1. SECRET WISDOM: A MIXED METHODS STUDY OF SPIRITUAL INTELLIGENCE IN
ADOLESCENTS AGES 12-18
by
Charmayne Elizabeth Kilcup
A dissertation submitted
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
in Transpersonal Psychology
Sofia University
Palo Alto, California
March 2, 2014
I certify that I have read and approved the content and presentation of this dissertation:
_________________________________________________ __________________
Jenny Wade, Ph.D., Committee Chairperson Date
_________________________________________________ __________________
Samuel Himelstein, Ph.D., Committee Member Date
_________________________________________________ __________________
Dorothy Sisk, Ph.D., Committee Member Date
3. iii
Abstract
Secret Wisdom: Spiritual Intelligence in Adolescents Ages 12-18
by
Charmayne Elizabeth Kilcup
Current models of spiritual development suggest that adolescents have limited capacity
for spirituality and spiritual experiences. In such models, adolescents are seen to have immature
moral and ethical judgment and be incapable of deep spiritual experience due to lack of cognitive
development. This mixed-methods study explored the existence of spiritual intelligence in 115
adolescents aged 12-18 using 3 surveys to measure spiritual intelligence and spirituality: the
Spiritual Intelligence Self-Report Inventory (SISRI), the Integrated Spiritual Intelligence Scale
(ISIS), and the Intrinsic Spirituality Scale (ISS). High scorers were found on every survey, and
all surveys were positively correlated. Females scored significantly higher than males on the ISIS
(t = .03, p < .05). Fifteen of the top 30 scorers were interviewed concerning their lived
experience of spirituality. Thematic analysis revealed 8 major categories: (a) definition of
spirituality, (b) definition of God, (c) importance of family, (d) ways of connecting to the divine,
(e) spiritual experiences, (f) role models, (g) spiritual values, and (h) skepticism of spirituality.
Some adolescents display high levels of spiritual intelligence, which manifests as having
spiritual values (e.g., altruism, compassion, openness), spiritual experiences, and practices to
connect to the divine.
4. iv
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the many people who contributed their time, energy, guidance, and
support to make this possible. Thank you to my chair, Dr. Jenny Wade, for your high
expectations, clear guidance, and unwavering belief in my ability to see this through. I am so
grateful you chose to be part of this process. I could feel you behind me at all times and would
not have had the confidence to do this without you. You have been my rock. I also wish to
acknowledge my committee members, Dr. Sam Himelstein and Dr. Dorothy Sisk. Thank you for
your personal interest in this topic and your own commitment to helping adolescents navigate
their own spiritual paths. Your work is invaluable.
Also, thank you to Ken and Kaelyn for being my support team. Ken, thank you for
believing in me from the day we met. You knew I would be doing this before I did. Kaelyn,
thanks for going before me and pulling me through this. Thank you for guiding me through every
step and taking my tearful emergency phone calls.
I am overwhelmed with gratitude.
5. v
Dedication
To my parents.
Thank you for seeing me, for always reminding me of who I am and for
continually urging me along the road less travelled.
I am forever grateful.
6. vi
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iii!
Acknowledgments ..........................................................................................................................iv!
Dedication........................................................................................................................................v!
List of Tables............................................................................................................................... viii!
Chapter 1: Introduction....................................................................................................................1!
Chapter 2: Literature Review ..........................................................................................................5!
Spirituality, Religiosity, and Adolescence ..........................................................................6!
Research on Religiosity and Spirituality in Adolescents ..................................................13!
Spiritual Intelligence and Adolescents ..............................................................................26!
Conclusion.........................................................................................................................55!
Chapter 3: Methods .......................................................................................................................57!
Recruitment .......................................................................................................................57!
Participants ........................................................................................................................58!
Instrumentation..................................................................................................................59!
SISRI .....................................................................................................................59!
ISIS........................................................................................................................61!
ISS .........................................................................................................................65!
Procedure...........................................................................................................................66!
Treatment of Data..............................................................................................................68!
Chapter 4: Results..........................................................................................................................69!
Quantitative Results...........................................................................................................71!
Significant findings. ..............................................................................................73!
Nonsignificant findings .........................................................................................74!
Summary of quantitative findings .........................................................................76!
7. vii
Qualitative Data.................................................................................................................77!
Definition of spirituality........................................................................................81!
Definition of God ..................................................................................................83!
Importance of family .............................................................................................84!
Ways of connecting to divine................................................................................85!
Spiritual experiences .............................................................................................87!
Role models...........................................................................................................89!
Spiritual values ......................................................................................................90!
Skepticism of spirituality.......................................................................................93!
Summary of Quantitative and Qualitative Results ............................................................95!
Chapter 5: Discussion....................................................................................................................98!
Quantitative Findings ........................................................................................................99!
Qualitative Findings ........................................................................................................100!
Limitations and Delimitations .........................................................................................109!
Implications for Future Research ....................................................................................112!
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................113!
References ...................................................................................................................................114!
Appendix A: Letter to Prospective Schools ................................................................................123!
Appendix B: Informed Consent...................................................................................................125!
Appendix C: Demographic Questionnaire ..................................................................................129!
Appendix D: Semistructured Interview Script ............................................................................130!
Appendix E: Tables .....................................................................................................................131!
8. viii
List of Tables
Table Page
1 Participants by Age and Sex…………………………………………………......69
2 Participant Source……………………………………………………………......70
3 Participants by Ethnicity……………………………………………………........70
4 Participants by Religion……………………………………………………….....71
5 Survey Means and Standard Deviations for Sample…………………………......73
6 Correlations Between Surveys……………………………………………….......73
7 Average Means and Standard Deviations by Sex……………………………......74
8 Mean and Standard Deviations by Age Group………………………………......74
9 Mean Scores by Ethnicity……………………………………………………......75
10 Mean Scores by Religion…………………………………………………….......76
11 Interviewees—Age and Sex…………………………………………………......78
12 Survey Participant Scores Compared to Interview Participant Scores…………..78
13 Interviewees Demographic Profile by Ethnicity……………………………........79
14 Interviewees Religions (n = 15).............................................................................80
15 Interviewees Source (n = 15).................................................................................80
E1 Independent Samples t-test Comparing Males and Females Mean Scores..........131
E2 Independent Samples t-test Comparing 12-15 Year Olds and
16-18 Year Olds Mean Scores…………………………………………….........132
E3 ANOVA Comparing Means Between Ethnic Groups……………………….....133
E4 ANOVA Comparing Means Between Religious Groups……………………....133
9. 1
Chapter 1: Introduction
The developmental period of adolescence, considered to be the ages between 12 and 18,
can be considered a time of turbulent transition that all people who reach adulthood must
undergo (Bussing, Foller-Mancini, Gidley, & Heusser, 2010). It is a transitory period between
childhood and adulthood characterized by individuation, identity shifts, and physical and social
changes (Pint, 2010). The central task of adolescence is to find a sense of identity, sense of place,
and purpose (Benson, 1997; Erikson, 1968/1994).
Considered by many a period of high risk, adolescence is commonly accepted as a deeply
challenging time for many adolescents. During this time period, young people plunge into the
process of physical metamorphosis, identity formation, and the quest for social acceptance.
Particularly in Western industrialized nations, many adolescents begin to experiment with
controlled substances, alcohol, sex, and violence (Mellor & Freeborn, 2011). During this very
vulnerable developmental stage, adolescents are at increased risk for psychological disorders.
The World Health Organization (2008) has predicted that within the next decade, psychological
disorders will be one of the top five causes of disability and death for adolescents. Indeed,
suicide rates for people ages 10 to 24 have been increasing and it is now the third leading cause
of death in this age group (American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 2008; Center
for Disease Control & Prevention, 1995). Concern over adolescent mental health has led some
researchers to examine protective factors that may help mitigate the difficulties some youth deal
with during this developmental period (Rasic, Kisely, & Langille, 2011). Two such factors
emerging are religiosity and spirituality.
The spiritual dimension of adolescent development has been largely ignored until
recently (Benson, Scales, Sesma, & Roehlkepartain, 2006; Pint, 2010). Interest in adolescent
10. 2
spirituality has spiked dramatically in the last decade with the introduction of the field of
Positive Youth Development (PYD), which focuses on strengths-based programming, research,
and support that encourages youth to live a responsible, meaningful life with a sense of higher
purpose (Benson et al., 2008; Briggs, Akos, Czyszczon, & Eldridge, 2011). With the PYD
movement, adolescence has come to be seen as a critical time, the successful resolution of which
has been linked to greater well-being and success in adulthood. Indeed, some psychologists even
suggest that adolescence may be the most crucial period for spiritual development (Good &
Willoughby, 2008). During this sensitive time, adolescents begin to question their beliefs,
personal values, and their inherited cultural biases (Magdaldi-Dopman & Park-Taylor, 2010).
Several studies have examined the effects of spirituality or religiosity on resiliency and sense of
purpose in an adolescent population (Crawford, Wright, & Masten, 2006; Kim & Esquivel,
2011). However, few studies distinguish between the effects of religiosity and spirituality in
youth.
Historically, spirituality has been subsumed under the study of religion (Benson, 1997;
Benson et al., 2006). In the theological and psychological literature, religion and spirituality have
been considered to be overlapping constructs. Religion has been defined as a set of beliefs,
practices, or rituals that promote or express spirituality; whereas, spirituality has been described
as the intrapersonal experience of the sacred or divine (Magaldi-Dopman & Park-Taylor, 2010).
Much of the literature on youth spirituality has in fact viewed the phenomenon from a religious
lens (Benson et al., 2006). Specifically, research has tended to focus on adolescents’ relationship
to religion, which has been shown to decrease after age 11. Religious behavior, such as church or
youth group attendance has been one way researchers have attempted to assess adolescent
11. 3
spirituality and religiosity. However, such approaches may be misleading given the wide variety
of internal manifestations of spirituality.
Indeed, capturing the depth and diversity of a construct as broad and multidimensional as
spirituality poses many challenges. It becomes even more complicated when adding the variable
of development. Until very recently, the study of both religion and spirituality was assumed to
fall under the domain of adulthood. Literature on faith development has assumed that both
children and adolescents are incapable of true spirituality because of immature cognitive
development (Fowler, 1981). It was thought that because adolescents do not have complete brain
development, that they may be incapable of having spiritual experiences. However, research is
beginning to paint a new picture of the spiritual lives of adolescents (e.g., Coles, 1990; Hart,
2003).
A survey of 6,800 youth (ages 12-25) from eight countries revealed that 39% rated
themselves as very spiritual, 37% somewhat spiritual, and 24% not spiritual (Search Institute,
2008). Of this same population, 82% said they believed in a God, Goddess, Higher Source,
greater power, or life force. Many claimed to have had meaningful spiritual experiences,
including direct communion with a higher power, angels or other nonphysical beings, feelings of
complete joy or love, and feelings of unity with the planet.
Though there has been a marked increase in research on spirituality in adolescence, very
little research has examined adolescents who are considered exceptionally spiritual, or spiritually
high-functioning. A small popular and theoretical literature has suggested that some youth may
display a level of spiritual awareness beyond their developmental age (Coles, 1990; Hosseini,
Elias, Krauss, & Aishah, 2010; Sinetar, 2002; Sisk, 2008). Some researchers have posited that
there exist youth who display a set of behaviors and have internal experiences and
12. 4
understandings that could be called spiritual intelligence including concern with existential truth,
the capacity for transcendence, a desire to be of service, and the ability to experience
connectedness (Sisk, 2002). To date, no empirical studies were located supporting the assertion
that some adolescents display spiritual intelligence. Thus, a gap in the literature exists which this
study aims to address.
This study investigates whether spiritual intelligence can be found in adolescents ages 12
to 18 and if so, how it is subjectively experienced. It is an assumption of this researcher that
spiritual awareness is possible without mature cognitive and psychological development and that
adolescents are capable of having spiritual experiences, such as, but not limited to unity
consciousness, experiences of universal love, desire to be of service, and decision-making using
intuition. As such, this subject is best approached through the lens of transpersonal psychology,
which explores the full range of human potential, including states beyond ego, which are
characteristic of spiritual intelligence (Hartelius, Caplan, & Rardin, 2007; Sisk, 2008).
Exploration and the validation of the phenomenon would further the research on
adolescent spirituality and development. The validation of spiritual intelligence in adolescence
could challenge current models of faith and spiritual development while also offering insight into
how some youth successfully navigate the many challenges of adolescence. In addition,
exploration of this topic may help inform psychologists, educators, and spiritual mentors how to
best support youth to develop their unique gifts.
13. 5
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Adolescence can be defined as a transitory stage of life wherein the individual moves
from childhood to adulthood (Pint, 2010). Biological changes result from puberty and manifest
as changes in weight, height, body composition, and secondary sex characteristics (Steinberg,
2005). In the United States, adolescence is the time period during which individuals obtain many
of the social and legal rights of adults, including the right to drive a car, vote, and get married, as
well as the ability to establish a separate household.
Erik Erikson (1968/1994) suggested that adolescence is one of the most important and
challenging developmental stages an individual will ever go through. During this time, identity
confusion is at its highest point in an individual’s life. Teens are leaving behind their identities as
dependent children and beginning the process of individuation. During this process, they try on
identities to find who they are, how they fit into the world, and how the world responds to them,
while experiencing tremendous doubt and confusion (Feist & Feist, 2006): “Young people are in
a process of unknown identity, social role, unclear future perspective, and moral purpose”
(Bussing et al., 2010, p. 26).
Cognitively, some research shows adolescence is the time when individuals develop
higher levels of abstract thought (Hacker, 1994). For the first time, individuals are able to think
and see multiple layers of reality, thus formulating ideas about concepts that are bigger than the
egoic self. Adolescents begin to be able to view themselves in more abstract and complex ways
than ever before and begin to view others in similarly complex ways. They can begin to think
hypothetically, imagine different perspectives, and use metacognition to reflect on their own
ideas (Good & Willoughby, 2008). The capacity for abstract thought allows adolescents to start
questioning cultural norms and authority (Bussing et al., 2010).
14. 6
Bussing et al. (2010) have suggested that while adolescents may be given many
opportunities to figure out personality-based identities (i.e., artistic, a jock, beautiful, smart, a
rebel, etc.), they seem to rarely be given the chance to experience or explore a spiritual identity.
New research suggests that adolescence may be a time of particular importance for spiritual and
religious exploration and commitment (Good & Willoughby, 2008). Indeed, adolescence has
only recently been examined as an existentially and spiritually rich stage of life (Berman,
Weems, & Stickle, 2006; Hacker, 1994).
Spirituality, Religiosity, and Adolescence
Defining spirituality and religiosity has long been a challenge to the fields of theology
and psychology (Zinnbauer et al., 1997). Historically, spirituality and religiosity have been
considered to be the same construct (Hill et al., 2000). In his pioneering work, The Varieties of
Religious Experience, William James (1902/2008) described religion in ways that are analogous
to today’s descriptions of spirituality:
Religion, therefore, as I now ask you arbitrarily to take it, shall mean for us the feelings,
acts, and experiences of individual men in their solitude, so far as they apprehend
themselves to stand in relation to whatever they may consider the divine. (p. 29)
Prior to the rise of secularism, the term “religion” was used to describe both institutional
and individual elements of the search for and experience of the sacred (Hill et al., 2000;
Zinnbauer et al., 1997). Zinnbauer et al. (1997) suggested that spirituality was indistinguishable
from religiosity until widespread disillusionment with religion led to a rejection of traditional
religion in favor of personal experiences of communion with the sacred. As a result, the
definition of religion is now narrower than ever before.
In an attempt to characterize and define modern concepts of religion and spirituality,
Zinnbauer et al. (1997) surveyed 346 individuals from different churches and nontraditional
spiritual institutions in the Midwest (M = 40 years of age). Participants wrote down their own
15. 7
definitions of religion and spirituality and were asked to rate themselves on a 5-point Likert scale
regarding the degree to which they considered themselves spiritual and religious. Results showed
that the majority of participants (36%) defined spirituality as “feelings or experiences of
connectedness/relationship/oneness with God/Christ/Higher Power/Transcendent
Reality/Nature/etc.” followed by “personal beliefs such as belief or faith in God/Higher
power/the divine/personal values, etc.” which were expressed by (34%) of the participants
(Zinnbauer et al., 1997, p. 556). Other responses included integrating one’s values into daily life,
striving for inner states of comfort, security, and love. When describing the sacred, 70% of the
definitions referred to traditional terms such as God, Christ, and the church. In contrast, religion
was most commonly defined (22%) as “belief or faith in God/higher power/the divine/personal
values/etc.” followed by “organizational practices or activities such as attendance at services,
performance of rituals, church membership or allegiance” (21%; Zinnbauer et al., 1997, p. 557).
Other definitions included integrating values into daily life, following God’s will, loving others,
personal worship through prayer or meditation, and feeling connected to a transcendent reality.
Statistical analyses revealed that definitions of religiosity and spirituality were significantly
different in terms of content, yet shared some overlap. Religiosity involved institutional beliefs
and practices, whereas spirituality referred to a personal connection to the transcendent.
Thus, this preliminary research supports the notion that religion is largely seen as the
institutional and organizational dogma that structures specific religious groups (Hill et al., 2000);
whereas, spirituality is now seen as the personal experience of the divine or the “feelings,
thoughts, experiences, and behaviors that arise from a search for the sacred” (Hill et al., 2000, p.
66). Alternatively, spirituality has been defined as the capacity to experience and acknowledge
dimensions of reality that transcend ordinary reality (Benson, 1997). Thus, religion may evoke
16. 8
spirituality but is not necessarily qualified as spiritual. For purposes of this research, the
commonly accepted definitions of spirituality and religion as described above (Hill et al., 2000)
are employed throughout this paper; specifically, spirituality is defined as the internal experience
of the sacred; whereas, religion is defined as external institutional rules, dogma, and doctrine
characteristic of a religious tradition.
In the field of psychology, spirituality has been considered to fall into the realm of
adulthood (Benson, 1997). Yet some recent researchers have suggested that spirituality is a
“universal human capacity” (Benson, 1997, p. 206) that transcends age. Indeed, it has been
posited that adolescence is the individual’s first encounter with deep spirituality and existential
angst (Hacker, 1994).
Scholarly literature on childhood and adolescent spirituality is in its infancy. Yet
movements such as the Positive Youth Development movement are focusing on adolescence as a
critical time period and thus driving new research on adolescent mental health, well-being,
spirituality, purpose, and resiliency (Good, Willoughby, & Busseri, 2011; Kim & Esquival,
2011). Increasingly, it has been shown that spirituality and religion may be protective factors for
adolescents (Briggs et al., 2011).
In the early 1980s, Fowler (1981) introduced the first and only existing comprehensive
theory of spiritual development. He expanded on the developmental theories of both Piaget
(1947/2003) and Erikson (1950/1993) and posited the first comprehensive theory of faith,
consisting of seven stages of faith development. Fowler (1981) defined faith as a process of
meaning-making, specifically:
People’s evolved and evolving ways of experiencing self, others and world (as they
construct them) as related to and affected by the ultimate conditions of existence (as they
construct them) and of shaping their lives’ purposes and meanings, trust and loyalties, in
light of the character of being, value and power determining the ultimate conditions of
17. 9
existence (as grasped in their operative images—conscious and unconscious—of them).
(pp. 92-92)
According to Fowler (1981), age 0-2 is the Primal stage in which the newborn/toddler
assesses whether the world is safe or unsafe. During this time, infants form attachments to
caregivers and form internal working models, or schemas, about how the world works. From
ages 3-7, children enter the first actual stage of faith development termed the Intuitive Projective
Faith stage in which they are sponges absorbing culture and learning about cultural norms.
Imagination is active and wild and in this stage Fowler asserted that consciousness is passive and
can be possessed by culture.
Fowler (1981) said that children around the age of 7 move into Mythic-Literal Faith in
which symbol and ritual are literal. The imagination is subdued, thinking becomes linear, and
children in this stage hold onto the notion of justice. Stories, rules, and values create a
predictable and orderly understanding of reality. The relationship with God or the Universe is
seen as reciprocal and children begin to learn the difference between reality and make-believe.
As children enter adolescence, they move into Fowler’s (1981) third stage, Synthetic-
Conventional wherein individuals adhere to rules. Dogma, morals, and conformity are the central
themes of this stage. Adolescents in this stage are thought to adopt unquestioningly the religious
and societal norms of their culture, and to ascribe authority to individuals or groups who
represent those religious and cultural beliefs. Individuals in this stage are not aware that they are
following rules and dogma that have been handed down to them.
Fowler’s (1981) fourth stage is Individuative-Reflective, which begins in young
adulthood. In this stage, individuals begin to separate their identity from that of the group and
begin to question group norms and beliefs. This stage is characterized by struggle and anxiety as
individuals leave the comfort of the tribe to begin the search for individual truth. They begin to
18. 10
define their own values, goals, and meaning apart from the group. At this stage, they begin to
self-define their roles and relationships.
The fifth stage is the Conjunctive stage which may begin in adulthood (Fowler, 1981). In
this stage, individuals develop the capacity to see symbols as holding multiple meanings. This is
the beginning of mysticism and the beginning of feeling the ecstasy of divinity. Individuals are
more concerned with what is true than their beliefs and have no problem finding the unifying
elements in many different religions. In this stage, the individual finds peace with paradox. Truth
is understood to have many different perspectives and contradictions.
Fowler’s (1981) final stage is the Universalizing Faith, in which all people and creatures
are seen as one. Individuals feel compelled to commit themselves completely to a Universal
cause or vision. Spiritual awareness becomes an everyday lived experience. Fowler noted that
some individuals never move through all of the stages, but rather remain in an earlier stage even
through adulthood, as evidenced by adults who remain in the Synthetic-Conventional stage and
never question their inherited religious dogma.
In Fowler’s (1981) theory, adolescents are thought to absorb and ascribe to religious and
cultural norms with little ability to question what cultural and religious doctrine has been handed
down to them. Adolescents also are not considered capable of experiencing the spiritual or
mystical dimensions of life, as that is thought to require full cognitive development. In Fowler’s
model, transcendence is reserved for the chronologically mature. My study indicates that this is
not valid.
Fowler’s (1981) theory has been criticized by many; however, no one has yet presented
another comprehensive model of faith development. Critics argue that Fowler’s (1981) theory
more appropriately describes ego development. He has also been criticized for an overreliance on
19. 11
stage theory (Day, 2001). In introducing stage theory to the psychology of religion, Fowler
limited children’s faith to their cognitive abilities (Roehlkepartain, Benson, King, Wagener,
2006). Day (2001) wrote:
Structuralist approaches to the psychology of religious development . . . have held that
religious development proceeds in a uniform way across a series of universal,
hierarchical, and irreversible stages. It follows a course that moves the human being from
heteronomy to autonomy, in a process of ongoing meaning-making centered in the
cognitive structures of the individuals disposed, as philosophers, to an ongoing concern
with questions of meaning, the nature of the sacred, and relationships between human and
divine activity. (p. 173)
The term development may be misleading as in many cultural and religious traditions spirituality
exists fully formed in newborns (Gottlieb, 2006). Indeed, in some cultures such as that of the
Beng people in West Africa, infants are considered to be the most spiritual of all humans and
childcare is focused on nurturing the spiritual nature of children. According to Day (2001):
“spirituality is more mystical, relational, and divinely gifted than is suggested by the use of the
word development, which can imply a sort of inevitability to the process” (p. 10). Hay and Nye
(2007) echo this sentiment:
the cumulative feeling I am left with after reviewing what we know about childhood
spirituality is an uneasiness about the adequacy of developmental theory to give an
account of it. . . . I do not deny that stage theories have their uses. The major problem is
their narrowness, coming near to dissolving religion into reason and therefore childhood
spirituality into nothing more than a form of immaturity or inadequacy. (p. 57)
Absorption, joy, wonder, reverence, connection with nature, intuition, empathy, and compassion
are spiritual experiences that children and adolescents experience on a regular basis (Hart, 2006).
In his research on the spiritual experiences of children and youth, Hart (2006) conducted both
qualitative and quantitative studies of children who have had spiritual experiences and found that
spirituality is deep and alive in some young people:
Children’s spiritual expressions often go unrecognized or are interpreted as merely
immature religiosity. However, children’s spirituality may exist apart from adult rational
and linguistic conceptions and from knowledge about religion. Although children may
20. 12
not be able to articulate a moment of wonder or conceptualize a religious concept, their
presence—their mode of being and knowing in the world—may be distinctly spiritual.
(pp. 163-164)
To illustrate his point, Hart (2006) tells the story of Karen who said:
I was 15, sitting in silence in my “special spot” outside, a short walk from my family’s
house. I was just sort of tuning in to nature, the little bird and insects here and there. Then
suddenly I had this experience of everything being connected. Both in the sense of just
part of the same, but then, what was most amazing to me was there was also a sense of
everything being equal—the majestic mountain, the blade of grass, and me. (p. 165)
He also described Jim who at age 14 said:
I couldn’t get my teachers to take my questions and ideas seriously. I thought this was
what school was going to be about. There was such a big deal about going off to first
grade, but I kept waiting for us to talk about life—you know, why we’re all here? What’s
this world about? The nature of the universe. Things like that. (Hart, 2006, p. 169)
Indeed, some children and youth display a remarkable capacity for wisdom that is not based on
cognitive ability, but rather from direct inner knowing or transrational processes (Hart, 2006).
Those who have worked with adolescents in a spiritual context assert that adolescent
spirituality is not only real, but deep, powerful, transformative, and ripe with spiritual
experiences (McCulloch, 2003). The central task of adolescence is to find self, understand self,
and expand the self which often presents deep spiritual crises, though this aspect of adolescence
is often overlooked. Indeed, adolescence can be seen as a time of deep existential inquiry, which
often begins the individual’s search for meaning, transcendence, and purpose (Berman et al.,
2006; Hacker, 1994; Kim & Esquival, 2011):
This existential crisis faced by the adolescent results in the intense search for new ways
to affirm life: (a) to search for meaning, (b) to search for linkage with others, (c) to search
for linkage with someone greater than one’s self such as a Supreme Being or God, (d) to
develop a sense of relationship with meaningful philosophies, and (e) to find a way to
bring about purpose for being. (Schlesing, 2005, p. 78)
The search for identity, sense of place, and purpose are all highly spiritual desires that target the
root of existential questions (Benson, 1997; Hacker, 1994).
21. 13
Through the process of breaking away and forming identity, many adolescents may face a
time of breakdown (and possibly a subsequent breakthrough), which results in increased feelings
of emptiness and the need to search for personal meaning.
An adolescent can awaken one morning with the insight that, for the first time in his or
her life, an incredible feeling of isolation and loneliness stemming from a sense of not
belonging has invaded his or her thoughts. An adolescent also can gain, in a moment, the
insight that who he or she is no longer depends on what others believe but rather on who
he or she wants to become. (Hacker, 1994, p. 304)
Adolescence seems to be a spiritually sensitive time of identify formation and deep existential
questioning.
The spiritual needs of adolescents during this transitory time of profound biological,
emotional, mental, and social changes have not been explored nor researched. What has been
demonstrated is that spirituality and religiosity seem to be protective factors during the critical
time period of adolescence, even though the exact mechanisms of this are not known.
Research on Religiosity and Spirituality in Adolescents
Research on spirituality and religiosity in adolescence has mostly focused on their
generally positive effects on mental health, well-being, and resiliency. Berman et al. (2006)
sought to examine the sources of existential anxiety in youth using the three-domain framework
posited by Tillich (1952): anxiety about fate and death, emptiness and meaninglessness, and guilt
and condemnation. Participants comprised 139 adolescents ages 15-18 (M = 16.7, 70% were
female, 30% were male) recruited from high school psychology classes in Florida. Researchers
administered three measures: the 13-item Existential Anxiety Questionnaire (EAQ) using true-
false statements to measure the subdomains of Tillich’s theory; the 18-item Brief Symptom
Inventory using a 5-point Likert scale measuring depression, anxiety, and somatization; and the
Ego Identity Process Questionnaire to assess identity status.
22. 14
Existential concerns were highly prevalent in the sample. Results showed that 70% of the
sample reported anxiety related to emptiness, 64% to fate, 59% to guilt, 53% to condemnation,
48% to death, and 30% to meaninglessness (Berman et al., 2006). EAQ was also found to be
correlated with anxiety and depression. Limitations of this study include the cross-sectional
design, homogenous sample, and ratio of females to males. However, this study indicates that
many young people grapple with abstract and complex existential issues such as emptiness.
Similarly, Davis, Kerr, and Kurpius (2003) examined the effect of spirituality and/or
religiosity on 45 adolescents (25 female, 20 male) ranging in age from 14 to 17 (M = 15.2) who
were part of a nationally sponsored workshop for at-risk youth (defined as having talent or
leadership potential and being economically impoverished, undersupported, minority status, and
engaging in delinquent behaviors). Participants completed the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory
which measures situational and chronic anxiety; the Spiritual Well-Being Scale which measures
religious and existential well-being; the Allport/Ross Religious Orientation Scale which
measures extrinsic and intrinsic religiosity; and the Social Provisions Scale which measures the
social provisions of attachment, opportunity for nurturance, social integration, guidance,
reassurance of worth, and reliable alliance.
Results (Davis et al., 2003) demonstrated significant correlations between trait anxiety
and spiritual well-being for males (r = .58, p <.01). When spiritual well-being was analyzed by
its subscales of existential well-being and religious well-being, males reported significantly
higher existential well-being than their female counterparts. In addition, existential well-being
was negatively correlated with trait anxiety for both males (r = -.48, p < .05) and females (r = -
.39, p < .05). Existential well-being was a significant predictor of trait anxiety. The study
indicates that spirituality and religiosity affect anxiety in adolescents, and that existential well-
23. 15
being may be a more salient construct than religious well-being when looking at trait anxiety. A
limitation of this study is the use of at-risk adolescents and small sample size. Nevertheless, this
study supports the idea that adolescents may be deeply concerned with existential issues and that
spirituality may buffer existential anxiety.
Indeed, the link between spirituality/religiosity and adolescent mental health has been
demonstrated by a number of studies (Benson, 1997). Increased spirituality and religiosity have
been tied to positive developmental outcomes including decreased sexual activity, decreased
substance abuse, decreased violence, and increased prosocial values such as helping others, more
harmonious family relationships, and greater academic success (Benson, 1997; Good &
Willoughby, 2008). These findings however, do not differentiate between spiritual and religious
causes. Most empirical studies have focused on religion as a protective factor in adolescence.
Rasic et al. (2011) examined the self-rated personal importance of religion and frequency
of attendance at religious services with risk of depression and risky behaviors in adolescents ages
15-19 in Nova Scotia. A total of 1,615 individuals (number of females and males not provided)
were administered the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale to measure levels of
depression, a survey measuring alcohol and drug use along with suicidal thinking, a four-item
scale measuring the importance of religion and frequency of church service attendance, and a
measure of social capital which was defined as perceived trustworthiness of school peers.
Separate analyses were conducted for males and females because of distinct risk factors for
depression, suicidal behavior, and substance abuse. Results showed that the relationship between
religiosity, mental health, and substance abuse is different for each sex.
Religious importance was shown to have weak protective effects for depression and
suicidal thoughts in females, although findings became nonsignificant when constructs of social
24. 16
trust and substance use were not used (Rasic et al., 2011). In females, religious attendance was
found to be a protective factor for substance abuse. In males, religious importance was a
protective factor for substance use, and religious attendance was a protective factor for binge
drinking. Limitations of this study include the inability to infer causation, self-report bias, and a
homogenous sample from one area. However, results suggest that religiosity may positively
affect adolescent mental health and engagement in risky behaviors.
Sawatzky, Gadermann, and Pesut (2009) examined the relationships between spirituality,
health, and quality of life (QOL) in adolescents. Researchers hypothesized that
(a) spirituality is associated with physical and mental health status in adolescents, (b)
spirituality and health status have the potential to contribute to adolescents’ QOL, and (c)
there are other aspects of life, often referred to as life domains, that are relevant to
adolescents’ QOL. (Sawatzky et al., 2009, p. 7)
The five life domains examined were family, friends, school experiences, living environment,
and perception of self. Data were obtained through a cross-sectional sample of 8,225 adolescents
(50% male and 50% female) in grades 7 to 12 (M = 15.2 years of age) who participated in the
British Columbia Youth Survey on Smoking and Health II. Participants attended 49 schools in
different areas of British Colombia, Canada, and were administered surveys during class.
Measures included an adapted form of the Spiritual Well-being Scale to assess existential
spirituality on a 5-point Likert scale (e.g., “I believe there is some real purpose in my life”), the
Multidimensional Students’ Life Satisfaction Scale (MSLSS) using a 6-point Likert scale to
measure satisfaction with four life domains (school, friends, self, living environment), and two
items measuring quality of life using a 5-point Likert scale (e.g., “I am satisfied with my quality
of life”). Analyses were run based on polychoric correlations.
Results showed that 89% of the participants agreed or strongly agreed that their life has a
real purpose (Sawatzky et al., 2009). In addition, 86% agreed or strongly agreed that there is real
25. 17
meaning in life. Interestingly, only 17% of the participants strongly agreed and 32% agreed that
religiosity and spirituality were a source of comfort. Spirituality was significantly correlated with
global QOL. Of the six attributes of spirituality measured, existential matters were the best
predictor of QOL. Spiritual and religious attributes were also significantly associated with
perceived mental health status and perceived physical health status, though to a lesser degree.
Limitations of this study include the homogeneity of the sample (72.6% were Caucasian) and
possible bias given that some surveys were administered electronically and others by pen and
paper. Despite this, this study shows that spirituality and religiosity do have an influence on
adolescents’ quality of life and mental health. Of particular interest is the result that existential
factors of spirituality were the most salient factor when predicting QOL.
Markstrom, Huey, and Krause (2010) sought to test three hypotheses: (a) that adolescent
females would score higher than males on religious attendance, empathy, volunteerism, care for
others, and perspective taking; (b) that adolescents who were more religious would score higher
on volunteerism, empathy, care, and perspective taking; and (c) that care and volunteerism would
predict the level of empathy and perspective taking for both males and females regardless of
religiosity. A sample of 165 males and 263 females (n = 428) ranging in age from 15 to 17 from
rural West Virginia was used. Most participants self-identified as White and Christian.
Participants were asked about their religious participation (e.g., “How often do you attend
religious services?” and “How important are religious or spiritual beliefs in your day-to-day
life?”). Questions were answered with multiple choice or on a 7-point Likert scale as applicable.
Three other variables were assessed: empathic concern/perspective taking, care, and
volunteerism. To measure empathic concern/perspective taking, the Interpersonal Reactivity
Index was administered. A single yes or no question was used to assess volunteerism, which was
26. 18
“Do you currently do any volunteer work (without pay)?” Care was assessed using an 8-item
subscale from the Psychosocial Inventory of Ego Strengths using a 5-point Likert scale.
Females scored significantly higher than males on religious attendance, importance of
beliefs, empathic concern, perspective taking, and care (Markstrom et al., 2010). There were no
significant differences between sexes regarding volunteerism. Religious attendance was
significantly positively correlated with care for others for males (r = .25, p = .00) and females (r
= .21, p = .00) yet z tests showed no significant differences. For females, importance of beliefs
was significantly positively correlated with empathic concern (r = .12, p = .046) but not for
males. For males, importance of beliefs was significantly correlated with perspective taking (r =
.15, p = .04) but not for females. Religious attendance was not a significant predictor of empathic
concern or perspective taking in either sex. Multiple regressions revealed that importance of
beliefs and not religious attendance was a better predictor of empathic concern, perspective
taking, care, and volunteerism.
Self-acknowledged limitations of this study were the small quantity of items measuring
attendance and spirituality, homogenous sample size, and lack of measurement of social
desirability (Markstrom et al., 2010). Other limitations included the low number of items
measuring particular constructs such as volunteerism and care, which compromises validity.
Wong, Rew, and Slaikeu (2006) conducted a systematic review of recent research on the
relationship between adolescent spirituality and religiosity and mental health. Researchers
defined religiosity as an individual’s relationship with a faith tradition or doctrine. They defined
spirituality as the intrinsic experience of the sacred which involves the search for meaning,
purpose, and connectedness. Twenty articles on quantitative studies focused on adolescent
mental health populations in the United States published between 1998 and 2004 were selected
27. 19
from CINAHL, ERIC, Medline, PsychINFO, and Sociological Abstracts database. Demographic
data revealed that the majority of participants self-identified as Christian, yet two studies used
exclusively African American samples and one utilized an Asian Indian American sample. Two
studies used only female samples. All participants were in school.
Articles were analyzed and categories of religiosity and spirituality were extracted (Wong
et al., 2006). Categories were coded as “institutional” (e.g., focusing on the social and behavioral
elements), “ideological” (e.g., beliefs, attitudes, ideology), “personal devotion” (e.g., personal
devotion and private practices), “existential” (existential well-being), “multidimensional” (e.g., a
combination of the other factors), and “generic” (e.g., generic or vague). In addition, analyses
examined the relationship between adolescent religiosity/spirituality and negative and positive
aspects of mental health. Out of the 20 studies analyzed, 18 (90%) demonstrated positive
findings suggesting that adolescents who reported high levels of religiosity and spirituality also
report better mental health.
Of the religiosity and spirituality factors, institutional and existential were the best
predictors of adolescent mental health (Wong et al., 2006), and ideological and personal
devotion, the poorest predictors. In addition, religiosity and spirituality mediated mental health
more often for boys than girls and more often in older adolescents than younger adolescents.
Self-acknowledged limitations included the use of data from only the United States, the use of
only published studies leading to possible bias, and possible inflation of terms based on
conceptual overlap between religiosity and spirituality. Despite this, the systematic review serves
as strong evidence that a relationship between religiosity/spirituality and mental health does exist
in adolescence. In addition, it suggests that the variables encompassed by the institutional and
existential categories might have particular salience for adolescent populations.
28. 20
As evidenced by these studies, spirituality and religiosity have been shown to positively
affect mental health outcomes in adolescence. Both have been shown to be a protective factor in
youth in that they are related to reduced anxiety, increased prosocial behaviors, decreased
substance abuse, and decreased sexual activity. Specifically, existential well-being seems to be
an important predictor of adolescent mental health.
Substantial research demonstrates that spirituality and religiosity positively impact
healthy identity formation, civic engagement, purpose, and resilience. Yet, less is known about
spirituality and religiosity as domains of development in their own right (Good et al., 2011). In
2005, researchers from UCLA’s Higher Education Research Institute conducted a survey of
112,232 college freshman (55% female, 45% male, mean age not reported) from 236 colleges
and universities across the United States (Astin, Astin, Lindholm, Bryant, Szelenyi, &
Calderone, 2005). Data from 98,593 participants and 209 institutions were used in the final
analysis since participation from some institutions was deemed too low. Student religious
preferences indicated that 19 different religions were represented, with 12 of them being
Christian denominations. The most represented religions included: 28% Roman Catholic, 17%
no religion, 13% Baptist, and 11% Other Christian. Seventy-seven percent of participants
believed that “we are all spiritual beings.” In addition, four in five students reported “having an
interest in spirituality” and “believing in the sacredness of life.” Approximately two-thirds of
participants agreed that “my spirituality is a source of joy” and three-fourths reported that they
“are searching for meaning/purpose in life.” Three in four freshman reported having had a
spiritual experience while in nature, and half had one while listening to music. Religion was also
of great importance, with four in five attending religious services in the past year and regularly
discussing religion and spirituality with friends and family. The majority (74%) felt a “sense of
29. 21
connection with God/Higher power that transcends my personal self.” In addition, 47% had
sought out opportunities to help themselves grow more spiritually.
Interestingly, survey results support the notion that adolescence may be a time of deep
questioning (Astin et al., 2005). Sixty-five percent of the participants reported having “felt
distant from God” at different times in their lives, and 57% had questioned their religious beliefs.
This further supports the possibility that adolescence is a sensitive time for spiritual development
(Good et al., 2011). However, the mean age, sex breakdown, ethnic breakdown, and
socioeconomic breakdown of this sample were not reported. The sample included only college
students, a socioeconomically privileged population.
In another survey of adolescent spirituality conducted by the Search Institute involving
12,000 public school students in grades 6-12 (breakdown by sex not reported) recruited from a
large Southwestern city in the United States, 48% said “being religious or spiritual” was of high
importance, and 17% said it was somewhat important (Benson, 1997). Students were asked to
rate the importance of their values. “Helping other people” was rated highest (74%), followed by
“equality” (60%), honesty (59%), “making the world a better place” (57%), and
religion/spirituality (48%). Even though religion and spirituality as an explicit value were rated
fifth, the other variables may be seen as reflections of spirituality or spiritual awareness. It is
possible that adolescents place importance on spiritual values without understanding or labeling
them as spiritual.
In a study by Good et al. (2011), researchers sought to describe configurations of
spirituality/religiosity over time based on four dimensions of spirituality. Researchers used a
longitudinal, person-centered analysis approach. A sample of 803 students (52% female, 48%
male) from eight high schools in Ontario completed a survey during grade 11 (M = 16.42 years
30. 22
of age) and then the following year in grade 12 (M = 17.36 years of age). The survey consisted of
questions about involvement in religious activities (e.g., “How often in the last month have you
gone to religious/spiritual meetings other than church/synagogue/temple”), enjoyment of
religious activities (e.g., “I enjoy attending activities held by my religious/spiritual group”),
wondering about spiritual issues (e.g., “I often wonder about spiritual issues [i.e., life after death,
the existence of a higher power, etc.]), psychological effects of spirituality (e.g., “Even when I
experience problems, I can find a spiritual peace inside”), frequency of prayer (e.g., ”in the past
month, how often have you prayed?”), and frequency of meditation (e.g., “In the past month,
how often have you meditated?”). Participants rated their responses on a 5-point Likert scale
assessing frequency or agreement, as applicable.
Results showed that adolescents could be divided into five clusters (Good et al., 2011):
36% in Grade 11 and 5% in Grade 12 were characterized by low involvement with religion,
meditation, and prayer, but high concern with spiritual issues, the Disconnected Wanderers; 24%
of students in Grade 11 and 26% in Grade 12 revealed low involvement with religious
institutions, yet frequent use of prayer suggesting a personal connection with the divine, the
Personal group; 17% of students in Grade 11 and 8% in Grade 12 were shown to be affectively
and behaviorally engaged with the institutional and personal elements of spirituality/religiosity,
the Institutional/Personal group; 14% of students in Grade 11 and 13% in grade 12 did not note
spiritual/religious feelings or behaviors and said that a connection to the sacred did not represent
a positive effect in their day-to-day life, the Aspiritual/Irreligious group; and 9% of students in
Grade 11 and 8% in Grade 12 who reported frequent engagement in meditation, yet little to no
involvement with religion, the Meditators.
31. 23
These five clusters remained stable from Grade 11 to Grade 12 (Good et al., 2011).
However, one notable effect emerged: adolescents in the Institutional/Personal cluster in Grade
12 reported higher levels of involvement in religious activities and enjoyment of those activities
as compared to their results from Grade 11. Researchers suggested that this may reflect a
crystallization and commitment to religion. In addition, individuals in the Institutional/Personal
cluster in Grade 11 were more likely than chance to be described as fitting into the Personal
cluster by Grade 12. The researchers acknowledged that 1 year may be insufficient time to
measure stability of spirituality/religiosity patterns. Another acknowledged limitation was the
homogenous sample.
Bussing et al. (2010) examined which aspects of spirituality are valued by adolescents
using their own Aspects of Spirituality (ASP) questionnaire (Bussing, Ostermann, & Matthissen,
2007), which measures both religiosity and spirituality and quantifies the cognitive, emotional,
intentional, and behavioral aspects of both religion (defined as an institutional and organized
closed system of belief) and spirituality (defined as the multidimensional and internal search for
purpose and meaning). The ASP consists of 25 statements (e.g., “I orient myself with ethical
norms”) rated by agreement on a 5-point Likert scale. It includes four scales derived from
previous research and pilot-tested on adolescents taking religious courses in high school
(Bussing et al., 2007): Search for Insight/Wisdom (existential and philosophical views, e.g.,
“Trying to develop wisdom,” “Life is a search and question for answers”), Conscious
Interactions (humanistic views, e.g., “Conscious interaction with others,” “Conscious interaction
with myself”), Religious Orientation (religious views, e.g., “Praying for others,” “Reading
religious or spiritual books”), and Transcendence Conviction (esoteric views, e.g., “Convinced of
a rebirth of man,” “Convinced that man is a spiritual being”). In addition, participants were
32. 24
administered the Brief Multidimensional Life Satisfaction Scale (BMLSS) which assesses life-
satisfaction on a 7-point Likert scale across eight different dimensions: Myself, Overall Life,
Friendships, Family Life, School, Location, Financial Situation, and Future prospects. Surveys
were administered to 254 adolescents (51% female, 49% male, mean age 16.6 years) from four
high schools in Germany. Most students had a Christian background. However, 67% identified
as being neither spiritual nor religious; 21% rated themselves religious, but not spiritual; and 6%
rated themselves as spiritual, but not religious. Reliability, factorial analyses, analyses of
variance, and correlation analyses were run with a p > 0.05 significance level. Researchers
confirmed the factorial structure of the ASP by combining adolescent data with data from 988
healthy adults. The instrument was found to have good internal consistency: Cronbach’s alpha =
.94 for the whole sample, and Cronbach’s alpha = .90 for the adolescent sample.
The adolescents rated “Conscious Interactions” as the most relevant variable to their own
sense of spirituality, followed by “Search for Insight/Wisdom.” “Prayer/Trust in God” and
“Transcendence Conviction” were rated as the least important (Bussing et al., 2010). Researchers
said that 16 and 17 year old adolescents most appreciated humanistic values such as “Conscious
Interactions,” “Compassion/Generosity,” and “Aspiring for Beauty/Wisdom.” Existential and
religious values, such as “Religious Orientation,” “Transcendence Conviction,” and “Quest
Orientation” (not defined), were rated of least importance. Females scored significantly higher
on the “Compassion/Generosity” dimension than males. Findings confirmed results of a pilot
study that most adolescents do not consider themselves to be religious or spiritual, yet value
conscious interactions with peers, family, and authority figures. Researchers suggested that
adolescents may cognitively reject the notion of religion or spirituality, but emotionally “there
seems to be a longing to be sheltered, guided, and beloved by an external transcendental being
33. 25
providing meaning and direction in a complicated life” (Bussing et al., 2010, p. 40). Though this
study may suggest possible nuances in adolescent spirituality, the sample consisted of only
German youth whom the researchers observed may have a more pragmatic attitude that rejects
ideas of religion and spirituality (the United States is generally considered a more religious
country compared to most Northern European countries).
Rew, Wong, Torres, and Howell (2007) sought to investigate the role of family and
friends’ influence on spirituality and religiosity and to explore the diversity of spiritual and
religious experiences in older adolescents between 18 and 21 years of age. Qualitative data were
collected from 28 undergraduates (17 women, 11 men) from a public university in the
Southwest. The sample consisted of 10 Caucasians, 10 Asian American/Pacific Islanders, 4
Hispanics, 3 African Americans, and 1 biracial individual. Participants responded to 10 open-
ended questions related to their spirituality/religiosity, how it differs from their friends’ or
parents’, how beliefs have influenced life decisions, and how beliefs or practices have changed
since starting college. All participants were compensated $30 for their time. Data were coded and
categorized into themes.
The majority of participants described their beliefs and practices as similar to one or both
parents’ (Rew et al., 2007). However, participants also described themselves as being more
open-minded and questioning than their parents. Overall, most participants said they had both
similar and different beliefs than their friends. The majority also stated that their beliefs and
practices had at least some effect on major life decisions. Over half indicated no change in
beliefs since arriving at college. However, many reported questioning spiritual and religious
beliefs after being exposed to new ideas, beliefs, and practices. A major limitation of the study is
the small sample size.
34. 26
As has been shown, adolescence seems to be a time of deep existential questioning in
which youth grapple with constructs of God, empathy, altruism, and connection to others.
Research on adolescent spirituality has been increasingly emerging in scholarly literature for
over a decade. Substantial literature exists pertaining to the positive effects of spirituality and
religiosity on mental health, prosocial values, and resiliency in adolescent populations. Most
adolescents rate spirituality and/or religiosity as important, and the majority of adolescents seem
to identify as spiritual even if they do not explicitly describe themselves as such, suggesting that
conceptual spirituality and lived spirituality may be different for this population.
It is important to note sex differences evident among adolescents, with males displaying
less existential anxiety and females displaying more empathic concern, religious attendance,
perspective taking, importance of beliefs, compassion, and care. Religiosity and spirituality also
seem to more positively affect mental health for males than females and more often in older
adolescents than younger adolescents. This suggests the possibility of developmental differences
related to spiritual development in males and females, though this has yet to be researched. It is
also possible that females are acculturated to respond in more empathic ways and thus suffer
from social bias in self-report measures. More research is needed on the differences between
male and female adolescents’ sense of spirituality.
Spiritual Intelligence and Adolescents
Though scholarly literature has begun to examine spirituality and religiosity in youth,
almost no research examines adolescents who could be considered spiritually high functioning.
Current research on spiritual intelligence in adolescence is theoretical in nature, but suggests that
some adolescents may utilize spiritual principles at higher than average levels.
35. 27
In the last 20 years, the concept of spiritual intelligence (or SQ) has gained some
momentum in popular and scholarly literature. The notion of multiple intelligences by Gardner
(1983) argued for intelligences other than intellectual intelligence (IQ), which focuses on logical
rational intelligence, including the possibility of a spiritual intelligence. However, controversy
exists over the construct of SQ and whether it is best operationalized as an “intelligence.” No
singular definition of SQ exists, making it hard to define as a theoretical construct.
Gardner (1999) suggested that intelligence may be understood as “a biopsychological
potential to process information that can be activated in a cultural setting to solve problems or
create products that are of value in a culture” (p. 34). He identified eight intelligences: linguistic,
logical-mathematical, musical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and
naturalist. Gardner (1999) suggested that each intelligence functions separately as an
independent system and could be qualified as an intelligence if it met the following criteria:
1. An identifiable and consistent set of operations
2. An evolutionary advantage or potential
3. A characteristic pattern of development
4. Potential isolation by brain damage
5. Case studies of exceptional humans with or without the intelligence system
6. Potential to encode in a symbol system
7. Support from experimental psychological experiments
8. Support from psychometric findings. (pp. 62-65)
Subsequently, Goleman (1995) popularized the concept of emotional intelligence, based
on the research of Boyatzis (e.g., Boyatzis & Sala, 2004) of motive and trait-level intrapersonal
and interpersonal competencies. He suggested that emotional intelligence is the ability to
empathize, persist, self-regulate, hope, and engage in self-awareness. According to Goleman
(1995), emotional intelligence dictates how IQ is used in that it enables a person to navigate the
inevitable trials and tribulations of life.
36. 28
Emmons (2000) expanded upon the notion of emotional intelligence to suggest the
possibility of a spiritual intelligence. He found that one of the hallmarks of intelligence is the
ability to problem-solve and promote the goals of a person (Sternberg, 1990). He defined
spirituality as the search for and experience of the sacred or transcendent and suggested that
spiritual intelligence might be a subset of spirituality that allows an individual to use spiritual
themes and abilities to solve problems. Emmons (2000) considered spirituality “a set of specific
abilities or capacities” that may “underlie a variety of problem-solving skills relevant to
everyday life situations” (p. 8), congruent with Gardner’s (1999) criteria. Emmons (2000)
defined spiritual intelligence as “a framework for identifying and organizing skills and abilities
needed for the adaptive use of spirituality” (p. 163). However, Emmons (2000) was also careful
to note that spirituality cannot be reduced to the capacity to problem solve, but rather
encompasses the ability to solve everyday problems. He identified five characteristics that define
spiritual intelligence:
1. The capacity for transcendence—experiences that go beyond the purely physical, a
sense of going beyond the purely physical
2. The ability to enter into heightened spiritual states of consciousness—also known as
exceptional human experiences
3. The ability to see the sacred in everyday life
4. The ability to use spiritual resources to solve daily problems
5. The capacity to engage in virtuous behavior or to be virtuous—to show forgiveness,
to express gratitude, to be humble, and to practice compassion. (Emmons, 2000, p. 3)
Gardner (2000) refuted Emmons’ (2000) view, arguing insufficient evidence to support
the concept of spiritual intelligence. He said that intelligence refers to cognition and information
processing and that Emmons uses intelligence to describe “motivation, emotions, personality,
and morality” (Gardner, 2000, p. 33). Gardner rejected the idea of a spiritual intelligence, but
suggested the possibility of an existential intelligence that encompasses many of the variables
considered to make up spiritual intelligence. However, Gardner (2003) acknowledged that the
37. 29
criteria for separate intelligences are judgmental and not fixed. He viewed the concept of
intelligence from a reductionist lens whereas Emmons (2000) viewed it from a holistic lens. This
suggests that even though Gardner (2000) established his eight criteria for defining an
intelligence, they may be subjective.
Some researchers have criticized Gardner’s (2000) criteria for intelligence. Noble (2000)
suggested that spiritual intelligence is a dynamic concept that cannot be defined in a static way.
In addition, Sisk and Torrance (2001) criticize Gardner’s definition because it fails “to take into
account the multisensory perspective of problem solving that employs vision and intuition, the
primary problem solving tools of Einstein, Tesla, and Hildegarde de Bingen to name a few” (p.
6).
Mayer (2000) suggested that what is considered spiritual intelligence might be better
described as spiritual consciousness. He described consciousness as the structuring of awareness,
or the ability to be aware of one’s self as opposed to cognition, which is mental process. He
refined Emmons’ five characteristics of spiritual intelligence to reflect consciousness rather than
cognition:
1. Attending to the transcendent
2. Consciously entering into altered states of awareness
3. Attending to the sacred in everyday life
4. Structuring consciousness so that daily problems are seen as part of the spiritual life
5. Desiring to act and acting in virtuous ways (through forgiveness, compassion,
humility, and gratitude). (Mayer, 2000, p. 47)
He suggested that it might be more appropriate to describe spiritual intelligence as a state of
awareness or beingness rather than as a mental ability. Mayer (2000) is especially critical of
Emmons’ fifth aspect of spiritual intelligence because virtuous behavior is based more on
temperament than cognition, which suggests that it fits under the realm of personality, not
cognition.
38. 30
As a result of these critiques, Emmons (2000) retracted his fifth criterion, but maintained
that spiritual intelligence is what facilitates taking action in the world and using skills to
problem-solve in a spiritually adaptive way. Thus, he maintained that spiritual intelligence
should be considered a legitimate intelligence and does belong in the realm of cognition.
Since his introduction of the term, many researchers and laypeople have created their
own definitions of spiritual intelligence. Sinetar (2000) defined spiritual intelligence as a
consciousness that includes full understanding of self, a natural creativity, authenticity, unitive
identification, inspired thought, and compassion. Sisk (2008) said that spiritual intelligence is the
“capacity to use a multisensory approach—intuition, meditation, and visualization—to access
one’s inner knowledge to solve problems of a global nature. SQ includes awareness of unity or
connectedness with self, others, the community, the earth, and the cosmos” (p. 25) and that
“spiritual intelligence can be described as a deep self-awareness in which one becomes more and
more aware of the dimensions of self, not simply as a body, but as a mind-body, and spirit”
(Sisk, 2002, p. 209). Levin (2000) described spiritual intelligence as the realization that human
beings are interconnected and that there is more to the human experience than logic, rationalism,
and physical reality. Zohar and Marshall (2000) described it as the capacity to problem solve
through value, vision, and meaning. Vaughan (2002) defined spiritual intelligence as “a capacity
for a deep understanding of existential questions and insight into multiple levels of
consciousness” (p. 19). Amram (2008) described it as “the ability to apply, manifest, and
embody spiritual resources, values, and qualities to enhance daily functioning and well-being”
(p. 5). A more recent definition by Hosseini et al. (2010) described spiritual intelligence as:
A blend/combination of the individual’s personality characteristics, neurological
processes, specialized cognitive capabilities, and spiritual qualities and interests. It can
help us to outgrow our immediate ego selves and to reach beyond those deeper layers of
potentiality that lie hidden within us. It helps us to live life at a deeper level of meaning.
39. 31
And finally, we can use our SQ to wrestle with problems of good and evil, problems of
life and death, the deepest origins of human suffering, and often despair. (p. 179)
Although this last definition encompasses cognition, personality, and spirituality presented in
previous constructs, it is clear that little consensus exists.
Based on her research of spiritual pathfinders, or great spiritual teachers and leaders, Sisk
(2008) has compiled a list of the major components that make up spiritual intelligence. She
describes them as:
Core capacities Concern with cosmic/existential issues and the skills of meditating,
intuition, and visualization
Core values Connectedness, unity of all, compassion, balance, responsibility,
service
Core experiences Awareness of ultimate values and their meaning, peak experiences,
feelings of transcendence, and heightened awareness
Key virtues Truth, justice, compassion, and caring
Symbolic systems Poetry, music, dance, metaphor, and stories
Cognitive states Rapture. (Sisk, 2008, p. 25)
These characteristics combined with the various definitions of spiritual intelligence suggest that
spiritual intelligence is a deep self-awareness that transcends the ego and is often marked with
existential concern, transcendence, unity, desire to be of service, intuition, and compassion. For
purposes of this research, this definition was used.
Very little research exists on spiritual intelligence. The majority of articles and books on
the topic use varying definitions to explore anecdotal accounts of children, adolescents, and
adults who display what is best described as spiritual intelligence (Sinetar, 2000; Sisk, 2002;
Zohar & Marshall, 2000). Most publications on the subject are theoretical (Hosseini et al. 2010;
Ronel, 2008).
Amram (2007) was one of the first researchers to qualitatively explore spiritual
intelligence and was also the first to develop an ecumenical SQ theory. He interviewed 71 people
from different faith traditions who were considered spiritually intelligent by their associates in
40. 32
that they demonstrated a spirituality that enhanced functioning in everyday life. He conducted
semistructured interviews with people in the following traditions: Buddhism (n = 7), Christianity
(n = 7), Earth-based (Shamanic and Pagan) (n = 6), Eclectic (n = 20), Hindu (n = 5),
Islam/Sufism (n = 5), Jewish (n = 7), Nondual (n = 5), Taoist (n = 4), and Yogic (n = 5).
Interviewees were asked to describe their everyday spiritual practices and qualities, how
spirituality affects their work and relationships, and how spirituality helps them in their daily
functioning. Interviews were coded to identify individual properties and themes. Subsequent
interviews were continued until convergence and saturation were found in a grounded theory
approach. Amram (2007) found seven major themes:
1. Consciousness—Consciously developed self-awareness and self-knowledge
2. Grace—Living in alignment with the self and sacred, loving and trusting life
3. Meaning—Experiencing significance in daily life and engaging in service with a
sense of purpose
4. Transcendence—Going beyond the physical and egoic self into experiencing
something more
5. Truth—Living with acceptance and love for all of creation
6. Serenity—Peaceful surrender to Self or concept of God
7. Inner-Directedness—Freedom coupled with wise action. (p. 3)
The author concluded, “that most spiritual and wisdom traditions cultivate a universal set of
qualities that are adaptive, i.e., increase functioning and wellbeing” (Amram, 2007, p. 6).
Participants reported regularly using SQ capacities such as intuition and holistic thinking.
According to Amram (2007),
An ecumenical theory of spiritual intelligence holds an expanded view of human
potential. In this view, people are capable of experiencing existential meaning,
developing refined consciousness, living in grace, love and reverence for life, being
curious and open to truth, and attaining peacefulness, wholeness, and inner-directed
freedom. (p. 6)
Amram (2007) found many traits that seem to phenomenologically describe and possibly define
spiritual intelligence amongst many religious and spiritual traditions. However, other traits may
41. 33
exist that the participants were not able to articulate. Results point to possible themes in spiritual
intelligence, but cannot be extrapolated beyond the adult spiritual leaders of the traditions
described.
In one of the two peer-reviewed quantitative studies on spiritual intelligence and
adolescence found, Annalakshmi and Tony (2011) examined the relationship between spiritual
intelligence and resilience in Catholic youth. They attempted to identify strong predictors of
resilience in adolescents between the ages of 16 and 19 in Ernakulum, Kerala.
One hundred and forty-one females and 79 males (N = 220) were recruited from Roman
Catholic schools and churches (Annalakshmi & Tony, 2011). Participants completed the
Integrated Spiritual Intelligence Scale (ISIS), which was developed by Amram and Dryer (2008)
and the BU Resilience Scale (BURS), developed by the researchers to measure resilience, which
was defined as the ability to cope with stress and catastrophe. The ISIS consists of 45 statements
on a 6-point Likert scale measuring 22 variables including beauty, gratitude, wholeness,
intuition, service, and truth. The BURS consisted of 30 self-assessment statements on a Likert
scale measuring reaction to negative events, ability to recover normal functioning, response to
risk factors, perception of past, definition of problem, hope/confidence in regards to the future,
and openness/flexibility to experience. The Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient was found to
be 0.88 (0.83 for the current sample). The ISIS was reported as having a Cronbach’s alpha of
0.97 (0.85 for the current sample). Data were analyzed using multiple regressions (Annalakshmi
& Tony, 2011). Results showed that intuition, synthesis, beauty, discernment, gratitude,
immanence, joy, purpose, service, higher self, holism, equanimity, inner wholeness, openness,
presence, and trust were significantly positively correlated with resilience at the 0.00 level.
Those 16 capabilities were analyzed using a stepwise method. A five factor model emerged, F(5,
42. 34
214) = 20.65, p > 0.000 in which trust, equanimity, joy, discernment, and synthesis accounted for
57% of the variance (Adjusted R square = 0.3). A posthoc power analysis revealed the power of
the analysis was 1.00. VIF range was 1.1 to 1.2 with a tolerance range of 0.9 which indicated no
presence of multicollinearity.
The study results showed high correlations between spiritual intelligence and resilience
(Annalakshmi & Tony, 2011). However, the sample was too specific to be generalizable.
Additionally, use of the ISIS, which was normed on American adults and includes many items
particular to adult populations, may be problematic.
In the second study involving spiritual intelligence and adolescence, Hosseini et al.
(2010) investigated the effects of spiritual intelligence training (SI-G) in Iranian students in
Kuala Lumpur in a quasi-experimental design. Participants included 120 Iranian girls (M = 15
years of age) living in Malaysia who were attending an Iranian school. The measure was Amram
and Dryer’s (2008) ISIS. The reliability of the scale was measured in a pilot test completed with
30 students. The remaining 90 participants were then administered the ISIS, and the lowest
scoring 34 participants were selected for the experimental portion of the study, and randomly
divided into two groups of 17. The experimental group was given five spiritual intelligence
training sessions, which consisted of 130 minutes of training per week. The control group
partook in their regular training programs, such as life skills and religious studies. A post test
was administered 3 weeks later to assess training stability.
Results were analyzed using data from 16 students in each group although the reason for
the reduction in sample was not explained (Hosseini et al., 2010). The mean score for the control
group was 3.95 and 3.96 for the experimental group. The control group showed significant
change only in the purpose subscale (t = 2.40, p ≥ .05, M = 0.47). The experimental group
43. 35
showed a significant difference in pre and post tests (t = 6.08, p < .0001), with gratitude showing
the largest effect size (t = 7.42, p ≤ .0001).
The follow up test showed that the “training program did not have good sustainability on
SQ and some of the subscales” (Hosseini et al., 2010, p. 186). However, the researchers
concluded that the training program positively affected SQ. Major limitations of this study
include the small sample size and specific population (Hosseini et al., 2010) in addition to
potential problems with using the ISIS with this population. All in all, it is questionable whether
spiritual intelligence may be improved with training.
Taken together, these studies suggest that spiritual intelligence may be related to positive
psychological outcomes. It is also unclear whether adolescents possess high spiritual
intelligence. To date, no measures of spiritual intelligence have been created for and normed on
an adolescent population.
Surprisingly, little research also exists on the components that comprise SQ, namely
empathy, altruism, compassion, transcendence, emotional intelligence, and intuition as they
relate to adolescent populations. Empathy has been the most researched, specifically, the
development of empathy through childhood and adolescence (e.g., Eisenberg, Eggum, &
Edwards, 2010), with some research on emotional intelligence, altruism, and transpersonal
commitment. Empirical studies on compassion and intuition in adolescent populations were not
found.
Empathy seems to be the underlying variable in many of the components of SQ such as
altruism, compassion, and emotional intelligence. Eisenberg et al. (2010) defined empathy as:
an affective response stemming from the apprehension or comprehension of another’s
emotional state or condition; thus, it is a response that is identical, or very similar, to
what the other person is feeling or might be expected to be feeling. (p. 115)
44. 36
Hoffman (2001) defined empathy as “a feeling that fits someone else’s condition more than
one’s own. This feeling may or may not exactly match that of the other person” (p. 62).
Empathy, then, can be seen as experiencing the affective state of another.
It has been suggested that empathy plays a key role in moral development and actions
(Hay & Cook, 2007). Empathy seems to be a precursor to prosocial behaviors such as helping
alleviate another’s suffering. It has been suggested that empathy precedes altruism and other
prosocial behaviors (Eisenberg et al., 2010; Raboteg-Saric, 1997). Conversely, a lack of empathy
is associated with conduct problems, aggression, and delinquency in youth (Frick & White,
2008).
Empathic behavior has been observed as early as infancy (Hay & Cook, 2007). Hoffman
(1977, 2001) proposed the most detailed developmental model of empathy, suggesting that
empathy includes a behavioral aspect (helping), a cognitive aspect (moral reasoning), and an
affective aspect (empathy). In his observations of children, he noticed five stages of empathic
distress. He postulated that in infancy, children have no boundaries and cannot differentiate
between themselves and another. As they grow, they differentiate themselves from others and
progress from trying to appease their own empathic distress to engaging in prosocial behaviors
that reduce the distress of another.
Specifically, in the first stage, newborns exhibit global empathic distress when they see
or hear another newborn crying and respond by crying themselves (Hoffman, 1977, 2001). By 6
months of age, infants seem to only cry in response to prolonged crying by another. At 11-12
months, infants engage in egocentric empathic distress. At this point, they will whimper and
watch another infant or child in distress. After age 1, children exhibit quasi-egocentric empathic
distress and begin to make helpful gestures such as patting, kissing, advising, hugging, and
45. 37
soliciting help from adults on behalf of a peer in distress. Hoffman (1977, 2001) thought that
children at this age may be just starting to understand what are their own desires and those of
others. In the fourth stage, children at age 2 show increasingly accurate empathy for another’s
feeling. Children recognize that they are separate from others at this point and thus engage in
prosocial behaviors that will alleviate the suffering of others. In the fifth stage, children ages 6-9
begin to experience empathic distress beyond the situation. Hoffman (1977, 2001) suggested that
at this age, children form an identity that is coherent and solid which enables them to empathize
and engage in even more prosocial behaviors. Additionally, he speculated that children are able
to feel compassion at this point. Hoffman’s (1977, 2001) theory of empathic distress
development marks the beginning of serious inquiry into the development of empathy.
In a related vein, Kohlberg (1963, 1973, 1983) established a developmental theory of
moral judgment for children and adolescents based on Piaget’s work with cognition. His six
stages are broken down into three levels.
The Preconventional Level contains Stages 1 and 2 and is thought to apply to children up
to age 9 (Kohlberg, 1963, 1973, 1983). In this level, individuals are mostly concerned with direct
consequences and are not able to take the perspectives of others. Stage 1 is the Punishment-
Obedience Orientation wherein morality is seen as obeying rules and avoiding punishment. In
Stage 2, the Self-Interest Orientation, children are thought to be consumed with self-interest.
They approach morality from the perspective of how situations can benefit them. Thus, in both
stages, children are thought to be egocentric and judge moral dilemmas based on rules and self-
interest.
The Conventional Level applies from age 9 through adolescence (Kohlberg, 1963, 1973,
1983). In this level, the individual acts in accordance with societal rules and norms for what is
46. 38
right and wrong. In Stage 3, the main desire is for group approval. Thus, the individual acts in
ways that will garner approval from friends and family. Relationships to others in their social
circle are of utmost importance. In Stage 4, the Authority Maintaining Morality, the individual
becomes concerned with society at large. Societal rules and authority trump relational approval.
Morality is thus dictated by external sources.
In the last level, the Post-Conventional Level, individuals begin to realize they are
separate from society (Kohlberg, 1963, 1973, 1983). Chronologically, this is thought to be
reserved for adulthood. In this level, an individual’s morality may take precedence over
authoritative or social morality. Rules no longer seem fixed. In Stage 5, the Morality of Contract
becomes of central importance. The concern is with the health of the larger society. The
individual understands that any given society comprises many beliefs and cultures and morality
becomes about upholding the values. In Stage 6, or the Morality of Individual Principles, the
individual determines her own ethical code based on universal ethical principles. Justice is seen
as upholding a universal ethic, even when this may contradict society’s rules.
Kohlberg (1963, 1973, 1983) hypothesized that development follows these stages and
that only rarely do individuals regress to earlier stages. There are many criticisms of Kohlberg’s
(1963, 1973, 1982) theory, which is based upon almost exclusively male participants. Kohlberg
conceptualized morality as justice to the exclusion of other values such as caring and nurturing
which some may value over justice (Gilligan, 1982). Kohlberg (1963) based his entire theory on
a theoretical problem, the Heinz dilemma, which may or may not reflect actual behavior. Last,
Kohlberg’s (1963, 1973, 1983) theory of moral development could be described as overly
cognitive and related only to rules, laws, and authority (Eisenberg, Carlo, Murphy, & Van Court,
1995) excluding the affective aspects of empathy and prosocial behavior.
47. 39
Since Hoffman (1977, 2001) and Kohlberg (1963, 1973, 1983), some additional research
has examined the relationship between empathy and prosocial behavior. Eisenberg (Eisenberg-
Berg, 1979; Eisenberg et al., 1995) conducted a series of studies on empathy in childhood and
adolescence. In her studies, children and adolescents were presented with a series of moral
dilemmas in which there was a cost of helping. In some of the studies, participants were also
administered measures such as the Empathy Scale (Cronbach’s alpha = .78) measuring empathy,
the Social Desirability Scale for Children (Cronbach’s alpha = .92) measuring social desirability,
and Davis’s Interpersonal Reactivity scale (Cronbach’s alpha = .83, .73, and .74 on the subscales
of Sympathy, Perspective Taking, and Personal Distress, respectively). Additionally, in one of
the studies (Eisenberg et al., 1991), parents of participating children were asked to complete the
Altruism scale, measuring altruism, about their child’s behavior. One of the studies was the first
to examine empathy longitudinally in children and adolescents.
Responses were coded by two raters and complex analyses were run (Eisenberg-Berg,
1979; Eisenberg et al., 1995). Relevant results to this study included demonstrating that the
pattern of childhood and adolescent moral reasoning was relatively congruent with Kohlberg’s
(1963) stages. The exception was that no evidence was found for punishment and authority-
related moral judgment as predicted by Kohlberg’s Stage 1. The researchers attributed this to the
age of the sample and suggested that Stage 1 may occur at a very young age. Additionally, it was
found that high school students’ reasoning became more abstract and more strongly empathetic
as they aged. Additionally, females used higher levels of moral reasoning up until ages 11-12, at
which point their scores were equal to males. The researchers speculated that social desirability
may have a role in female’s self-reported moral reasoning because of acculturation.
48. 40
Though the researchers found support for Kohlberg’s theory, (e.g., Eisenberg-Berg, 1979;
Eisenberg et al., 1995), their research designs employed moral dilemmas in the same way
Kohlberg used the Heinz dilemma, which restricts moral judgment to hypothetical scenarios.
Additionally, the dilemmas restrict response to a set number of responses and discourage
children from out-of-the box problem solving.
More recently, Hay and Cook (2007) compiled the existing literature on the development
of prosocial behavior from infancy to childhood. They found that most studies suggest that
infants and children often display prosocial behavior, defined as those behaviors that help
alleviate other people’s and animals’ suffering. From their perspective, the authors saw altruism
as one type of prosocial behavior.
As a result, the researchers observed three types of prosocial development in infancy and
childhood: feeling for another which involves empathic concern, kindness, and affection;
working with another which involves cooperation, sharing, and helping; and ministering to
another, which involves comforting, nurturing, and willing compliance (Hay & Cook, 2007).
Infants have been observed sharing toys and food with peers and parents, comforting those in
distress, and voluntarily giving up their own objects to those in need. As children grow older,
their cooperation increases. By age 1, children comply with verbal and nonverbal requests
especially when they involve safety or fairness. By age 2, children cooperate and problem solve
with adults and peers. Additionally, toddler’s rates of responding to those in distress have been
shown to be comparable with adults (Demetriou & Hay, 2004). At ages 3 and 4, children pay
attention to social cues and attend to others in socially acceptable ways. Thus, the authors assert
that children may be born empathetic and that: “prosocial behaviors emerge in the first 2 years of
life, and subsequently become regulated in accordance with societal expectations” (Hay & Cook,
49. 41
2007, p. 124). However, the authors note that it is difficult to tease out what is authentic altruism
and what is social conditioning and that much of the literature is based on small and homogenous
samples.
Many studies support the notion that 1-year-olds help and comfort others (e.g., Buckley,
Siegel, & Ness, 1979; Svetlova, Nichols, & Brownell, 2010). Warneken and Tomasello (2009)
found that toddlers display altruistic behavior when no reward is present. The researchers found
that 14-month to 18 month-old toddlers displayed unrewarded altruistic behavior such as helping
adults reach objects. Indeed, children as young as 14 months display altruistic behavior even
when there is personal cost, such as physical obstacles in the way. Children who receive material
rewards for helping become less motivated to help compared to children who receive no rewards.
This suggests that young children are intrinsically altruistic and that altruistic behavior may not
be entirely conditioned.
Few studies explore the manifestation of empathy in adolescence. Raboteg-Saric (1997)
sought to investigate the relationship between affective empathy and maturity of moral reasoning
in adolescents. He hypothesized that empathic tendency would be positively correlated with
prosocial behavior which was defined as “voluntary and intentional behaviour which has positive
consequences for the well-being of other persons” (Raboteg-Saric, 1997, p. 493).
Participants included 311 14-year olds (174 female, 137 male) in the 8th grade living in
Croatia (Raboteg-Saric, 1997). All were administered the Altruism Scale, the Emotional
Empathy Scale, and the Fantasy Scale. The altruism scale consisted of a 17-item self-report
measure in which the participant rates the frequency of prosocial behaviors on a 5-point scale.
Example behaviors include helping neighbors, sharing classnotes, sharing food, and so forth. The
Emotional Empathy Scale consists of 19 items assessing emotional responsiveness, empathy, and
50. 42
sympathy, rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Example statements include “I feel sorry when I see
someone being helpless.” The Fantasy Scale is a 6-item scale that measures respondents’
tendencies to imagine themselves taking the places of fictitious characters and was administered
to assess for empathy. The type of scale or measure was not reported. Participants’ moral
reasoning was assessed using the Moral Judgment Interview which consisted of three written
dilemmas involving life, law, punishment, and consequences. A global score and a moral
maturity score (MMS) were found and used to assess participants for Kohlberg’s stages (1973).
An intelligence test, the Problem Test, was also administered to control for the relationship
between moral reasoning, fantasy, and intelligence. It was standardized on a Croatian population.
Last, a 13-item social desirability scale, the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale was
administered with a low Cronbach’s alpha of 0.59.
Participants were administered tests as part of regular vocational counseling (Raboteg-
Saric, 1997). The mean MMS was 284.08 (SD = 38.12), which researchers indicated that the
majority of subjects were in the third stage of moral reasoning. Females showed higher MMS
than males (t(209) = 1.99, p = .05). A qualitative index of moral reasoning indicated that moral
judgments were largely in stage 3 (81% of subjects). Females scored significantly higher on the
Emotional Empathy Scale (t(309) = 6.66, p <.001, the Fantasy Scale (t(309) = 6.04, p < .001),
and the Altruism Scale (t(309) = 3.43, p =. 001).
Altruism was found to be positively and significantly related to emotional empathy and
social desirability scores (r = .45, p < 0.01 and r = .25, p < 0.001, respectively) and not
correlated with moral maturity and fantasy scores (r = 0.02 and r = .05, respectively; Raboteg-
Saric, 1997). Moral reasoning was not correlated to empathy. There was no significant
correlation between moral maturity and emotional empathy when controlling for sex.
