IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v22y1986i5p579-586.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Psychosocial wellness among spiritual healing participants

Author

Listed:
  • Glik, Deborah Carrow

Abstract

The findings reported are based on an exploratory, comparison group study of participants in spiritual healing practices carried out over a 2-year period (1981-1983) in Baltimore, Md. In this study, participation in such forms of healing, which generally occurs in small groups, is related to various measures of psychosocial wellness defined as the emic construct of 'subjective health'. Interview data from regular participants in two types of healing group, charismatic (n = 83) and metaphysical (n = 93), were compared with regular utilizers of primary care (n = 137), using the same data collection procedures. Members of the two types of healing group differ on some social attribute data. Members of charismatic healing groups tend to be of slightly lower SES overall than members of metaphysical healing groups. Members of both types of healing groups, however, had significantly more positive scores on wellness measures than primary care patients, even when sex, age, marital status, illness severity and religiosity were controlled statistically. Findings suggest that such groups play a social support function among regular participants, and that participation in specific healing systems can be seen as a contextual variable which has an effect on subjective self-reports of health or, as defined here, wellness.

Suggested Citation

  • Glik, Deborah Carrow, 1986. "Psychosocial wellness among spiritual healing participants," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 579-586, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:22:y:1986:i:5:p:579-586
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(86)90025-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:22:y:1986:i:5:p:579-586. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.