable with that, but she's not comfortable with being without her. I'm sure a lot of us would be able to say that a non-theistic worldview is entirely as satisfying and helps remove the fear of death, and I think a lot of those same people (myself included) would not express an overwhelming emotional need to have a continued hand-on-the-shoulder from a deceased relative. If someone, like my mom, expresses that they do, maybe a hugely important need for it, I'm not sure that a rational disbelief in the hereafter will ameliorate that need. **

I would suggest that religion manufactures these wants and needs in some part, and then offers the fulfillment. Not even intentionally, just by fleshing out what happens, adding extra fears (Hell!) and extra things to look forwards to (Heaven!) and then raising expectations along the way. I'm looking for a non-crass, non-drug pusher metaphor for this, something like a manufactured need for sexy cars and fancy gadgets, or a manufactured desire for thin women over heavier gals this era when previous eras had different standards for beauty, thus showing that these needs do have a grip on people but that they do not actually exist outside the social conditioning that bred them.

My theory here would imply that a society without much religion would have fewer people claiming to need (not just miss, which is normal) continued contact with passed-away relatives and so forth. People who have their loved ones suddenly, tragically snatched away don't really count for this, but living a long happy life and dying peacefully in your sleep should not leave such a lasting hole, I would think. Maybe I'm just an asshole. If my theory turns out to be full of shit then so am I, but I think people who were never "really" religious might have a much decreased desire for such things. I will miss my parents when they pass away, probably often and forever, but I am not sure I'll have the same experience she does, or if I would have ever thought about those kinds of feelings if I hadn't see her go through it herself. I hope I do not, it is troubling to think about.

Clearly, studies have shown that emotional needs can be created. I'd say that the emotional needs that religion fills are usually ones it creates itself, and that a non-religious person (or successfully un-religioned person) may simply not understand some of the hunger pangs that a lack of faith leaves because they themselves don't have those same emotional needs. I certainly do not have the same needs as my mother, but I think it may be reasonable to assume some people do, even despite a loss of all other trappings of faith. But maybe I'm just splitting hairs.

**
((Since she is the chief subject of this one-person case study, I feel like I should clarify that I really don't think there's any rational solution to what she wants. My assumption that this is an emotional need, and not a fear of death or damnation (which could be reasoned away) is based upon a huge amount of conversations about such things. My mother is personally not sure about what she thinks happens when you die, or if there's a God, or anything, but she also has an intense need to believe that these dreams were real and that there is some watchful spirit of her mother and grandmother with her. Because this need demands an absence of logic, and appears to be based upon a socialized expectation of continued spiritual presence as an expression of love and acceptance from said spiritual force, I can only conclude that my mother is feeling an emotional need that was created by her religion rather than an inherent one. She never doubted her mother's love and acceptance of her in her life, so there's no reason, besides religion, why this intense need should exist after death... at least by my reasoning, weak as it is.))

[Stark]

This could also indicate that willing belief in a deity is evidence of willingness to give credit to things unproven, which would increase the halo and placebo effects of any active treatment.

Many people certainly use the mental tools (or at least their names) of 'rationalism' to deliberately prevent therapy from working. I'm not sure if this is because they're atheists or simply that many people who identify as not believing in god are predisposed toward negative mental health outcomes. Given that the fast majority of people never put any real thought into their belief system, and that most religions have a huge corpus of faith-based expectation training and attitude construction whereas the atheism of many people does not, this shouldn't really surprise anyone.

[Formless]

This is old news to anyone who has studied psychology. However, what is important to note is that it is a correlation, and the cause has many interpretations. For example, a common interpretation is that religion is often correlated with a bigger social circles (because people make friends with their local congregation), and social connections are good for psychological well being. After all, pet ownership is also correlated with good mental health!

Something else to consider is that these studies don't study religious skeptics or deviants directly, and instead use a strength of belief scale to gather the data. That lumps people who are nominally religious but functionally about as sincere as The Simpsons in with guys like Dawkins and Sagan. The problem then is that people who are nominally religious may find that their beliefs are more easily challenged; that the religious community can guilt trip them more easily for not regularly participating; or go into therapy with unrealistic expectations that religion will play a big part in their personal growth and are disappointed when they fail to meet God through their doctor.

A self aware atheist or agnostic on the other hand probably has more concrete convictions to hold onto, don't have a pastor or community pestering them or filling their head with bullshit about the need for "spiritual" healing, and may better understand that if they need mental help they need to be active in making it work for them. Or maybe not, again these studies are not generally about explicitly irreligious patients.

On the other hand, schizophrenics often incorporate religion into their delusions and hallucinations, so the effect is not helpful for all types of mental disorders. Mostly its helpful for depression, A.K.A. the Common Cold of Mental Problems.

Considering how trying to help people dealing with mental health issues through the "logical and rational" kind of talk often seen in vocal atheists often does nothing but make things worse, it shouldn't be surprising at all that it correlates to making it harder to help yourself when you're more likely to think in that way, too.

That depends on what you mean by "logical and rational". Rational-Emotive therapy and Cognitive-Behavioral therapy are both predicated on the idea that mental states are affected by our beliefs and thought processes; for instance, depression is often highly correlated with illogical perceptions about oneself and others. Beliefs inform behavior, behavior leads other people to react to you as a "loser" or an "asshole", which furthers poor self esteem, which reinforces the beliefs that lead to that behavior in a downward spiral. The idea is that a good therapist can help someone realize for themselves just how maladaptive or unrealistic their views are, stop the downward spiral, and thus engender personal change.

However, if you mean that criticism often makes people feel even worse about themselves, then you're right, because many of the thought processes targeted by these styles of therapy are self-criticism or internalization of other people's judgements. Eating disorders are probably the most dramatic example of that.

[Singular Intellect]

So a pastafarian has a placebo effect going, cool.

I echo this sentiment. I for one won't argue with the notion believing in Thor can make you feel better.

[Broomstick]

I have long maintained that religion serves emotional needs that reason and logic do not.

I call BULLSHIT. I find the pursuit of knowledge to be quite emotionally rewarding. Thats the core behind science and logic.

That's what YOU find emotionally fulfilling. It is not what everyone else finds emotionally fulfilling. This isn't about you, or about anyone one individual. It's about what helps people, which vary considerably. If you do not require religion that is fine with me. If other people do need it for their mental healthy that's fine with me as well.

I realize that many atheists see religion as a form of insanity but if there is proof that at least in some cases it is useful and results in better functioning then perhaps said atheists need to rethink their position.

I do not think religion is insanity. But you are arguing that I am emotionally damaged for not having religion. Pot calling the kettle black.

Nonsense. Way to distort my position.

Nowhere did I say a lack of religion results in "emotional damage". What this study says is that for a subset of mentally ill people religion is beneficial. That says nothing about your mental state, or speaks to the best solution to other subsets that do not benefit from it. It says nothing about whether religion is beneficial for mentally healthy people, either. Try not to read more into statement than what is actually in that statement.

[General Zod]

That's what YOU find emotionally fulfilling. It is not what everyone else finds emotionally fulfilling. This isn't about you, or about anyone one individual. It's about what helps people, which vary considerably. If you do not require religion that is fine with me. If other people do need it for their mental healthy that's fine with me as well.

How does this study help people who aren't religious? It doesn't seem to bother to examine the underlying mechanisms that actually promote this benefit.

[Broomstick]

It may not help people who are not religious. Well, maybe it informs the interested parties that if a mentally ill person is non-religious that making the suggestion "go to church" is not likely to be of help and other forms of assistance should be investigated. Who it might benefit are mentally ill people who are already religious, in that a care provider could make the suggestion to become more involved in that religion even if the provider is not him or herself religious with more confidence that it will be a helpful path to pursue and not merely a meaningless or useless delusion.

As one, isolated study it is of limited utility. As something to spur further questions it has value.

Longer term, if it does seem that religion benefits a substantial sub-set of the population then I would advocate encouraging religions of tolerance that are open to more rational types of thought and discouraging the intolerant variants. Not all religions are equal, if we must have religions then let us have those that are least damaging/most beneficial to society at large.

[General Zod]

It may not help people who are not religious. Well, maybe it informs the interested parties that if a mentally ill person is non-religious that making the suggestion "go to church" is not likely to be of help and other forms of assistance should be investigated. Who it might benefit are mentally ill people who are already religious, in that a care provider could make the suggestion to become more involved in that religion even if the provider is not him or herself religious with more confidence that it will be a helpful path to pursue and not merely a meaningless or useless delusion.

As one, isolated study it is of limited utility. As something to spur further questions it has value.

Longer term, if it does seem that religion benefits a substantial sub-set of the population then I would advocate encouraging religions of tolerance that are open to more rational types of thought and discouraging the intolerant variants. Not all religions are equal, if we must have religions then let us have those that are least damaging/most beneficial to society at large.

Or. You could advocate digging deeper into the study to figure out what mechanisms are actually promoting this kind of benefit so you can figure out a way of applying it without the superstitious strings attached. Given we're talking about depression here it could be as simple as the fact that their religion gives them value and a sense of purpose.

[Simon_Jester]

I have long maintained that religion serves emotional needs that reason and logic do not.

I call BULLSHIT. I find the pursuit of knowledge to be quite emotionally rewarding. Thats the core behind science and logic.

Fish are tasty and nutritious. Eat a diet of nothing but fish and you will die of vitamin deficiencies.

No, that is not "BULLSHIT." That is simply a recognition that most people (some people are unusual) don't get everything they need from logicking their way through problems. They need, for example, "I love you," which is generally not a logical sentiment for most people.

Humans are evolved creatures, wired for a certain social environment, to need certain forms of mental validation and physical nourishment. To get that validation we need buttons pushed. Religion pushes some buttons that (for most people) simply being educated about facts and logic doesn't.

Are there exceptions? Sure, but there are always exceptions to any observation about human nature beyond "we're bipeds who burn carbon with oxygen."