Others studies shouldn't be needed to call into question the validity of a research study. We, as scientists, should be able to evaluate these studies ourselves when we read the originial research. My post referenced studies reporting health benefits. I never said anything about healing. Actually, the research I was speaking of is in the area of stress and coping. There are a number of studies that indicate spiritual support (perceived support from God) has a stress-buffering effect (here are just a few references I could put my finger on - Maton, 1989; Yates, Chalmer, St. James, Fulloansbee, & McKengney, 1981; Zackerman, Kasl, & Ostfel, 1984). I know there are usually reliabiity or validity (or both) issues in most studies. And, yes, it's possible to design quality research to study this issue. Just because it has to do with spirtuality doesn't make it any more difficult than other research topics like attitudes, persuasion, dissonance, attribution, etc. The point I was making was simply that psychologists do study spirtuality and prayer - it's not ignored.
Cheers,
Diana Kyle
Fullerton College
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tipsters:I am almost certain that quite recently I ran across studies that called into
question the "healing benefits" of prayer on the grounds that the studies
investigating it were not well controlled. If I can dig up the reference, I
will.There are certainly enough possible other explanations of prayer's effects,
starting with the old familiar placebo, remissions (which happen enough in
the absence of prayer to be of note) and the like.There is little support for whole-heartedly endorse the role of prayer and
spirituality in psychology. Much more high quality research needs to be done
(if that is possible).Nancy Melucci
