Associations of general religiousness and specific religious beliefs with coping appraisals in response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita

Abstract

Are specific religious beliefs related to interpretations of stressful events and available coping resources? The present study addressed this by assessing appraisals, general religiousness, and two specific beliefs—verticality (deity-centered vs. person-focused approach to religion) and God image—in 63 Christian and Jewish undergraduates coping with the 2005 hurricane season. Primary appraisals (interpretation of the stressor as a challenge, threat, loss, and benefit) and secondary appraisals (perception of whether self, others, and God have control over the stressor) were related to religion. By controlling for general religiousness, unique associations of specific beliefs with appraisals were identified. General religiousness was positively associated with interpreting hurricane-related events as a loss for the Christian participants and as a benefit for the Jewish participants. For both groups, general religiousness and God image were related positively to perception that God was in control, and verticality was related negatively to the perception of self-control. For Jewish participants, verticality was associated negatively with others-control and positively with God-control. Overall, general religiousness was more related to primary appraisals (relevance), and specific beliefs were associated with secondary appraisals (resources). Investigation of finely grained distinctions in religious belief furthers understanding of the roles of religion in coping.

Keywords:

• appraisal
• coping
• general religiousness
• hurricane
• specific religious beliefs
• transactional model

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Christian Brady and Carrie Doehring for their assistance in the development of the Verticality Scale and to Amie Grady, Bernadette Adams–Gauthé, and Ashley Baker–Brumfield for their assistance with data collection. Thanks also to the members of the Stress, Trauma, and Coping Research group at the University of Denver for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

Notes

^a—Vertical focus

^b—Horizontal focus