Religious status and addictive behaviors: Exploring patterns of use and psychological proneness.


Journal

Comprehensive psychiatry
ISSN: 1532-8384
Titre abrégé: Compr Psychiatry
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372612

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2023
Historique:
received: 08 04 2023
revised: 29 08 2023
accepted: 04 09 2023
medline: 30 10 2023
pubmed: 12 9 2023
entrez: 12 9 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Previous studies have emphasized the role of religiosity as both a protective factor and a factor contributing to the success of recovery in the case of addictive beahaviors. However, the associations between religious status and the involvement in distinct addictive behaviors as well as the associations between religious status and psychological factors have not been comprehensively examined. Therefore, the aims of the present study were to extend the literature by examining the (i) relationship between religiosity and distinct addictive behaviors including substance use and behavioral addictions, and (ii) interactive effects of religious status and psychological factors on addictive behaviors. Data from two representative samples were analyzed (National Survey on Addiction Problems in Hungary [NSAPH]: N = 1385; 46.8% male; mean age = 41.77 years [SD = 13.08]; and Budapest Longitudinal Study [BLS]: N = 3890; 48.4% male; mean age = 27.06 years [SD = 4.76]). Distinct addictive behaviors and psychological factors related to the psychological proneness to addictive behaviors (impulsivity, sensation seeking, rumination, well-being, mentalization, and worry) were comprehensively examined in relation to religious status (religious, agnostic, and non-religious). Chi-square, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney (MW) tests and multinomial logistic regressions were performed. Religious individuals showed significantly lower involvement in addictive behaviors whereas agnostic individuals showed significantly higher involvement in addictive behaviors. With regards to psychological factors related to the proneness to addictive behaviors, agnostic individuals showed the highest level of psychological proneness. The results of multinomial regression models showed that religiosity was protective in the NSAPH sample. However, worry could overwrite the protective effect. In the BLS study, the protective role of religiosity was uncertain. It was not protective in itself, but through interaction with sensation seeking, rumination and uncertian mentalization, religiosity can also be protective. The findings highlight the general protective role of religiosity in addictions. However, interaction with some psychological contructs can modify the protective role of religious status. The study also highlights the need to take into account agnostic religious status of individuals in future research. Consequently, further studies are needed to explore the causality and mediating roles between these variables.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Previous studies have emphasized the role of religiosity as both a protective factor and a factor contributing to the success of recovery in the case of addictive beahaviors. However, the associations between religious status and the involvement in distinct addictive behaviors as well as the associations between religious status and psychological factors have not been comprehensively examined. Therefore, the aims of the present study were to extend the literature by examining the (i) relationship between religiosity and distinct addictive behaviors including substance use and behavioral addictions, and (ii) interactive effects of religious status and psychological factors on addictive behaviors.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Data from two representative samples were analyzed (National Survey on Addiction Problems in Hungary [NSAPH]: N = 1385; 46.8% male; mean age = 41.77 years [SD = 13.08]; and Budapest Longitudinal Study [BLS]: N = 3890; 48.4% male; mean age = 27.06 years [SD = 4.76]). Distinct addictive behaviors and psychological factors related to the psychological proneness to addictive behaviors (impulsivity, sensation seeking, rumination, well-being, mentalization, and worry) were comprehensively examined in relation to religious status (religious, agnostic, and non-religious). Chi-square, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney (MW) tests and multinomial logistic regressions were performed.
RESULTS
Religious individuals showed significantly lower involvement in addictive behaviors whereas agnostic individuals showed significantly higher involvement in addictive behaviors. With regards to psychological factors related to the proneness to addictive behaviors, agnostic individuals showed the highest level of psychological proneness. The results of multinomial regression models showed that religiosity was protective in the NSAPH sample. However, worry could overwrite the protective effect. In the BLS study, the protective role of religiosity was uncertain. It was not protective in itself, but through interaction with sensation seeking, rumination and uncertian mentalization, religiosity can also be protective.
DISCUSSION
The findings highlight the general protective role of religiosity in addictions. However, interaction with some psychological contructs can modify the protective role of religious status. The study also highlights the need to take into account agnostic religious status of individuals in future research. Consequently, further studies are needed to explore the causality and mediating roles between these variables.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37699271
pii: S0010-440X(23)00055-X
doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2023.152418
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

152418

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest ELTE Eötvös Loránd University receives funding from the Szerencsejáték Ltd. to maintain a telephone helpline service for problematic gambling. The University of Gibraltar receives funding from the Gibraltar Gambling Care Foundation, an independent charity. Mark D. Griffiths' university has received research funding from Norsk Tipping (the gambling operator owned by the Norwegian Government). Griffiths has also received funding for a number of research projects in the area of gambling education for young people, social responsibility in gambling and gambling treatment from Gamble Aware (formerly the Responsible Gambling Trust), a charitable body which funds its research program based on donations from the gambling industry. Griffiths also regularly undertakes consultancy for various gaming companies in the area of player protection and social responsibility in gambling. However, these funding sources are not related to this paper and the funding institution had no role in the study design or the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data, writing the manuscript, or the decision to submit the paper for publication. All other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Auteurs

Bettina Kata Kádár (BK)

Department of Psychiatry, University of Szeged, 8-10 Korányi fasor, Szeged H-6720, Hungary.

Lea Péter (L)

Department of Psychiatry, University of Szeged, 8-10 Korányi fasor, Szeged H-6720, Hungary.

Borbála Paksi (B)

Institute of Education, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, 23-27 Kazinczy Street, Budapest H-1075, Hungary.

Zsolt Horváth (Z)

Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, 46 Izabella Street, Budapest H-1064, Hungary; Centre of Excellence in Responsible Gaming, University of Gibraltar, Europa Point Campus, Gibraltar GX11 1AA, Gibraltar.

Katalin Felvinczi (K)

Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, 46 Izabella Street, Budapest H-1064, Hungary.

Andrea Eisinger (A)

Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, 46 Izabella Street, Budapest H-1064, Hungary; Doctoral School of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, 46 Izabella Street, Budapest H-1064, Hungary.

Mark D Griffiths (MD)

International Gaming Research Unit, Psychology Department, Nottingham Trent University, 50 Shakespeare Street, NG1 4FQ Nottingham, United Kingdom.

Andrea Czakó (A)

Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, 46 Izabella Street, Budapest H-1064, Hungary; Centre of Excellence in Responsible Gaming, University of Gibraltar, Europa Point Campus, Gibraltar GX11 1AA, Gibraltar.

Zsolt Demetrovics (Z)

Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, 46 Izabella Street, Budapest H-1064, Hungary; Centre of Excellence in Responsible Gaming, University of Gibraltar, Europa Point Campus, Gibraltar GX11 1AA, Gibraltar. Electronic address: zsolt.demetrovics@unigib.edu.gi.

Bálint Andó (B)

Department of Psychiatry, University of Szeged, 8-10 Korányi fasor, Szeged H-6720, Hungary. Electronic address: ando.balint@med.u-szeged.hu.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH