<%BANNER%>

Sense of Coherence, Spiritual Maturity, and Psychological Well-Being among United Methodist Clergy

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0019401/00001

Material Information

Title: Sense of Coherence, Spiritual Maturity, and Psychological Well-Being among United Methodist Clergy
Physical Description: 1 online resource (77 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Arnold, Richard Wade
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2007

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: clergy, soc, spirituality, wellbeing
Psychology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Counseling Psychology thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: While there has been a great deal of research into the psychological functioning of religious persons, Christians in particular, relatively little research has been devoted to the psychological functioning of religious leaders. What research is available on the psychological functioning of both religious persons and clergy has largely focused on pathology. This study focused on the psychological well-being of clergy. Three hypotheses were tested. The first hypothesis predicted that sense of coherence, or that one perceives his or her life as predictable, meaningful and manageable, would contribute to six domains of psychological well-being. Sense of Coherence was found to contribute to Autonomy, Environmental Mastery, Positive Relations with Others, Purpose in Life, and Self Acceptance, but was not found to contribute to Personal Growth among clergy. However, Sense of Coherence was found to make a small contribution to Purpose in Life when the total sample was considered together. The second hypothesis, that clergy would fare better psychologically than non-clergy, was largely not supported. Hypothesis three predicted that Sense of Coherence mediates spiritual maturity and psychological well-being. Sense of coherence was found to mediate Spiritual Maturity dimensions of Awareness of God and Instability and each domain of psychological well-being.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Richard Wade Arnold.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2007.
Local: Adviser: Neimeyer, Greg J.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2007
System ID: UFE0019401:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0019401/00001

Material Information

Title: Sense of Coherence, Spiritual Maturity, and Psychological Well-Being among United Methodist Clergy
Physical Description: 1 online resource (77 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Arnold, Richard Wade
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2007

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: clergy, soc, spirituality, wellbeing
Psychology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Counseling Psychology thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: While there has been a great deal of research into the psychological functioning of religious persons, Christians in particular, relatively little research has been devoted to the psychological functioning of religious leaders. What research is available on the psychological functioning of both religious persons and clergy has largely focused on pathology. This study focused on the psychological well-being of clergy. Three hypotheses were tested. The first hypothesis predicted that sense of coherence, or that one perceives his or her life as predictable, meaningful and manageable, would contribute to six domains of psychological well-being. Sense of Coherence was found to contribute to Autonomy, Environmental Mastery, Positive Relations with Others, Purpose in Life, and Self Acceptance, but was not found to contribute to Personal Growth among clergy. However, Sense of Coherence was found to make a small contribution to Purpose in Life when the total sample was considered together. The second hypothesis, that clergy would fare better psychologically than non-clergy, was largely not supported. Hypothesis three predicted that Sense of Coherence mediates spiritual maturity and psychological well-being. Sense of coherence was found to mediate Spiritual Maturity dimensions of Awareness of God and Instability and each domain of psychological well-being.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Richard Wade Arnold.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2007.
Local: Adviser: Neimeyer, Greg J.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2007
System ID: UFE0019401:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text





SENSE OF COHERENCE, SPIRITUAL MATURITY, AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-
BEING AMONG UNITED METHODIST CLERGY






















By

RICHARD WADE ARNOLD


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2007





























O 2007 Richard Wade Amold































To ministers









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank the following people for their contribution to me personally and

professionally: Susan Addis, Tricia and Doug Bagby, Andrew Blair, Brad Creed, Ross Davis,

David Garland, Jenn and Tim Garrett, Carolyn Godbey, Wayne Griffen, Shevon and Eric

Kaufman, Sarah Lee, John and Jill Shea, Robert and Lesley Staton, David Wallace, and Vivian

Yamada. I would especially like to thank Greg Neimeyer, my advisor and committee chair for

his openness and generosity.

I would like to thank my parents for their encouragement and support in all my academic

endeavors. Last, and most importantly, I thank my wife, Jessica. Without her loving support and

longsuffering I would not have been able to complete this proj ect.












TABLE OF CONTENTS


page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............. ...............4.....


LIST OF TABLES ............ ...... ._._ ...............7....


AB S TRAC T ......_ ................. ............_........8


CHAPTER



1 PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING OF UNITED METHODIST CLERGY ........................9


2 REVIEW OF SENSE OF COHERENCE, RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY, AND
PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING LITERATURE ................. ............... ......... ...12


Sense of Coherence. ................... .... ............. ...............12......
Sense of Coherence and Mental Health............... ...............20.
Pastors' Sense of Coherence .............. ...............23....

Spirituality and Religion...................... ............2
Defining Religion and Spirituality .............. ...............24....
M easuring Spirituality ................. ...............26.......... ......
Psychological Well-Being .................... .. .............. .......2
Religion, Spirituality, and Psychological Well-Being .............. ..... ............... 3
Clergy Well-Being............... ...............3
Questions and Hypotheses ................. ...............36........... ....

3 M ETHODS .............. ...............37....


Participants .............. ...............37....
M measures ................. ...............37.................
Sense of Coherence .............. ...............37....

Spiritual Assessment Inventory ................. ...............39................
Scale of Psychological Well-being............... ...............4
Stress in General Scale .............. ...............43....
Procedure .............. ...............43....

Analyses............... ...............44

4 RE SULT S .............. ...............47....


Descriptive Statistics .............. ...............47....
Preliminary Analy ses ................. ...............47......._.. .....
Hypothesis 1 .............. ...............50....
Autonomy ..........._.._. ........ ...............50.....
Environmental Mastery .............. ...............51....
Personal Growth ..........._.._._ ...............5_ 1....._.__...













Positive Relations with Others .............. ...............52....

Purpose in Life .............. ...............52....
Self-acceptance ................. ...............53.................

Hypothesis 2 .............. ...............53....
Autonomy ................. ...............54.......... ......
Environmental Mastery .............. ...............54....
Personal Growth ................. ...............54...
Positive Relations with Others .............. ...............55....

Purpose in Life .............. ...............55....
Self-Acceptance ................. ...............55.................

Hypothesis 3 .............. ...............56....


5 DI SCUS SSION ............. ...... .__ ............... 1...


General Discussion ............. ...... ...............61...

Hypothesis 1 .............. ...............61....
Hypothesis 2 .............. ...............63....
Hypothesis 3 .............. ...............64....
Implications .............. ...............66....
Limitations ............. ...... .__ ...............69...
Future Directions .............. ...............70....


LIST OF REFERENCES ............. ...... .__ ...............72..


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .............. ...............77....










LIST OF TABLES


Table page

3-1 Clergy and student demographic information............... ..............4

3-2 Clergy responses to ministry related questions ................. ...............46..............

4-1 Means and Standard Deviations for Clergy and Students .............. .....................5

4-2 Measures of internal consistency (Cronbach' s alpha) for Independent and Dependent
Variables for total sample, Clergy and Students ................. ...............57........... ..

4-3 Standardized Beta weights for Psychological Well-being Regression Equations .............58

4-3 continued ........... __..... ._ ...............59....

4-4 Standardized Betas for the non-mediated and mediated regression models and upper
and lower bounds of confidence intervals .............. ...............60....









Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

SENSE OF COHERENCE, SPIRITUAL MATURITY, AND PSYCHOLOGICAL
WELL-BEING AMONG UNITED METHODIST CLERGY

Richard Wade Arnold

August 2007


Chair: Greg Neimeyer
Major: Counseling Psychology

While there has been a great deal of research into the psychological functioning of

religious persons, Christians in particular, relatively little research has been devoted to the

psychological functioning of religious leaders. What research is available on the psychological

functioning of both religious persons and clergy has largely focused on pathology. This study

focused on the psychological well-being of clergy. Three hypotheses were tested. Hypothesis 1

predicted that sense of coherence, or that one perceives his or her life as predictable, meaningful

and manageable, would contribute to six domains of psychological well-being. Sense of

coherence was found to contribute to autonomy, environmental mastery, positive relations with

others, purpose in life, and self acceptance, but was not found to contribute to Personal Growth

among clergy. However, Sense of coherence was found to make a small contribution to purpose

in life when the total sample was considered together. Hypothesis 2 predicted that clergy would

fare better psychologically than non-clergy, was largely not supported. Hypothesis 3 predicted

that sense of coherence mediates spiritual maturity and psychological well-being. Sense of

coherence was found to mediate spiritual maturity dimensions of awareness of God and

instability and each domain of psychological well-being.









CHAPTER 1
PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING OF UNITED METHODIST CLERGY

An ABC News poll reported in February 2002 that 83% of all Americans profess to be

Christians. It is not surprising that most religious research until recent years has focused in

particular on Christians (Hood, Spilka, Hunsburger, & Gorsuch, 1996). My study extends this

knowledge base. Even though there is a large amount of data on Christians in general, little

research has been conducted on the psychological functioning of Christian leaders. Past research

has largely focused on pathology and personal dysfunction. My study distinguishes itself by

focusing on psychological well-being of pastors. This line of research has far-ranging

implications concerning ministry effectiveness and longevity, clergy marital satisfaction and

relationship satisfaction more broadly, and many other areas of clergy personal and professional

development. Development of prevention programs aimed at assisting clergy in developing a

more psychologically healthy lifestyle may forestall burnout, compassion fatigue, and the

devastating consequences of pastoral malfeasance.

Positive functioning in the psychological literature has been examined primarily through

the use of two constructs: subjective well-being and psychological well-being. Subjective Well-

being has been developed by Deiner and colleagues as a measure of life satisfaction, the

experience of pleasant emotion, and infrequent negative affect (Deiner, Lucas, and Oishi, 2002).

Other researchers, however, argue that one might experience a sense of subj ective well-being,

yet not engage in adaptive behaviors that allow the individual to function at the highest possible

level (Ryff, 1989a, 1989b). As an alternative Ryff proposed the notion of psychological well-

being that encompasses the domains of self-acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy,

environmental mastery, purpose in life, and personal growth. According to Ryff, this conception










of psychological well-being is consistent with philosophical and psychological theory concerning

what constitutes the good life (Ryff & Singer, 1998).

What factors might contribute to the psychological well-being of pastors? My project

proposes that two variables will contribute to the psychological well-being of pastors: sense of

coherence and spiritual maturity. Sense of coherence was developed by medical sociologist

Anton Antonovsky (1987). Essentially, an individual with a high sense of coherence perceives

his or her environment as structured, manageable, and meaningful. Antonovsky's contention,

supported by subsequent research, is that individuals with a high sense of coherence will have

better medical outcomes than individuals with a lower sense of coherence. Other researchers

have extended Antonovsky's salutogenic work to include psychological as well as medical

outcomes (chapter 2). Based on this line of thought, high sense of coherence is hypothesized to

contribute to the psychological well-being of pastors.

The second factor predicted to contribute to the psychological well-being of pastors is

spiritual maturity. Hall and Edwards (1995) developed a theory of spiritual maturity based on

obj ect relations theory. Obj ect relations theorists hold that human beings are not basically

pleasure seeking, as Freud had posited, but that humans beings are relationship seeking. In more

analytic terms, the libido does not seek pleasure, but obj ects. According to British obj ect

relations theorists such as Fairbairn (1952) and Guntrip (1971), the goal of parenting (i.e., the

interpersonal goal of early relational obj ects) is the development of a child who is able to

maintain real contact with real people. In other words, if early parental interactions are

inadequate, the child may turn away from the external world of people, thus preventing the

establishment of authentic relationships. The meaning of this for my proj ect is that if a person is









not capable of establishing and maintaining contact with people, neither will that person be

capable of establishing and maintaining a relationship with God.

Hall and Edwards (1996) contend that individuals relate to God through the same

psychological processes used to relate to others. Hall and Edwards theorize that in order to have

a relationship with God, one must first be aware of God. Therefore, the first domain of their

theory is awareness. The second domain of their theory is Quality of Relationship with God. The

Quality of Relationship domain has three factors: instability, grandiose, and Realistic

Acceptance. Individuals with an unstable relationship with God alternate between extreme

valuing and devaluing their relationship with God, have a chaotic relationship pattern with God,

and frequently experience feelings of abandonment by God. An individual with a grandiose

pattern of relating to God values the relationship for purely self-centered reasons such as getting

personal needs met or for protection. The most mature relationship pattern is Realistic

Acceptance. Individuals with this predominant relationship style value their relationship with

God in and of itself, are able to deal with disappointments with God productively, and maintain

continuity in the relationship. It is this relationship pattern that is predicted to contribute to the

psychological well-being of pastors.

The personal functioning of pastors is important for a variety of reasons. Very little is

known about the psychological health of this subgroup of Christians. Knowledge generated by

this proj ect may help members of the clergy to develop healthier lifestyles. This project may

contribute to clergy training and the development of self-care strategies. Finally, research with

clergy is important because of the potential influence they have on American culture. My project

examines the influence two variables, sense of coherence and spiritual maturity, have on the

psychological well-being of pastors.










CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF SENSE OF COHERENCE, RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY, AND
PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING LITERATURE

For an individual to develop a sense that life is meaningful, he or she must develop a

sense that the tools needed to meet life's challenges are available. In order to properly utilize the

skills and resources necessary in any given situation, that person must have a way to structure

life's experiences in a comprehensible way. This is the essence of Antonovsky's (1987) Sense of

coherence. Spirituality has historically been measured in a variety of ways, none of which,

however, have been tied closely to psychological theory. Hall and Edwards (1996) have

developed a model of spirituality based in obj ect relations theory that attempts to redress this gap

in theory and measurement. Finally, Carole Ryff (1989a, 1989b) has developed a theory of

psychological well-being based primarily on developmental and humanistic theories. Each of

these theories along with questions and hypotheses are addressed in the chapter that follow.

Sense of Coherence

Anton Antonovsky first formally proposed the salutogenic model of health in his seminal

work Health, Stress, and' Coping (1978). A decade later Antonovsky clarified his thoughts in

traveling the M~ystery ofHealth: How People manage Stress and' Stay Well (1987).

Antonovsky, a medical sociologist, argues that the medical field has focused entirely on

pathology at the expense of other fruitful avenues of research and practical application. This

focus on pathology has arisen out of a philosophical position that, in Antonovsky's view, is

fundamentally flawed.

Traditionally, medicine has viewed human beings as either healthy or sick. This

categorical system of classification has led physicians to focus much of their energy and

attention on only one category: the sick. Antonovsky argues that this is a perfectly reasonable









course of action since to do otherwise would seem to be an ethically untenable position. But the

exchtsive focus on pathology has led researchers and clinicians alike to neglect the biological,

sociological and psychological factors that maintain health. In Antonovsky's terminology, the

medical field has failed to consider what moves an individual toward the ease end of the health

ease/disease continuum. Antonovsky argues that a salutary approach to medicine can (and

should) complement the current focus on pathology. Included in the more pathologically-

oriented hypotheses considered in most research papers should be some hyptheses that attempt to

address the question, "What predicts a good outcome (Antonovsky, 1987, p.7)." In order to shift

focus to a more salutary clinical and research agenda, Antonovsky proposes a fundamental shift

in the way health is viewed.

Rather than adopting the categorical healthy/sick dichotomy, Antonovsky proposes a

health ease/dis-ease continuum. Health is not a static condition; biological homeostasis is an

illusion. For Antonovsky, "the fundamental assumption [concerning biological functioning is] of

heterostasis, disorder and pressure towards entropy as the prototypical characteristic of the living

organism (1987, p.2, italics in original)." If heterostasis is the norm, an individual's health status

can be seen as in constant flux; hence, one can be viewed as moving toward either end of the

ease/dis-ease continuum at any given moment.

Considering heterostasis as the norm also has implications for the role of what are

typically called stressors. Antonovsky (1987) argues that individuals are constantly bombarded

by stimuli from the environment. What is the difference between two individuals faced with the

same stimuli in the same environment if only one views the perceived stimuli as a stressor? For

Antonovsky, the difference between the two is that the one individual has more appropriate

adaptive resources, or generalized resistance resources (GRRs). This person may not perceive the









stimuli as a stressor. The other individual does not have the necessary adaptive resources or has

generalized resistance deficits (GRDs). So, whether or not one perceives environmental stimuli

as stressful is directly related to the degree to which the individual has adapted to his or her

environment. What is of interest to Antonovsky is not the pathological case, the diabetic who

dies early because she refuses to adhere to her medication regime, but the diabetic who

successfully copes with the diagnosis. What is the difference between these two individuals?

In answer to this question, Antonovsky (1987) proposes the sense of coherence (SOC).

SOC is defined as follows:

The sense of coherence is a global orientation that expresses the extent to which one has a
pervasive, enduring though dynamic feeling of confidence that (1) the stimuli deriving
from one's internal and external environments in the course of living are structured,
predictable and explicable; (2) the resources are available to one to meet the demands
posed by these resources stimuli; and (3) these demands are challenges worthy of
investment and engagement (p.19).

Antonovsky has labeled the three components of his definition comprehensibility, manageability,

and meaningfulness.

Comprehensibility refers to the most cognitive aspect of SOC. A key word for Antonovsky

in discussing comprehensibility is predictability. A comprehensible world is one in which the

individual can order the stimuli that bombard the senses, structure can be extracted (or imposed)

on the incoming stimuli, and clarity can be achieved through such structuring. Of the

components of the SOC, this component serves a type of gateway for the other two; if the

individual cannot comprehend his or her environment, the individual will not know what

resources are necessary to meet the challenge posed by the environment. This in turn leads to a

very low likelihood that an individual will be motivated to marshal the necessary coping

resources. At the same time, however, Antonovsky places comprehensibility second to

meaningfulness in a hierarchy of SOC components. Antonovsky posits that if one is faced with a









situation that is meaningful enough, the person will impose structure and find resources to adapt

to the situation.

Manageability refers to the person's perception that he has the resources available meet the

demands imposed by the environment. A person who sees his or her environment as manageable

has confidence that in most situations that arise he or she will be able to adapt to changing

demands. It is important to note that Antonovsky does not say that the adaptive resources must

be personal resources. These resources may either belong to others, be public, or be corporate;

the individual only has to have confidence that he or she will reliably gain access to the

appropriate resources as needed.

Most important to the development of a strong SOC is the component of meaningfulness.

Meaningfulness is the most affective of the three components of SOC. A meaningful life is one

that "makes sense emotionally" and indicates that some of life's challenges "are 'welcome'

rather than burdens that one would much rather do without (Antonovsky, 1987, p.18)."

Antonovsky (1987) claims that an individual's SOC is not necessarily applicable in all

domains of life, but operates within a limited sphere of concern. What is important is that those

domains of life the individual considers important are comprehensible, manageable, and

meaningful. Antonovsky allows that individuals are capable of expanding or contracting their

sphere of concern with the proviso that they cannot exclude inner experience, interpersonal

relations, maj or life activities, and existential issues if they wish to maintain a strong SOC. One

difficulty with this proposition is that Antonovsky does not directly address the issue of breadth

of sphere of concern. It seems logical that the individual with a high SOC and a broad sphere of

concern will obj ectively fare better when faced with environmental challenges than the

individual with high SOC and a more limited sphere of concern (to say nothing of those with a









low SOC). Perhaps Antonovsky leaves this end loose in order to increase the generalizability of

his theory. While not the focus of the current proj ect, this possibility is worthy of future

empirical investigation.

In developing his theory, Antonovsky (1987) also makes a distinction between a strong

SOC and a rigid SOC. Antonovsky describes a person with a strong SOC as authentic, with a

strong sense of self, open to alternatives, flexible, and open to new information and feedback. In

contrast, the person with a rigid SOC is seen as inauthentic, claims to know almost everything,

believes all problems have a ready solution, finds doubt intolerable, is frequently given to

religious fanaticism, lacks a strong sense of self, is closed to alternative explanations, is

automaton-like, inflexible, and is closed to new information and feedback. Having said this,

Antonovsky makes no value judgments concerning cultural sources of a strong SOC. He states

that it is possible that some individuals whom most would judge as unsavory characters could

quite possibly have a strong SOC. A contemporary example would be that of the Islamic jihadist

who may likely have a very high SOC because that particular world view offers

comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness to his or her existence. Conversely, it is

entirely possible that many conservative evangelical Christians potentially have a very rigid SOC

because their faith has not rendered their life experiences comprehensible, manageable, and

meaningful .

In considering whether or not one has a strong or weak SOC gives rise to the question How

does one develop a strong SOC? Antonovsky (1987) limits his discussion to three broad

developmental periods: childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. While Antonovsky does not use

the term, he describes the situation in which a child develops a sense that the world is

comprehensible by being securely attached (Rholes & Simpson, 2004) to his or her primary










caregiver. That an infant's world is predictable and has some discernable structure opens the

door to comprehensibility. If a child finds his or her environment overwhelming (i.e. being

required to perform tasks for which he or she is not developmentally prepared), then the child is

highly likely to see the world as highly unmanageable. Finally, Antonovsky proposes that if a

child does not receive quality feedback, such as positively expressed emotion through "play,

touch, concern, and voice (Antonovsky, 1987, p. 97)" from the environment, the child is not

likely to see many aspects of his or her environment as meaningful.

Antonovsky posits that there are two "pathways" to a strong SOC in adolescence. The first

is "the complex open society, which provides a wide variety of legitimate, realistic options

(Antonovsky, 1987, p. 102)." Here the young person is free to explore his or her world within

clear, but broad boundaries. The second pathway is "the integrated, homogeneous, and relatively

isolated culture or subculture (Antonovsky, 1987, p. 102)" such as those found in some sects of

Judaism, Mormons, Amish, and other such groups. The experiences provided by a more

circumscribed set of cultural expectations can also lead to a strong SOC. There is one other

potential adolescent pathway that Antonovsky describes, but unlike the other two, it leads to a

weak SOC. Many young people in many cultures live with the stark reality that the world is not a

predictable place. War, violence, poverty, disease and the like can overwhelm those with even

the most well-developed coping strategies. For those who have not had the opportunity to

develop their adaptive capacities to the fullest, developing a strong SOC may be nearly

impossible.

In discussing adult development, Antonvosky limits his comments to the domain of work.

In order for one's work to have meaning, Antonovsky proposes that one will have freely chosen

the j ob, and has a voice in choosing the tasks, the sequence of the tasks, and the pace of the










work. If one perceives the tasks set before him (or which he chooses) as manageable, then he

will perceive that he has the resources at his disposal to complete the task. Otherwise the person

experiences overload, which contributes to a weak SOC.

Work comprehensibility consists of several elements. The first element is role complexity;

that is, one knows how one' s work role fits within the overall organization. Secondly, job

security: one is confident that she will a job in future, that one's job serves a unique function in

the organization, and that she is confident that the work will continue to be valued by the larger

society. Three, there is a shared culture that provides comprehensibility for the "insider." To the

outsider, the work environment may seem chaotic, but to the person "in-the-know" everything is

orderly. In concluding this discussion, Antonovsky does offer the caveat that the work role is

only one important adult role. It could be that other roles the person finds him or herself in are

more salient. It may be that one role or another is more dominant or generalizes more than

others.

Antonovsky seems to be somewhat ambivalent about the stability of one' s SOC. Early in

his discussion Antonovsky stated that an individual's SOC is a stable characteristic. However, he

does consider exceptions to that general rule. For those who enter adulthood with a low SOC, he

offers no hope of improvement. For those with a moderate SOC, they will tend to spiral

downward. People in this category have a limited response repertoire and therefore see the world

as less manageable and eventually, Antonovsky theorizes, they will come to see the world as less

comprehensible. The only good news is for those who enter adulthood with a strong SOC; once

reaching adulthood, a person's SOC will likely remain quite stable. Antonovsky's contention is

that therapeutic intervention at the individual level is of little benefit because psychologists

cannot intervene directly and broadly in the cultural institutions in which the weak SOC









individual is embedded. From Antonovsky's perspective, these societal forces then are greater

than the individual's push for change. Nevertheless, Antonovsky does allow that clinical

intervention may have the ability to raise an individual's SOC scores (see below for scoring

details). While these scores may be statistically significant, Antonovsky questions the clinical

significance of such a change (Antonovsky, 1998).

Finally, one might ask How does the SOC operate? The process starts with the perception

of some environmental stimuli. The person with a relatively stronger SOC views the stimuli as a

non-stressor. The stimuli poses no burden for the individual. The person with a relatively weaker

SOC will view the stimuli as a stressor. Antonovsky (1987) defines a stressor "as a characteristic

that introduces entropy into the system--that is, a life experience characterized by inconsistency,

under- or overload, and exclusion from participation in decision-making (p. 28)." Viewing the

stimuli as a non-stressor is a form of environmental adaptation.

For the individual who perceives a stimuli as a stressor, Antonovsky (1987) offers three

possibilities in descending order of relative strength of SOC. The individual may perceive the

stressor to be benign or irrelevant. This perception represents yet another adaptive coping

response. Alternately, the individual may perceive the stimuli to be positive, thus taking into

account Selye' s (1956, 1974) definition of eustress. Lastly, the individual with the weaker still

SOC will view the stressor as endangering or threatening.

When a stimuli is perceived as a threat, Antonovsky proposes two types of responses:

affective and instrumental. The person with the relatively weaker SOC at this stage will respond

with emotions that do not lend themselves to an instrumental response due to their supposedly

diffuse nature. These vague emotional responses, that are considered low in comprehensibility,

do not lead the individual to effective, adaptive behavioral responses or a sense of manageability.









Antonovsky identifies anxiety, rage, shame, despair, abandonment, and bewilderment as the

types of emotions that are experienced by a person with a relatively weaker SOC that precludes

an instrumental response. However, a person with a stronger SOC will experience emotions with

greater clarity, which opens up the possibility of an appropriate instrumental response. For

instance, sadness, fear, pain, anger, guilt, grief, and worry are all theorized to provide enough

clarity to allow the individual to manage the threatening stimuli. Antonovsky does not discuss

the distinctions he makes between these two classes of emotion or how the two lists were

derived. This is another point which Antonovsky may have left open for empirical research.

There is one final step in the process. Once the individual has understood the threatening

stimuli as both comprehensible and manageable, he or she must select what is perceived to be the

most appropriate coping strategy. This selection is based on how the individual has

comprehended the environment. Once the strategy is implemented, the person with a stronger

SOC will effectively use feedback from the environment to revise the coping strategy as needed.

The person with the weaker SOC will not respond to environmental feedback appropriately.

Rather, the person with the relatively weaker SOC may become rigid in responding to

environmental feedback, thus applying the same or similar coping strategies across a wide

variety of situations that may be managed more effectively through the utilization of a wider

array of coping strategies.

Sense of Coherence and Mental Health

Since Antonovsky (1987) originally proposed sense of coherence as a salutogenic

approach to physical health, mental health researchers have also applied the concept to a variety

of psychological outcomes. So how do psychological researchers make the leap from physical

health outcomes to mental health outcomes? At base, the sense of coherence construct indicates

the likelihood that an individual has the resources (or has access to the resources) and will utilize









those resources as necessary to cope with stimuli in the environment that are perceived as

threatening. Antonovsky was correct in identifying physical illness as a potential environmental

threat against which one must armament oneself. However, Antonovsky was short-sighted in

limiting the range of potential environmental threats to medical conditions. Antonovsky was also

limited because of his belief in the socially determined nature of one' s ability to develop

generalized resistance resources. This proj ect extends Antonovsky's line of thinking by including

intra- and interpersonal, social, and other environmental factors in the range of stimuli to which a

person must respond. Also, I am more optimistic about an individual's ability to develop

generalized resistance resources that increase the probably of an effective instrumental response

to perceived threats. This is not to say that one's culture does not influence, and perhaps set

limits on, the resources upon which one may call to respond to threatening stimuli. In this study,

spiritual maturity is seen as a protective factor that enables a person to view their world as

comprehensible, manageable and meaningful, or more coherently.

Several studies have examined psychological adjustment after trauma such as spinal cord

injury (Lustig, 2005), long-term survivors of Hodgkin's lymphoma (Wettergren, Bjorkholm, &

Axdorph, 2004), and women with Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IB S; Motzer, Hertig, & Jarret,

2003). While Antonovsky's original hypothesis was that patients with a higher SOC will have

better physical health outcomes, these studies bridge the gap between health outcome and

psychological outcome research relating to SOC. Lustig (2005) had individuals with spinal cord

injury complete the Life Orientation Questionnaire twice, once as they saw themselves prior to

injury and a second time as they saw their functioning at the time of assessment. Lustig found

that for those who rated their SOC lower post-injury were more likely to have experienced shock

and higher levels of anxiety, depression, and external hostility. These same participants scored









lower on measures of acknowledgement and adjustment. Those participants who rated their SOC

as higher were less likely to score high on measures of shock, anxiety, depression, and internal

anger. Interestingly, high SOC scores did not correlate significantly with measures of adjustment

and acknowledgement. Wettergren, Bj orkholm, & Axdorph (2004) found SOC to be a predictor

of self-ratings of quality of life among survivors of Hodgkin' s lymphoma. Motzer, Hertig, &

Jarret (2003) found SOC to be inversely related to distress, depression, and somatization in non-

IBS patients. The only IBS symptom related (negatively) to SOC was alternating constipation

and diarrhea. These studies are representative of the general findings that SOC is related to

positive health and psychological outcomes (Antonovsky, 1993).

Additionally, sense of coherence has been shown to be inversely related to depression. For

instance, Chimich and Nekolaichuk (2004) found that individuals who did not meet the criteria

for depression showed higher levels of SOC, hope, and personal spirit as well as greater

willingness to take risks. Conversely, patients meeting the criteria for depression scored

significantly lower on measures of SOC and risk-taking.

Finally, suicidal ideation and suicide attempts have both been negatively associated with

SOC (Petrie & Brooks, 1992). Edwards & Holden (2001) found sense of coherence and emotion-

oriented coping predictive of future suicidal ideation, attempts, and self-reported likelihood of

future suicidal behavior in women. For men, sense of coherence and emotion-oriented coping

were predictive of suicidal ideation only. So, while SOC is generally predicative of suicidal

ideation, gender differences seem to be a limiting factor to the general conclusion.

Studies investigating the role SOC plays in the work lives of helping professionals are

limited. If Hall & Edwards' (1996) contention that the ministerial vocation is conceptually linked

to the helping professions, then this line of research has particular significance to the present










study. One study found that therapists with a higher SOC had few negative and more positive

changes following experiences of vicarious traumatization (Linley, Joseph, Loumidis, 2005).

Only one study (discussed below) was identified that considered the operation of SOC in the

lives of clergy.

Pastors' Sense of Coherence

To date only one study has examined sense of coherence among clergy. Darling, Hill, &

McWey (2004) examined the quality of life of 259 clergy and 177 clergy spouses. Quality of life

was operationalized in terms of Deiner' s Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larson,

& Griffin, 1985). Their findings indicate that sense of coherence is significantly and positively

related to subjective well-being (.543) and spiritual resources (.427). Conversely, a significant

negative correlation was found between sense of coherence and family stress (-.251), compassion

fatigue (-.441), level of coping (-.231), psychological stress (-.614), and physiological stress

(-.480). The authors also conducted a path analysis which indicated that psychological and

physiological stress had direct negative effects on subj ective well-being, whereas sense of

coherence had a direct positive effect on subj ective well-being. Level of coping mediated the

effects of family stress on psychological and physiological stress. While compassion fatigue and

spiritual resources had a mediating effect on both psychological and physiological stress, both

variables had a direct effect on subj ective well-being. Additionally, compassion fatigue was

found to have a negative relationship with spiritual resources, while spiritual resources

contributed positively to sense of coherence.

One of the unique contributions of this proj ect is that it will further explore the

relationship between the sense of coherence and spirituality. One could argue that one of the

primary purpose of religious teaching, particularly Christian theology, is fostering a view of the









world that is comprehensible, manageable, and meaningful. Therefore, one might predict that

sense of coherence mediates the relationship between spirituality and psychological well-being.

Spirituality and Religion

Defining Religion and Spirituality

Religion and Spirituality are two constructs around which there is little definitional

consensus. For many years in psychology, the two constructs were seen as synonymous (Wulff,

1998). More recently, however, psychologists have been making a distinction between the two.

Pargament (2002) is representative of recent trends in making a distinction between religion and

spirituality,

We prefer to use the term religion in its classic sense as a broad individual and institutional
domain that serves a variety of purposes, secular as well as sacred. Spirituality represents
the key and unique function of religion. In this chapter, spirituality is defined as "a search
for the sacred" (Pargament, 1999, p.12).

Religion is often seen as an institution or organization, such as the church or synagogue, that

exists for spiritual, social, political, economic, and other functions. Alternatively, spirituality

may be a part of the institution, but may, and often does, operate outside the bounds of a formal

religious/institutional context.

Another indicator of the lack of scholarly consensus in defining spirituality and religion is

the number of ways in which religion and spirituality have been operationalized in research. A

superficial perusal of the table of contents of~ea~sures ofReligiosity (Hill & Hood, 1999) gives

even the casual reader an indication of the diversity of interests among researchers of religion

and spirituality. These authors identify and review hundreds of instruments that claim to measure

a variety of constructs including religious beliefs, religious attitudes, religious practices, and

religious service attendance.









In addition to the definitional problems addressed above, Slater, Hall, and Edwards (2001)

identified four additional weaknesses in the measurement of religion and spirituality: illusory

spiritual health, ceiling effects, social desirability, and bias. The notion of illusory spiritual health

is based on Shedler, Mayman, & Manis' (1993) model of illusory mental health. Slater, Hall and

Edwards propose that there are three spiritual subgroups: those that are genuinely spiritual based

on both self-report and clinical observation, those that are not spiritual based on the same two

measures, and lastly, those that report spiritual health, but who are observed to be less spiritual

than they themselves report. The authors speculate that there are certain religious groups that

place pressure on individual adherents to maintain the appearance of spiritual health at all costs.

Thus, researchers need to account for this possible response bias in developing instruments

assessing spirituality.

A second problem in assessing spirituality is ceiling effects. Ceiling effects do not allow

researchers to draw accurate conclusions about individuals functioning above average. One

group of researchers (Bufford, Paloutzian, & Ellison, 1991) concluded that the Spiritual Well-

being Scale (Ellison, 1983), one of the more popular measures of spirituality, is of little use with

evangelical populations due to ceiling effects.

Thirdly, the authors argue that researchers need to attempt to control for social desirability

in both the development of spirituality instruments and in test administration. The authors

suggest including measures of social desirability in the development of the instrument so that the

data can either be factor analyzed or regressed.

Finally, the authors address bias. Research has indicated that many of the instruments

measuring spirituality have been developed within a denominational or theological context.

However, when moved out of that original context, it appears that members of other









denominations and/or theological traditions do not fair as well. The authors argue that traditional

measures of determining differential item functioning may not be adequate. Consequently, they

recommend the use of Item Response Theory to guide the selection of items. The difficulty with

this approach is that very large samples are required and that most research in this area has not

risen to this level of statistical sophistication.

Measuring Spirituality

Hall and Edwards (1996, 2002) have developed a model of spirituality that attempts to

address many of the theoretical and psychometric issues raised above. Hall and Edwards argue

that relationship is the centerpiece of Christian theology. That individuals relate to God is

supported by both biblical sources (e.g. Genesis 1:26) and theological discourse (Erikson, 1985;

Saucy, 1993). Hall and Edwards, however, took upon themselves the twin objectives of

remaining true to their Christian theological understandings while at the same time grounding

their model of spirituality in psychological theory.

To establish a solid psychological foundation for their theory, Hall and Edwards (1996)

turned to object relations theory. Two key assumptions undergird this choice. First, obj ect

relations theory is congruent with the basic theological premise previously stated. Second,

psychological and spiritual well-being have been seen as developing along parallel paths. Hall

and Edwards point to Carter (1974) as the first to propose that spiritual maturity and the process

of self actualization as described by theorists such as Jung and Rogers have significant points of

contact.

Hall and Edwards (1996) point to several studies that support the notion that psychological

maturity and spiritual maturity are linked. Shakelford (1978) compared biblical and object

relations understandings of dependence and concluded that the processes involved in mature

dependence on God are similar to those involved in mature dependence from an obj ect relations









perspective. Carter and Barnhurst (1986) argued that people relate to God and to other people

through the same psychological mechanisms. Additionally, four empirical studies have found

positive correlations between God image and level of obj ect relations development (Brokaw and

Edwards, 1994), God image and object relations developmental level and spiritual maturity (Hall

and Brokaw, 1995), and God image and obj ect relations developmental level and self concept

among psychiatric patients (Tisdale, Brokaw, Edwards, & Key, 1993).

Having established the theological and psychological foundation of a theory of spirituality,

Hall and Edwards (1996, 2002) turn to the development of the theory itself. The authors propose

a two-dimensional theory including awareness of God and quality of relationship with God. The

first dimension, awareness, is grounded in the theological position that any relationship with God

includes some type of communication with God. spiritual maturity along this dimension is a

growing "awareness of God' s responses, and an ability to listen to God, to notice his presence,

and to savor his responses (Hall and Edwards, 1996, p. 237)." This dimension was not designed

to measure the relationship between obj ect relations and spiritual maturity, but is assumed to be a

necessary prerequisite of spiritual maturity.

The second dimension of Hall and Edwards' theory is quality of relationship with God.

This dimension was designed explicitly to measure the relationship between spiritual maturity

and obj ect relations theory. Hall and Edwards assess three "levels" of spirituality. These levels

are not hierarchically arranged, so each factor will be called "domains" for purposes of the

current study. The three domains hypothesized were unstable, grandiose and realistic acceptance.

A person with an unstable (or instability) type of spirituality may be characterized by a tendency

to vacillate between extremely positive and extremely negative images of God, a chaotic

relationship with God, and frequent feelings of abandonment.










A grandiose style of relating to God may be somewhat narcissistic. The person is

"preoccupied with grand fantasies, crave[s] attention, and attempts] to present themselves as

better than others (Hall & Edwards, 1996, p. 237)." God becomes important only to the extent

that he supports the person's self esteem, provides protection, and provides for their needs. Thus,

the individual focuses not so much on the relationship itself, but on the benefits he or she derives

from it.

Realistic Acceptance is characterized by differentiating between the self and other,

integrating good and bad qualities, and maintaining long term relationships. These people have

the ability to acknowledge and express both pleasant and unpleasant emotions, deal with

disappointment in God in a productive manner that maintains the relationship, and value their

relationship with God for its own sake rather than the benefits they derive from the relationship.

The relationship between religion, spirituality, and psychological well-being will be

discussed in the following section.

Psychological Well-Being

A maj or movement in professional psychology during the past decade has been positive

psychology. This movement, spearheaded by former American Psychological Association

president Martin Seligman (2000), questions the almost exclusive focus within psychology on

psychopathology. Rather than focus on questions such as Why are depressed people depressed?

or What are effective treatments for anxiety?, a positive psychologist prefers to ask questions

such as What makes highly success~fd people so successful? or, more generally, What are the

traits of individuals who seem to be functioning best in hife? A positive psychologist does not say

that the former questions are not important and should not be studied; rather, in the same spirit of

Antonovsky above, the positive psychologist says that the exclusive focus on pathology to the









exclusion of well-being is both a detriment to the discipline of psychology's original purpose and

a terrible disservice to the larger society.

From a philosophical viewpoint, the ultimate question posed by positive psychology

becomes What is the good life? This question has been addressed by every major

philosopher/ethicist/ theologian from the time of Aristotle. In our own time, psychology has

attempted to address this question primarily in two ways. The current construct with the longest

history is that of subj ective well-being (SWB). Ed Deiner (1984) has been at the forefront of the

subj ective well-being, or happiness, research frontier. Deiner, Lucas, and Oishi (2002) define

subjective wellbeing as "a broad concept that includes experiencing pleasant emotions, low

levels of negative moods, and high life satisfaction (p. 63)." Rooted in Utilitarian philosophy,

subj ective well-being focuses on the individual's satisfaction with his or her life and the

theoretical relative balance of pleasant over unpleasant life events one experiences.

Research to date has focused on the question Who is happy? This body of research has

grown out of the work of Wilson (1967) who proposed that the happy person is "young, healthy,

well-educated, well-paid, extroverted, optimistic, worry-free, religious, married...with high self-

esteem, job morale, modest aspirations, of either sex and a wide range of intelligence (p. 294)."

The findings indicate that people who are happiest are married, religious, extraverted, and

optimistic (see Deiner, 1999 for a thorough review of the SWB literature). These findings have

held up in cross-cultural studies. However, there are some correlates of happiness that seem to be

more culture-specific or simply do not lend themselves to formulaic statements. Gender

differences are a case in point. Women tend to report the same mean level of SWB as men, but,

contrary to early formulations of SWB, women also tend to report more extreme scores on both

positive and negative affect. Self-esteem has been found to be highly correlated with SWB in









individualistic societies, but not in collectivist cultures. Wealthier nations also tend to have

higher SWB, but there is little difference between the SWB of rich and poor within countries.

Finally, SWB does not decline, as originally proposed, with age although the aged may

experience less positive affect (Deiner & Suh, 1998).

The second maj or psychological approach to the question What is the good hife? has been

offered by Carole Ryff (1989b) and her colleagues. Ryff tackles the bold task of "defining the

essential features of psychological well-being (p. 1069)." Ryff is critical of the above line of

research on several theoretical grounds. First, she points out that investigators who first noted

that positive and negative affect were independent of one another were not interested in defining

aspects of positive psychological functioning (Bradburn, 1969). The proposal that a relative

balance of positive affect over little negative affect constitutes psychological well-being lacks

strong theoretical underpinnings according to Ryff. Ryff~ s second critique of the SWB literature

is that SWB is based on a dubious interpretation of the Greek word eudaimonia. Ryff, quoting

Waterman (1984), argues that the ancient Greek understandings of eudaimonia and hedonia were

distinct. The Greeks would have understood the former to indicate all the feelings and behaviors

consistent with attaining one's highest good, whereas the latter would have been understood in a

way that is much more closely related to previous conceptions of subjective well-being. Ryff~ s

evaluation is that hedonism is an inadequate foundation upon which to build a solid theory of

psychological well-being. A person can claim to be happy without functioning adequately in a

variety of life areas.

From a developmental perspective, Ryff (1989a) also criticizes previous approaches to

well-being as it relates to aging on the grounds that wellness is most often defined as the absence

of illness. This is also reminiscent of Antonovsky's critique of the medical field outlined above.










Ryff is concerned when low scores on measures of anxiety, depression, loneliness and the like

are used to indicate psychological well-being. The limitation of this approach is that the more

positive aspects and attributes of successful adjustment in old age are ignored. Another criticism

of previous conceptions of continued well-being in aging populations is their tendency to "limit

continued growth and development in the later years (p. 38)." This conception of aging tends to

assume that individuals attain a developmental plateau rather than assuming that people continue

to grow and develop throughout all stages of the lifespan.

As a source for her own proposal for psychological well-being, Ryff (1989a; 1989b) draws

upon developmental theorists such as Erikson (1959), Buhler (1935), and Neugarten (1968,

1973), clinical theorists such as Rogers (1961), Maslow (1968), Jung (1933), and Allport (1961),

and mental health literature, particularly Jahoda (1958). Ryff says these theories of psychological

well-being have had limited impact for three reasons. First, they have spawned few credible

assessment procedures, the criteria for well-being proposed by each is quite diverse, and each has

been criticized as being "hopelessly value-laden (Ryff, 1989b, p. 1070)." Ryff, however,

undertook the arduous task of distilling these theories, extracting six characteristics of the

individual who is functioning well psychologically: self-acceptance, positive relations with

others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and personal growth.

In describing self-acceptance, Ryff (1989a) describes a person as having a generally

"positive attitude toward oneself and one's life (p.41)." A psychologically well-functioning

individual will also have positive relations nI ithr others. People high on this domain are described

as having elevated social interest, capable of greater capacity to give and receive love, empathic

toward those who are not as self-actualized, and generally able to relate to others in a warm and

compassionate way. An autonomous individual has an internal locus of control, is free to act in









non-conventional ways, values self evaluation over other-evaluation of self, and is self-

determining. Individuals possessing environmental mastery have a sense of competence in a

variety of life areas, a sense of contributing to the world, and the ability to choose or create a

living situation suitable to personal needs and desires. Purpose in life describes those persons

who have successfully navigated the middle adult years and have been able to successfully

maintain an inner sense of personal integrity, have the ability to live in the present moment, have

a unifying philosophy of life, [and] a "sense of directedness, balance, and integration (p.43)." For

Ryff, there is no end point to personal gian ,1 lr At no point in an individual's personal history

should one fail to be open to new experiences, or view themselves as having arrived rather than

being continually in process. In humanistic terms, striving toward self-actualization is a lifelong

task. It is the six above dimensions that Ryff operationalized in the Scale of Psychological Well-

being (PWB).

Religion, Spirituality, and Psychological Well-Being

What are the effects of religion and spirituality on psychological well being? Koenig,

McCullough, and Larson (2001) cite numerous studies indicating both the positive and negative

effects of religion and spirituality on psychological well-being as well as dysfunction. These

authors note, for instance, that religion promotes marital fidelity. Andrews and Withey (1976)

found that individuals who are married report greater levels of happiness than those who have

never been married, have been divorced, or who are separated. Strawbridge, Cohen, Shema, and

Kaplan (1997) found that couples who attended religious services weekly in 1965 were 80%

more likely to be married to the same person at a 28 year follow-up than those couples who

attended religious services less frequently.

Generally speaking, people who rate their health higher are happier than those who do not

(George & Landerman, 1984). High self-rated religious involvement is associated with lower









levels as alcohol and drug abuse (Bell, Wechsler, & Johnston, 1997; Khavari & Harmon, 1982),

lower levels of hypertension (Koenig, et al, 1998), heart disease (Oxman, Freeman, &

Manheimer, 1995), and longer lifespan (McCullough, Hoyt, Larson, Koenig, & Thoresen, 2000).

Religious communities promote participation in social activities ranging from attendance

at services of worship to mission endeavors. Koenig, McCullough & Larson (2001) report that

people who participate in religious activities more frequently have "larger support networks,

more social contacts, and greater satisfaction with support (p. 100)." The social support networks

developed through participation in the religious community contribute to psychological well-

being.

Religious participation has also been found to foster a greater sense of optimism and hope.

Sethi and Seligman (1993, 1994) found that religious fundamentalists (Orthodox Judaism,

Calvinism, and Islam) were more optimistic than members of liberal religious groups

(Unitarianism and reform Judaism). This finding was also found for hope, with fundamentalist

religious groups espousing more hope than liberal religious groups. The latter finding has been

supported by other researchers as well (Herth, 1989; Carson, Soeken, Shanty, & Terry, 1990).

Religion often teaches that life is meaningful and that life events do not happen by chance.

The research literature in this area is overwhelmingly in favor of the notion that religious

individuals have a greater sense of meaning and purpose in life (Burbank, 1992; Carroll, 1993).

These findings have a theoretical connection to both sense of coherence and psychological well-

being.

Three limitations to the above studies for the current purpose are of note. The foregoing are

indirect indicators of well-being. Marital status, health status, social support, optimism, hope,

and meaning and purpose in life may set the stage for psychological well-being but do not, in and









of themselves, constitute psychological well-being. Secondly, while the vast maj ority of the

research has found positive relationships between religious involvement and mental health, there

are a few exceptions (for example, see Moberg, 1984). A third limitation is one of measurement.

The studies above have not operationalized religiousness, religious participation, and well-being

consistently. Therefore, it is difficult to draw broad conclusions. Nevertheless, these studies do

lend support to the notion that spirituality and psychological well-being are positively related.

A somewhat more direct route of measuring well-being is through measuring the absence

of pathology. Analogous to the assumption in medicine that the absence of illness defines health,

a notion rej ected by both Antonovsky (1987) and Ryff (1989a), is the notion that the absence of

mental dysfunction defines psychological well-being. The definitional debate notwithstanding,

an important question becomes Are people 0 ithr strong religious values less prone to

psychological dysfunction? Koenig, McCullough, and Larson (2001) reviewed the literature on

depression and drew five conclusions. One, Jews and people with no religious affiliation are

more likely to experience depression and depressive symptoms. Two, people who are active in

their religious communities and value their religion for intrinsic reasons are at reduced risk for

depression; however, people with low involvement in their religious communities and who value

religion for extrinsic reasons are more likely to experience depressive symptoms. Three, not all

measures of religious involvement are equally predictive of depressive symptomology.

Involvement in organizational religious activities and intrinsic religious commitment are more

likely to buffer the individual against depression. Religious coping is an effective means of

helping individuals deal with stress. Finally, "prospective cohort studies and quasi-experimental

research all suggest that religious or spiritual activities may lead to a reduction in depressive

symptoms...(p. 135)."









Koenig, McCullough, and Larson (2001) also found an inverse relationship between

suicide, suicidal behavior, suicidal ideation, and tolerant attitudes toward suicide and religious

involvement (frequency of attendance, frequency of prayer, and degree of religious salience).

They also concluded that there is a weak inverse relationship between religion and anxiety. This

research is difficult to interpret because it is anxiety that might actually lead an individual to

engage in religious activities such as prayer. Prayer can be seen as a religions coping strategy.

In sum, the research supports the idea that religion has an inverse relationship with

depression, suicide, and anxiety. Again, that a person is not depressed, suicidal, or anxious does

not necessarily mean that he or she is functioning well psychologically. That a person is not

anxious or suicidal does not indicate that the person is living life joyfully to the fullest. Absence

of negative functioning does not necessarily imply positive functioning.

Clergy Well-Being

Hall (1997) reviewed the scant clergy well-being literature. He categorized the literature

along six dimensions: emotional well-being, stress and coping, marital/divorce adjustment,

family adjustment, burnout, and impairment. Hall draws several conclusions from his review of

the literature:

(a) the most frequent difficulties experienced by pastors are anxiety, disappointment,
feelings of inadequacy, spiritual dryness, stress, frustration, lack of time, fear of failure,
loneliness, and isolation; (b) pastor's emotional well-being is positively related to
vocational congruence; and (c) low self-concept, low degree of satisfaction in relationship
with God and self-criticism are associated with higher degrees of trait anxiety (243).

Hall goes on to note a significant literature of psychological impairment based in a

psychoanalytic tradition which is not directly related to this proj ect.

In sum, the clergy well-being literature suffers from the same limitations mentioned earlier

related to well-being literature in general; namely, the assumption is made that the absence of










pathology implies well-being. Thus, one of the distinguishing marks of the current proj ect is to

examine a model of well-being, rather than pathology, in a ministerial population.

Questions and Hypotheses

The primary question of this proj ect is What is the state of psychological well-being among

clergy? One might expect that religious leaders fare better than religious lay people

psychologically because they avail themselves of those aspects of religious life that are known to

indirectly effect psychological functioning, i.e., social support. Previous research indicates that

sense of coherence and religion/spirituality contribute to psychological well-being. Previous

studies, however, have operationalized religion/spirituality by measuring religious service

attendance, religious belief, and practice. No connections have been made between spiritual

maturity as measured by the Spiritual Assessment Inventory (SAI) and Ryff' s Scale of

Psychological Well-being (PWB). Previous research has operationalized psychological well-

being as happiness and life satisfaction, utilizing Deiner' s Subj ective Well-being construct.

Hypothesis 1, based on previous related findings and current theoretical considerations

(outlined above), is that both sense of coherence and spiritual maturity will contribute to the

psychological well-being of clergy. Hypothesis 2 flows from the first: M~embers of the clergy will

fare better psychologically when compared to a non-clergy group.

A second question considered in this proj ect is What is the relationship between spiritual

maturity, sense of coherence, and psychological well-being? Individuals who are spiritually

mature are both aware of God' s presence and well adjusted in their relationship with God.

Antonovsky argues that there are multiple sources for sense of coherence, but that it is sense of

coherence that has a direct affect on physical health and, by extrapolation, psychological health

outcomes. Hence, hypothesis 3 is that sense of coherence mediates the relationship between

spiritual maturity and Psychological well-being.









CHAPTER 3
METHOD S

Participants

Participants were United Methodist clergy from three Southern conferences and students

from the undergraduate research pool at the University of Florida. An email list containing 1745

names of clergy with working email addresses was obtained from United Methodist Church

Conference websites in the Southern United States. Participants were solicited through electronic

mail. The solicitation email message contained a request for participation as well as the link to

the website. Clergy participants were not compensated; student participants received course

credit for participation. Ministers from the United Methodist Church were selected for study

because of the author' s personal interest in this group and because of the readily availability of

contact information for this group.

Two hundred twenty-one student participants were solicited through the undergraduate

research pool at the University of Florida. Students were directed to the data collection website

and followed the same procedure outlined above. Students received one point of participation

credit as a part of their class assignments. Demographic characteristics for clergy and student

groups are shown in Table 3-1.

Data was also collected regarding clergy member's thoughts about leaving the ministry in

the past and currently. Results are shown in Table 3-2.

Measures

Sense of Coherence

The Sense of Coherence Scale was originally entitled The Life Orientation Questionnaire,

but is popularly referred to by the former (Antonovsky, 1993). The instrument was created by

Antonovsky in order to test his sense of coherence construct. There are two versions of the Sense









of Coherence Scale: SOC-29 and SOC-13. In order to save time and forestall participant fatigue,

the SOC-13 was utilized for this proj ect. The psychometric properties of the SOC-13 are

discussed here if available, unless otherwise noted.

The reliability of the SOC-29 has been supported by several studies noted by Antonovsky

(1993). Antonovsky reports average Cronbach alpha coeffieients of eight published studies of

.81, three theses or dissertations of .85, and fifteen unpublished papers of .88. Concerning the

SOC-13, the average Cronbach' s alpha for five unpublished studies was .82, and for 4 theses and

dissertations .81. It should be noted that these studies sampled a variety of cultures, but that the

consistent high alpha levels suggest a cross-culturally relevant instrument.

Test-retest reliability has been supported in a variety of cultures for the SOC-29. However,

the only test-retest correlation reported by Antonovsky for the SOC-13 was .77 for patients at a

veteran's hospital in the United States (six month retest period). For the SOC-29, test-retest

correlations range from .41 (one-year medical student sample) to .86 (Serbian teacher training

students after one year).

Antonovsky (1993) reported several studies assessing the criterion validity of the SOC-29.

Positive relationships have been found between SOC and internal locus of control (.44), self-

esteem (.63, SOC-13; .49), and hardiness (.50). Negative correlations have been found between

SOC and trait anxiety (-.61; -.69; and -.75, SOC-13).

Antonovsky (1993) also reported correlations with health and psychological well-being

measures. Antonovsky reported correlations between SOC and general well-being (.62), 6-month

prediction of morale (.71), quality of life (.76), and life satisfaction (.54). Antonovsky also

reported negative correlations between SOC and psychosomatic symptoms (-.70), psychotic

symptoms (-.59), and emotional distress (-.63). Other low correlations reported by Antonovsky









were generally consistent with the expected direction. Another interesting feature of these

correlations is there cross-cultural nature. Samples were drawn from the United States (morale,

emotional distress, and general well-being), Israel (life satisfaction), Sweden (quality of life,

psychosomatic symptoms, and psychotic symptoms).

Antonovsky also gives normative data for the SOC-13 with college faculty and

undergraduates, minority homeless women, and male patients at U.S. veteran's hospitals. Other

norms are given for populations outside the U.S., but are not discussed here. For faculty in the

United States, male faculty mean scores for the SOC-13 were 66.7 with female faculty scoring

66.4. The standard deviation (SD) for male and female faculty were 9.8 and 10.6, respectively. A

sample of 55-year old male Veteran' s Administration Hospital patients had a mean score of 61.9

and a SD of 17.8. An undergraduate sample in the United States had mean scores of 58.5 with a

SD of 12. 1. Finally, a sample of minority homeless women in the United States had a mean score

of 55.0 with a SD of 0.7. One would expect the clergy sample to score more similarly to faculty

samples given similar social and economic status. In sum, the SOC-13 is a thirteen-item

questionnaire utilizing a 7-point Likert scale. The scale has demonstrated acceptable reliability

and validity in multiple international studies. The questionnaire was used to operationalize

Antonovsky's construct sense of coherence.

Spiritual Assessment Inventory

Hall and Edwards (1996) report the results of two exploratory factor analytic studies that

support the theoretical model they proposed. The results of the two studies revealed the same

factor structures, therefore, only the results of the second study are included here; for details

concerning the first study, see Hall and Edwards (1996). A five factor solution was obtained

which they labeled (in descending order of Eigenvalues) instability, defensiveness/

disappointment, awareness, Realistic Acceptance, and grandiosity. Only those items with factor









loadings exceeding .30 were retained. As expected, there were some moderate correlations

between the awareness and Realistic Acceptance subscales (.33) and awareness and instability

subscales (-.33). Cronbach's alpha was used to test the reliability of each scale with values

ranging from .91 (defensiveness) to .52 (grandiosity). Reliability Alphas for the current student

are reported in Table 4.2 (p. 51).

In a follow-up study (Hall & Edwards, 2002), confirmatory factor analysis was used to

clarify the factor structure and to test the validity of the Spirituality Assessment Inventory (SAI).

Five factors again emerged from the data (again, in descending Eigenvalue order): awareness,

defensiveness (renamed disappointment due to content homogeneity), grandiosity, Realistic

Acceptance, and instability. Reliability was again calculated using Cronbach's Alpha; values

ranged from .95 (awareness) to .73 (grandiosity). Additionally, correlations with the Bell Object

Relations Inventory (BORI; Bell, Billington, & Becker, 1986), the Spiritual Well-being Scales

(SWB S; Elli son, 1983), and the Intrinsic/Extrensic-revi sed Sub scales (I/E-R; Gorsuch &

McPherson, 1989) generally support the external validity of the SAI.

In a second study reported by Hall and Edwards (2002), a set of impression management

(IM) items were added to the protocol. A principle axis factor analysis revealed six distinct

factors supporting the previous five-factor solution and confirming the homogeneity of the IM

items. Cronbach's alpha for the IM subscale was .77.

In conclusion, the SAI is a 47-item that measures Hall and Edwards' (1996) model of

spirituality along two dimensions: awareness and quality. The quality dimension has three

factors: Realistic Acceptance, instability, and grandiosity. The disappointment scale is viewed as

a validity scale in that if a person never or rarely endorses items that indicate disappointment

with God, this may represent a defensive pattern of responding. In light of the previous









discussion, this pattern of responding may represent illusory spiritual health. Finally, the

impression management items serve as an additional validity check. When controlling for IM,

the intercorrelations between the five previous scales dropped, thereby increasing the

heterogeneity of each scale.

Scale of Psychological Well-being

Ryff (1989b) developed the PWB to operationalize the aforementioned six domains of

psychological functioning. Item-to-scale correlations were conducted with theoretically derived

items. Items loading on two or more scales or loading more highly with a scale other than the

theoretically derived scale were eliminated. After the total number of items per scale was

reduced to 20, the internal consistency coefficients ranged from .86 (autonomy) to .93 (self-

acceptance). Six-week test-retest reliability coefficients ranged from .81 (environmental mastery

and personal growth) to .88 (autonomy). Measures of internal consistency for the current study

can be found in Table 4.2 (p. 51).

Perhaps, the most significant findings were age and gender differences. Ryff conducted a

multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA), utilizing follow-up analysis of variance (ANOVA) to

determine the location of significant differences. Along the personal gi/ 1,n ill dimension,

significant differences were found between older adults and both young and middle adults with

older adults scoring lower in each instance. Older adults scored significantly lower than middle

adults along the purpose in life dimension. Young adults scored significantly lower than both

middle and older adults in environmental mastery. Finally, young adults also scored lower than

middle adults in autonomy. These results indicated that individuals in middle age (mean age of

49.85) function better than young adults (mean age of 19.53) with a plateau or decline in

functioning into older adulthood (mean age 74.96). It is of note that there are no significant age

differences for the domains of self-acceptance and positive relations with others.










A significant gender difference was also found. Women tended to score higher on the

positive relations with others domain than did men, F(1, 315) = 17.64, p < .001. There were no

Gender by Age interactions.

One possible criticism of Ryff~ s study is that the sample was drawn from a middle class,

well-educated sample that did not represent the general population of the United States. In an

effort to broaden the generalizability of the PWB, Ryff and Keyes (1995) conducted a follow-up

study with a larger, nationally representative sample. The primary draw-back of this study was

that only three of the original 20-items from each scale were used. However, all items loaded

strongly and positively with their own scale. Scales, as predicted, were low to moderately

correlated (. 13 to .46). Age differences previously reported were supported in this study with two

exceptions. The autonomy scale showed age increments from young to middle adulthood only,

rather than an incremental increase throughout the three studied groups. Previously, no age

differences were found in positive relations with others; however, older adults scored higher than

both middle and young adults.

Utilizing confirmatory factor analysis, Ryff and Keyes (1995) tested several models to

determine the best model for the data. They determined that a "super-factor" model was the best

fit (E2 = 378.7, df = 129, AGFI = .89, BIC = -166.04). As such, the authors conclude that the six

factors originally proposed "are a function of, or are caused by, another latent construct (p. 722)"

which the authors label well-being.

In summary, the 54-item Scale of Psychological Well-being is a derivative of a larger 84-

item measure that has proven psychometric properties. The 54-item version was employed in this

proj ect in order to address participant load and fatigue. The instrument contains six subscales:

self acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life,










and personal growth. The measure was used to operationalize Ryff' s (1987) conception of

Psychological well-being.

Stress in General Scale

The Stress in General Scale (SIG) is a 15-item scale measuring work-related stress.

Respondents are asked to rate the words or phases using the 3-choice format of 'yes,' 'no,' or '?'

if that particular word or phrase describes their j ob. The SIG contains two subscales: pressure

and threat. The pressure scale contains items such as "demanding" and "hectic," whereas the

threat scale includes items such as "nerve-wracking" and "overwhelming." The coefficient alpha

is .88 and .82 for the pressure and threat scales respectively. Measures of internal consistency for

the current study can be found in Table 4.2 (p. 51). The factors had an intercorrelation of oc = .61

which suggests some overlap in the two scales.

Evidence of convergent validity for the pressure scale was demonstrated through

correlations with the time pressure subscale of the Job Stress Index (r = .52). Evidence of

divergent validity was demonstrated through correlations with general job satisfaction (r = -.47).

Validity evidence for the SIG needs further research and clarification.

Procedure

Clergy participants were solicited through electronic mail. 1745 usable email addresses

were collected through the websites of three United Methodist Conference in the South. 257

usable surveys were completed. The participation rate of all those solicited was 14.7%.

Solicitation emails directed participants to the data collection website. The first screen contained

the informed consent document. By continuing beyond the informed consent page, participants

agreed to participation. Participants were asked to fill out a brief demographics questionnaire

followed by the Sense of Coherence Scale, the Spiritual Assessment Inventory, the Scale of

Psychological Well-being, and the Stress in General Scale. Participants were randomly directed









to one of four orders of presentation based on a Latin Square design. Participants completed the

questionnaires in one sitting as responses could not be saved for a future session. After

submitting their responses, participants were directed to a debriefing page containing more

information about the study as well as contact information for the investigators.

Analyses

The Sense of Coherence Scale (Life Orientation Questionnaire) yields a global score with

continuous data. The Spiritual Assessment Inventory yields scores in six domains with

continuous data for each domain. The Scale of Psychological Well-being yields scores in six

domains with continuous data within each scale. The Stress in General Scale yields two scores

with continuous data.

In order to examine hypothesis 1, that sense of coherence and spiritual maturity will

contribute to psychological well-being, a series of six regression models were developed. The

global SOC score, as well as the six domains of the SAI. The six Psychological Well-being

domains of Self Acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery,

purpose in life, and Personal Growth were entered as dependent variables. The series of six

regression models was justified in that the primary interest of the researcher is the examination

of each dependent variable separately rather than each dependent variable simultaneously.

Regression equations were developed for both clergy and student groups as well as an aggregate

group containing both samples.

In order to examine hypothesis 2, M~embers of the clergy fare better psychologically when

compared to a non-clergy group, a series of six analysis of covariance were conducted. Clergy

and Students were entered as factors and age served as the covariate.

In order to examine hypothesis 3, that sense of coherence mediates spiritual maturity and

Psychological well-being, regression models including awareness of God and instability as










dependent variables, sense of coherence as a mediating variable, and each of the six measures of

psychological well-being as independent variables were developed. The bootstrapping procedure

developed by Preacher and Hayes (2004) was used to estimate the size of the indirect effects.

This procedure was carried out in order to test the significance of the mediated effect as

suggested by Baron & Kenny (1986), Frazier, Tix, & Barron (2004), and Kenny, Kashy, &

Bolger (1998). The estimates are based on 1000 random samples, with replacement, from the

original data. The significance tests are based on 99% confidence intervals for the size of each

indirect effect derived from the bootstrapped estimates.

Table 3-1. Clergy and student demographic information
Clergy Students
Mean Age 50.9 19.2
Gender
Male N 205.0 82.0
Female N 52.0 138.0
Ethnicity
Caucasian 243. 0 157.0
African American 10.0 25.0
Asian-American 0.0 17.0
Native American/Pacific Islander 0.0 2.0
Multiple Ethnicities 3.0 20.0
Marital Status
Never married 9.0 214.0
Married 209.0 1.0
Divorced 8.0 1.0
Widowed 3.0 0.0
Remarried 25.0 0.0
Children
Mean number of children 2.3 0.0
Mean number of children living at home 1.0 0.0
Mean hours spent at work/school 50.2 27.3
Mean hours spent with friends/family 19.0 23.2












Table 3-2. Clergy responses to ministry related questions.


I've never considered leaving the ministry.
I am not considering leaving the ministry.
The thought has (recently) crossed my mind.
I have (am) actively pursued (pursuing) information
about other professions.
I have pursued (am pursuing) contacts with non-
ministry-related employers.
I have interviewed (am interviewing) with employers
outside the professional ministry.
I considered (am considering) a job offer outside the
professional ministry.
I left, but eventually returned to the professional
ministry.
I already have plans to leave professional ministry.
I currently work outside the professional ministry.
No response.


Thoughts of leaving Ministry
Past (%) Current (%)
30.0 NA
NA 78.6
41.2 14.0
9.7 1.6









CHAPTER 4
RESULTS

Descriptive Statistics

The question arises as to how the mean scores for the current sample (shown in Table

4-1) compare with those found in the literature. Antonovsky (1998) reports the results of several

studies using the SOC-13. One study of University faculty in the United States, male and female

faculty members scores 66.7 and 66.4, respectively. Carling, Hill, and McWey (2004) reversed

scored the SOC-13 obtaining a mean score of 18. 1 in their study of clergy and their spouses.

Thus, a lower score indicates greater sense of coherence. Reverse scoring the results of the

current study yields a means of 30.0. Hall and Edwards have not reported normative data for the

Spiritual Assessment Inventory. Stanton and Balzer' s (2001) report in their original study means

for the pressure and threat domains of the Stress in General Scale of 13.9 and 9.24, respectively.

Results of this study indicate that this sample scored lower on the two domains of the Stress in

General Scale. Normative data for the Spiritual Assessment Inventory is still in the process of

development; this study can be conceived of as a contribution to that effort. Similarly, I was

unable to locate any published studies utilizing the 54-item version of the Scale of Psychological

Well-being, thus making mean comparisons meaningless.

Preliminary Analyses

The following analyses were conducted in order to test the assumptions underlying

multiple regression analyses used to examine the data. Tabachnick and Fidell (2001), citing

Green (1991), give two rules of thumb concerning the ratio of cases to number of independent

variables. N> 50 + 8m (m is number of independent variables) and N1 104 + m are suggested

rules of thumb for testing multiple regression and individual predictors, respectively. They

further suggest calculating N both ways and using the larger of the two numbers to estimate the









number of cases needed to perform the operation. In this proj ect, nine independent variables

were entered into the regression models (Sense of Coherence total score, awareness mean,

disappointment mean, Realistic Acceptance mean, grandiosity mean, Instability mean,

impression management mean, and the threat and pressure mean scores from the Stress in

General scale). Thus, with sample sizes of 221 students and 257 clergy, the ratio of cases to

independent variables was exceeded in both cases (122 case minimum for multiple regression

and 113 case minimum for individual predictors).

Multiple regression procedures also assume that there are no outliers among the

independent and dependent variables. Skewness and kurtosis was examined for all independent

and dependent variables. All dependent variables were within two standard deviations of the

mean with the exception of Personal Growth, which was found to be kurtotic, z = 4.02. The data

were also screened for multivariate outliers using Mahalanobis distance. Mahalanobis distance

greater than X2 (10) = 29.588, p <.001, were considered to be multivariate outliers. The same

three cases found to be univariate outliers on the Personal Growth Scale were found to be

multivariate outliers when regressed on all six dependent variables. The decision was made to

delete the three outliers in this variable because they seem not to be connected to the rest of the

sample, transforming the data seems too radical a solution given the small number of outliers and

the difficulty of interpreting transformed data. Thus, it is assumed that the deletion of these

variables has a negligible influence on the generalizability of the results.

Cohen et al. (2003) note that absence of measurement error in the independent variable is

also an assumption of regression. They suggest that standard reliability estimates are the most

common approach to assessing measurement error. For this proj ect internal consistency

reliability was used to assess measurement error. Cronbach's alphas for all variables for the total










sample, for clergy, and students are reported in Table 4.2. It is generally accepted that Cronbach

alpha levels exceeding .70 are appropriate. With the exception of SAI grandiosity, all variables

exceeded the .70 Cronbach alpha level.

Absence of multicollinearity and singularity are two additional assumptions of

regression. According to Belsley, Kuh, and Welsch (1980) multicollinearity exists when

collinearity diagnostics indicate a conditioning index great than 30 and there are at least two

variance proportions greater than .50. Conditioning indices ranged from 1.00 to 17.20. In none of

the regression models developed was there are conditioning index greater than thirty; therefore,

the first criteria for multicollinearity was not met. Tolerances range from .39 to .76. Cohen et al.

(2003) suggests that tolerance levels less than .10 indicate problems with multicollinearity. Thus,

the independent variables appear to be free of multicollinearity. Additionally, the variance

inflation factors (VIF) ranged from 1.31 to 2.57. Cohen et al. (2003) describe a rule of thumb

(which they see as too lenient) that VIFs greater than 10 are indicative of multicollinearity. All

the above evidence points to a low degree of multicollinearity.

Finally, multiple regression also assumes the residuals are independent of one another

and normally distributed. In order to test the independence of residuals assumption a Durbin-

Watson D statistic was calculated. D ranged from 1.73 (environmental mastery) to 2.07

(autonomy). Critical values for 100+ cases at oc = .05 are Dr = 1.57 and Du = 1.78. Because D =

1.73 falls within the critical values, the test is inconclusive. Because the remaining D values fall

above the upper critical value, but below 4 Du (2.2), it can be concluded that the residuals are

independent of one another. An examination of a scatterplot of the regression standardized

residuals and regression predicted residuals revealed that residuals were acceptably normally

di stributed.










Hypothesis 1

Hypothesis 1 stated that both sense of coherence and' spiritual maturity will contribute to

the Psychological well-being of clergy. In order to test this hypothesis a series of six regression

equations were conducted, one for each factor of psychological well-being. Given the definition

of spiritual maturity as composed of both SAI dimensions of God awareness and Realistic

Acceptance, the results only partially supported the hypothesis. The results supported the

hypothesis that sense of coherence and awareness of God contribute to the six dimensions of

Psychological well-being. Realistic acceptance, however, did not contribute to a single

dimension of psychological well-being. Surprisingly, the SAI dimension of instability was as

frequent a contributor to psychological well-being as was sense of coherence. While the

hypothesis is concerned only with the clergy group, the researcher also included data describing

the student group as well as composite information. For purposes of comparison, only

standardized Beta weights are reported. Table 4.3 summarizes the regression models for each

dependent variable.

Autonomy

For clergy, the standardized regression equation predicting PWB autonomy was

Predicted ZAutonomy = 19 Zsoc + .25 ZAwareness 18 ZInstability 23 .6% of the variance in autonomy

was accounted for sense of coherence, awareness of God, and instability in one's relationship to

God for clergy.

For students, the standardized regression equation predicting PWB autonomy was

Predicted ZAutonomy = .3 5 ZAwareness For students,1 1.5% of the variance in autonomy was

accounted for by awareness of God.

The standardized regressions for the composite of both groups was Predicted ZAutonomy

.18 Zsoc + .30 ZAwareness 18 ZInstability In the composite group, 19.7% of the variance in










autonomy was accounted for by sense of coherence, awareness of God, and instability in one's

relationship with God.

Environmental Mastery

For clergy, the standardized regression equation predicting PWB environmental mastery

was Predicted ZEnvironmental Mastery = .38 Zsoc .17 ZInstability .22 ZThreat Sense of coherence, SAI

instability, and SIG threat accounted for 47% of the variance in environmental mastery among

clergy.

Among students, the standardized regression equation predicting PWB environmental

mastery was Predicted ZEnvironmental Mastery = .47 Zsoc +. 19 ZDisappointment + .14 ZPressure- .29 ZThreat -

.17 ZInstability Sense of coherence, SAI disappointment, SIB pressure, SIG threat, and SAI

instability accounted for 42.5% of the variance in environment mastery among Students.

The composite standardized regression equation predicting environmental mastery was

Predicted ZEnvironmental Mastery = .44 ZSOC Total .25 ZThreat .16 ZInstability Sense of coherence, SIG

threat, and SAI instability accounted for 45.9% of the variance in environment mastery.

Personal Growth

For Clergy, the standardized regression equation for Personal Growth was

Predicted ZPersonal Growth = .40 ZAwareness .23 ZInstability Awareness and instability accounted for

29. 1% of the variance in Personal Growth among Clergy.

For students, the standardized regression equation for Personal Growth was

Predicted ZPersonal Growth = .50 ZAwareness .26 ZGrandiosity .20 ZInstability Awareness, grandiosity, and

instability accounted for 20% of the variance in Personal Growth among Students.

The composite standardized regression equation for Personal Growth was










Predicted ZPersonal Growth = .41 ZAwareness +.16 Zsoc + .12 ZDisappointment .17 ZSAI Instability

Awareness, sense of coherence, grandiosity, and instability accounted for 28.7% of the variance

in Personal Growth.

Positive Relations with Others

For Clergy, the standardized regression equation for positive relations with others was

Predicted ZPositive Relations = .27 Z soc + .36 ZAwareness .18 ZInstability Sense of coherence,

awareness, and instability accounted for 28.5% of the variance in positive relations with others

among Clergy.

For Students, the standardized regression equation for positive relations with others was

Predicted ZPositive Relations = .41 soc + .27 ZAwareness +.18 ZDisappointment + 16 ZPressure .23 ZGrandiosity

.15 ZThreat Sense of coherence, awareness, disappointment, pressure, grandiosity, and threat

accounted for 33.1% of the variance in positive relations with others among Students.

The composite standardized regression equation for positive relations with others is

Predicted ZPositive Relations = .34 Z soc + .22 ZAwareness + .12 ZDisappointment .13 ZGrandiosity Sense of

coherence, awareness, disappointment, and grandiosity accounted for 25.3% of the variance in

positive relations with others.

Purpose in Life

For clergy, the standardized regression equation for purpose in life was

Predicted ZPurpose = .28 Zsoc + .39 ZAwareness + .17 ZPressure .17 ZInstability .13 ZThreat Sense of

coherence, awareness, pressure, instability, and threat accounted for 39. 1% of the variance in

purpose in life among clergy.

For students, the standardized regression equation for purpose in life was










Predicted ZPurpose = .33 Zsoc + .26 ZAwareness + .16 ZPressure .17 ZThreat Sense of coherence,

awareness, pressure and threat accounted for 33.1% of the variance in purpose in life among

students.

The composite standardized regression equation for purpose in life was

Predicted ZPurpose = .31 Zsoc + .25 ZAwareness + .14 ZPressure .17 ZThreat .13 ZInstability Sense of

coherence, awareness, pressure, threat, and instability accounted for 3 5.0% of the variance in

purpose in life among clergy

Self-acceptance

For clergy, the standardized regression equation for Self Acceptance was

Predicted ZSelf Acceptance = .29 Zsoc + .20 ZAwareness .24 ZInstability 18 ZThreat Sense of coherence,

awareness, instability, and threat accounted for 37.8% of the variance in Self Acceptance among

students.

For students, the standardized regression equation for Self Acceptance was

Predicted ZSelf Acceptance = .41 Zsoc + .39 ZAwareness + .14 ZPressure .20 ZInstability .19 ZGrandiosity -

Sense of coherence, awareness, pressure, instability, and grandiosity accounted for 37.6% of the

variance in Self Acceptance among students.

The composite standardized regression equation for Self Acceptance was

Predicted ZSelf Acceptance = .37 Zsoc + .20 ZAwareness 19 ZInstability 14 ZThreat Sense of coherence,

awareness, instability, and threat accounted for 38.1% of the variance in Self Acceptance.

Hypothesis 2

Hypothesis 2 stated that members of the clergy will fare better psychologically when

compared' to a non-clergy group. Put differently, mean scores for clergy will be significantly

higher on each of the six dimensions of psychological well-being. A series of six Analyses of










Covariance were run, one for each of the measures of psychological well-being, controlling for

age as a potential confound.

Autonomy

A one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted including students and

clergy as factors, mean scores on the PWB autonomy sub scale as dependent variables, and age as

a covariate. A preliminary test of the homogeneity of slopes was conducted, which indicated that

the slopes of the two groups on the PWB variable did not differ significantly, F (1, 472) = .147,

MSE = 48. 17, p = .70. The ANCOVA was not significant, F (1, 473) = .029, MSE = 48.08, p =

.86. Thus, it cannot be said that mean clergy scores on the PWB autonomy scale were

significantly different than student scores.

Environmental Mastery

A one-way ANCOVA was conducted under the same conditions outlined above except

that the PWB environmental mastery scale was used as the dependent variable. An homogeneity

of slopes test was conducted. Results indicated the regression slopes of the two groups did not

differ significantly, F (1, 472) = .57, MSE = 57.74, p = .45. Again, the ANCOVA was not

significant, F (1, 473) = .63, MSE = 57.69, p = .43. Mean scores on the PWB environmental

mastery scale did not differ between clergy and students.

Personal Growth

The same one-way ANCOVA was conducted with the PWB Personal Growth scale as the

dependent variable. Once again, a homogeneity of slopes test was conducted which indicated

that the slopes for clergy and students did not differ significantly, F (1, 472) = .36, MSE = 43.97,

p = .55. Results of the ANCOVA indicated that mean PWB Personal Growth scores for clergy

were significantly higher than students, F (1, 473) = 7.77, MSE = 43.91, p = .006.









Positive Relations with Others

The dependent variable of PWB positive relations with others was included in a one-way

ANCOVA along with group as a factor and age as a covariate. Homogeneity of slopes test

indicated that the regression slopes of the two groups were not significantly different, F (1, 472)

=.04, MSE = 64.05, p = .85. The results of the ANCOVA, however, were not significant, F (1,

473) = .79, MSE = 63.92, p = .3 8. Clergy mean scores were not significantly higher than student

mean scores on the PWB positive relations with others.

Purpose in Life

A one-way ANCOVA was conducted including students and clergy as factors, mean scores

on the PWB purpose in life subscale as dependent variables, and age as a covariate. A

preliminary test of the homogeneity of slopes was conducted, which indicated that the slopes of

the two groups on the PWB variable did not differ significantly, F (1, 472) = .21, MSE = 56.60, p

=.65. The ANCOVA was significant, F (1, 473) = 6.71, MSE = 56.51, p = .01. Thus, it can be

said that mean clergy scores on the PWB purpose in life scale were statistically significantly

higher than student scores.

Self-Acceptance

A one-way ANCOVA was conducted under the same conditions outlined above except

that the PWB Self-Acceptance scale was used as the dependent variable. A homogeneity of

slopes test was conducted. Results indicated the regression slopes of the two groups did not

differ significantly, F (1, 472) = .01, MSE = 69.50, p = .91. Again, the ANCOVA was not

significant, F (1, 473) = 2.68, MSE = 69.36, p = .10. Mean scores on the PWB Self-Acceptance

scale did not differ between clergy and students.










Hypothesis 3

Hypothesis 3 stated that Sense of coherence mediates the relationship between spiritual

maturity and psychological well-being. In order to test this hypothesis, as series of regression

models were developed in which sense of coherence was entered as the mediating variable

between God awareness and instability and the six dimensions of Psychological well-being. All

betas were reduced when sense of coherence was included in the model, although not all were

reduced to zero. Also, the overall indirect effect of sense of coherence was significant with both

God awareness and instability and all six domains of psychological well-being as indicated by

the finding that the 99% confidence interval in each case did not include zero. Table 4.4 displays

the standardized betas for the non-mediated model, the mediated model as well as the upper and

lower bounds of the confidence intervals resulting from the bootstrapping procedure described in

chapter three.

Table 4-1. Means and Standard Deviations for Clergy and Students
Clergy Students
M SD M SD
SOC Total 65.70 11.75 55.75 11.78
Spirituality Assessment Inventory
Awareness 3.87 .76 2.76 1.18
Realistic Acceptance 2.44 1.45 1.71 1.41
Grandiosity 1.83 .47 1.79 .65
Instability 1.44 .45 1.89 .70
Disappointment 1.90 .80 1.92 .91
Impression Management 2.77 .83 2.29 .93
Stress in General
Pressure 9.43 4.00 6.10 4.53
Threat 5.55 4.62 5.00 4.47
Scale of Psychological Well-being
Autonomy 41.02 6.70 38.01 7.24
Environmental Mastery 40.95 7.80 37.33 7.57
Personal Growth 46.75 6.01 41.96 7.26
Positive Relations w/ Others 43.34 7.41 41.79 8.63
Purpose in Life 44.74 7.13 41.14 7.91
Self-acceptance 44.09 7.45 39.79 9.29












Table 4-2. Measures of internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) for Independent and Dependent
Variables for total sample, Clergy and Students
Total Clergy Students
Number
Measure oflItem s a N a N a
Life Orientation Questionnaire 13 .88 218 .86 170 .85
Spirituality Assessment Inventory
Instability 9 .78 257 .72 221 .77
Disappointment 7 .90 257 .89 221 .90
Grandiosity 7 .65 257 .58 221 .73
Awareness 19 .97 257 .94 221 .98
Realistic Acceptance 7 .84 257 .81 221 .86
Impression Management 5 .76 257 .72 221 .78
Stress in General: Pressure 7 .82 254 .76 213 .82
Stress in General: Threat 8 .81 251 .80 211 .82
Scale of Psychological Well-being
Autonomy 9 .74 248 .72 218 .73
Environmental Mastery 9 .78 243 .78 210 .76
Personal Growth 9 .73 251 .70 211 .68
Positive Relations 9 .79 244 .76 211 .81
Purpose in Life 9 .78 241 .75 213 .78
Self-acceptance 9 .85 249 .82 210 .85












Table 4-3. Standardized Beta weights for Psychological Well-being Regression Equations
SAI SAI
SOC SAI SAI SAI SAI SIG SIG
Realistic Impression
Total Awareness Grandiosity Instability Disappointment Pressure Threat
Acceptance Management

Aggregate
Autonomy .18 .30 -. 18

Environmental .44 -. 16 -.25
Mastery
Personal .22 .37 -.23
Growth
Positive .34 .22 -.13 .12
Relations
Purpose in .31 .25 -. 13 .14 -. 17
Life
Self- .37 .20 -. 19 -. 14
acceptance
Clergy
Autonomy .19 .25 -. 18


Environmental
Mastery
Personal
Growth
Positive
Relations
Purpose in
Life
Self-
acceptance


-.17

-.18

-.18


-.22


-. 18












Table 4-3., continued
Students
Autonomy .35

Environmental .47 -. 17 .19 -.29
Mastery
Personal .19 .43 -.24 -.23
Growth
Positive .41 .27 -.23 .18 .16 -. 15
Relations
Purpose in .33 .26 .16 -. 17
Life
Self- .41 .39 -.19 -.20 .14
acceptance
Note. Only those standardized beta weights with p<.05 are presented.












Table 4-4. Standardized Betas for the non-mediated and mediated regression models and upper
and lower bounds of confidence intervals
Awareness of God
P p (SOC in Lower Limit 99% CI Upper Limit 99% C1
model)
Autonomy .25 .14 .39 1.09
Environmental .27 .05 1.10 2.22


I


Mastery
Personal Growth
Positive
Relations
Purpose in Life
Self-acceptance

Autonomy
Environmental
Mastery
Personal Growth
Positive
Relations
Purpose in Life
Self-acceptance


1.06
1.60

1.59
2.01

-.77
-2.02

-.83
-1.49

-1.56
-1.87


.74
1.00


Instability


-.27
-.39

-.34
-.26

-.33
-.40


-.15
-.15

-.21
-.07

-.13
-.20


-.2.33
-4.16

-2.24
-3.34

-3.50
-4.05









CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION

General Discussion


The purpose of this project has been to examine the relationship between sense of

coherence, spirituality, and psychological well-being among United Methodist Clergy. This

study also addressed the dearth of research on the factors that contribute to the well-being of

professional clergy. Results of the study partially supported the hypothesis that spirituality as

measured by God awareness and Realistic Acceptance of one's relationship with God, and sense

of coherence contribute to the six dimensions of Psychological Well-being. That clergy fare

better than a non-clergy group on the dimensions of psychological well-being, hypothesis 2, was

largely not supported. Sense of coherence was found to mediate the relationship between

spirituality and psychological well-being.

Hypothesis 1

With regard to hypothesis 1, results were largely supported. As expected, sense of

coherence contributed to each domain of psychological well-being among clergy with the

exception of Personal Growth. This exception is somewhat counterintuitive when one considers

the significant definitional overlap. For instance, Ryff describes high scorers in purpose in life as

able to maintain a sense of personal integrity, have a unifying philosophy of life, and a sense of

purposefulness. For Antonovsky, personal integrity is impossible without a sense of coherence.

A unifying philosophy of life is, for Antonovsky, that which gives life meaning. It is possible to

read Ryff s purposefulness and Antonovsky's meaningfulness component of coherence as nearly

synonymous. Despite these theoretical considerations, the data did not support the conclusion

that sense of coherence contributes to the Personal Growth of clergy (or students). Interestingly,

when the total sample is considered, both clergy and students together, sense of coherence does









make a small contribution to Personal Growth. Further research is needed to clarify the

relationship between sense of coherence and the psychological well-being domain of Personal

Growth.

Likewise, awareness of God contributed to each domain of psychological well-being

except environmental mastery. This finding held true for clergy, students and both groups

considered together. In this case, however, there are no strong theoretical connections between

one' s sense of the presence of God and one' s ability to arrange one' s environment in a desirable

manner. In other words, a simple awareness of God' s presence does not necessarily lead directly

to the skill set needed to order one's surroundings.

While awareness of God and sense of coherence contributed positively to clergy

psychological well-being, Realistic Acceptance, or having a stable, broad view of how one

relates to God, did not have a similarly salutary effect. Realistic Acceptance, contrary to

hypothesis 1, did not contribute to a single dimension of psychological well-being. That Realistic

Acceptance did not contribute to psychological well-being of either clergy or students is

unexpected given the theoretical import given to the construct. If it is true that individuals relate

to God through the same psychological mechanisms by which they relate to other individuals,

one may intuitively expect Realistic Acceptance to contribute to the Psychological Well-being

dimension of positive relations with others. One might also expect Realistic Acceptance to

contribute to Self Acceptance, if one allows the Sullivanian notion that the self is made up of

reflected appraisals (Sullivan, 1953). This finding calls into question the interpersonal foundation

upon which Hall and Edwards' (1996) interpersonal theory of relating to God is based.

Before concluding that Hall and Edwards' interpersonal theory of spiritual maturity is of

no value, however, one must consider the via negative. While the results did not support the









notion that relational stability positively influence one's relating to God, there was evidence to

suggest that relational instability does have a deleterious influence on psychological well-being.

The SAI qualitative relational dimension of instability detracted from every dimension of

psychological well-being for clergy. The quality of one' s relationship with God does influence

psychological well-being, but the most important qualitative contribution may be the negative

influence instability exerts. Said differently, if one wavers between idealizing God and

castigating God, psychological well-being may be impaired.

Hypothesis 2

Hypothesis 2 predicted that clergy would fare better psychologically than non-clergy.

Clergy scores were significantly higher than their non-clergy/student counterparts on two of the

six scales of Psychological well-being: Personal Growth and purpose in life. Clergy and non-

clergy scores on the other four scales did not differ significantly. So, while clergy did not score

uniformly higher across all domains of Psychological well-being, if there were mean differences

between clergy and non-clergy, clergy scored significantly higher than students.

That clergy score high than students on purpose in life is intuitive on two counts. First,

Ryff (1989a) defines high scorers on this domain as having successfully navigated the middle

adult years and having been able to successfully maintain an inner sense of integrity, having the

ability to live in the present moment, having a unifying philosophy of life, and a "sense of

directedness, balance, and integration (p. 43). The first quality listed, to have successfully

navigated the middle adult years, alone disqualifies the traditional college student from scoring

high on this domain. Second, given that age was controlled for in the analysis, the developmental

aspect of this domain remained important. On the one hand, one would expect that clergy

members who have committed themselves to a particular worldview, philosophy of life, and who

have been trained in the transmission of that worldview would find meaning in their personal










lives based on that worldview. Students, on the other hand, are more likely to be at a stage of

exploration prior to having committed themselves to a particular set of beliefs and way of being

in the world.

Clergy also scored higher than non-clergy on dimensions of God awareness. This result

was not surprising given that one might expect religious leaders to have developed a greater

sensitivity to the presence of God. Within the Christian tradition, awareness of the presence of

God is requisite for leading others' spiritual quest. One of the important aspects of clerical

functioning is assisting others in becoming aware of God' s activity in the world. It only makes

sense that members of the clergy would have this awareness in themselves prior to attempting to

leading others on a similar quest.

Clergy apparently do not, however, see their world as more comprehensible, manageable,

or meaningful than non-clergy. This is consistent with Antonovsky's. assertion that a sense of

coherence is not derived from a particular worldview. For Antonovsky, there are presumably an

infinite number of ways environmental stimuli may be organized, managed, and given meaning.

This said, however, the results of this proj ect are not informative about the actual methods

individuals use in organizing, managing, and making meaning. For instance, on the basis of this

proj ect, one cannot conclude whether or not a theistic or non-theistic worldview may lead to an

individual's increased sense of life' s comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness. A

question for future proj ects might be to examine whether certain sets of beliefs, religious or not,

tend to enhance one's sense of coherence.

Hypothesis 3

Hypothesis 3 predicted that sense of coherence would mediate the relationship between

spiritual maturity and Psychological well-being. This hypothesis can only be supported with

regard to the spiritual maturity dimensions of God awareness and instability in one's relationship









with God. In part this result stems from the previous finding that God awareness and instability

were the only two spirituality domains found to have a direct relationship with the domains of

psychological well-being. While the beta weights did not drop to zero, sense of coherence

nevertheless significantly influenced the relationship between spirituality and psychological

well-being; thus it can be said that sense of coherence partially mediates spirituality and

psychological well-being.

That sense of coherence was found to only partially mediate spirituality and well-being

may be accounted for in a variety ways. First, there is infinite variety in the ways one may

comprehend, manage, and give meaning to their lived experience; spirituality is only one means

by which an individual may make sense of their world. One person may make sense of the world

through economics, another politics, yet another philosophy. Any of these perspectives have the

potential to lead one to a meaningful life. Perhaps, spirituality as measured here is not a strong

enough predictor of psychological well-being to warrant recourse to a mediating variable.

Second, measurement may also be an issue. Perhaps other measures of spirituality or

psychological well-being may produce stronger results. Perhaps measures of religious belief

and/or behavior may be stronger predictors of both sense of coherence and psychological well-

being. Perhaps there are other measures of psychological well-being such as Deiner' s (1984) Life

Satisfaction Scale or Frisch' s Quality of Life Inventory (Frisch, 1992) that may yield a stronger

relationship to this particular measure of spirituality. All of these issues may be addressed

empirically in future research endeavors.

The results of this study are consistent with previous studies on clergy sense of coherence

and well-being. As mentioned in chapter two, only one other study has examined sense of

coherence among clergy. Darling, Hill, & McWey (2004) found a large relationship between









sense of coherence and subj ective well-being. The results of this study indicated a similarly

positive relationship between sense of coherence and the six measured domains of Psychological

well-being.

The results of this study were also consistent with findings from previous studies

indicating that religious individuals have a greater sense of meaning and purpose (Burbank,

1992; Carroll, 1993). The current study found that the clergy group on average scored higher

than the non-clergy group on the Psychological Well-being domain of purpose in life. Future

studies may also compare differences between clergy and lay people and religious and non-

religious populations.

The results of this study were also congruent with previous study results of sense of

coherence and mental health outcomes. Previous studies suggested that higher sense of

coherence was related to better adjustment after injury and illness, lower levels of depression,

and reduced risk of suicidal behaviors. This study extended these findings to include the notion

that sense of coherence positively influences mental health as measured by the Scale of

Psychological Well-being.

Implications

This study has theoretical and methodological implications for theory regarding

spirituality, sense of coherence, and psychological well-being. There is no consensus on how to

best measure spirituality and religiosity. Religion and spirituality have been most frequently cast

in either terms of a set of beliefs or a set of behaviors. No general consensus has been reached on

the best way to measure religion and spirituality. Earlier I discussed with some hesitation the

literature in this area because of this very fact. There is no general consensus in the literature as

to whether a certain belief or set of beliefs, such as the belief in a loving, beneficent god, is

related to positive mental and medical outcomes or these outcomes are related to a particular










practice or set of behaviors, such as church attendance or prayer. Research seems to support the

conclusion that this is not an either/or question, but a both/and question. As stated previously,

however, the operationalization of spirituality in this study departs from widely adopted methods

of operationalizing spirituality used in most of the prior research on the subj ect. So, I offer the

above interpretation and discussion with the same caveat: While my results are consistent with

previous studies of religious life, more research is needed to assess the utility of an interpersonal

conception of religion. Hall and Edwards theory of spirituality is an attractive alternative to

simple measures of religious behavior and belief because it is grounded in both theology and

psychological theory. While their instrument has sound psychometric properties, because of the

relative newness of the instrument it has not been utilized in many studies. More research is

needed to further evaluate its psychometric properties with a broader range of populations. More

research is also needed to assess the instruments utility as both a predictor and criterion variable.

Following Hall and Edwards (2002), I see the SAI as potentially useful for pastors,

pastoral counselors and others who care for religiously oriented clients. The SAI may also be

potentially useful in working with pastors in developing a strategy for self care. For instance, if a

pastor scores high in instability, it may be helpful to that pastor to examine the shifts in

relationship between idealizing and criticizing God. This pattern of relating to God may also be

present in the clergy member' s other relationships; thus, recognition of this theme in the spiritual

realm may also prove useful in improving relationships in the temporal realm.

As stated previously, I am not aware of any previous research linking sense of coherence

and psychological well-being. Antonovsky originally proposed his theory focusing exclusively

on physical health outcomes, while denying its utility for psychological outcomes. Previous

studies on the relationship between sense of coherence and psychological health have focused on









the "disease" end of the "ease/disease" continuum. This study opens the door for the possibility

that sense of coherence is predictive of positive psychological outcomes, not just the absence of

negative (e.g. depression and anxiety) psychological outcomes. In short, a major contribution of

this study to the sense of coherence literature is that sense of coherence is an important predictor

of positive mental health outcomes (i.e. psychological well-being).

This study also has implications for the study of psychological well-being. First, I chose to

look at psychological well-being at the individual domain level rather than at the global level.

The reasoning behind this decision was based on practical utility. In practice, knowing an

individual's overall psychological well-being score is a potentially useful index, but lacks the

precision necessary to make appropriate interventions in the therapeutic setting. However,

knowing the relative and absolute values of an individual's scores on each of the six domains of

Psychological Well-being allows the therapist to make more precise interventions aimed at self-

acceptance or skills development, for instance.

A second theoretical implication for Psychological well-being is Ryff' s interpretation of

the word eud'aimonia. E.R. Dodds in his book The Greeks and' the Irrational points out that

characters in Greek mythology were sometimes said to be possessed by external forces or spirits,

or d'aimon. However, these forces did not always prompt an individual to act in his best interest.

Dodd points out that a person possessed by such a spirit often suffered from mental instability,

acted in ways inconsistent who they knew themselves to be, and used poor judgment. These

characteristics do not sound like a person who would score high on the Scale of Psychological

Well-being. The distinction between the psychological constructs of subjective well-being and

psychological well-being is an important one, but one that may go beyond its supposedly Greek









lexical origins. Nevertheless, perhaps a more careful reading of the Greek texts can enlighten our

understanding of these psychological constructs.

Limitations

There are, of course a number of limitations to this study. The study is self-report and

limited by all the vagaries self-report measures. There was also a self-selection bias in the

sampling method. Perhaps the most glaring drawback to the study with regard to the sample is

the differences inherent between a group of clergy and a group of undergraduate students. The

study did not measure particular religious beliefs of the two groups, which may effect how the

two groups responded. The religious affiliation of the students was not assessed. Ethnicity,

gender, age, and historical differences are also potentially confounding variables that need

further assessment. Also, it is important to note that the results of this study do not indicate that

sense of coherence causes psychological well-being. It could be that causality lies in the other

direction or that another variable causes each of these two. Likewise, the results of this study do

not rule out the possibility that spirituality is related to Psychological well-being. With a

different subset of these populations, or perhaps another measure of spirituality or religion,

different results may be found. Another potential limitation is reactivity among the participants.

A number of potential respondents/participants emailed the investigators with concerns ranging

from suspicion of motives to operationalization of constructs. It is impossible to determine the

number of potential respondents who shared these concerns and, therefore, did not respond to

requests for participation. It is almost equally as difficult to determine how reactive participants

were to the study. Some indication of participant reactivity may be inferred, however, from the

SAI impression management scale. The impression management scale did not load on any of the

regression equations predicting psychological well-being and mean scores did not differ between










clergy and non-clergy samples. This pattern of results tends to indicate a rather low level of

reactivity .

Future Directions

This proj ect opens the vista to several potential areas of further investigation. First, there

are several avenues for potentially fruitful investigation related to clergy well-being. If one

considers psychological well-being as a dependent variable, what are the variables that are the

strongest predictors of psychological well-being, especially those variables that are most

amenable to psychotherapeutic intervention? Considering psychological well-being as an

independent variable, what are the salutary effects of psychological well-being on the clergy

member' s personal and professional lives?

Another area of investigation that may be of some import is the question of the malleability

of sense of coherence. Antonovsky is a social determinist in that he assumed that the cultural

forces in which a person finds him or herself embedded exert such a strong influence on the

individual that an increase in sense of coherence after entering adulthood is impossible. To my

knowledge, there have been no controlled outcome studies directly addressing this assumption.

One difficulty in designing such an experiment is that the extant research has not identified those

factors that contribute to sense of coherence that are open to manipulation in an experimental

setting. In addition to the practical considerations developing a strong enough intervention to

move sense of coherence, there are potential ethical dilemmas inherent in the design of such an

experiment. For instance, let' s assume that there is an infinite array of paths to understanding,

managing, and giving meaning to one's life experience, designing an intervention for individuals

with disparate worldviews may be next to impossible from an ethical standpoint. For instance,

theists and atheists, two broad and mutually exclusive categories, will very likely give different

meanings to their life's experiences, while scoring similarly on sense of coherence. Nevertheless,









it is conceivable that the Life Orientation Questionnaire could be included in an assessment

battery as a part of a therapeutic outcome study.

Despite the lack of predictive power in this study of the Realistic Acceptance domain of

the Spiritual Assessment Inventory, we are hesitant to disregard the potential utility of the

instrument or the construct. As stated above, the instrument does have acceptable psychometric

properties. It has a strong foundation in theology and psychological theory. The idea that

spirituality contributes to well-being is appealing, but questions do remain, such as What

spirituality? Whose spirituality? How will spirituality be measured?

In sum, the maj or findings of this study are that spirituality may make a small contribution

to psychological well-being, though being mediated through sense of coherence. Sense of

coherence makes a large contribution to psychological well-being. Finally, members of the

clergy do seem to fare better than non-clergy on some, but not all, domains of Psychological

Well-being.










LIST OF REFERENCES

Allport, G.W. (1961). Pattern and gian,~ th in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Andrews, F.M. & Withey, S.B. (1976) Social indicators ofwell-being: Anzerica's perception of
hife quality. New York: Plenum.

Antonovsky, A. (1979). Health, stress, and coping. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Antonovsky, A. (1987). Traveling the nrystery of health: How people manage stress and stay
well. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Antonovsky, A. (1998). The sense of coherence: An historical and future perspective. In H.I
McCubbin, E.A. Thompson, A.I. Thompson, & J.E. Fromer (Eds.), Stress, coping, and
health in families: Sense of coherence and resiliency (pp. 3-20). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications.

Antonovsky, A. (1993). The structure and properties of the sense of coherence scale. Social
science and medicine, 36, 725-733.

Baron, R.M. & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
personality and social psychology, 51, 1173-1182.

Bell, R, Wechsler, H, & Johnston, L.D. (1997). Correlates of college student marijuana use:
Results of a U.S. national survey. Addiction, 92, 571-581.

Belsley, D.A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R.E. (1980) Regression diagnostics: identigjing influential
data and sources of collinearity. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Bradburn, N.M. (1969). The structure ofpsychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine.

Brokaw, B.F. & Edwards, K.J. (1994). The relationship of God image to level of obj ect relations
development. Journal of psychology and theology, 22, 352-371.

Bufford, R.K., Paloutzian, R.F., & Ellison, C.W. (1991). Norms for the spiritual well-being
scale. Journal of psychology and theology, 19, 56-70.

Buhler, C. (1935). The curve of life as studied in biographies. Journal ofappliedpsychology, 19,
405-409.

Burbank, P.M. (1992). An exploratory study: assessing the meaning of life in older adult clients.
Journal of gerontological nursing, 18, 19-28.

Carroll, S. (1993). Spirituality and purpose in life in alcoholism recovery. Journal of studies on
alcohol, 54, 297-301.

Carson, V., Soeken, K.L., Shanty, J., Shanty, J., & Terry, L. (1990). Hope and spiritual well-
being: essentials for living with AIDS. Perspectives in psychiatric care, 25, 28-34.










Carter, J.D. & Barnhurst, L.F. (1986)Ma~turity, intimacy, and spirituality. Paper presented at
Midwest Christian Association for Psychological Studies (CAPS), August 8-10.

Chimich, W.T. & Nekolaichuk, C.L. (2004). Exploring the links between depression, integrity,
and hope in the elderly. Canadian journal ofpsychiatry, 49, 428-433.

Darling, C.A., Hill, E.W., & McWey, L.M. (2004). Understanding stress and quality of life for
clergy and clergy spouses. Stress and health, 20, 261-277.

Deiner, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological bulletin, 93, 542-575.

Diener, E., Emmons, R.A., Larsen, R.J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale.
Journal of personality assessment, 49, 71-75.

Deiner, E., Lucas, R.E., & Oishi, S. (2002). Subjective well-being: the science of happiness and
life satisfaction. In Handbook of positive psychology (C.R. Snyder & S.J. Lopez, Eds.), pp.
63-73.

Deiner, E. & Suh, E. (1998). Age and subjective well-being: an international analysis. Annual
review of gerontology and geriatrics, 17, 304-324.

Edwards, M.J. & Holden, R.R. (2001). Coping, meaning of life, and suicidal manifestations:
examining gender differences. Journal of clinical psychology, 59, 1133-1150.

Ellison, C.W. (1983). Spiritual well-being: conceptualization and measurement. Journal of
psychology and theology, 11, 330-340.

Erikson, E. (1959). Identity and the lifecycle. Psychological issues, 1, 18-164.

Erikson, M.J. (1985). Christian theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

Fairbairn, W.R.D. (1952). An object relations theory of personality. New York: BasicBooks

Frazier, P.A., Tix,, A.P., & Barron, K.E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effect in
counseling psychology research. Journal ofcounseling psychology, 51, 115-134.

Frisch, M. B.; Cornell, J. & Villanueva, M. (1992). Clinical validation of the Quality of Life
Inventory: A measure of life satisfaction for use in treatment planning and outcome
assessment. Psychological assessment, 4, 92-101.

George, L.K. & Landerman, R. (1984). Health and subjective well-being: a replicated secondary
data analysis. International journalI ofaging and human development, 19, 133-156.

Gorsuch, R.L. & McPherson, S.E. (1989). Intrinsic/extrinsic measurement: I/E-revised and
single-item scales. Journal for the scientific study ofreligion, 28, 348-354.

Green, S.B. (1991) How many subj ects does it take to do a regression analysis? Midltivariate
behavioral research, 26, 449-510.










Guntrip, H. (1971). Psychoanalytic theory, therapy, and the self: New York: BasicBooks.

Hall, T.W. & Brokaw, B.F. (1995). The relationship of spiritual maturity to obj ect relations
development and God image. Pa;storalpsychology, 43, 373-391.

Hall, T.W. & Edwards, K.J. (1996). The initial development and factor analysis of the spiritual
assessment inventory. Journal ofpsychology and theology, 24, 233-246.

Hall, T.W. & Edwards, K.J. (2002). The spiritual assessment inventory: a theistic model and
measure for assessing spiritual development. Journal for the scientific study ofreligion, 42,
341-357.

Herth, K. (1989). The relationship between level of hope and level of coping response and other
variables in patients with cancer. Oncology nursing forum, 16, 67-79.

Hill, P.C. & Hood, R.W. (1999). (Eds) M~easures ofreligiosity. Birmingham, AL: Religious
Education Press.

Hood, R.W., Spilka, B., Hunsburger, B., Gorsuch, R. (1996). The Psychology ofreligion: An
empirical approach (2nd Ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

Jahoda, M. (1958). Current concepts in positive mental health. New York: Basic Books.

Jung, C.G. (1933). Modern man in search of a soul (W. S. Dell & C.F. Baynes, Trans.). New
York: Harcourt, Brace, & World.

Kenny, D.A., Kashy, D.A. & bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D.T.
Gilbert & S.T. Fiske (Eds.), Handbook ofsocialpsychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 233-265.
New York: McGraw Hill.

Khavari, K.A. & Harmon, T.M. (1982). The relationship between degree of professed religious
belief and use of drugs. International journal of addictions, 17, 847-857.

Koenig, H.G., George, L.K., Cohen, H.J., Hays, J.C., Blazer, D.G., & Larson, D.B.(1998). The
relationship between religious activities and blood pressure in older adults. International
journal ofpsychiatry in medicine, 28,189-213.

Koenig, H.G., McCullough, M.E., Larson, D.B. (2001). Handbook of religion and health.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Linley, P.A., Joseph, S., Loumidis, K. (2005). Trauma work, sense of coherence, and positive
and negative changes in therapists. Psy hathIopylll(3 & psychosomatics, 74, 185-188.

Lustig, D.C. (2005). The adjustment process for individuals with spinal cord injury: the effect of
perceived premorbid sense of coherence. Rehabilitation counseling bulletin, 48, 146-156.

McCullough, M.E., Hoyt, W.T. Larson, D.B. Koenig, H.G. & Thoresen, C.E. (2000). Religious
involvement and mortality: a meta-analytic review. Health psychology, 19, 21 1-222.










Moberg, D.O. Subjective measures of spiritual well-being. Review of religious research, 25, 351-
364.

Motzer, S.A., Hertig, V., Jarrett, M. (2003). Sense of coherence and quality of life in women
with and without irritable bowel syndrome. Nursing research, 52, 329-337.

Neugarten, B.L. (1968). The awareness of middle age. In B.L. Neugarten (Ed.), M~iddle age and
aging (pp.93-98). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Neugarten, B.L. (1973). Personality change in late life: a developmental perspective. In C.
Eisdorfer & M.P. Lawton (Eds.), The psychology ofadult development and aging (pp. 3 11-
335). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Oxman, T.E. Freeman, D.H. & Manheimer, E.D. (1995). Lack of social participation or religious
strength and comfort as risk factors for death after cardiac surgery in the elderly.
Psychosomatic medicine, 57, 5-15.

Pargament, K.I. (1999). The psychology of religion and spirituality? Yes and no. international
journal of psychology of religion, 9, 3-16.

Pargament, K.I. & Mahoney, A. (2002). Spirituality: discovering and conserving the sacred. In
C.R. Snyder & S.J. Lopez (Ed.), H~andbook of positive psychology. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Pavot, W. & Deiner, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological
assessment, 5, 164-172.

Petri, E. K. & Brook, R. (1992). Sense of coherence, self-esteem, depression, and hopelessness
as correlates of reattempting suicide. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 31, 293-300.

Rholes, W.S. & Simpson, J.A. (2004). Attachment theory: Basic concepts and contemporary
questions. In W.S. Rholes & J.A. Simpson (Eds.), Adult attachment: Theory, research, and
clinical implications (pp. 3-14). New York: Guilford Press.

Rogers, C.R. (1961).On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Ryff, C.D. (1989a). Beyond Ponce de Leon and life satisfaction: new directions in quest of
successful ageing. hIternational journal of behavioral development, 12, 35-55.

Ryff, C.D. (1989b). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of
psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology, 57, 1069-108 1.

Ryff, C.D. & Keyes, C.L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited.
Journal of personality and social psychology, 69, 719-727.

Saucy, R.L. (1993). Theology and human nature. In J.P. Moreland & D. Ciocci (Eds.). Christian
perspectives on being human (pp.17-52). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.










Seligman, M. & Chikczentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: and introduction. American
psychologist, 55, 5-14.

Selye, H. (1956). The stress of hfe. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Selye, H. (1976). Stress in health and disease. Woburn, MA: Butterworth.

Sethi, S., & Seligman, M.E.P. (1994). The hope of fundamentalists. Psychological science, 5, 58.

Shackelford, J.F. (1978). A comparison of psychological and theological concepts of
dependency. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Rosemead School of Psychology, Bioloa
University, La Miranda, California.

Shedler, J., Mayman, M. & Manis, M (1993). The illusion of mental health. American
psychologist, 48, 1117-113 1.

Strawbridge, W.J., Cohen, R.D. Shema, S.J. & Kaplan, G.A. (1997). Frequent attendance at
religious services and mortality over 28 years. American journal of public health, 87, 957-
961.

Sullivan, H.S. (1953). Conceptions of modernpsychiatry. New York: W.W. Norton.

Sussman, D. (2002, March). Who Goes to Church? Older Southern Women Do; Many Catholic
Men Don't. Retreived October 16, 2005 from
http://ab cnews.go. com/US/story? id=903 72&page= 1

Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics. Needham Heights, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.

Tisdale, T.C., Brokaw, B.F., Edwards, K.J. & Key, T.L. (1993). Impact ofp sych rl diciopy1 ~
treatment on level of object relations development, God image, and self-esteem. A
presentation at the American Psychological Convention, Toronto Canada.

Wettergren, L., Bj orkhom, M., Axdorph, U. (2004). Determinants of health-related quality of life
in long-term survivors of Hodgkin' s lymphoma. Quality of hfe research: An international
journal of quality of hife aspects of treatment, care & rehabilitation, 13, 1369-1379.

Wilson, W. (1967). Correlates of avowed happiness. Psychological bulletin, 67, 294-306.

Wulff, D. (1998). Psychology of religion: classic and contemporary (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Wade Arnold earned his Bachelor of Liberal Arts (philosophy, psychology, and

communication) at Mississippi State University in 1992. In 1994, Wade earned a Master of

Science degree in counselor education specializing in college student development. After

working in Housing and Residence Life at Mississippi State University and Ball State

University, he served as minister of youth and education at First United Methodist Church in Los

Alamos, New Mexico. Wade went on to earn the Master of Divinity degree, graduating magna

cum laude, from the George W. Truett Theological Seminary at Baylor University in 2000.

Wade plans on completing his doctoral degree from the University of Florida in August 2007.





PAGE 1

SENSE OF COHERENCE, SPIRITUAL MATURITY, AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELLBEING AMONG UNITED METHODIST CLERGY By RICHARD WADE ARNOLD A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007 1

PAGE 2

2007 Richard Wade Arnold 2

PAGE 3

To ministers 3

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the fo llowing people for their contribution to me personally and professionally: Susan Addis, Tricia and Doug Bagby, Andrew Bl air, Brad Creed, Ross Davis, David Garland, Jenn and Tim Garrett, Carolyn Godbey, Wayne Griffen, Shevon and Eric Kaufman, Sarah Lee, John and Jill Shea, Robert and Lesley Staton, Davi d Wallace, and Vivian Yamada. I would especially like to thank Greg Neimeyer, my advisor and committee chair for his openness and generosity. I would like to thank my parents for their encouragement and support in all my academic endeavors. Last, and most importantly, I thank my wife, Jessica. Without her loving support and longsuffering I would not have been able to complete this project. 4

PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. ..........7 ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................................8 CHAPTER 1 PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING OF UNITED METHODIST CLERGY........................9 2 REVIEW OF SENSE OF COHERENCE, RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY, AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BE ING LITERATURE............................................................12 Sense of Coherence............................................................................................................. ....12 Sense of Coherence and Mental Health...........................................................................20 Pastors Sense of Coherence...........................................................................................23 Spirituality and Religion...................................................................................................... ...24 Defining Religion and Spirituality..................................................................................24 Measuring Spirituality.....................................................................................................26 Psychological Well-Being......................................................................................................2 8 Religion, Spirituality, and Psychological Well-Being....................................................32 Clergy Well-Being...........................................................................................................35 Questions and Hypotheses......................................................................................................36 3 METHODS...................................................................................................................... .......37 Participants.............................................................................................................................37 Measures.................................................................................................................................37 Sense of Coherence.........................................................................................................37 Spiritual Assessment Inventory.......................................................................................39 Scale of Psychological Well-being..................................................................................41 Stress in General Scale....................................................................................................43 Procedure................................................................................................................................43 Analyses..................................................................................................................................44 4 RESULTS...................................................................................................................... .........47 Descriptive Statistics......................................................................................................... .....47 Preliminary Analyses........................................................................................................... ...47 Hypothesis 1................................................................................................................... ........50 Autonomy........................................................................................................................50 Environmental Mastery...................................................................................................51 Personal Growth..............................................................................................................51 5

PAGE 6

Positive Relations with Others........................................................................................52 Purpose in Life................................................................................................................52 Self-acceptance................................................................................................................ 53 Hypothesis 2................................................................................................................... ........53 Autonomy........................................................................................................................54 Environmental Mastery...................................................................................................54 Personal Growth..............................................................................................................54 Positive Relations with Others........................................................................................55 Purpose in Life................................................................................................................55 Self-Acceptance...............................................................................................................55 Hypothesis 3................................................................................................................... ........56 5 DISCUSSION................................................................................................................... ......61 General Discussion............................................................................................................. ....61 Hypothesis 1................................................................................................................... .61 Hypothesis 2................................................................................................................... .63 Hypothesis 3................................................................................................................... .64 Implications................................................................................................................... .........66 Limitations.................................................................................................................... ..........69 Future Directions....................................................................................................................70 LIST OF REFERENCES...............................................................................................................72 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.........................................................................................................77 6

PAGE 7

LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Clergy and student de mographic information....................................................................45 3-2 Clergy responses to mi nistry related questions..................................................................46 4-1 Means and Standard Deviat ions for Clergy and Students.................................................56 4-2 Measures of internal consistency (Cr onbachs alpha) for Inde pendent and Dependent Variables for total sample, Clergy and Students................................................................57 4-3 Standardized Beta weights for Psyc hological Well-being Regression Equations.............58 4-3 continued.................................................................................................................. ..........59 4-4 Standardized Betas for the non-mediated and mediated regression models and upper and lower bounds of confidence intervals.........................................................................60 7

PAGE 8

Abstract of Dissertation Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy SENSE OF COHERENCE, SPIRITUAL MATURITY, AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING AMONG UNITED METHODIST CLERGY Richard Wade Arnold August 2007 Chair: Greg Neimeyer Major: Counseling Psychology While there has been a great deal of resear ch into the psychological functioning of religious persons, Christians in particular, relatively little rese arch has been devoted to the psychological functioning of religious leaders. What research is availa ble on the psychological functioning of both religious persons and clergy has largely focused on pathology. This study focused on the psychological well-being of cler gy. Three hypotheses were tested. Hypothesis 1 predicted that sense of coherence, or that one per ceives his or her life as predictable, meaningful and manageable, would contribute to six dom ains of psychological well-being. Sense of coherence was found to contribute to autonomy, environmental mastery, positive relations with others, purpose in life, and self acceptance, but was not found to contribute to Personal Growth among clergy. However, Sense of coherence was found to make a small contribution to purpose in life when the total sample wa s considered together. Hypothesi s 2 predicted that clergy would fare better psychologically than non-clergy, wa s largely not supported. Hypothesis 3 predicted that sense of coherence mediates spiritual ma turity and psychological well-being. Sense of coherence was found to mediate spiritual matu rity dimensions of awareness of God and instability and each domain of psychological well-being. 8

PAGE 9

CHAPTER 1 PSYCHOLOGICAL WELLBEING OF UNITED METHODIST CLERGY An ABC News poll reported in February 2002 that 83% of all Amer icans profess to be Christians. It is not surprising that most relig ious research until recent years has focused in particular on Christians (Hood, Spilka, Hunsburger, & Gorsuch, 1996). My study extends this knowledge base. Even though there is a large amount of data on Christians in general, little research has been conducted on the psychological f unctioning of Christian leaders. Past research has largely focused on pathology and personal dysfunction. My study distinguishes itself by focusing on psychological well-being of pastors. This line of research has far-ranging implications concerning ministry effectivene ss and longevity, clergy ma rital satisfaction and relationship satisfaction more br oadly, and many other areas of clergy personal and professional development. Development of prevention progra ms aimed at assisting clergy in developing a more psychologically healthy lifestyle may forestall burnout, compassion fatigue, and the devastating consequences of pastoral malfeasance. Positive functioning in the psychological lite rature has been examined primarily through the use of two constructs: subjective well-being and psychological well-being. Subjective Wellbeing has been developed by Deiner and colleagues as a measure of life satisfaction, the experience of pleasant emotion, and infrequent ne gative affect (Deiner, Lucas, and Oishi, 2002). Other researchers, however, argu e that one might experience a sense of subjective well-being, yet not engage in adaptive behaviors that allow the individual to function at the highest possible level (Ryff, 1989a, 1989b). As an alternative Ry ff proposed the notion of psychological wellbeing that encompasses the domains of self-acce ptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and persona l growth. According to Ryff, this conception 9

PAGE 10

of psychological well-being is c onsistent with philosophical and psychological theory concerning what constitutes the good life (Ryff & Singer, 1998). What factors might contribute to the psychol ogical well-being of pastors? My project proposes that two variables will contribute to the psychological well-being of pastors: sense of coherence and spiritual matur ity. Sense of coherence was de veloped by medical sociologist Anton Antonovsky (1987). Essentially, an individua l with a high sense of coherence perceives his or her environment as structured, mana geable, and meaningful. Antonovskys contention, supported by subsequent research, is that indivi duals with a high sense of coherence will have better medical outcomes than individuals with a lower sense of coherence. Other researchers have extended Antonovskys salutogenic work to include psychological as well as medical outcomes (chapter 2). Based on this line of thoug ht, high sense of cohere nce is hypothesized to contribute to the psychologi cal well-being of pastors. The second factor predicted to contribute to the psychological well-being of pastors is spiritual maturity. Hall and Edwards (1995) devel oped a theory of spiritu al maturity based on object relations theory. Object relations theorists hold that hu man beings are not basically pleasure seeking, as Freud had posited, but that hu mans beings are relationship seeking. In more analytic terms, the libido does not seek pleasure, but objects. According to British object relations theorists such as Fairbairn (1952) and Guntrip (1971), the goal of parenting (i.e., the interpersonal goal of early relational objects) is the development of a child who is able to maintain real contact with real people. In other words, if early pare ntal interactions are inadequate, the child may turn away from the ex ternal world of people, thus preventing the establishment of authentic relationships. The meaning of this for my project is that if a person is 10

PAGE 11

not capable of establishing and maintaining cont act with people, neither will that person be capable of establishing and maintaining a relationship with God. Hall and Edwards (1996) contend that indi viduals relate to God through the same psychological processes used to re late to others. Hall and Edwards theorize that in order to have a relationship with God, one must first be awar e of God. Therefore, th e first domain of their theory is awareness. The second domain of their theory is Quality of Re lationship with God. The Quality of Relationship domain has three fact ors: instability, grandiose, and Realistic Acceptance. Individuals with an unstable rela tionship with God alternate between extreme valuing and devaluing their relati onship with God, have a chaotic relationship pattern with God, and frequently experience feelings of abandonment by God. An individual with a grandiose pattern of relating to God values the relationship for purely selfcentered reasons such as getting personal needs met or for protection. The most mature relationship pattern is Realistic Acceptance. Individuals with this predominant relationship style value their relationship with God in and of itself, are able to deal with disappointments w ith God productively, and maintain continuity in the relationship. It is this relations hip pattern that is predic ted to contribute to the psychological well-being of pastors. The personal functioning of pastors is importa nt for a variety of r easons. Very little is known about the psychological health of this subgroup of Christians. Knowledge generated by this project may help members of the clergy to develop healthier lifestyles. This project may contribute to clergy training and th e development of self-care stra tegies. Finally, research with clergy is important because of th e potential influence they have on American culture. My project examines the influence two variables, sense of coherence and spiritual maturity, have on the psychological well-being of pastors. 11

PAGE 12

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF SENSE OF COHERENCE, RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY, AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELLBEING LITERATURE For an individual to develop a sense that life is meaningful, he or she must develop a sense that the tools needed to meet lifes challeng es are available. In orde r to properly utilize the skills and resources necessary in any given situation, that person must have a way to structure lifes experiences in a comprehensible way. This is the essence of Antonovskys (1987) Sense of coherence. Spirituality has historically been measured in a variety of ways, none of which, however, have been tied closely to psychol ogical theory. Hall a nd Edwards (1996) have developed a model of spirituality ba sed in object relations theory that attempts to redress this gap in theory and measurement. Finally, Carole Ryff (1989a, 1989b) has developed a theory of psychological well-being based primarily on developmental and humanistic theories. Each of these theories along with questi ons and hypotheses are addressed in the chapter that follow. Sense of Coherence Anton Antonovsky first formally proposed the sa lutogenic model of health in his seminal work Health, Stress, and Coping (1978). A decade later Antonovsky clarified his thoughts in Unraveling the Mystery of Health: How People manage Stress and Stay Well (1987). Antonovsky, a medical sociologist, argues that the medical field has focused entirely on pathology at the expense of other fruitful avenue s of research and practical application. This focus on pathology has arisen out of a philos ophical position that, in Antonovskys view, is fundamentally flawed. Traditionally, medicine has viewed human beings as eith er healthy or sick. This categorical system of classification has led physicians to focus much of their energy and attention on only one category: the sick. Antonovsky argues that th is is a perfectly reasonable 12

PAGE 13

course of action since to do othe rwise would seem to be an et hically untenabl e position. But the exclusive focus on pathology has led researchers and c linicians alike to ne glect the biological, sociological and psychological factors that maintain healt h. In Antonovskys terminology, the medical field has failed to consid er what moves an individual towa rd the ease end of the health ease/disease continuum. Antonovsky argues that a salutary appr oach to medicine can (and should) complement the current focus on pat hology. Included in the more pathologicallyoriented hypotheses considered in most research papers should be some hy ptheses that attempt to address the question, What predicts a good ou tcome (Antonovsky, 1987, p.7). In order to shift focus to a more salutary clin ical and research agenda, Ant onovsky proposes a fundamental shift in the way health is viewed. Rather than adopting the categorical healthy/sick di chotomy, Antonovsky proposes a health ease/dis-ease continuum. He alth is not a static condition; biological homeostasis is an illusion. For Antonovsky, the fundamental assump tion [concerning biological functioning is] of heterostasis, disorder and pressure towards entropy as the prototypical characte ristic of the living organism (1987, p.2, italics in original ). If heterostasis is the norm, an individuals health status can be seen as in constant flux; hence, one can be viewed as moving to ward either end of the ease/dis-ease continuum at any given moment. Considering heterostasis as the norm also has implications for the role of what are typically called stressors. Antonovsky (1987) argues that individuals are constantly bombarded by stimuli from the environment. What is the di fference between two individuals faced with the same stimuli in the same environment if only one views the perceived stim uli as a stressor? For Antonovsky, the difference between the two is th at the one individual has more appropriate adaptive resources, or generalized resistance res ources (GRRs). This pers on may not perceive the 13

PAGE 14

stimuli as a stressor. The other individual does no t have the necessary adaptive resources or has generalized resistance deficits (GRDs). So, whether or not one perceives environmental stimuli as stressful is directly relate d to the degree to which the individual has adapted to his or her environment. What is of interest to Antonovsky is not the pathological case, the diabetic who dies early because she refuses to adhere to her medication regime, but the diabetic who successfully copes with the dia gnosis. What is the difference between these two individuals? In answer to this question, Antonovsky (1987) proposes the sense of coherence (SOC). SOC is defined as follows: The sense of coherence is a global orientation that expresses the extent to which one has a pervasive, enduring though dynamic feeling of confidence that (1) the stimuli deriving from ones internal and external environmen ts in the course of living are structured, predictable and explicab le; (2) the resources are availabl e to one to meet the demands posed by these resources stimuli; and (3) these demands are challenges worthy of investment and engagement (p.19). Antonovsky has labeled the three components of hi s definition comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness. Comprehensibility refers to the most cogniti ve aspect of SOC. A key word for Antonovsky in discussing comprehensibility is predictabili ty. A comprehensible world is one in which the individual can order the stimuli that bombard the senses, structur e can be extracted (or imposed) on the incoming stimuli, and clarity can be achieved through such structuring. Of the components of the SOC, this component serves a type of gateway for the other two; if the individual cannot comprehend his or her envi ronment, the individual will not know what resources are necessary to meet the challenge posed by the environment. This in turn leads to a very low likelihood that an individual will be motivated to marshal the necessary coping resources. At the same time, however, Antonovsky places comprehensibility second to meaningfulness in a hierarchy of SOC components. Antonovsky posits that if one is faced with a 14

PAGE 15

situation that is meaningful enough, the person wi ll impose structure and find resources to adapt to the situation. Manageability refers to the pe rsons perception that he has th e resources available meet the demands imposed by the environment. A person who sees his or her environment as manageable has confidence that in most situations that arise he or she will be able to adapt to changing demands. It is important to not e that Antonovsky does not say that the adaptive resources must be personal resources. These resources may either belong to others, be public, or be corporate; the individual only has to have confidence that he or she will reliably gain access to the appropriate resources as needed. Most important to the development of a str ong SOC is the component of meaningfulness. Meaningfulness is the most affec tive of the three components of SOC. A meaningful life is one that makes sense emotionally and indicates th at some of lifes challenges are welcome rather than burdens that one would mu ch rather do without (Antonovsky, 1987, p.18). Antonovsky (1987) claims that an individuals SOC is not necessarily applicable in all domains of life, but operates within a limited sphere of concern. What is important is that those domains of life the individual considers impor tant are comprehensible, manageable, and meaningful. Antonovsky allows that individuals are capable of expanding or contracting their sphere of concern with the proviso that they cannot exclude inner experience, interpersonal relations, major life activities, and existential issues if they wish to maintain a strong SOC. One difficulty with this proposition is that Antonovsky does not directly addre ss the issue of breadth of sphere of concern. It seems logical that the individual with a high SOC and a broad sphere of concern will objectively fare better when f aced with environmental challenges than the individual with high SOC and a more limited sphere of concern (to say no thing of those with a 15

PAGE 16

low SOC). Perhaps Antonovsky leaves this end loose in order to in crease the generalizability of his theory. While not the focus of the current project, this possibility is worthy of future empirical investigation. In developing his theory, Antonovsky (1987) al so makes a distinction between a strong SOC and a rigid SOC. Antonovsky describes a pe rson with a strong SOC as authentic, with a strong sense of self, open to alternatives, flexib le, and open to new information and feedback. In contrast, the person with a rigid SOC is seen as inauthentic, claims to know almost everything, believes all problems have a ready solution, find s doubt intolerable, is frequently given to religious fanaticism, lacks a strong sense of self is closed to altern ative explanations, is automaton-like, inflexible, and is closed to new information and feedback. Having said this, Antonovsky makes no value judgments concerning cu ltural sources of a strong SOC. He states that it is possible that some individuals whom most would ju dge as unsavory characters could quite possibly have a strong SOC. A contemporary example would be that of the Islamic jihadist who may likely have a very high SOC because that particular world view offers comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness to his or her existence. Conversely, it is entirely possible that many conservative evangelical Christians potentially have a very rigid SOC because their faith has not re ndered their life experiences comprehensible, manageable, and meaningful. In considering whether or not one has a str ong or weak SOC gives rise to the question How does one develop a strong SOC? Antonovsky (1987) limits his discussion to three broad developmental periods: childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. While Antonovsky does not use the term, he describes the situation in which a child develops a sens e that the world is comprehensible by being securely attached (Rholes & Simpson, 2004) to his or her primary 16

PAGE 17

caregiver. That an infants world is predictabl e and has some discernable structure opens the door to comprehensibility. If a child finds hi s or her environment overwhelming (i.e. being required to perform tasks for which he or she is not developmentally prepared), then the child is highly likely to see the world as highly unma nageable. Finally, Antonovsky proposes that if a child does not receive quality feedback, such as positively expressed emotion through play, touch, concern, and voice (Antonovsky, 1987, p. 97) fr om the environment, the child is not likely to see many aspects of his or her environment as meaningful. Antonovsky posits that there are two pathways to a strong SOC in adolescence. The first is the complex open society, which provides a wide variety of legitimate, realistic options (Antonovsky, 1987, p.102). Here the young person is fr ee to explore his or her world within clear, but broad boundaries. The second pathway is the integrated, homogeneous, and relatively isolated culture or subculture (Antonovsky, 1987, p. 102) such as those found in some sects of Judaism, Mormons, Amish, and other such groups. The experiences provided by a more circumscribed set of cultural e xpectations can also lead to a strong SOC. There is one other potential adolescent pathway that Antonovsky desc ribes, but unlike the ot her two, it leads to a weak SOC. Many young people in many cultures live with the stark reality that the world is not a predictable place. War, violence, poverty, diseas e and the like can overwhelm those with even the most well-developed coping strategies. Fo r those who have not had the opportunity to develop their adaptive capaci ties to the fullest, developi ng a strong SOC may be nearly impossible. In discussing adult development, Antonvosky lim its his comments to the domain of work. In order for ones work to have meaning, Antonovsky proposes that one will have freely chosen the job, and has a voice in choosing the tasks, the sequence of the tasks, and the pace of the 17

PAGE 18

work. If one perceives the tasks set before him (or which he chooses) as manageable, then he will perceive that he has the resources at his di sposal to complete the task. Otherwise the person experiences overload, which contributes to a weak SOC. Work comprehensibility consists of several elements. The first element is role complexity; that is, one knows how ones wo rk role fits within the overall organization. Secondly, job security: one is confident that she will a job in future, that ones job se rves a unique function in the organization, and that she is confident that th e work will continue to be valued by the larger society. Three, there is a shared culture that prov ides comprehensibility for the insider. To the outsider, the work environment may seem chaotic but to the person in-the-know everything is orderly. In concluding this discussion, Antonovsky does offer the cav eat that the work role is only one important adult role. It could be that ot her roles the person finds him or herself in are more salient. It may be that one role or anot her is more dominant or generalizes more than others. Antonovsky seems to be somewhat ambivalent a bout the stability of ones SOC. Early in his discussion Antonovsky stated that an individual s SOC is a stable characteristic. However, he does consider exceptions to that general rule. Fo r those who enter adulth ood with a low SOC, he offers no hope of improvement. For those with a moderate SOC, they will tend to spiral downward. People in this category have a limited response repertoire and therefore see the world as less manageable and eventually, Antonovsky theori zes, they will come to see the world as less comprehensible. The only good news is for thos e who enter adulthood with a strong SOC; once reaching adulthood, a persons SOC will likely re main quite stable. Antonovskys contention is that therapeutic intervention at the individual le vel is of little bene fit because psychologists cannot intervene directly and broadly in the cultural institutions in which the weak SOC 18

PAGE 19

individual is embedded. From An tonovskys perspective, these societal forces then are greater than the individuals push for change. Nevert heless, Antonovsky does allow that clinical intervention may have the ability to raise an individuals SOC scores (see below for scoring details). While these scores may be statistically significant, Antonovsky questions the clinical significance of such a change (Antonovsky, 1998). Finally, one might ask How does the SOC operate? The process starts with the perception of some environmental stimuli. The person with a relatively stronger SOC views the stimuli as a non-stressor. The stimuli poses no burden for the individual. The person w ith a relatively weaker SOC will view the stimuli as a stressor. Antonovsky (1987) defines a stressor as a characteristic that introduces entropy into the systemthat is, a life experience characte rized by inconsistency, underor overload, and exclusion from participation in decision-making (p. 28). Viewing the stimuli as a non-stressor is a fo rm of environmental adaptation. For the individual who perceives a stimuli as a stressor, Antonovsky (1987) offers three possibilities in descending order of relative strength of SOC. The individual may perceive the stressor to be benign or irrelevant. This pe rception represents yet another adaptive coping response. Alternately, the individua l may perceive the stimuli to be positive, thus taking into account Selyes (1956, 1974) definition of eustress. Lastly, the individual w ith the weaker still SOC will view the stressor as endangering or threatening. When a stimuli is perceived as a threat Antonovsky proposes two types of responses: affective and instrumental. The person with the re latively weaker SOC at this stage will respond with emotions that do not lend themselves to an instrumental response due to their supposedly diffuse nature. These vague emotional responses, that are considered low in comprehensibility, do not lead the individual to effective, adaptive be havioral responses or a sense of manageability. 19

PAGE 20

Antonovsky identifies anxiety, rage, shame, desp air, abandonment, and bewilderment as the types of emotions that are experienced by a pers on with a relatively weaker SOC that precludes an instrumental response. However, a person wi th a stronger SOC will experience emotions with greater clarity, which opens up the possibility of an appropriate instrumental response. For instance, sadness, fear, pain, anger, guilt, grief, and worry are all theorized to provide enough clarity to allow the individual to manage the threatening stimuli. Antonovsky does not discuss the distinctions he makes between these two classes of emotion or how the two lists were derived. This is another point which Antonovsky may have left open for empirical research. There is one final step in the process. Once the individua l has understood the threatening stimuli as both comprehensible and manageable, he or she must select what is perceived to be the most appropriate coping strategy. This sele ction is based on ho w the individual has comprehended the environment. Once the strate gy is implemented, the person with a stronger SOC will effectively use feedback from the enviro nment to revise the coping strategy as needed. The person with the weaker SOC will not respond to environmental feedback appropriately. Rather, the person with the re latively weaker SOC may become rigid in responding to environmental feedback, thus applying the same or similar coping strategies across a wide variety of situations that may be managed more effectively th rough the utilization of a wider array of coping strategies. Sense of Coherence and Mental Health Since Antonovsky (1987) origin ally proposed sense of c oherence as a salutogenic approach to physical health, mental health researchers have also applied the concept to a variety of psychological outcomes. So how do psychological researchers make the leap from physical health outcomes to mental health outcomes? At base, the sense of cohere nce construct indicates the likelihood that an individual has the resources (or has access to the re sources) and will utilize 20

PAGE 21

those resources as necessary to cope with stimuli in the envi ronment that are perceived as threatening. Antonovsky was correct in identifying physical illness as a potential environmental threat against which one must armament onese lf. However, Antonovsky was short-sighted in limiting the range of potential e nvironmental threats to medical conditions. Antonovsky was also limited because of his belief in the socially determined nature of ones ability to develop generalized resistance resources. This project extends Antonovskys line of thinking by including intraand interpersonal, social, and other environmental factors in the range of stimuli to which a person must respond. Also, I am more optimistic about an individuals ability to develop generalized resistance resources that increase the probably of an effective instrumental response to perceived threats. This is not to say that ones culture does not infl uence, and perhaps set limits on, the resources upon which one may call to respond to threatening stimuli. In this study, spiritual maturity is seen as a protective factor that enables a person to view their world as comprehensible, manageable and meaningful, or more coherently. Several studies have examined psychological adju stment after trauma such as spinal cord injury (Lustig, 2005), long-term survivors of Hodgkins lymphoma (Wettergren, Bjorkholm, & Axdorph, 2004), and women with Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS; Motzer, Hertig, & Jarret, 2003). While Antonovskys original hypothesis was th at patients with a higher SOC will have better physical health outcomes, these studies bridge the gap between health outcome and psychological outcome research relating to SOC. Lustig (2005) had individuals with spinal cord injury complete the Life Orient ation Questionnaire twice, once as they saw themselves prior to injury and a second time as they saw their functioning at the time of assessment. Lustig found that for those who rated their SOC lower post-injury were more likely to have experienced shock and higher levels of anxiety, depression, and exte rnal hostility. These same participants scored 21

PAGE 22

lower on measures of acknowledgement and adjust ment. Those participants who rated their SOC as higher were less likely to score high on m easures of shock, anxiety, depression, and internal anger. Interestingly, high SOC scor es did not correlate significantly with measures of adjustment and acknowledgement. Wettergren, Bjorkholm, & Axdorph (2004) found SOC to be a predictor of self-ratings of quality of life among survi vors of Hodgkins lymphoma. Motzer, Hertig, & Jarret (2003) found SOC to be inve rsely related to distress, depression, and somatization in nonIBS patients. The only IBS sympto m related (negatively) to SOC was alternating constipation and diarrhea. These studies are representative of the general findings that SOC is related to positive health and psychological outcomes (Antonovsky, 1993). Additionally, sense of coherence has been shown to be invers ely related to depression. For instance, Chimich and Nekolaichuk (2004) found that individuals who did not meet the criteria for depression showed higher leve ls of SOC, hope, and personal spirit as well as greater willingness to take risks. Conversely, patient s meeting the criteria for depression scored significantly lower on measures of SOC and risk-taking. Finally, suicidal ideation and suicide attempts have both been negatively associated with SOC (Petrie & Brooks, 1992). Edwards & Holden (2001) found sense of coherence and emotionoriented coping predictive of future suicidal ideation, attempts, and self-reported likelihood of future suicidal behavior in women. For men, se nse of coherence and emotion-oriented coping were predictive of suicidal ideation only. So, while SOC is generally pr edicative of suicidal ideation, gender differences seem to be a limiting factor to the general conclusion. Studies investigating the role SOC plays in the work lives of help ing professionals are limited. If Hall & Edwards (1996) contention that the ministerial vocation is conceptually linked to the helping professions, then this line of research has partic ular significance to the present 22

PAGE 23

study. One study found that therapists with a higher SOC had few negative and more positive changes following experiences of vicarious traumatization (Linley, Joseph, Loumidis, 2005). Only one study (discussed below) was identified that considered the operation of SOC in the lives of clergy. Pastors Sense of Coherence To date only one study has examined sense of coherence among clergy. Darling, Hill, & McWey (2004) examined the qual ity of life of 259 clergy and 177 clergy spouses. Quality of life was operationalized in terms of Deiners Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larson, & Griffin, 1985). Their findings indicate that sense of coherence is significantly and positively related to subjective well-being (.543) and spiritual resources (.427). Conversely, a significant negative correlation was found betw een sense of coherence and fa mily stress (-.251), compassion fatigue (-.441), level of coping (-.231), psycholog ical stress (-.614), and physiological stress (-.480). The authors also conducte d a path analysis which indi cated that psychological and physiological stress had direct negative eff ects on subjective well-being, whereas sense of coherence had a direct positive effect on subjective well-being. Level of coping mediated the effects of family stress on psychological and physiological stress. While compassion fatigue and spiritual resources had a medi ating effect on both psychologica l and physiological stress, both variables had a direct effect on subjective well-being. Additionally, compassion fatigue was found to have a negative relationship with sp iritual resources, while spiritual resources contributed positively to sense of coherence. One of the unique contributions of this pr oject is that it will further explore the relationship between the sense of coherence and spirituality. One could argue that one of the primary purpose of religious teachin g, particularly Christian theology, is fostering a view of the 23

PAGE 24

world that is comprehensible, manageable, and meaningful. Therefore, one might predict that sense of coherence mediates the relationship be tween spirituality and psychological well-being. Spirituality and Religion Defining Religion and Spirituality Religion and Spirituality are two constructs around which there is little definitional consensus. For many years in psychology, the tw o constructs were seen as synonymous (Wulff, 1998). More recently, however, psychologists have been making a distin ction between the two. Pargament (2002) is representative of recent tren ds in making a distinction between religion and spirituality, We prefer to use the term religion in its classic sense as a br oad individual and institutional domain that serves a variety of purposes, secular as well as sacred. Spirituality represents the key and unique function of relig ion. In this chapter, spiritua lity is defined as a search for the sacred (Pargament, 1999, p.12). Religion is often seen as an institution or organizati on, such as the church or synagogue, that exists for spiritual, social, political, economic, and other functions. Alternatively, spirituality may be a part of the institution, but may, and of ten does, operate outsid e the bounds of a formal religious/institutional context. Another indicator of the lack of scholarly cons ensus in defining spirituality and religion is the number of ways in which religion and spiritua lity have been operati onalized in research. A superficial perusal of the table of contents of Measures of Religiosity (Hill & Hood, 1999) gives even the casual reader an indication of the di versity of interests among researchers of religion and spirituality. These authors identify and review hundreds of instruments that claim to measure a variety of constructs including religious beliefs, re ligious attitudes, religious practices, and religious service attendance. 24

PAGE 25

In addition to the definitional problems addressed above, Slater, Hall, and Edwards (2001) identified four additional weaknesses in the m easurement of religion and spirituality: illusory spiritual health, ceiling effects, social desirabil ity, and bias. The notion of illusory spiritual health is based on Shedler, Mayman, & Manis (1993) model of illusory mental health. Slater, Hall and Edwards propose that there are th ree spiritual subgroups: those that are genuinely spiritual based on both self-report and clinical observation, those that are not sp iritual based on the same two measures, and lastly, those that report spiritual health, but who are observed to be less spiritual than they themselves report. Th e authors speculate th at there are certain religious groups that place pressure on individual adherents to maintain the appearance of spiritua l health at all costs. Thus, researchers need to account for this po ssible response bias in developing instruments assessing spirituality. A second problem in assessing spirituality is ceiling effects. Ceili ng effects do not allow researchers to draw accurate conclusions about individuals functioning above average. One group of researchers (Bufford, Paloutzian, & Ellison, 1991) concluded th at the Spiritual Wellbeing Scale (Ellison, 1983), one of the more popular measures of spirituality, is of little use with evangelical populations due to ceiling effects. Thirdly, the authors argue that re searchers need to attempt to control for social desirability in both the development of spirituality instru ments and in test administration. The authors suggest including measures of social desirability in the development of the instrument so that the data can either be factor analyzed or regressed. Finally, the authors address bias. Research has indicated that ma ny of the instruments measuring spirituality have been developed wi thin a denominational or theological context. However, when moved out of that original context, it appears that members of other 25

PAGE 26

denominations and/or theological traditions do not fair as well. The authors argue that traditional measures of determining differential item func tioning may not be adequate. Consequently, they recommend the use of Item Response Theory to guide the selection of items. The difficulty with this approach is that very large samples are requir ed and that most research in this area has not risen to this level of statistical s ophistication. Measuring Spirituality Hall and Edwards (1996, 2002) have developed a model of spirituality that attempts to address many of the theoretical and psychometric issues raised above. Hall and Edwards argue that relationship is the centerpiece of Christia n theology. That individuals relate to God is supported by both biblical sources (e.g. Genesis 1:26) and theological discourse (Erikson, 1985; Saucy, 1993). Hall and Edwards, however, took upon themselves the twin objectives of remaining true to their Christ ian theological understa ndings while at the same time grounding their model of spirituality in psychological theory. To establish a solid psychological foundation for their theory, Hall and Edwards (1996) turned to object relations theory. Two key a ssumptions undergird this choice. First, object relations theory is congruent with the basic theological prem ise previously stated. Second, psychological and spiritual well-being have been s een as developing along parallel paths. Hall and Edwards point to Carter (1974) as the first to propose that sp iritual maturity and the process of self actualization as described by theorists such as Jung and Rogers have significant points of contact. Hall and Edwards (1996) point to several studies that support the notion that psychological maturity and spiritual maturity are linked. Sh akelford (1978) compared biblical and object relations understandings of dependence and concluded that the processes involved in mature dependence on God are similar to those involved in mature dependence from an object relations 26

PAGE 27

perspective. Carter and Barnhurst (1986) argued that people rela te to God and to other people through the same psychological mechanisms. A dditionally, four empirical studies have found positive correlations between God image and level of object relations development (Brokaw and Edwards, 1994), God image and object relations deve lopmental level and spir itual maturity (Hall and Brokaw, 1995), and God image and object relations developmental level and self concept among psychiatric patients (Tisdale, Brokaw, Edwards, & Key, 1993). Having established the theological and psycholog ical foundation of a theory of spirituality, Hall and Edwards (1996, 2002) turn to the developm ent of the theory itself. The authors propose a two-dimensional theory including awareness of God and quality of relationship with God. The first dimension, awareness, is grounded in the th eological position that an y relationship with God includes some type of communication with God. sp iritual maturity along this dimension is a growing awareness of Gods responses, and an ab ility to listen to God, to notice his presence, and to savor his responses (Hall and Edwards, 1996, p. 237). This dimension was not designed to measure the relationship between object relations and spiritual ma turity, but is assumed to be a necessary prerequisite of spiritual maturity. The second dimension of Hall and Edwards theo ry is quality of relationship with God. This dimension was designed explicitly to meas ure the relationship between spiritual maturity and object relations theory. Hall and Edwards asse ss three levels of spirituality. These levels are not hierarchically arranged, so each factor will be called domains for purposes of the current study. The three domains hypothesized were unstable, grandiose a nd realistic acceptance. A person with an unstable (or instability) type of spirituality ma y be characterized by a tendency to vacillate between extremely positive and extremely negative images of God, a chaotic relationship with God, and freque nt feelings of abandonment. 27

PAGE 28

A grandiose style of relating to God may be somewhat narcissistic. The person is preoccupied with grand fantasies, crave[s] atte ntion, and attempt[s] to present themselves as better than others (Hall & Edwards, 1996, p. 237). God becomes important only to the extent that he supports the persons se lf esteem, provides protection, a nd provides for their needs. Thus, the individual focuses not so much on the relations hip itself, but on the benefits he or she derives from it. Realistic Acceptance is characterized by di fferentiating between the self and other, integrating good and bad qualities, and maintaining long term relationships. These people have the ability to acknowledge and express both pl easant and unpleasant emotions, deal with disappointment in God in a productive manner that maintains the relatio nship, and value their relationship with God for its own sake rather than the benefits th ey derive from the relationship. The relationship between religion, spiritual ity, and psychological well-being will be discussed in the following section. Psychological Well-Being A major movement in professional psychology during the past decade has been positive psychology. This movement, spearheaded by form er American Psychological Association president Martin Seligman (2000), questions the almost exclusive focus within psychology on psychopathology. Rather than focus on questions such as Why are depressed people depressed? or What are effective treatments for anxiety? a positive psychologist prefers to ask questions such as What makes highly successful people so successful? or, more generally, What are the traits of individuals who seem to be functioning best in life? A positive psychologist does not say that the former questions are not important and should not be studied ; rather, in the same spirit of Antonovsky above, the positive psychologist says th at the exclusive focus on pathology to the 28

PAGE 29

exclusion of well-being is both a detriment to the discipline of ps ychologys original purpose and a terrible disservice to the larger society. From a philosophical viewpoint, the ultim ate question posed by positive psychology becomes What is the good life? This question has been addressed by every major philosopher/ethicist/ theologian from the time of Aristotle. In our own time, psychology has attempted to address this question primarily in two ways. The current construct with the longest history is that of subjec tive well-being (SWB). Ed Deiner (1984) has been at the forefront of the subjective well-being, or happiness, research fr ontier. Deiner, Lucas, and Oishi (2002) define subjective wellbeing as a broad concept that includes experiencing pleasant emotions, low levels of negative moods, and high life satisfac tion (p. 63). Rooted in Utilitarian philosophy, subjective well-being focuses on the individuals satisfaction with his or her life and the theoretical relative balan ce of pleasant over unpleasant life events one experiences. Research to date has focused on the question Who is happy? This body of research has grown out of the work of Wilson (1967) who pr oposed that the happy person is young, healthy, well-educated, well-paid, extroverted, optimistic, worry-free, religious, marriedwith high selfesteem, job morale, modest aspirations, of either sex and a wide range of intelligence (p. 294). The findings indicate that people who are happ iest are married, reli gious, extraverted, and optimistic (see Deiner, 1999 for a thorough review of the SWB literature). These findings have held up in cross-cultural studies. However, there are some correlate s of happiness that seem to be more culture-specific or simp ly do not lend themselves to formulaic statements. Gender differences are a case in point. Women tend to report the same mean le vel of SWB as men, but, contrary to early formulations of SWB, women also tend to report more extreme scores on both positive and negative affect. Self-esteem has been found to be highly correlated with SWB in 29

PAGE 30

individualistic societies, but not in collectivist cultures. Wealth ier nations also tend to have higher SWB, but there is little difference between the SWB of rich and poor within countries. Finally, SWB does not decline, as originally proposed, with age although the aged may experience less positive aff ect (Deiner & Suh, 1998). The second major psychological approach to the question What is the good life? has been offered by Carole Ryff (1989b) and her colleagues. Ryff tackles the bold task of defining the essential features of psychologica l well-being (p. 1069). Ryff is cr itical of the above line of research on several theoretical gr ounds. First, she points out that investigators who first noted that positive and negative affect were independent of one another were not interested in defining aspects of positive psychological functioning (B radburn, 1969). The proposal that a relative balance of positive affect over little negative affect constitutes psychological well-being lacks strong theoretical underpinnings according to Ryff. Ryffs second critique of the SWB literature is that SWB is based on a dubious interpretation of the Greek word eudaimonia. Ryff, quoting Waterman (1984), argues that the ancient Greek unde rstandings of eudaimonia and hedonia were distinct. The Greeks would have understood the form er to indicate all the feelings and behaviors consistent with attaining ones highest good, wher eas the latter would have been understood in a way that is much more closely related to prev ious conceptions of subjective well-being. Ryffs evaluation is that hedonism is an inadequate foundation upon whic h to build a solid theory of psychological well-being. A person can claim to be happy without functioning adequately in a variety of life areas. From a developmental perspective, Ryff (1989a ) also criticizes prev ious approaches to well-being as it relates to aging on the grounds that wellness is most often defined as the absence of illness. This is also reminiscent of Antonovs kys critique of the medical field outlined above. 30

PAGE 31

Ryff is concerned when low scores on measures of anxiety, depression, loneliness and the like are used to indicate psychological well-being. The limitation of this approach is that the more positive aspects and attributes of successful adju stment in old age are ignored. Another criticism of previous conceptions of con tinued well-being in aging populati ons is their tendency to limit continued growth and development in the later y ears (p. 38). This conception of aging tends to assume that individuals attain a developmental plateau rather than assuming that people continue to grow and develop throughout all stages of the lifespan. As a source for her own proposal for psychol ogical well-being, Ryff (1989a; 1989b) draws upon developmental theorists such as Eriks on (1959), Buhler (1935) and Neugarten (1968, 1973), clinical theorists such as Rogers (1961), Maslow (1968), Jung (193 3), and Allport (1961), and mental health literature, particularly Jahoda (1958). Ryff says these theories of psychological well-being have had limited impact for three re asons. First, they have spawned few credible assessment procedures, the criteria for well-being proposed by each is quite diverse, and each has been criticized as being hopelessly valu e-laden (Ryff, 1989b, p. 1070). Ryff, however, undertook the arduous task of distilling these theories extracting six char acteristics of the individual who is functioning well psychologicall y: self-acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, a nd personal growth. In describing self-acceptance Ryff (1989a) describes a person as having a generally positive attitude toward onese lf and ones life (p.41). A psychologically well-functioning individual will also have positive relations with others. People high on this do main are described as having elevated social interest, capable of gr eater capacity to give a nd receive love, empathic toward those who are not as selfactualized, and generally able to relate to others in a warm and compassionate way. An autonomous individual has an internal locu s of control, is free to act in 31

PAGE 32

non-conventional ways, values self evaluation ov er other-evaluation of self, and is selfdetermining. Individuals possessing environmental mastery have a sense of competence in a variety of life areas, a sense of contributing to the world, and th e ability to choose or create a living situation suitable to personal needs and desires. Purpose in life describes those persons who have successfully navigated the middle adult years and have been able to successfully maintain an inner sense of personal integrity, have the ability to live in the present moment, have a unifying philosophy of life, [and] a sense of di rectedness, balance, and integration (p.43). For Ryff, there is no end point to personal growth At no point in an indi viduals personal history should one fail to be open to new experiences, or view themselves as having arrived rather than being continually in process. In humanistic terms, striving toward self-actualization is a lifelong task. It is the six above dimens ions that Ryff operationalized in the Scale of Psychological Wellbeing (PWB). Religion, Spirituality, and Psychological Well-Being What are the effects of religion and spirituality on psychological well being? Koenig, McCullough, and Larson (2001) cite numerous studies indicating both the positive and negative effects of religion and spiritua lity on psychological well-being as well as dysfunction. These authors note, for instance, that religion promotes marital fidelity. Andr ews and Withey (1976) found that individuals who are ma rried report greater levels of happiness than those who have never been married, have been divorced, or w ho are separated. Strawbridge, Cohen, Shema, and Kaplan (1997) found that couples who attended religious services w eekly in 1965 were 80% more likely to be married to the same person at a 28 year follow-up than those couples who attended religious serv ices less frequently. Generally speaking, people who rate their hea lth higher are happier than those who do not (George & Landerman, 1984). High self-rated religious involvement is associated with lower 32

PAGE 33

levels as alcohol and drug abuse (Bell, W echsler, & Johnston, 1997; Khavari & Harmon, 1982), lower levels of hypertension (Koenig, et al, 1998), heart disease (Oxman, Freeman, & Manheimer, 1995), and longer lifespan (McCul lough, Hoyt, Larson, Koenig, & Thoresen, 2000). Religious communities promote participation in social activities ranging from attendance at services of worship to mission endeavors. Koenig, McCullough & Larson (2001) report that people who participate in religious activities mo re frequently have l arger support networks, more social contacts, and greater satisfaction with support (p. 100). The social support networks developed through participation in the religious community c ontribute to psychological wellbeing. Religious participation has also been found to foster a greater sense of optimism and hope. Sethi and Seligman (1993, 1994) found that reli gious fundamentalists (Orthodox Judaism, Calvinism, and Islam) were more optimistic than members of liberal religious groups (Unitarianism and reform Judaism). This finding was also found for hope, with fundamentalist religious groups espousing more hope than libe ral religious groups. The latter finding has been supported by other researchers as well (Hert h, 1989; Carson, Soeken, Shanty, & Terry, 1990). Religion often teaches that life is meaningful and that life events do not happen by chance. The research literature in this area is overwhe lmingly in favor of the notion that religious individuals have a greater sens e of meaning and purpose in life (Burbank, 1992; Carroll, 1993). These findings have a theoretical connection to both sense of coheren ce and psychological wellbeing. Three limitations to the above studies for the current purpose are of note. The foregoing are indirect indicators of we ll-being. Marital status, health status, social support, optimism, hope, and meaning and purpose in life may set the stag e for psychological well-being but do not, in and 33

PAGE 34

of themselves, constitute psyc hological well-being. Secondly, while the vast majority of the research has found positive relationships between religious involvement a nd mental health, there are a few exceptions (for example, see Moberg, 1984). A third limitation is one of measurement. The studies above have not opera tionalized religiousness, religious particip ation, and well-being consistently. Therefore, it is di fficult to draw broad conclusion s. Nevertheless, these studies do lend support to the notion that spirituality and psychological we ll-being are positively related. A somewhat more direct route of measuri ng well-being is through measuring the absence of pathology. Analogous to the assumption in medici ne that the absence of illness defines health, a notion rejected by both Antonovsky (1987) and Ryff (1989a), is the notion that the absence of mental dysfunction defines psychological well-be ing. The definitional debate notwithstanding, an important question becomes Are people with strong religio us values less prone to psychological dysfunction? Koenig, McCullough, and Larson (2001) reviewed the literature on depression and drew five conclusions. One, Jews and people with no religious affiliation are more likely to experience depression and depr essive symptoms. Two, people who are active in their religious communities and valu e their religion for intrinsic reasons are at reduced risk for depression; however, people with low involvement in their religious communities and who value religion for extrinsic reasons are more likely to experience depressive sy mptoms. Three, not all measures of religious involvement are equa lly predictive of depressive symptomology. Involvement in organizational religious activitie s and intrinsic religious commitment are more likely to buffer the individual against depressi on. Religious coping is an effective means of helping individuals deal with st ress. Finally, prospective cohort studies and quasi-experimental research all suggest that religious or spiritual activities may lead to a reduction in depressive symptoms(p. 135). 34

PAGE 35

Koenig, McCullough, and Larson (2001) also found an inverse relationship between suicide, suicidal behavior, suic idal ideation, and tolerant attitu des toward suicide and religious involvement (frequency of attendance, frequency of prayer, and degree of religious salience). They also concluded that there is a weak inve rse relationship between religion and anxiety. This research is difficult to interpret because it is an xiety that might actually lead an individual to engage in religious activities su ch as prayer. Prayer can be se en as a religions coping strategy. In sum, the research supports the idea that religion has an inverse relationship with depression, suicide, and anxiety. Again, that a person is not depressed, suicidal, or anxious does not necessarily mean that he or she is functioning well psychologically. That a person is not anxious or suicidal does not indicate that the person is living life joyfully to the fullest. Absence of negative functioning does not necessarily imply positive functioning. Clergy Well-Being Hall (1997) reviewed the scant cl ergy well-being literature. He categorized the literature along six dimensions: emotional well-being, stress and coping, marita l/divorce adjustment, family adjustment, burnout, and impairment. Hall dr aws several conclusions from his review of the literature: (a) the most frequent difficulties experien ced by pastors are anxi ety, disappointment, feelings of inadequacy, spiritual dryness, stre ss, frustration, lack of time, fear of failure, loneliness, and isolation; (b) pastors em otional well-being is positively related to vocational congruence; and (c) low self-concept, low degree of satisfaction in relationship with God and self-criticism are associated with higher degrees of trait anxiety (243). Hall goes on to note a significant literatur e of psychological impairment based in a psychoanalytic tradition which is not di rectly related to this project. In sum, the clergy well-being literature suffers from the same limitations mentioned earlier related to well-being literature in general; name ly, the assumption is made that the absence of 35

PAGE 36

pathology implies well-being. Thus, one of the disti nguishing marks of the current project is to examine a model of well-bei ng, rather than pathology, in a ministerial population. Questions and Hypotheses The primary question of this project is What is the state of ps ychological well-being among clergy? One might expect that religious leader s fare better than religious lay people psychologically because they avail themselves of those aspects of religious life that are known to indirectly effect psychological functioning, i.e., so cial support. Previous re search indicates that sense of coherence and religion/spirituality c ontribute to psychological well-being. Previous studies, however, have operationalized religion /spirituality by measuring religious service attendance, religious belief, and practice. No connections have been made between spiritual maturity as measured by the Spiritual Assessment Inventory (SAI) and Ryffs Scale of Psychological Well-being (PWB). Previous rese arch has operationalized psychological wellbeing as happiness and life sa tisfaction, utilizing Deiners Subjective Well-being construct. Hypothesis 1, based on previous related finding s and current theoretical considerations (outlined above), is that both sense of coheren ce and spiritual maturity will contribute to the psychological well-being of clergy. Hypothesis 2 flows from the first: Members of the clergy will fare better psychologically when compared to a non-clergy group. A second question considered in this project is What is the relations hip between spiritual maturity, sense of coheren ce, and psychological well-being? Individuals who are spiritually mature are both aware of Gods presence and we ll adjusted in their relationship with God. Antonovsky argues that there are multiple sources for sense of coherence, but that it is sense of coherence that has a direct aff ect on physical health and, by extr apolation, psychological health outcomes. Hence, hypothesis 3 is that sense of co herence mediates the relationship between spiritual maturity and Psychological well-being. 36

PAGE 37

CHAPTER 3 METHODS Participants Participants were United Met hodist clergy from three Southe rn conferences and students from the undergraduate research pool at the University of Flor ida. An email list containing 1745 names of clergy with working email addresse s was obtained from United Methodist Church Conference websites in the Southern United States Participants were so licited through electronic mail. The solicitation email message contained a re quest for participation as well as the link to the website. Clergy participants were not compensated; student participants received course credit for participation. Minist ers from the United Methodist C hurch were selected for study because of the authors personal in terest in this group and because of the readily availability of contact information for this group. Two hundred twenty-one student participants were solicited through the undergraduate research pool at the University of Florida. Students were directed to the data collection website and followed the same procedure outlined above. Students received one point of participation credit as a part of their class assignments. Demographic characteristic s for clergy and student groups are shown in Table 3-1. Data was also collected rega rding clergy members thoughts a bout leaving the ministry in the past and currently. Resu lts are shown in Table 3-2. Measures Sense of Coherence The Sense of Coherence Scale was originally entitled The Life Orie ntation Questionnaire, but is popularly referred to by the former (Antonovsky, 1993). The instrument was created by Antonovsky in order to test his se nse of coherence construct. There are two versions of the Sense 37

PAGE 38

of Coherence Scale: SOC-29 and SOC-13. In order to save time and forest all participant fatigue, the SOC-13 was utilized for this project. Th e psychometric properties of the SOC-13 are discussed here if availabl e, unless otherwise noted. The reliability of the SOC-29 has been s upported by several studi es noted by Antonovsky (1993). Antonovsky reports average Cronbach alpha coefficients of eight published studies of .81, three theses or dissertati ons of .85, and fifteen unpublished papers of .88. Concerning the SOC-13, the average Cronbachs alpha for five unpublished studies was .82, and for 4 theses and dissertations .81. It should be noted that these stud ies sampled a variety of cultures, but that the consistenty high alpha levels suggest a cross-cultural ly relevant instrument. Test-retest reliability has been supported in a variety of cu ltures for the SOC-29. However, the only test-retest correlati on reported by Antonovsky for the SO C-13 was .77 for patients at a veterans hospital in the United States (six m onth retest period). For the SOC-29, test-retest correlations range from .41 (one -year medical student sample) to .86 (Serbian teacher training students after one year). Antonovsky (1993) reported seve ral studies assessing the cr iterion validity of the SOC-29. Positive relationships have been found between SOC and internal locus of control (.44), selfesteem (.63, SOC-13; .49), and hardiness (.50). Ne gative correlations have been found between SOC and trait anxiety (-.61; -.69; and -.75, SOC-13). Antonovsky (1993) also reported correlations with health and psychological well-being measures. Antonovsky reported correlations betw een SOC and general we ll-being (.62), 6-month prediction of morale (.71), qua lity of life (.76), and life sa tisfaction (.54). Antonovsky also reported negative correlations between SOC and psychosomatic symptoms (-.70), psychotic symptoms (-.59), and emotional distress (-.63). Other low correlations reported by Antonovsky 38

PAGE 39

were generally consistent with the expected direction. Anothe r interesting f eature of these correlations is there cross-cultur al nature. Samples were drawn from the United States (morale, emotional distress, and general well-being), Israel (life satisfaction), Sweden (quality of life, psychosomatic symptoms, and psychotic symptoms). Antonovsky also gives normative data for the SOC-13 with college faculty and undergraduates, minority homeless women, and male patients at U.S. veterans hospitals. Other norms are given for populations outside the U.S., but are not discussed here. For faculty in the United States, male faculty mean scores for the SOC-13 were 66.7 with female faculty scoring 66.4. The standard deviation (SD) for male and female faculty were 9.8 and 10.6, respectively. A sample of 55-year old male Veterans Administ ration Hospital patients had a mean score of 61.9 and a SD of 17.8. An undergraduate sample in the United States had mean scores of 58.5 with a SD of 12.1. Finally, a sample of minority homeless women in the United States had a mean score of 55.0 with a SD of 0.7. One would expect the clergy sample to score more similarly to faculty samples given similar social and economic status. In sum, the SOC-13 is a thirteen-item questionnaire utilizing a 7-point Likert scale. The scale has de monstrated acceptable reliability and validity in multiple international studies. The questionnaire was used to operationalize Antonovskys construct sense of coherence. Spiritual Assessment Inventory Hall and Edwards (1996) report the results of two exploratory f actor analytic studies that support the theoretical model they proposed. The re sults of the two studies revealed the same factor structures, therefore, only the results of the second study are incl uded here; for details concerning the first study, see Hall and Edwards (1996). A five factor solution was obtained which they labeled (in descending order of Eigenvalues) instabili ty, defensiveness/ disappointment, awareness, Realis tic Acceptance, and grandiosity. Only those items with factor 39

PAGE 40

loadings exceeding .30 were retained. As expect ed, there were some moderate correlations between the awareness and Realis tic Acceptance subscales (.33) and awareness and instability subscales (-.33). Cronbachs alpha was used to te st the reliability of each scale with values ranging from .91 (defensiveness) to .52 (grandiosity). Reliability Alphas for the current student are reported in Table 4.2 (p. 51). In a follow-up study (Hall & Edwards, 2002), conf irmatory factor analysis was used to clarify the factor structure and to test the validity of the Spiritu ality Assessment Inventory (SAI). Five factors again emerged from the data (agai n, in descending Eigenvalue order): awareness, defensiveness (renamed disappoint ment due to content homogene ity), grandiosity, Realistic Acceptance, and instability. Reliability was ag ain calculated using Cronbachs Alpha; values ranged from .95 (awareness) to .73 (grandiosity). Additionally, correlations with the Bell Object Relations Inventory (BORI; Bell, Billington, & Becker, 1986), the Spiritu al Well-being Scales (SWBS; Ellison, 1983), and the Intrinsic/Extrensic-revised Subscales (I/E-R; Gorsuch & McPherson, 1989) generally support th e external validity of the SAI. In a second study reported by Hall and Edward s (2002), a set of impression management (IM) items were added to the prot ocol. A principle axis factor an alysis revealed six distinct factors supporting the previous five-factor solution and confirming the homogeneity of the IM items. Cronbachs alpha for the IM subscale was .77. In conclusion, the SAI is a 47-item that m easures Hall and Edwards (1996) model of spirituality along two dimensions: awareness an d quality. The quality dimension has three factors: Realistic Acceptance, instability, and gr andiosity. The disappointment scale is viewed as a validity scale in that if a pe rson never or rarely endorses ite ms that indicate disappointment with God, this may represent a defensive patte rn of responding. In light of the previous 40

PAGE 41

discussion, this pattern of responding may repr esent illusory spiritua l health. Finally, the impression management items serve as an addi tional validity check. When controlling for IM, the intercorrelations between the five prev ious scales dropped, th ereby increasing the heterogeneity of each scale. Scale of Psychological Well-being Ryff (1989b) developed the PWB to operati onalize the aforementioned six domains of psychological functioning. Item-toscale correlations were conducted with theoretically derived items. Items loading on two or more scales or lo ading more highly with a scale other than the theoretically derived scale were eliminated. Af ter the total number of items per scale was reduced to 20, the inte rnal consistency coefficients ra nged from .86 (autonomy) to .93 (selfacceptance). Six-week test-retest reliability coe fficients ranged from .81 (environmental mastery and personal growth) to .88 (autonomy). Measures of internal consistency for the current study can be found in Table 4.2 (p. 51). Perhaps, the most significant findings were age and gender differences. Ryff conducted a multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA), utilizing fo llow-up analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the location of si gnificant differences. Along the personal growth dimension, significant differences were found between older adults and both young and middle adults with older adults scoring lower in e ach instance. Older adults scored significantly lower than middle adults along the purpose in life dimension. Young adults scored significantly lower than both middle and older adults in environmental mastery Finally, young adults also scored lower than middle adults in autonomy These results indicated that indi viduals in middle age (mean age of 49.85) function better than young adults (mean ag e of 19.53) with a plateau or decline in functioning into older adulthood (m ean age 74.96). It is of note that there are no significant age differences for the domains of self-acceptance and positive relations with others. 41

PAGE 42

A significant gender difference was also found. Women tended to score higher on the positive relations with others domain than did men, F (1, 315) = 17.64, p < .001. There were no Gender by Age interactions. One possible criticism of Ryffs study is that the sample was drawn from a middle class, well-educated sample that did not represent th e general population of the United States. In an effort to broaden the generalizability of the PWB, Ryff and Keyes (1995) conducted a follow-up study with a larger, nationally representative sample. The prim ary draw-back of this study was that only three of the original 20-items from each scale were used. However, all items loaded strongly and positively with their own scale. Sc ales, as predicted, were low to moderately correlated (.13 to .46). Age differences previously reported were supported in this study with two exceptions. The autonomy scale showed age increments from young to middle adulthood only, rather than an incremental increase throughout the three studied groups. Previously, no age differences were found in positive relations with ot hers; however, older adults scored higher than both middle and young adults. Utilizing confirmatory factor analysis, Ryff and Keyes (1995) tested several models to determine the best model for the data. They determined that a super-factor model was the best fit ( 2 = 378.7, df = 129, AGFI = .89, BIC = -166.04). As such, the authors conclude that the six factors originally proposed are a function of, or are caused by, a nother latent construct (p. 722) which the authors label well-being In summary, the 54-item Scale of Psychological Well-being is a deriva tive of a larger 84item measure that has proven psychometric propertie s. The 54-item version was employed in this project in order to address participant load and fatigue. The instrument c ontains six subscales: self acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, 42

PAGE 43

and personal growth. The measure was used to operationalize Ryffs (1987) conception of Psychological well-being. Stress in General Scale The Stress in General Scale (SIG) is a 15item scale measuring work-related stress. Respondents are asked to rate the words or phases using the 3-choice format of yes, no, or ? if that particular word or phr ase describes their job. The SIG c ontains two subscales: pressure and threat. The pressure scale contains items such as demanding and hectic, whereas the threat scale includes items such as nerve-wrack ing and overwhelming. The coefficient alpha is .88 and .82 for the pressure and threat scales respectively. Measur es of internal consistency for the current study can be found in Table 4.2 (p. 51 ). The factors had an intercorrelation of = .61 which suggests some overlap in the two scales. Evidence of convergent valid ity for the pressure scal e was demonstrated through correlations with the time pressure subscale of the Job Stress Index ( r = .52). Evidence of divergent validity was demonstr ated through correlations with general job satisfaction ( r = -.47). Validity evidence for the SIG needs fu rther research and clarification. Procedure Clergy participants were solicited through el ectronic mail. 1745 usable email addresses were collected through the websites of three Un ited Methodist Conference in the South. 257 usable surveys were completed. The particip ation rate of all those solicited was 14.7%. Solicitation emails directed participants to the data collection website. The first screen contained the informed consent document. By continuing beyond the informed consent page, participants agreed to participation. Participants were aske d to fill out a brief demographics questionnaire followed by the Sense of Coherence Scale, the Spiritual Assessment Inventory, the Scale of Psychological Well-being, and the Stress in General Scale. Participants were randomly directed 43

PAGE 44

to one of four orders of presentation based on a Latin Square design. Part icipants completed the questionnaires in one sitting as responses c ould not be saved for a future session. After submitting their responses, participants were dir ected to a debriefing page containing more information about the study as well as c ontact information for the investigators. Analyses The Sense of Coherence Scale (Life Orientati on Questionnaire) yields a global score with continuous data. The Spiritual Assessment Inventory yields scores in six domains with continuous data for each domain. The Scale of Psychological Well-being yields scores in six domains with continuous data within each scale. The Stress in General Scale yields two scores with continuous data. In order to examine hypothesis 1, that sense of coherence and spiritual maturity will contribute to psychological well-being a series of six regression models were developed. The global SOC score, as well as the six domains of the SAI. The six Psychological Well-being domains of Self Acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and Personal Growth were entere d as dependent variables. The series of six regression models was justified in that the primar y interest of the researcher is the examination of each dependent variable separately rather than each dependent variable simultaneously. Regression equations were developed for both cler gy and student groups as well as an aggregate group containing both samples. In order to examine hypothesis 2, Members of the clergy fare better psychologically when compared to a non-clergy group, a series of six analysis of covariance were conducted. Clergy and Students were entered as factors and age served as the covariate. In order to examine hypothesis 3, that sense of coherence mediat es spiritual maturity and Psychological well-being regression models including awar eness of God and instability as 44

PAGE 45

dependent variables, sense of coherence as a medi ating variable, and each of the six measures of psychological well-being as independent variab les were developed. The bootstrapping procedure developed by Preacher and Hayes (2004) was used to estimate the size of the indirect effects. This procedure was carried out in order to test the significance of the mediated effect as suggested by Baron & Kenny (1986), Frazier Tix, & Barron (2004), and Kenny, Kashy, & Bolger (1998). The estimates are based on 1000 random samples, with replacement, from the original data. The significance tests are based on 99% confidence intervals for the size of each indirect effect derived fro m the bootstrapped estimates. Table 3-1. Clergy and student demographic information Clergy Students Mean Age 50.9 19.2 Gender Male N 205.0 82.0 Female N 52.0 138.0 Ethnicity Caucasian 243.0 157.0 African American 10.0 25.0 Asian-American 0.0 17.0 Native American/Pacific Islander 0.0 2.0 Multiple Ethnicities 3.0 20.0 Marital Status Never married 9.0 214.0 Married 209.0 1.0 Divorced 8.0 1.0 Widowed 3.0 0.0 Remarried 25.0 0.0 Children Mean number of children 2.3 0.0 Mean number of children living at home 1.0 0.0 Mean hours spent at work/school 50.2 27.3 Mean hours spent with friends/family 19.0 23.2 45

PAGE 46

Table 3-2. Clergy responses to ministry related questions. Thoughts of leaving Ministry Past (%) Current (%) Ive never considered leaving the ministry. 30.0 NA I am not considering leaving the ministry. NA 78.6 The thought has (recently) crossed my mind. 41.2 14.0 I have (am) actively pursued (pursuing) information about other professions. 9.7 1.6 I have pursued (am pursuing) contacts with nonministry-related employers. 3.5 .8 I have interviewed (am inte rviewing) with employers outside the pr ofessional ministry. 1.9 0 I considered (am consideri ng) a job offer outside the professional ministry. 2.3 0 I left, but eventually returned to the professional ministry. 6.6 NA I already have plans to leav e professional ministry. NA 2.3 I currently work outside the professional ministry. 4.3 2.3 No response. .4 .4 46

PAGE 47

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Descriptive Statistics The question arises as to how the mean scores for the current sample (shown in Table 4-1) compare with those found in the literature. Antonovsky (1998) reports the results of several studies using the SOC-13. One study of University faculty in the United States, male and female faculty members scores 66.7 and 66.4, respectivel y. Carling, Hill, and McWey (2004) reversed scored the SOC-13 obtaining a mean score of 18.1 in their study of cl ergy and their spouses. Thus, a lower score indicates greater sense of coherence. Reverse scor ing the results of the current study yields a means of 30.0. Hall and Ed wards have not reported normative data for the Spiritual Assessment Inventory. Stanton and Balze rs (2001) report in thei r original study means for the pressure and threat domains of the St ress in General Scale of 13.9 and 9.24, respectively. Results of this study indicate that this sample scored lower on th e two domains of the Stress in General Scale. Normative data for the Spiritual Assessment Inventory is still in the process of development; this study can be conceived of as a contribution to that effort. Similarly, I was unable to locate any published studi es utilizing the 54-item versi on of the Scale of Psychological Well-being, thus making mean comparisons meaningless. Preliminary Analyses The following analyses were conducted in order to test the assumptions underlying multiple regression analyses used to examine the data. Tabachnick and Fidell (2001), citing Green (1991), give two rules of thumb concerning the ratio of cases to number of independent variables. N > 50 + 8m ( m is number of independent variables) and N > 104 + m are suggested rules of thumb for testing multiple regression and individual predictors, respectively. They further suggest calculating N both ways and using the larger of the two numbers to estimate the 47

PAGE 48

number of cases needed to perf orm the operation. In this project, nine independent variables were entered into the regression models (Sense of Coherence total sc ore, awareness mean, disappointment mean, Realistic Acceptance m ean, grandiosity mean, Instability mean, impression management mean, and the threat and pressure mean scores from the Stress in General scale). Thus, with sample sizes of 221 students and 257 clergy, the ratio of cases to independent variables was exceeded in both ca ses (122 case minimum for multiple regression and 113 case minimum for i ndividual predictors). Multiple regression procedures also a ssume that there are no outliers among the independent and dependent variables. Skewness and kurtosis was examined for all independent and dependent variables. All depe ndent variables were within tw o standard deviations of the mean with the exception of Personal Growth, which was found to be kurto tic, z = 4.02. The data were also screened for multivariate outliers using Mahalanobis distance. Mahalanobis distance greater than 2 (10) = 29.588, p <.001, were considered to be multivariate outliers. The same three cases found to be univaria te outliers on the Personal Growth Scale were found to be multivariate outliers when regressed on all six de pendent variables. The decision was made to delete the three outliers in this variable because th ey seem not to be connected to the rest of the sample, transforming the data seems too radical a solution given the small number of outliers and the difficulty of interpreting transformed data. Thus, it is assumed that the deletion of these variables has a negligible influence on the generalizability of the results. Cohen et al. (2003) note that absence of measurement error in the independent variable is also an assumption of regression. They suggest th at standard reliability estimates are the most common approach to assessing measurement erro r. For this project internal consistency reliability was used to assess measurement error. Cronbachs alphas for all variables for the total 48

PAGE 49

sample, for clergy, and students ar e reported in Table 4.2. It is ge nerally accepted that Cronbach alpha levels exceeding .70 are appropriate. With the exception of SAI grandiosity, all variables exceeded the .70 Cronbach alpha level. Absence of multicollinearity and singularity are two additional assumptions of regression. According to Belsley, Kuh, and We lsch (1980) multicollinearity exists when collinearity diagnostics indicate a conditioning index great than 30 and there are at least two variance proportions greater th an .50. Conditioning indices range d from 1.00 to 17.20. In none of the regression models developed was there are co nditioning index greater than thirty; therefore, the first criteria for multi collinearity was not met. Tolerances range from .39 to .76. Cohen et al. (2003) suggests that tolerance levels less than .10 indicate problems with multicollinearity. Thus, the independent variables appear to be free of multicollinearity. A dditionally, the variance inflation factors (VIF) ranged from 1.31 to 2.57. C ohen et al. (2003) describe a rule of thumb (which they see as too lenient) that VIFs grea ter than 10 are indicative of multicollinearity. All the above evidence points to a low degree of multicollinearity. Finally, multiple regression also assumes the residuals are independent of one another and normally distributed. In order to test the independence of residuals assumption a DurbinWatson D statistic was calculated. D ranged from 1.73 (environmental mastery) to 2.07 (autonomy). Critical values for 100+ cases at = .05 are Dl = 1.57 and Du = 1.78. Because D = 1.73 falls within the critical values the test is inconclusive. Becau se the remaining D values fall above the upper critical value, but below 4 Du (2.2), it can be concluded that the residuals are independent of one another. An examination of a scatterplot of the regression standardized residuals and regression predicted residuals reve aled that residuals were acceptably normally distributed. 49

PAGE 50

Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 1 stated that both sense of coherence and spiritua l maturity will contribute to the Psychological well-being of clergy. In order to test this hypothe sis a series of six regression equations were conducted, one for each factor of psychological well-being. Given the definition of spiritual maturity as com posed of both SAI dimensions of God awareness and Realistic Acceptance, the results only partially supported the hypothesis. The results supported the hypothesis that sense of coherence and awareness of God contribu te to the six dimensions of Psychological well-being. Realistic acceptance, however, did not contribute to a single dimension of psychological well-being. Surprisingl y, the SAI dimension of instability was as frequent a contributor to psyc hological well-being as was sense of coherence. While the hypothesis is concerned only with the clergy group, the researcher also included data describing the student group as well as composite in formation. For purposes of comparison, only standardized Beta weights are reported. Table 4.3 summarizes the regression models for each dependent variable. Autonomy For clergy, the standardized regressi on equation predicting PWB autonomy was Predicted ZAutonomy = .19 ZSOC + .25 ZAwareness .18 ZInstability 23.6% of the variance in autonomy was accounted for sense of coherence, awareness of God, and instability in ones relationship to God for clergy. For students, the standardized regres sion equation predicti ng PWB autonomy was Predicted ZAutonomy = .35 ZAwareness For students,11.5% of the variance in autonomy was accounted for by awareness of God. The standardized regressions for the co mposite of both groups was Predicted ZAutonomy = .18 ZSOC + .30 ZAwareness .18 ZInstability In the composite group, 19.7% of the variance in 50

PAGE 51

autonomy was accounted for by sense of coherence, awareness of God, and instability in ones relationship with God. Environmental Mastery For clergy, the standardized regression e quation predicting PWB environmental mastery was Predicted ZEnvironmental Mastery = .38 ZSOC .17 ZInstability .22 ZThreat Sense of coherence, SAI instability, and SIG threat accounted for 47% of the variance in environmental mastery among clergy. Among students, the standardized regressi on equation predicting PWB environmental mastery was Predicted ZEnvironmental Mastery = .47 ZSOC +.19 ZDisappointment + .14 ZPressure.29 ZThreat .17 ZInstability Sense of coherence, SAI disappointm ent, SIB pressure, SIG threat, and SAI instability accounted for 42.5% of the vari ance in environment mastery among Students. The composite standardized regression equa tion predicting environmental mastery was Predicted ZEnvironmental Mastery = .44 ZSOC Total .25 ZThreat .16 ZInstability Sense of coherence, SIG threat, and SAI instability accounted for 45.9% of the variance in environment mastery. Personal Growth For Clergy, the standardized regressi on equation for Personal Growth was Predicted ZPersonal Growth = .40 ZAwareness .23 ZInstability Awareness and instability accounted for 29.1% of the variance in Personal Growth among Clergy. For students, the standardized regres sion equation for Personal Growth was Predicted ZPersonal Growth = .50 ZAwareness .26 ZGrandiosity .20 ZInstability Awareness, grandiosity, and instability accounted for 20% of the vari ance in Personal Growth among Students. The composite standardized regressi on equation for Personal Growth was 51

PAGE 52

Predicted ZPersonal Growth = .41 ZAwareness +.16 ZSOC + .12 ZDisappointment .17 ZSAI Instability Awareness, sense of coherence, grandiosity, and instability acc ounted for 28.7% of the variance in Personal Growth. Positive Relations with Others For Clergy, the standardized regression equa tion for positive relations with others was Predicted ZPositive Relations = .27 Z SOC + .36 ZAwareness .18 ZInstability Sense of coherence, awareness, and instability accounted for 28.5% of the variance in positive relations with others among Clergy. For Students, the standardized regression equation for positive relations with others was Predicted ZPositive Relations = .41 SOC + .27 ZAwareness +.18 ZDisappointment + .16 ZPressure .23 ZGrandiosity .15 ZThreat Sense of coherence, awareness, disap pointment, pressure, gr andiosity, and threat accounted for 33.1% of the variance in positiv e relations with others among Students. The composite standardized regression equa tion for positive relations with others is Predicted ZPositive Relations = .34 Z SOC + .22 ZAwareness + .12 ZDisappointment .13 ZGrandiosity Sense of coherence, awareness, disappointment, and grandi osity accounted for 25.3% of the variance in positive relations with others. Purpose in Life For clergy, the standardized regres sion equation for purpose in life was Predicted ZPurpose = .28 ZSOC + .39 ZAwareness + .17 ZPressure .17 ZInstability .13 ZThreat Sense of coherence, awareness, pressure, instability, a nd threat accounted for 39.1% of the variance in purpose in life among clergy. For students, the standardized regression equation for purpose in life was 52

PAGE 53

Predicted ZPurpose = .33 ZSOC + .26 ZAwareness + .16 ZPressure .17 ZThreat Sense of coherence, awareness, pressure and threat accounted for 33.1% of the variance in purpose in life among students. The composite standardized regression equation for purpose in life was Predicted ZPurpose = .31 ZSOC + .25 ZAwareness + .14 ZPressure .17 ZThreat .13 ZInstability Sense of coherence, awareness, pressure, threat, and in stability accounted for 35.0% of the variance in purpose in life among clergy Self-acceptance For clergy, the standardized regressi on equation for Self Acceptance was Predicted ZSelf Acceptance = .29 ZSOC + .20 ZAwareness .24 ZInstability .18 ZThreat Sense of coherence, awareness, instability, and thre at accounted for 37.8% of the va riance in Self Acceptance among students. For students, the standardized regression equation for Self Acceptance was Predicted ZSelf Acceptance = .41 ZSOC + .39 ZAwareness + .14 ZPressure .20 ZInstability .19 ZGrandiosity Sense of coherence, awareness, pressure, inst ability, and grandiosity accounted for 37.6% of the variance in Self Acceptance among students. The composite standardized regressi on equation for Self Acceptance was Predicted ZSelf Acceptance = .37 ZSOC + .20 ZAwareness .19 ZInstability .14 ZThreat Sense of coherence, awareness, instability, and threat accounted for 38.1% of the variance in Self Acceptance. Hypothesis 2 Hypothesis 2 stated that members of the clergy will fare better psychologically when compared to a non-clergy group. Put differently, mean scores for clergy will be significantly higher on each of the six dimensions of psychological well-being. A series of six Analyses of 53

PAGE 54

Covariance were run, one for each of the measur es of psychological well-being, controlling for age as a potential confound. Autonomy A one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted incl uding students and clergy as factors, mean scores on the PWB autonom y subscale as dependent variables, and age as a covariate. A preliminary test of the homogeneity of slopes was conducted, which indicated that the slopes of the two groups on the PWB variable did not differ signif icantly, F (1, 472) = .147, MSE = 48.17, p = .70. The ANCOVA was not signi ficant, F (1, 473) = .029, MSE = 48.08, p = .86. Thus, it cannot be said that mean cler gy scores on the PWB autonomy scale were significantly different than student scores. Environmental Mastery A one-way ANCOVA was conducted under the sa me conditions outlined above except that the PWB environmental mastery scale was us ed as the dependent va riable. An homogeneity of slopes test was conducted. Re sults indicated the regression sl opes of the two groups did not differ significantly, F (1, 472) = .57, MSE = 57.74, p = .45. Again, the ANCOVA was not significant, F (1, 473) = .63, MSE = 57.69, p = .43. Mean scores on the PWB environmental mastery scale did not differ between clergy and students. Personal Growth The same one-way ANCOVA was conducted with the PWB Personal Growth scale as the dependent variable. Once again, a homogeneity of slopes test was c onducted which indicated that the slopes for clergy and students did not differ significantly, F (1, 472) = .36, MSE = 43.97, p = .55. Results of the ANCOVA indicated that mean PWB Personal Growth scores for clergy were significantly higher than students, F (1, 473) = 7.77, MSE = 43.91, p = .006. 54

PAGE 55

Positive Relations with Others The dependent variable of PWB positive relations with others was included in a one-way ANCOVA along with group as a factor and age as a covariate. Homogeneity of slopes test indicated that the regres sion slopes of the two groups were not significantly different, F (1, 472) = .04, MSE = 64.05, p = .85. The results of the ANCOVA, ho wever, were not significant, F (1, 473) = .79, MSE = 63.92, p = .38. Clergy mean scores were not significantly higher than student mean scores on the PWB positive relations with others. Purpose in Life A one-way ANCOVA was conducted including students and clergy as factors, mean scores on the PWB purpose in life subscale as depende nt variables, and age as a covariate. A preliminary test of the homogeneity of slopes wa s conducted, which indicated that the slopes of the two groups on the PWB variable did not differ significantly, F (1, 472) = .21, MSE = 56.60, p = .65. The ANCOVA was significa nt, F (1, 473) = 6.71, MSE = 56.51, p = .01. Thus, it can be said that mean clergy scores on the PWB purpose in life scale were statistically significantly higher than student scores. Self-Acceptance A one-way ANCOVA was conducted under the sa me conditions outlined above except that the PWB Self-Acceptance s cale was used as the dependent variable. A homogeneity of slopes test was conducted. Results indicated the regression slopes of the two groups did not differ significantly, F (1, 472) = .01, MSE = 69.50, p = .91. Again, the ANCOVA was not significant, F (1, 473) = 2.68, MSE = 69.36, p = .10. Mean scores on the PWB Self-Acceptance scale did not differ between clergy and students. 55

PAGE 56

Hypothesis 3 Hypothesis 3 stated that Sense of coherence mediates th e relationship between spiritual maturity and psychological well-being. In order to test this hypothesis, as series of regression models were developed in which sense of cohe rence was entered as the mediating variable between God awareness and instability and the six dimensions of Psychological well-being. All betas were reduced when sense of coherence wa s included in the model, although not all were reduced to zero. Also, the overall indirect effect of sense of coherence wa s significant with both God awareness and instability and all six domai ns of psychological wellbeing as indicated by the finding that the 99% confidence interval in each case did not include zero. Table 4.4 displays the standardized betas for the non-mediated model, the mediated model as well as the upper and lower bounds of the confidence inte rvals resulting from the bootstra pping procedure described in chapter three. Table 4-1. Means and Standard De viations for Clergy and Students Clergy Students M SD M SD SOC Total 65.70 11.75 55.75 11.78 Spirituality Assessment Inventory Awareness 3.87 .76 2.76 1.18 Realistic Acceptance 2.44 1.45 1.71 1.41 Grandiosity 1.83 .47 1.79 .65 Instability 1.44 .45 1.89 .70 Disappointment 1.90 .80 1.92 .91 Impression Management 2.77 .83 2.29 .93 Stress in General Pressure 9.43 4.00 6.10 4.53 Threat 5.55 4.62 5.00 4.47 Scale of Psychological Well-being Autonomy 41.02 6.70 38.01 7.24 Environmental Mastery 40.95 7.80 37.33 7.57 Personal Growth 46.75 6.01 41.96 7.26 Positive Relations w/ Others 43.34 7.41 41.79 8.63 Purpose in Life 44.74 7.13 41.14 7.91 Self-acceptance 44.09 7.45 39.79 9.29 56

PAGE 57

Table 4-2. Measures of internal consistency (C ronbachs alpha) for Independent and Dependent Variables for total sample, Clergy and Students Total Clergy Students Measure Number of Items N N Life Orientation Questionnaire 13 .88 218 .86 170 .85 Spirituality Assessment Inventory Instability 9 .78 257 .72 221 .77 Disappointment 7 .90 257 .89 221 .90 Grandiosity 7 .65 257 .58 221 .73 Awareness 19 .97 257 .94 221 .98 Realistic Acceptance 7 .84 257 .81 221 .86 Impression Management 5 .76 257 .72 221 .78 Stress in General: Pressure 7 .82 254 .76 213 .82 Stress in General: Threat 8 .81 251 .80 211 .82 Scale of Psychological Well-being Autonomy 9 .74 248 .72 218 .73 Environmental Mastery 9 .78 243 .78 210 .76 Personal Growth 9 .73 251 .70 211 .68 Positive Relations 9 .79 244 .76 211 .81 Purpose in Life 9 .78 241 .75 213 .78 Self-acceptance 9 .85 249 .82 210 .85 57

PAGE 58

Table 4-3. Standardized Beta weights for Psychological Well-being Regression Equations SOC Total SAI Awareness SAI Realistic Acceptance SAI Grandiosity SAI Instability SAI Disappointment SAI Impression Management SIG Pressure SIG Threat Aggregate Autonomy .18 .30 -.18 Environmental Mastery .44 -.16 -.25 Personal Growth .22 .37 -.23 Positive Relations .34 .22 -.13 .12 Purpose in Life .31 .25 -.13 .14 -.17 Selfacceptance .37 .20 -.19 -.14 Clergy Autonomy .19 .25 -.18 Environmental Mastery .38 -.17 -.22 Personal Growth .16 ..38 -.18 Positive Relations .27 .36 -.18 Purpose in Life .28 .39 -.17 .17 -.13 Selfacceptance .29 .20 -.24 -.18 58

PAGE 59

59 Table 4-3., continued Students Autonomy .35 Environmental Mastery .47 -.17 .19 -.29 Personal Growth .19 .43 -.24 -.23 Positive Relations .41 .27 -.23 .18 .16 -.15 Purpose in Life .33 .26 .16 -.17 Selfacceptance .41 .39 -.19 -.20 .14 Note. Only those standardized beta weights with p<.05 are presented.

PAGE 60

Table 4-4. Standardized Betas for the non-mediat ed and mediated regression models and upper and lower bounds of confidence intervals Awareness of God (SOC in model) Lower Limit 99% CI Upper Limit 99% CI Autonomy .25 .14 .39 1.09 Environmental Mastery .27 .05 1.10 2.22 Personal Growth .37 .25 .40 1.06 Positive Relations .26 .10 .71 1.60 Purpose in Life .38 .21 .74 1.59 Self-acceptance .32 .12 1.00 2.01 Instability Autonomy -.27 -.15 -.2.33 -.77 Environmental Mastery -.39 -.15 -4.16 -2.02 Personal Growth -.34 -.21 -2.24 -.83 Positive Relations -.26 -.07 -3.34 -1.49 Purpose in Life -.33 -.13 -3.50 -1.56 Self-acceptance -.40 -.20 -4.05 -1.87 60

PAGE 61

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION General Discussion The purpose of this project has been to examine the relationship between sense of coherence, spirituality, and psychological well-being among United Me thodist Clergy. This study also addressed the dearth of research on the factors that contribute to the well-being of professional clergy. Results of the study partiall y supported the hypothesis that spirituality as measured by God awareness and Realistic Acceptance of ones relationship with God, and sense of coherence contribute to the six dimensions of Psychological Well-being. That clergy fare better than a non-clergy group on the dimensions of psychologi cal well-being, hypothesis 2, was largely not supported. Sense of coherence wa s found to mediate the relationship between spirituality and psychological well-being. Hypothesis 1 With regard to hypothesis 1, results were largely supported. As expected, sense of coherence contributed to each domain of psychological well-being among clergy with the exception of Personal Growth. This exception is somewhat counterintuitive when one considers the significant definitional overla p. For instance, Ryff describes high scorers in purpose in life as able to maintain a sense of personal integrity, have a unifying philosophy of life, and a sense of purposefulness. For Antonovsky, personal integrity is impossible without a sense of coherence. A unifying philosophy of life is, for Antonovsky, that which gives life meani ng. It is possible to read Ryffs purposefulness and Antonovskys meani ngfulness component of coherence as nearly synonymous. Despite these theoretical considerati ons, the data did not support the conclusion that sense of coherence contribu tes to the Personal Growth of clergy (or students). Interestingly, when the total sample is considered, both cler gy and students together, sense of coherence does 61

PAGE 62

make a small contribution to Personal Growth. Further research is needed to clarify the relationship between sense of coherence and th e psychological well-being domain of Personal Growth. Likewise, awareness of God contributed to each domain of ps ychological well-being except environmental mastery. This finding held true for clergy, stude nts and both groups considered together. In this case, however, th ere are no strong theoretic al connections between ones sense of the presence of G od and ones ability to arrange ones environment in a desirable manner. In other words, a simple awareness of G ods presence does not nece ssarily lead directly to the skill set needed to order ones surroundings. While awareness of God and sense of coherence contributed positively to clergy psychological well-being, Realistic Acceptance, or having a stable, broad view of how one relates to God, did not have a similarly saluta ry effect. Realistic A cceptance, contrary to hypothesis 1, did not contribute to a single dimension of psychol ogical well-being. That Realistic Acceptance did not contribute to psychological we ll-being of either clergy or students is unexpected given the theoretical impor t given to the construct. If it is true that individuals relate to God through the same psychological mechanisms by which they relate to other individuals, one may intuitively expect Realistic Acceptance to contribute to the Psychological Well-being dimension of positive relations with others. On e might also expect Realistic Acceptance to contribute to Self Acceptance, if one allows th e Sullivanian notion that the self is made up of reflected appraisals (Sullivan, 1953 ). This finding calls into que stion the interpersonal foundation upon which Hall and Edwards (1996) interperso nal theory of relati ng to God is based. Before concluding that Hall and Edwards interpersonal theory of spiritual maturity is of no value, however, one must consider the via negativa While the results did not support the 62

PAGE 63

notion that relational stability pos itively influence ones relating to God, there was evidence to suggest that relational instability does have a deleterious influence on psychological well-being. The SAI qualitative relational di mension of instability detrac ted from every dimension of psychological well-being for clergy. The quality of ones relationship with God does influence psychological well-being, but the most important qualitative contributio n may be the negative influence instability exerts. Said differentl y, if one wavers between idealizing God and castigating God, psychological we ll-being may be impaired. Hypothesis 2 Hypothesis 2 predicted that clergy would fa re better psychologically than non-clergy. Clergy scores were significantly higher than their non-clergy/stude nt counterparts on two of the six scales of Psychological well-being: Pers onal Growth and purpose in life. Clergy and nonclergy scores on the other four scales did not di ffer significantly. So, wh ile clergy did not score uniformly higher across all domains of Psychological well-being, if there were mean differences between clergy and non-clergy, clergy scored significantly higher than students. That clergy score high than students on purpose in life is intuitive on two counts. First, Ryff (1989a) defines high scorers on this domai n as having successfully navigated the middle adult years and having been able to successfully maintain an inne r sense of integrity, having the ability to live in the present moment, having a unifying philos ophy of life, and a sense of directedness, balance, and integration (p. 43). The first quality listed, to have successfully navigated the middle adult years, alone disqualifi es the traditional college student from scoring high on this domain. Second, given that age was controlled for in the analysis, the developmental aspect of this domain remained important. On the one hand, one would expect that clergy members who have committed themselves to a particular worldview, philosophy of life, and who have been trained in the transm ission of that worldview woul d find meaning in their personal 63

PAGE 64

lives based on that worldview. Students, on the ot her hand, are more likely to be at a stage of exploration prior to having committed themselves to a particular set of beliefs and way of being in the world. Clergy also scored higher than non-clergy on di mensions of God awareness. This result was not surprising given that one might expect religious leader s to have developed a greater sensitivity to the presence of God. Within the Ch ristian tradition, awareness of the presence of God is requisite for leading others spiritual qu est. One of the important aspects of clerical functioning is assisting others in becoming aware of Gods activity in the world. It only makes sense that members of the clergy would have this awareness in themselves prior to attempting to leading others on a similar quest. Clergy apparently do not, however, see their wo rld as more comprehensible, manageable, or meaningful than non-clergy. This is consiste nt with Antonovskys asse rtion that a sense of coherence is not derived from a particular wo rldview. For Antonovsky, there are presumably an infinite number of ways environmental stimu li may be organized, mana ged, and given meaning. This said, however, the results of this project are not informative about the actual methods individuals use in organizing, ma naging, and making meaning. For instance, on the basis of this project, one cannot conclude whet her or not a theistic or non-theistic worldview may lead to an individuals increased sense of lifes comprehensibility, manag eability, and meaningfulness. A question for future projects might be to examine whether certain sets of beliefs, religious or not, tend to enhance ones sense of coherence. Hypothesis 3 Hypothesis 3 predicted that sense of cohere nce would mediate the relationship between spiritual maturity and Psychological well-bei ng. This hypothesis can only be supported with regard to the spiritual maturity dimensions of God awareness and instabil ity in ones relationship 64

PAGE 65

with God. In part this result st ems from the previous finding that God awareness and instability were the only two spirituality domains found to have a direct relationshi p with the domains of psychological well-being. While the beta weight s did not drop to zero, sense of coherence nevertheless significantly influenced the relationship between spirituality and psychological well-being; thus it can be said that sense of coherence partia lly mediates spirituality and psychological well-being. That sense of coherence was found to only pa rtially mediate spirit uality and well-being may be accounted for in a variety ways. First, th ere is infinite variet y in the ways one may comprehend, manage, and give meaning to their li ved experience; spirituality is only one means by which an individual may make sense of thei r world. One person may make sense of the world through economics, another politics yet another philosophy. Any of these perspectives have the potential to lead one to a meani ngful life. Perhaps, spirituality as measured here is not a strong enough predictor of psychological well-being to warrant recourse to a mediating variable. Second, measurement may also be an issue. Perhaps other measures of spirituality or psychological well-being may pr oduce stronger results. Perhaps measures of religious belief and/or behavior may be stronger predictors of both sense of coheren ce and psychological wellbeing. Perhaps there are other measures of psycho logical well-being such as Deiners (1984) Life Satisfaction Scale or Frischs Qu ality of Life Inventory (Frisch, 1992) that may yield a stronger relationship to this particular measure of spirituality. All of these issues may be addressed empirically in future research endeavors. The results of this study are consistent with previous studi es on clergy sense of coherence and well-being. As mentioned in chapter two, only one other study has examined sense of coherence among clergy. Darling, Hill, & McWe y (2004) found a large relationship between 65

PAGE 66

sense of coherence and subjective well-being. The results of this study indicated a similarly positive relationship between sense of coherence and the six measured domains of Psychological well-being. The results of this study were also consistent with fi ndings from previous studies indicating that relig ious individuals have a greater sense of meaning and purpose (Burbank, 1992; Carroll, 1993). The current study found that the clergy gr oup on average scored higher than the non-clergy group on the Psychological We ll-being domain of purpose in life. Future studies may also compare differences between clergy and lay people and religious and nonreligious populations. The results of this study were also congrue nt with previous study results of sense of coherence and mental health outcomes. Previous studies su ggested that higher sense of coherence was related to better ad justment after injury and illne ss, lower levels of depression, and reduced risk of suicidal behaviors. This study extended these findings to include the notion that sense of coherence positively influences mental health as measured by the Scale of Psychological Well-being. Implications This study has theoretical and methodologica l implications for theory regarding spirituality, sense of coherence, and psychological well-being. Th ere is no consensus on how to best measure spirituality and religiosity. Religion and spirituality have been most frequently cast in either terms of a set of beliefs or a set of behaviors. No general consensus has been reached on the best way to measure religion and spirituality. Earlier I discussed with some hesitation the literature in this area because of this very fact. There is no genera l consensus in the literature as to whether a certain belief or set of beliefs, su ch as the belief in a lo ving, beneficent god, is related to positive mental and medical outcomes or these outcomes are related to a particular 66

PAGE 67

practice or set of behaviors, such as church attendance or prayer. Research seems to support the conclusion that this is not an either/or questi on, but a both/and question. As stated previously, however, the operationa lization of spirituality in this study departs from widely adopted methods of operationalizing spirituality used in most of the prior research on the subject. So, I offer the above interpretation and discussion with the same caveat: While my results are consistent with previous studies of religious life, more research is needed to assess the util ity of an interpersonal conception of religion. Hall and Edwards theory of spirituality is an at tractive alte rnative to simple measures of religious behavior and be lief because it is grounded in both theology and psychological theory. While their instrument has sound psychometric properties, because of the relative newness of the instrument it has not been utilized in many studies. More research is needed to further evaluate its psychometric pr operties with a broader ra nge of populations. More research is also needed to assess the instruments utility as both a predictor and criterion variable. Following Hall and Edwards (2002), I see the SAI as potentially us eful for pastors, pastoral counselors and others who care for religiously oriented clients. The SAI may also be potentially useful in working with pastors in deve loping a strategy for self care. For instance, if a pastor scores high in instability, it may be help ful to that pastor to examine the shifts in relationship between idealizing and criticizing God. This pattern of relating to God may also be present in the clergy members other relationships; thus, recognition of this theme in the spiritual realm may also prove useful in improving relationships in the temporal realm. As stated previously, I am not aware of any previous resear ch linking sense of coherence and psychological well-being. Antonovsky originally proposed his theory focusing exclusively on physical health outcomes, wh ile denying its utility for psyc hological outcomes. Previous studies on the relationship between sense of cohe rence and psychological health have focused on 67

PAGE 68

the disease end of the ease/disease continuum. This study opens the door for the possibility that sense of coherence is predictive of positive psychological outcomes, not just the absence of negative (e.g. depression and anxi ety) psychological outcomes. In short, a major contribution of this study to the sense of coherenc e literature is that sense of c oherence is an important predictor of positive mental health outcomes (i.e. psychological well-being). This study also has implications for the study of psychological well-bein g. First, I chose to look at psychological well-being at the individual domain level rather than at the global level. The reasoning behind this deci sion was based on practical u tility. In practice, knowing an individuals overall psychologica l well-being score is a potentia lly useful index, but lacks the precision necessary to make appr opriate interventions in the therapeutic setting. However, knowing the relative and absolute values of an i ndividuals scores on each of the six domains of Psychological Well-being allows the therapist to ma ke more precise interventions aimed at selfacceptance or skills development, for instance. A second theoretical implication for Psychologi cal well-being is Ryffs interpretation of the word eudaimonia. E.R. Dodds in his book The Greeks and the Irrational points out that characters in Greek mythology were sometimes said to be possessed by external forces or spirits, or daimon. However, these forces did not always prompt an individual to act in his best interest. Dodd points out that a person possessed by such a spirit often suffered from mental instability, acted in ways inconsistent who they knew themselves to be, and used poor judgment. These characteristics do not sound like a person who w ould score high on the Scale of Psychological Well-being. The distinction between the psycholog ical constructs of s ubjective well-being and psychological well-being is an important one, but one that may go beyond its supposedly Greek 68

PAGE 69

lexical origins. Nevertheless, perhaps a more caref ul reading of the Greek texts can enlighten our understanding of these psychological constructs. Limitations There are, of course a number of limitations to this study. The st udy is self-report and limited by all the vagaries self-report measures. There was also a self-selection bias in the sampling method. Perhaps the most glaring drawback to the study with regard to the sample is the differences inherent between a group of clergy and a group of underg raduate students. The study did not measure particular religious belief s of the two groups, which may effect how the two groups responded. The religious affiliation of the students was not assessed. Ethnicity, gender, age, and historical di fferences are also potentially confounding variables that need further assessment. Also, it is important to note th at the results of this study do not indicate that sense of coherence causes psychological well-being. It could be that causal ity lies in the other direction or that another variable causes each of these two. Likewise, the results of this study do not rule out the possibility that spirituality is related to Psychological well-being. With a different subset of these populations, or perhaps another measur e of spirituality or religion, different results may be found. Another potential limitation is reactivity among the participants. A number of potential respondent s/participants emailed the inve stigators with concerns ranging from suspicion of motives to ope rationalization of constructs. It is impossible to determine the number of potential respondents who shared these concerns and, therefore, did not respond to requests for participation. It is almost equally as difficult to determine how reactive participants were to the study. Some indication of participan t reactivity may be inferred, however, from the SAI impression management scale. The impression management scale did not load on any of the regression equations predicting psychological well -being and mean scores did not differ between 69

PAGE 70

clergy and non-clergy samples. This pattern of results tends to i ndicate a rather low level of reactivity. Future Directions This project opens the vista to several potential areas of furt her investigation. First, there are several avenues for potentially fruitful i nvestigation related to clergy well-being. If one considers psychological well-being as a dependent variable, what are the variables that are the strongest predictors of psychological well-being, especially th ose variables that are most amenable to psychotherapeutic intervention? Considering psychologi cal well-being as an independent variable, what are the salutary effects of psychological well-being on the clergy members personal and professional lives? Another area of investigation th at may be of some import is the question of the malleability of sense of coherence. Antonovsky is a social de terminist in that he assumed that the cultural forces in which a person finds him or herself embedded exert such a strong influence on the individual that an increase in sense of coherence after entering adulthood is impossible. To my knowledge, there have been no controlled outcome studies directly addressing this assumption. One difficulty in designing such an experiment is th at the extant research has not identified those factors that contribute to sense of coherence that are open to ma nipulation in an experimental setting. In addition to the prac tical considerations developing a strong enough intervention to move sense of coherence, there are potential ethical dilemmas inhe rent in the design of such an experiment. For instance, lets assume that ther e is an infinite array of paths to understanding, managing, and giving meaning to ones life experi ence, designing an intervention for individuals with disparate worldviews may be next to impossible from an ethical standpoint. For instance, theists and atheists, two broad and mutually excl usive categories, will very likely give different meanings to their lifes experien ces, while scoring similarly on sense of coherence. Nevertheless, 70

PAGE 71

it is conceivable that the Life Orientation Questionnaire could be included in an assessment battery as a part of a therapeutic outcome study. Despite the lack of predictive power in this study of the Realistic Acceptance domain of the Spiritual Assessment Inventory, we are hesita nt to disregard the po tential utility of the instrument or the construct. As stated above, th e instrument does have a cceptable psychometric properties. It has a strong f oundation in theology and psycholog ical theory. The idea that spirituality contributes to well-being is a ppealing, but questions do remain, such as What spirituality? Whose spirituality? How will spirituality be measured? In sum, the major findings of this study are that spirituality may make a small contribution to psychological well-being, though being mediat ed through sense of coherence. Sense of coherence makes a large contribution to psyc hological well-being. Fi nally, members of the clergy do seem to fare better than non-clergy on some, but not all, domains of Psychological Well-being. 71

PAGE 72

LIST OF REFERENCES Allport, G.W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Andrews, F.M. & Withey, S.B. (1976) Social indicators of well-being: Americas perception of life quality. New York: Plenum. Antonovsky, A. (1979). Health, stress, and coping. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Antonovsky, A. (1987). Unraveling the mystery of health: How people manage stress and stay well. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Antonovsky, A. (1998). The sense of coherence: An historical and future perspective. In H.I McCubbin, E.A. Thompson, A.I. Thompson, & J.E. Fromer (Eds.), Stress, coping, and health in families: Sense of coherence and resiliency (pp. 3-20). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Antonovsky, A. (1993). The structure and proper ties of the sense of coherence scale. Social science and medicine, 36, 725-733. Baron, R.M. & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-m ediator variable dis tinction in social psychological research: Con ceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51, 1173-1182. Bell, R, Wechsler, H, & Johnston, L.D. (1997). Correlates of college student marijuana use: Results of a U.S. national survey. Addiction, 92 571-581. Belsley, D.A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R.E. (1980) Regression diagnostics: id entifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Bradburn, N.M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine. Brokaw, B.F. & Edwards, K.J. (1994). The relations hip of God image to level of object relations development. Journal of psychology and theology, 22, 352-371. Bufford, R.K., Paloutzian, R.F., & Ellison, C.W. (1991). Norms for the spiritual well-being scale. Journal of psychology and theology, 19 56-70. Buhler, C. (1935). The curve of life as studied in biographies. Journal of applied psychology, 19, 405-409. Burbank, P.M. (1992). An explorator y study: assessing the meaning of life in older adult clients. Journal of gerontological nursing, 18 19-28. Carroll, S. (1993). Spirituality and pur pose in life in alcoholism recovery. Journal of studies on alcohol, 54, 297-301. Carson, V., Soeken, K.L., Shanty, J., Shanty, J ., & Terry, L. (1990). Hope and spiritual wellbeing: essentials fo r living with AIDS. Perspectives in psychiatric care, 25 28-34. 72

PAGE 73

Carter, J.D. & Barnhurst, L.F. (1986) Maturity, intimacy, and spirituality. Paper presented at Midwest Christian Associat ion for Psychological Studies (CAPS), August 8-10. Chimich, W.T. & Nekolaichuk, C.L. (2004). Explor ing the links between depression, integrity, and hope in the elderly. Canadian journal of psychiatry 49, 428-433. Darling, C.A., Hill, E.W., & McWey, L.M. (2004). Understanding stress and quality of life for clergy and clergy spouses. Stress and health, 20, 261-277. Deiner, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological bulletin, 93 542-575. Diener, E., Emmons, R.A., Larsen, R.J., & Griffi n, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of personality assessment 49 71. Deiner, E., Lucas, R.E., & Oishi, S. (2002). Subj ective well-being: the sc ience of happiness and life satisfaction. In Handbook of positive psychology (C.R. Snyder & S.J. Lopez, Eds.), pp. 63-73. Deiner, E. & Suh, E. (1998). Age and subjectiv e well-being: an inte rnational analysis. Annual review of gerontology and geriatrics, 17 304-324. Edwards, M.J. & Holden, R.R. (2001). Coping, m eaning of life, and suicidal manifestations: examining gender differences. Journal of clinical psychology, 59, 1133-1150. Ellison, C.W. (1983). Spiritual well-being: conceptualization and measurement. Journal of psychology and theology, 11 330-340. Erikson, E. (1959). Identity and the lifecycle. Psychological issues, 1 18-164. Erikson, M.J. (1985). Christian theology Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. Fairbairn, W.R.D. (1952). An object relations theory of personality New York: BasicBooks Frazier, P.A., Tix,, A.P., & Barron, K.E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effect in counseling psychology research. Journal of counseling psychology 51, 115-134. Frisch, M. B.; Cornell, J. & Villanueva, M. (199 2). Clinical validation of the Quality of Life Inventory: A measure of lif e satisfaction for use in treatment planning and outcome assessment. Psychological assessment, 4, 92-101. George, L.K. & Landerman, R. (1984). Health and subjective well-being: a replicated secondary data analysis. International journal of aging and human development, 19 133-156. Gorsuch, R.L. & McPherson, S.E. (1989). Intrin sic/extrinsic measurem ent: I/E-revised and single-item scales. Journal for the scientific study of religion, 28 348-354. Green, S.B. (1991) How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis? Multivariate behavioral research, 26, 449-510. 73

PAGE 74

Guntrip, H. (1971). Psychoanalytic theory, therapy, and the self. New York: BasicBooks. Hall, T.W. & Brokaw, B.F. (1995). The relationshi p of spiritual maturity to object relations development and God image. Pastoral psychology, 43, 373-391. Hall, T.W. & Edwards, K.J. (1996). The initial de velopment and factor analysis of the spiritual assessment inventory. Journal of psychology and theology, 24 233-246. Hall, T.W. & Edwards, K.J. (2002). The spiritual assessment inventory: a theistic model and measure for assessing spiritual development. Journal for the scientific study of religion, 42 341-357. Herth, K. (1989). The relationship between level of hope and level of coping response and other variables in patients with cancer. Oncology nursing forum, 16, 67-79. Hill, P.C. & Hood, R.W. (1999). (Eds) Measures of religiosity Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press. Hood, R.W., Spilka, B., Hunsburger, B., Gorsuch, R. (1996). The Psychology of religion: An empirical approach (2nd Ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Jahoda, M. (1958). Current concepts in positive mental health. New York: Basic Books. Jung, C.G. (1933). Modern man in search of a soul (W.S. Dell & C.F. Baynes, Trans.). New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World. Kenny, D.A., Kashy, D.A. & bolger, N. (1998). Da ta analysis in social psychology. In D.T. Gilbert & S.T. Fiske (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 233-265. New York: McGraw Hill. Khavari, K.A. & Harmon, T.M. (1982). The relationship between degree of professed religious belief and use of drugs. International journal of addictions, 17, 847-857. Koenig, H.G., George, L.K., Cohen, H.J., Hays, J.C., Blazer, D.G., & Larson, D.B.(1998). The relationship between religious activities and blood pressure in older adults International journal of psychiatry in medicine, 28,189-213. Koenig, H.G., McCullough, M.E., Larson, D.B. (2001). Handbook of religion and health. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Linley, P.A., Joseph, S., Loumidis, K. (2005). Tr auma work, sense of coherence, and positive and negative changes in therapists. Psychotherapy & psychosomatics, 74 185-188. Lustig, D.C. (2005). The adjustment process for indi viduals with spinal cord injury: the effect of perceived premorbid sense of coherence. Rehabilitation counseling bulletin, 48 146-156. McCullough, M.E., Hoyt, W.T. Larson, D.B. Koen ig, H.G. & Thoresen, C.E. (2000). Religious involvement and mortality: a meta-analytic review. Health psychology, 19 211-222. 74

PAGE 75

Moberg, D.O. Subjective measures of spiritual well-being. Review of religious research, 25, 351364. Motzer, S.A., Hertig, V., Jarrett, M. (2003). Sens e of coherence and quality of life in women with and without irritable bowel syndrome. Nursing research, 52 329-337. Neugarten, B.L. (1968). The awareness of middle age. In B.L. Neugarten (Ed.), Middle age and aging (pp.93-98). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Neugarten, B.L. (1973). Personality change in la te life: a developmental perspective. In C. Eisdorfer & M.P. Lawton (Eds.), The psychology of adul t development and aging (pp. 311335). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Oxman, T.E. Freeman, D.H. & Manheimer, E.D. (1995) Lack of social part icipation or religious strength and comfort as risk factors for death after cardiac surgery in the elderly. Psychosomatic medicine, 57 5-15. Pargament, K.I. (1999). The psychology of religion and spirit uality? Yes and no. International journal of psychology of religion, 9 3-16. Pargament, K.I. & Mahoney, A. (2002). Spirituality: discovering and conserving the sacred. In C.R. Snyder & S.J. Lopez (Ed.), Handbook of positive psychology Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pavot, W. & Deiner, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological assessment, 5, 164-172. Petri, E. K. & Brook, R. (1992). Sense of cohe rence, self-esteem, depression, and hopelessness as correlates of reattempting suicide. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 31 293-300. Rholes, W.S. & Simpson, J.A. (2004). Attachment theory: Basic concepts and contemporary questions. In W.S. Rholes & J.A. Simpson (Eds.), Adult attachment: Theory, research, and clinical implications (pp. 3-14). New York: Guilford Press. Rogers, C.R. (1961).On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Ryff, C.D. (1989a). Beyond Ponce de Leon and life satisfaction: new dire ctions in quest of successful ageing. International journal of behavioral development, 12 35-55. Ryff, C.D. (1989b). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology, 57 1069-1081. Ryff, C.D. & Keyes, C.L. M. (1995). The st ructure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of personality and social psychology, 69 719-727. Saucy, R.L. (1993). Theology and human nature In J.P. Moreland & D. Ciocci (Eds.). Christian perspectives on being human (pp.17-52). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. 75

PAGE 76

Seligman, M. & Chikczentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: and introduction. American psychologist, 55, 5-14. Selye, H. (1956). The stress of life. New York: McGraw-Hill. Selye, H. (1976). Stress in health and disease. Woburn, MA: Butterworth. Sethi, S., & Seligman, M.E.P. (1994). The hope of fundamentalists. Psychological science, 5, 58. Shackelford, J.F. (1978). A comparison of psychological and theological concepts of dependency. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Rosemead School of Psychology, Bioloa University, La Mira nda, California. Shedler, J., Mayman, M. & Manis, M (1993). The illusion of mental health. American psychologist, 48, 1117-1131. Strawbridge, W.J., Cohen, R.D. Shema, S.J. & Kaplan, G.A. (1997). Frequent attendance at religious services and mortality over 28 years. American journal of public health, 87 957961. Sullivan, H.S. (1953). Conceptions of modern psychiatry New York: W.W. Norton. Sussman, D. (2002, March). Who Go es to Church? Older Southern Women Do; Many Catholic Men Dont. Retreived October 16, 2005 from http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=90372&page=1 Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Tisdale, T.C., Brokaw, B.F., Edwards, K.J. & Key, T.L. (1993). Impact of psychotherapy treatment on level of object relations development, God image, and self-esteem A presentation at the American Psychological Convention, Toronto Canada. Wettergren, L., Bjorkhom, M., Axdorph, U. (2004). De terminants of health-re lated quality of life in long-term survivors of Hodgkins lymphoma. Quality of life research: An international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care & rehabilitation, 13, 1369-1379. Wilson, W. (1967). Correlates of avowed happiness. Psychological bulletin, 67 294-306. Wulff, D. (1998). Psychology of religion: classic and contemporary (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley. 76

PAGE 77

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Wade Arnold earned his Bach elor of Liberal Arts ( philosophy, psychology, and communication) at Mississippi State University in 1992. In 1994, Wade earned a Master of Science degree in counselor ed ucation specializing in colleg e student development. After working in Housing and Residence Life at Mississippi State Univ ersity and Ball State University, he served as minister of youth and education at First United Methodist Church in Los Alamos, New Mexico. Wade went on to earn the Master of Divi nity degree, graduating magna cum laude, from the George W. Truett Theologi cal Seminary at Baylor University in 2000. Wade plans on completing his doctoral degree from the University of Florida in August 2007. 77


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20101112_AAAACK INGEST_TIME 2010-11-12T13:56:26Z PACKAGE UFE0019401_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 7206 DFID F20101112_AABMGD ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH arnold_r_Page_30thm.jpg GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
4518cde68821fff8fa5661926d2e5adf
SHA-1
1741c2d574704ed8b5984137e6b1280fcc890ac2
25271604 F20101112_AABLPL arnold_r_Page_77.tif
85e5317851c24e7e2483c1c6653dded6
522e5916b02e87bf4791de3380a2afa501781005
45618 F20101112_AABLZG arnold_r_Page_54.pro
e588eb906cddee566fc8eb1958ecf989
ebb2fc819a3f01fc042eac7a9f542237aca6e6ff
1444 F20101112_AABMBG arnold_r_Page_45.txt
53db5be77f1b0c4417c8dc64bd129beb
c4b0c0d4b450c0a308f0ea2964aa81034c7b58d6
1051944 F20101112_AABLUJ arnold_r_Page_36.jp2
62b14d5d19d6d2aa9b400f5976d80893
7e01caed6ade08bc25aee3830153e38de75e605f
7434 F20101112_AABMGE arnold_r_Page_20thm.jpg
0a8fb8ef7ba71073b476cb904e5b0ac6
a12f84e8fbb8a01433fa43b86165361329a56e87
1051969 F20101112_AABLPM arnold_r_Page_65.jp2
5f2c3653f3690280cd73c10426347e83
4c49f5656a8b10e5206e1aeed745133fec146412
43859 F20101112_AABLZH arnold_r_Page_55.pro
ac5851a0c714b5a31f2cd4bdb5ed36ea
b75efeec037d08743f4db5e114978c09cce28e95
850 F20101112_AABMBH arnold_r_Page_46.txt
2503db21bd195ff438e14a5888f6bbd9
83cc2e5ae4070537ffaa2711fffe51510b544709
1010016 F20101112_AABLUK arnold_r_Page_37.jp2
71d3043ea693526fe60467c8a2bc5f60
4fc8261998f5c88b01f2ddfa0d232040a54a7916
6666 F20101112_AABMGF arnold_r_Page_76thm.jpg
24995151fd287b8ea948a3eb1c90d4b1
86350e7891a0b4a535702c4f61e02843c819c1f8
50578 F20101112_AABLPN arnold_r_Page_76.pro
f908811ddaa72c97bc75ffec70c25f46
8b9c74e15f8e2b106033a9aeb3cda1ff1ce05b1a
44970 F20101112_AABLZI arnold_r_Page_56.pro
648dfcacf2e653fbede16e45173cec76
9e093327171c83769cf199ad8cea2cd4decb0c5c
2142 F20101112_AABMBI arnold_r_Page_47.txt
a22472e04d728253f2f47c0e47ee7d28
79254841244272251ee39d441d9f347d423e8d40
1051981 F20101112_AABLUL arnold_r_Page_38.jp2
3f7792385c1dd65565afb7ac9f586ac8
953d9d9c19ce1e3ea651122c402b8940e1e76516
26762 F20101112_AABMGG arnold_r_Page_70.QC.jpg
39b0acbd9f793b6d2191cb3434ad28f9
b767d5be19a46c73fa015b3a4834e53bc73bd594
87670 F20101112_AABLPO arnold_r_Page_35.jpg
95b25009c4313776b53e43e340d77481
2d5f9d4fded87ab790dff3b19e37ab764719169d
23271 F20101112_AABLZJ arnold_r_Page_57.pro
618225e6b6e14505d6d78cdc00814562
418173bb5528db645489436894f9983ef2cb2cff
2159 F20101112_AABMBJ arnold_r_Page_48.txt
95792a420eed8df91daf405bc4186832
4585499888b0c2fb92dbf1927fb81ff798a607e0
1051906 F20101112_AABLUM arnold_r_Page_39.jp2
738fe58f343d9e4e3e7d8c85b3196c00
05ee663031dd8fc39f7cc27ae0a7feb3c8950d2e
7167 F20101112_AABMGH arnold_r_Page_16thm.jpg
cfdef1b57a41db4e3c2b74b1d1d3e51d
012e193fbedd2721c3cc40a86d4fae3f7031df82
410473 F20101112_AABLPP arnold_r_Page_60.jp2
cb0ced215e117b9dc50fda6e974e7bac
784d90ddc206a0ed47eef8849eac723b420b9d8d
16601 F20101112_AABLZK arnold_r_Page_58.pro
86ab9a0914accf9cf9525f08b1a723bc
8e8bd6fb8128400b772e2c25d212c78080d49ddc
2104 F20101112_AABMBK arnold_r_Page_49.txt
9378ffa1d21d84dd32b708a20982b702
2731902e00b793bee1f700e4141bca7540491ef1
1051963 F20101112_AABLUN arnold_r_Page_40.jp2
75a1b4d2d5adb22461101d0a8f3373d4
60fe719c66c4a0f7ff27710b7c316771545a42be
6530 F20101112_AABMGI arnold_r_Page_56thm.jpg
bebad73063bdf8dcef5e99586da3504e
7984ccd54a82fecd67b887db284a298f5805427c
1051955 F20101112_AABLPQ arnold_r_Page_63.jp2
e059750674a84bafa7721e43e456b45a
22be13071a93ade9c818f909d59b9d073602d32c
8490 F20101112_AABLZL arnold_r_Page_59.pro
c6a77630605b927f8e66171955056b42
9e6b7fa83b0a689d55cd8dab4ba0eca74b42aeb7
1980 F20101112_AABMBL arnold_r_Page_50.txt
9d4466ac3b9a85472cac89b35385e6a4
b9a58dacfbd9db11941169e5df891d00b94f72df
1051957 F20101112_AABLUO arnold_r_Page_41.jp2
5ad6741b6f3564ed0ad76294a668695b
1804e1e17f7b874f0eb1e5fcae1e9e129c60da4d
6400 F20101112_AABMGJ arnold_r_Page_08thm.jpg
a42d9e2d7b6ff4bf93fa99294fd993ac
28edefdbc3c213ee1ad022d99b2d0717e76e2d43
7336 F20101112_AABLPR arnold_r_Page_29thm.jpg
7675666ddf6c727feb399d09ad43440c
c72bcb53894107f097e45afc6a915f26e8b289a3
17437 F20101112_AABLZM arnold_r_Page_60.pro
a6996cfa9191bfa7e9cac002160996d9
353a2ec0c2737aa422030cd0bfa68ab686dc64c4
1791 F20101112_AABMBM arnold_r_Page_51.txt
d84bf22cc80ef3c32b9f71a8ced14d67
3abca603e210d42be89b2a99eeb97c09f25155d0
26738 F20101112_AABMGK arnold_r_Page_09.QC.jpg
109bb7f088b7b66ed911e37f9d89fb02
9a8569da79ca5b357f5e40855163b954e1a5434d
53535 F20101112_AABLPS arnold_r_Page_26.pro
e6b4a4a9ead6d1b6fc1028b923573a76
71828f4cd08dbb54584d2f38dcef66070b2b60a0
50084 F20101112_AABLZN arnold_r_Page_61.pro
2ab358583a63ac2f115187fe795c9778
404bf220bf2ee5cf334c1b15df0e29ac0ea89b25
1763 F20101112_AABMBN arnold_r_Page_52.txt
977ab68d18da0c476c14c9c64e545974
05a470e73a29b1f93099fba151878b61878dd001
1051949 F20101112_AABLUP arnold_r_Page_43.jp2
1c69834b5fc888c3d399f592253ea484
b4d5e69bac6470c11d0bf56814bd75b2b5be7446
26594 F20101112_AABMGL arnold_r_Page_43.QC.jpg
f1a9dd8136e143243a9be5d8d8dc188d
c296c6ed5616db337880a7d5248ac43da14588d2
53311 F20101112_AABLZO arnold_r_Page_62.pro
c3234d343e7af74990a77cf588a031ce
a79006ecf466aa7d299c6d4abc8db49bd6fcb4f7
1853 F20101112_AABMBO arnold_r_Page_53.txt
b91318a02701cc8d6f810c0d21e4dd4c
b321997286108febf6ccfa4544c420e77a57da78
1051940 F20101112_AABLUQ arnold_r_Page_47.jp2
3ec9b9b3286525993be662395c02adb4
885233d08bdcc5a36c8ba4639e72d034d2cbf453
55827 F20101112_AABLPT arnold_r_Page_34.pro
20623419842bdc16cf4e93f9dc0c6221
b25d8c1acc1521df6fb809c93986d1260ab40b2f
6244 F20101112_AABMGM arnold_r_Page_53thm.jpg
8e6956eb0207918e206e8242415ceaaa
21dd3bbd38229d4315f232258ba1fddb57ca6a70
56885 F20101112_AABLZP arnold_r_Page_63.pro
2b149445b4b3c9e1be68bb029ae66602
5ce834baf8c0a6571d250f1400c0bbc6b0c09b9e
1745 F20101112_AABMBP arnold_r_Page_55.txt
2d665c1bc674bd66e25e571f7f888543
8cb56321c3037fe7e1bc4d9f503a15d5d8619075
1051942 F20101112_AABLUR arnold_r_Page_48.jp2
71986f4bc57b690bad66313800c93bf7
ceb47d486106041711fca81eab2525dfc877dbf2
1051974 F20101112_AABLPU arnold_r_Page_50.jp2
6449ef72f6a86ac2254acc29c13442c8
2d8d34afb3cf0c0243b8ab83ae4d1da330ce806d
7217 F20101112_AABMGN arnold_r_Page_68thm.jpg
348ceff9be78623c304b990534c4ee7c
b8b20e68e1d736d16dc31e5b97c27b845d33f69a
51780 F20101112_AABLZQ arnold_r_Page_66.pro
6f24819b25a856ea7cd40114dedfb1d4
8ebfb099ac1090da00d0da2a136109ec43313303
1925 F20101112_AABMBQ arnold_r_Page_56.txt
1c7e0e369f68884a130dcb6587da99a7
4b6590e39b1fc9ec0e3892a516064dbbb038985f
962569 F20101112_AABLUS arnold_r_Page_51.jp2
18df1c6589c4edb282ce7f9cca17dea9
815f7c938c7314210937c41c094a19df60d25b4f
82700 F20101112_AABLPV arnold_r_Page_33.jpg
376c9535fd8534fcfcaa43f305dfad76
c851b11d18c39b4bdbb4c232304b1508be1e7a6a
11100 F20101112_AABMGO arnold_r_Page_07.QC.jpg
d115d218d9da41a0770cfe1bf6405801
e15072601ec8ed0e1efa3de43a7eae8173df8d94
58193 F20101112_AABLZR arnold_r_Page_67.pro
1dc53d33d0e65bf459dcffaa25b4bb95
0cf345c24de7c7531532f9e1dbcccddbf4f87498
1046 F20101112_AABMBR arnold_r_Page_57.txt
ab9d233852f3c7833643157fa981757b
63619801dbd0814547bc866e04131f68b7634bb9
910684 F20101112_AABLUT arnold_r_Page_52.jp2
67072647e001999f7f7f3c2ce5c3eb9d
f9d8d00b2c3681d9a705d88be61e8e253b6d0eaf
52485 F20101112_AABLPW arnold_r_Page_10.pro
ec0f8ea84cdcfb9633ad23b45d0bd535
b0fd0d61cbb8565884f7627d0453aa2a1c261d25
5477 F20101112_AABMGP arnold_r_Page_59.QC.jpg
d68408cd75725144f8759aa3757cb64a
256ebbdac3bfdbf22a2dd83b012700646001ad8d
55036 F20101112_AABLZS arnold_r_Page_69.pro
460bcb909a48cc5404d3483170d3d6fc
b2946572ec9752331f9a7d31b544bcbf630ddd65
930 F20101112_AABMBS arnold_r_Page_58.txt
102055c9c8fc8984376c73bb34177b00
a1c7339071cce6cf8a7e7db2d4c5ebbdd8b9e611
1033758 F20101112_AABLUU arnold_r_Page_54.jp2
358a19c0d795a25d29dcbc7377c22940
84a662188c00e3c81606cb53b9f98b08655393dd
2284 F20101112_AABLPX arnold_r_Page_67.txt
0c7e2b31ae14b3174718f61f48872b6d
0e5d6936b5fe33f2137eb93df5d1fec18658ab67
116923 F20101112_AABMGQ UFE0019401_00001.xml FULL
fee70a2f09ae4f34901914aa824a57e3
08dbf516490c9548044c22e15c8576a9028e9720
55408 F20101112_AABLZT arnold_r_Page_70.pro
087f39ae72070cde8803461cbca09110
21e46221a6300304ca042fcc8857797c8b4f8cd2
400 F20101112_AABMBT arnold_r_Page_59.txt
05dfb3eb8135fa0fa44f6bbe86f0c18d
e8e1e94c171966661f922df16906bcd093cd3d37
994149 F20101112_AABLUV arnold_r_Page_55.jp2
dc300abf64e44adbe417a8af2a4d3ae6
115d4883268f77e98c577c0863cb295e1e0a64f4
F20101112_AABLNA arnold_r_Page_68.tif
a258cdf92d088f89763273c552e524f0
cc6cb7e53b2bb963b3ff5ef1a52b7a15d4525839
F20101112_AABLPY arnold_r_Page_33.tif
39d4d909f6c127ad13b18156bb0e40c5
0576116cd11ff80ca84622251c69c120a005d391
3148 F20101112_AABMGR arnold_r_Page_02.QC.jpg
7b6631350da392f97b2a1989d4c8844e
41526655f9528c0eea97aa2844c1b39fe730f33f
839 F20101112_AABMBU arnold_r_Page_60.txt
4e4a33503f26dc0856d8a212ed1ad758
20e45f6f5605031b162632b22db2fd1b57529d8b
1027269 F20101112_AABLUW arnold_r_Page_56.jp2
76606b2c1df12ccffbb10947d3e9ea80
328a73864fb50dbbf4416da305ea774e177ff37d
F20101112_AABLNB arnold_r_Page_75.jp2
47bc3c6f6a682857366d2347b4d1f20c
19f7e7b7fde879feaffc1413af9a279cd7e8d019
2110 F20101112_AABLPZ arnold_r_Page_26.txt
217ec7c734f763d3731cbfbc56f6c29e
32598da914c077148a2c4d0d9e21d09bf2960117
2960 F20101112_AABMGS arnold_r_Page_03.QC.jpg
d21f555949bb0b64af8f38f06bbb83b6
baf87f28ac40818f2379bf8a843c0d00fa18f843
62106 F20101112_AABLZU arnold_r_Page_72.pro
cacfe96df52972abf80487c1a6396bcc
23ece39a44554babc80d4fc76ab69c89658a0ce5
2080 F20101112_AABMBV arnold_r_Page_61.txt
f948c4b0c6957ae5cb7571a99ce1ccd4
78d166c72798d39858ed1d49aea087f2ced39f9c
537691 F20101112_AABLUX arnold_r_Page_57.jp2
d8e0820f41bd29ae973c7c4e83b4cc45
5834a9a69e5da739f7bf04e85687caf108c35317
8825 F20101112_AABLNC arnold_r_Page_58.QC.jpg
0d731cb851ea7b5e287530da616d3667
1d7c6ba4bc0cd9c185d1abbc32bda67f9f6d7743
12037 F20101112_AABMGT arnold_r_Page_04.QC.jpg
803a03f26b9cc2ab0d0af342abce4dd1
fd68a327db67318ce392be03f7e62a6fda63c191
65674 F20101112_AABLZV arnold_r_Page_73.pro
e5cb2cc5c26d9eca98ca19e9da044634
6ade16c3483cb47801f6ca18583553c8927d3896
2101 F20101112_AABMBW arnold_r_Page_62.txt
4e1ede4a6748e222a1b2b34f055431d9
68b2fc97197adc06b8b80bb214d3e548d8aedd6e
87044 F20101112_AABLSA arnold_r_Page_39.jpg
59420d492a623036baf12f87808ef3ec
e92071ec27bd684ccc160f60596d569f3f6be2da
427812 F20101112_AABLUY arnold_r_Page_58.jp2
53baf1549ac3c000b6d6d1f30e034469
a1efa56cb879dfb2be487b478c5d04238749f260
2139 F20101112_AABLND arnold_r_Page_41.txt
eca6acfedd5ad2ad6a646524c7b8df72
e6b25fa6a2f6dbae63d928a93c4e7bb228b337ac
5363 F20101112_AABMGU arnold_r_Page_05thm.jpg
b2499dc69673885f59ca964fc0db545b
d672c29970f75872d0cddd2da0bdedfb34a4b552
66541 F20101112_AABLZW arnold_r_Page_74.pro
623087b111ccb1e91c9c64496574834a
ee391a24279960c8f90c8eb6b1f883256f04ad97
2229 F20101112_AABMBX arnold_r_Page_63.txt
0838c4e8a8bf9851f7d251f8c0bb7c31
ba4efc8c8f89132fd8c4e4f4022ec61d94b56dab
85788 F20101112_AABLSB arnold_r_Page_40.jpg
16dbf56644daf4e49858580394c7285f
75b9050c669efdd716bf91b8360c21839b8a905b
203941 F20101112_AABLUZ arnold_r_Page_59.jp2
647725eefa26e00a0a471a34a7d13aaa
27a38e37c663580d253e2d12f251035454fe590f
7426 F20101112_AABLNE arnold_r_Page_22thm.jpg
5475f1331904edca3fa0299f23baa45c
3e0ea95a04c307436487063475c863df4e0a8a8d
7090 F20101112_AABMGV arnold_r_Page_10thm.jpg
a88e810b7935b92086dc1d2db37b59cf
5c26d97f50abd4bbf29d27b8914bd673cf10c17d
65896 F20101112_AABLZX arnold_r_Page_75.pro
51f1785668df047baec93ff82e36eb30
c9067ff823f54fcabe5b7f1eb4b4e4adf8380a6a
2095 F20101112_AABMBY arnold_r_Page_64.txt
3b6dac2056eb1d9f8d302e587c85bd4e
ed584419a067a215be4ce9cf77c39e66e712b67a
85233 F20101112_AABLSC arnold_r_Page_41.jpg
d52718d871edad262b5181d6cba18ea4
ba33e436566334d95e3b1c6b03598be3ec627f2a
82 F20101112_AABLNF arnold_r_Page_02.txt
13f5e79989a7eb764d4eccec8c6491a6
5709f1d67e34a7a32a0de4643b2cdaf1cddc8331
26742 F20101112_AABMGW arnold_r_Page_11.QC.jpg
68243199d46558a5980c47f4b388e6c7
c1aa4756bae7ceda7746798fe583cd5d6cc9b32d
19252 F20101112_AABLZY arnold_r_Page_77.pro
922cf784174af04ffc27ee1d8ac0daa9
52515a9275a5df9b5dd2980b9dacf64b73237d73
2114 F20101112_AABMBZ arnold_r_Page_65.txt
905e2dc38e093ed28415789cf0aad32e
daafe7b8da139690582ec19f5b371fe02814f33a
81140 F20101112_AABLSD arnold_r_Page_43.jpg
4c98308d12a7a13f2b3a0e4ff7bb3dc3
822ade3a1d18cd0e956322ab7316e46062b75b50
2163 F20101112_AABLNG arnold_r_Page_19.txt
7743528fa8bcf1975eb7045140f28944
b2c04ab7a420e733f323d78adee9a7e3b4c04ac6
F20101112_AABLXA arnold_r_Page_60.tif
88ad1da75faaff4445b4bfe67b38f64e
4e7d5f4ace7dc0d29ca6363cf76f343be3beee77
27356 F20101112_AABMGX arnold_r_Page_14.QC.jpg
df4c5143df5b5ab73554d2e0e2fc6cbc
15f378e45e56d0f347bba68d78cf8ab5c1fe8871
500 F20101112_AABLZZ arnold_r_Page_01.txt
c0768b4a8c99b78164b200818bd4e84f
2f00e20788860007d97dd0369393f3f84df74785
81747 F20101112_AABLSE arnold_r_Page_44.jpg
0e7b92bddc1d7edd43e1253a232f43d5
6ebb08982fe599b196b3ba68b2c6dbfc764cfda7
7603 F20101112_AABLNH arnold_r_Page_75thm.jpg
5e4d98e29e179b4f8dddf4930875b9f6
d31d02217ef8aac1add1134f65616e74cadc4b02
F20101112_AABLXB arnold_r_Page_61.tif
063f7b80e3bccb23d610d93aedcf7bd9
604b7695797fc8bc184e4850c1200438f2bd6cbc
7273 F20101112_AABMGY arnold_r_Page_14thm.jpg
d6f9443da4f7bf1da8844c37acb1cbd2
05c58f86a84db0c6a56965302a85e8a38cb4e35d
40659 F20101112_AABLSF arnold_r_Page_46.jpg
5b3bd2fdee61d0c8a3cfed20af41b400
e97c35ed96416cb09483baf0c814647a14c6cf02
F20101112_AABLXC arnold_r_Page_62.tif
846318ad2616b814655f2e566be7ccdf
8a9331e3d8c1f959ed8bce12338778ebf89a00ff
26643 F20101112_AABMGZ arnold_r_Page_23.QC.jpg
8f10199cf7d5947c6291f8898ed15226
6201d7e78a8e77d6bd6d5c0ba54d61746dde96fd
3895 F20101112_AABMEA arnold_r_Page_57thm.jpg
f7a3a64cf126ca4b813fbe00b8731500
f8c2b55c206a09962814b2c849e2f791c84b96fd
81846 F20101112_AABLSG arnold_r_Page_47.jpg
ae2db63dd79aef23a459a33d7de9c3a2
bc6dba10125899bfc1a4d640c9bfb0b484fe2895
F20101112_AABLNI arnold_r_Page_48.tif
59ecac223cb3c3a6e23c92b804747f11
33c4da9bfac218462a9b10eb5805ec023be989c0
F20101112_AABLXD arnold_r_Page_63.tif
7bf085c20a67a2c429b77429cb2f1d6f
d3ad850043a8d2e225003335c4a47b35ddbb91c8
25610 F20101112_AABMEB arnold_r_Page_28.QC.jpg
a0acde352ed4c8b452e1a39ccae1c236
5fd8c4eb77fc4cc42c08d0fca416d6a929eb0cfe
86363 F20101112_AABLSH arnold_r_Page_48.jpg
15afde2dce87d6be5a8d48729d2e1410
cbab78d3396d34309038f8e6829e401eaaf4fb6c
7099 F20101112_AABLNJ arnold_r_Page_23thm.jpg
48aaab70745fdba9e394e8fd7e11509e
3287cbffb107b03b92ea7e1da11bc854b43f2ed0
F20101112_AABLXE arnold_r_Page_64.tif
11eadf6005e97824b6f0d95ca4b7e908
c7fb110547b90e2d9890a9d6c8ec764c83e142d6
7222 F20101112_AABMEC arnold_r_Page_15thm.jpg
555308d3c5c6087a7c7d9dbd53ab92b6
9bf23e448ffa8184e0a797ca193b043b2829eb29
83568 F20101112_AABLSI arnold_r_Page_49.jpg
2766e88dafdd1c9db4082d5477839caf
b4052daaca9f07f952a6698d7556279b672f4b7e
1051939 F20101112_AABLNK arnold_r_Page_49.jp2
201964a61d75d7c2a8c856d139789f62
c82a7dfdbc1cfd0c484a4bb95b9d33d21aa30483
F20101112_AABLXF arnold_r_Page_65.tif
47ad36c8b439aa943210037650ce73e6
7b99040a47c57dad2bed2c233e8d6ebcefe8864f
7213 F20101112_AABMED arnold_r_Page_25thm.jpg
88cac0581cbe8f3ddbbcd7af19fab513
3a60a5fe96eca789d65f805978cbeb97fd9f48b3
76783 F20101112_AABLSJ arnold_r_Page_50.jpg
7f2f051eb5aa8048e5d32bc84eb8eb1d
fb7abf514fb5a817ecca5c62071be202a10e293b
6918 F20101112_AABLNL arnold_r_Page_61thm.jpg
8d77daa58a43e0a32d7c50a4e31e17e3
7b9d735a852f88914f7e32948a8fe92e158fb30c
F20101112_AABLXG arnold_r_Page_66.tif
6f0d23bd0620ac90d2abdac5fafcc231
1b132a1e7fa6f900c4cbb8253446f884f8b9f69a
26790 F20101112_AABMEE arnold_r_Page_65.QC.jpg
d5b368dfef48eac0ceba05be6d2ec52b
a89fb8d8fec8138e41e6f75598eef14eca534f6a
70315 F20101112_AABLSK arnold_r_Page_51.jpg
adb7c805529b055647d3bafa660d41ee
03ca51fbf6bdc18a7a41862896ac4f96cb852b30
65251 F20101112_AABLNM arnold_r_Page_52.jpg
d4af83939ca6830a11ebb3f3a1513303
5240acea6c6df9f4b881e66eddc06c4876f2e143
F20101112_AABLXH arnold_r_Page_67.tif
f7a199b18335db404c659c9e9d7ab677
eccc22750199cd44c3eedcdcb7d206fb1c502d80
18392 F20101112_AABMEF arnold_r_Page_45.QC.jpg
e8dc5872a37c2d2a7c45ea3a48bbbc97
653aeaf00e82515a3dd6eef17b1165fd918cdd0c
73234 F20101112_AABLSL arnold_r_Page_54.jpg
4e2a7f8fee7d0dd13ddcdfa402eb1644
c06bdc711e1db15a9716273171c592fa1b8a6032
53912 F20101112_AABLNN arnold_r_Page_17.pro
ae6583e265edd61d382f9856264acede
88dcf95823644b8ccf4abb7d66e2ed91b41a2fea
F20101112_AABLXI arnold_r_Page_69.tif
69427969890efcf45862c3ae4f2a4436
5506fe17dd270e8bd56dd9e820135196e7ca8a79
3584 F20101112_AABMEG arnold_r_Page_77thm.jpg
4b04ebbc4f6c2d403546f1606b278817
22485c844d3ce7ded6b18206063199acce0bdbf3
71951 F20101112_AABLSM arnold_r_Page_55.jpg
3a155948aa74215a274021f1be28e8d6
29d12e6e0f8a9b0bf355778722e2e4b00d5dade1
5315 F20101112_AABLNO arnold_r_Page_45thm.jpg
262caf003d0ddfcf5a426123456582ac
2f81e0d410275a1858fbc47d8b65b2543e897d1f
F20101112_AABLXJ arnold_r_Page_70.tif
cf76a8c1034dc06dd8b5650a401ec58e
c73340e667a317bb730fc4eb5a710cd40c727232
26390 F20101112_AABMEH arnold_r_Page_15.QC.jpg
e0dfd393f2c8ecf113a9ded0c66521d6
561441dac30fc6e76880d2a0cead03eace664476
7782 F20101112_AABLNP arnold_r_Page_01.QC.jpg
e2f58e0ae5987b660dd94fff268400a5
0242457fec63623eabfa1d3171a2c5c00d7c7918
F20101112_AABLXK arnold_r_Page_71.tif
04bc8a7d2cd89bde1d57c635bd07a017
3b28becaed8b8e6c7a699aaca3f9fa7e8b0436ff
27825 F20101112_AABMEI arnold_r_Page_29.QC.jpg
01cf4c4ec8012a70736af755790d8782
1192914fca1f52feaa3612ccf07f2c918e5df812
74726 F20101112_AABLSN arnold_r_Page_56.jpg
258c9b38896ea04db00ba551da9468a1
12eb5c04e8128f7eede4366c6ad8bfdb3bcdafd9
7569 F20101112_AABLNQ arnold_r_Page_13thm.jpg
a64f3ae6203545035e743a6e2d0a1244
a143fb8f97e029ca24781430c4d4a4280341478d
F20101112_AABLXL arnold_r_Page_72.tif
69b6e8def61501460c2c5f638cd44bb6
4b1e4e7d77fc977c395ae26e02d8491c4d75ae29
21295 F20101112_AABMEJ arnold_r_Page_52.QC.jpg
0756b5bd0be0d3f0e37e62da3068abf4
2d3445a8cdc413a332cf419c8a373e65382ff871
43967 F20101112_AABLSO arnold_r_Page_57.jpg
7b5f464d0019fc222ee290ce12a3fe73
1905e6b8a41af9454d74b44d77c91f6d177e4135
F20101112_AABLNR arnold_r_Page_08.tif
295c0b0bfc4041ebcb3d16afd0a3d7a5
45693fada1aaeb4b7500067930ebb7537121875f
F20101112_AABLXM arnold_r_Page_73.tif
65dab07fd967a062ac256886da0875bd
17674ab16ac55ae1c7af9c895a9466d49b637cd4
6909 F20101112_AABMEK arnold_r_Page_24thm.jpg
a1bdef6a75a382f1321ce27d6cf6aefe
23e99c6a22b043def4edac3565f088a86153ada5
960372 F20101112_AABLNS arnold_r_Page_53.jp2
694b3e219c9b209f20bf500df9689268
1dec11db795dc13d22f7a4a508c22d1a5e1b387a
F20101112_AABLXN arnold_r_Page_74.tif
7a77da7a49f315b144fc77f3638d3703
08ccb8694a086a3e13fb8e8f783060cded31a680
25880 F20101112_AABLSP arnold_r_Page_58.jpg
d7b31bd04dfdc004b7de921039f796db
78db2733f7e8ec5d29e7f65f9979de2bdf9a5489
26760 F20101112_AABMEL arnold_r_Page_62.QC.jpg
5c8f66e7d40345435d56550a6f5e7d53
2718b534eb3c38943b97f2086bedffa775cea1dd
F20101112_AABLNT arnold_r_Page_21.tif
6ae5f760609e19fdbfb52fc98a8e3d90
9d6f1f1c8e89cfb3a62370483b7cfe9773a10d9b
F20101112_AABLXO arnold_r_Page_75.tif
65fb482470b7de3acff2ca5cb59f0e1c
6ebc666a596e9c9abd9e4324c909d49094246a71
15264 F20101112_AABLSQ arnold_r_Page_59.jpg
886b4cd6a4c9d4de3933386f332f685e
6b3f6cbd39aa5f39b9431fb1fcdde5455633c3ee
26992 F20101112_AABMEM arnold_r_Page_19.QC.jpg
e5d1249ec97389502fa70320e597662a
b2cd2ed95e7e32a3eb1c580cee2df0db60961e53
492726 F20101112_AABLNU arnold_r_Page_46.jp2
fafef52d60b97577b8a7981a8b98a4b7
75d0ec1920ea3605aab1a8c6c0a69cacc4e64410
F20101112_AABLXP arnold_r_Page_76.tif
30b9b480155543ffb2657fe73442e815
c1949a6611b34935a44af4495f5a756143dfee1f
80314 F20101112_AABLSR arnold_r_Page_61.jpg
cef7d34372d28a7a84cd365b6e70caee
ab4b0bd80b96cb40fe06360d92fed4c6afb7f59f
27234 F20101112_AABMEN arnold_r_Page_17.QC.jpg
2d1ea5f841bf5092830ff66f9c88dd7a
46a96170f8f9043f1c978ef5b10641a97fae030b
F20101112_AABLNV arnold_r_Page_19.tif
2ab67d26efb24feffe90d6cf53a5d247
22fc37162a32122e63fd6618088fd7f0cdcfa6c9
8713 F20101112_AABLXQ arnold_r_Page_01.pro
98a4b2ca088f5c0c0c26f1b33c840b55
f572ecd73a2c524724a38438f0cc245bdf99b88c
84274 F20101112_AABLSS arnold_r_Page_62.jpg
9ec15004b29892214d7d04fda605174d
e095bb6c6c2d795ce5bee66da607bc463f795ad6
F20101112_AABMEO arnold_r_Page_59thm.jpg
b30bb423643b612469634f962e2ddc7f
abb43d6fe8b85a11f0ba9580a2af892ecb068fb6
84975 F20101112_AABLNW arnold_r_Page_70.jpg
c5ce00ae3525a7126f217f21ed603ee4
35fec6accf9382257a6ff04af0644d2ae6b56414
933 F20101112_AABLXR arnold_r_Page_02.pro
0804e93a956f4212e8ce4033b5b7cb29
b8b1ffd8b5a2d76d1f133da5680d31f40203e66d
88278 F20101112_AABLST arnold_r_Page_63.jpg
2388d3b5f6227bbfcf47b668856f9768
894b0c6d1a37eecd0e7d286631b640372fe9a303
24686 F20101112_AABMEP arnold_r_Page_24.QC.jpg
7b3e02f6efaf9cfd730de1f1ce617580
c39543953f2a0d5d419737b8b00ba03378aa3430
56496 F20101112_AABLNX arnold_r_Page_35.pro
fdd5349af57326fdddf4537e98d068a0
d8b2637b2d82a5768e8b7b422217eff93e23e4d6
83561 F20101112_AABLSU arnold_r_Page_64.jpg
577ccda7aab6ab1cb2006ab8e32c0d63
40436950263abdfda0450cf8d74baea612f31ac1
7154 F20101112_AABMEQ arnold_r_Page_35thm.jpg
6b2ed082c21829b9b1be2518db47f6fe
5e973bcc513dad27036bf951431902335f81bcf2
37361 F20101112_AABLNY arnold_r_Page_60.jpg
836b6166237d196e6e7a8f6e9cc0c4ab
0e49a771ef5e11728168fb7a80e671af694ac131
595 F20101112_AABLXS arnold_r_Page_03.pro
fb95cf766ccf5770cb744b8c8954c122
4042102874ec21bef17105f323fa148831d1038d
83967 F20101112_AABLSV arnold_r_Page_65.jpg
e1a12649eb58be33d1111350f0bc5428
1c7e72d28fe3035706ac19ad1985752ee2733e5f
25249 F20101112_AABMER arnold_r_Page_61.QC.jpg
83b0c3a2f2c8468672b78942eac1cd5b
d634d6e92becfbbdae6606f100fefd89d9fa5888
2044 F20101112_AABLNZ arnold_r_Page_24.txt
4414f8a881c5ebccc01f9bd695490dab
39b3ee12b138a65d586b8d7de1254c5ec6b33140
19659 F20101112_AABLXT arnold_r_Page_04.pro
ec514cd4020a07fb57974c724eee35f5
e053526d421223296cfb6cacaa84a3bf91e253b6
80484 F20101112_AABLSW arnold_r_Page_66.jpg
7434b030adc1fe74b286bec59dad65e1
386d07c819d8104787836a4ca271161d2b4faf67
7387 F20101112_AABMES arnold_r_Page_70thm.jpg
a528bf7c1bfe5a18d55f4bb27746dc2c
3faa1137fa461f6996044d803db9759a0fbd3c95
67987 F20101112_AABLXU arnold_r_Page_05.pro
89e52a8bdce282e8d7ea00a563356db0
bee172e3316428eb5423dab8e2509fc12787c9a0
88827 F20101112_AABLSX arnold_r_Page_67.jpg
3791940e1513c0ae1c05959d1d5e7780
ac637a62270c8203ace7fcee57d816bb18f3dcde
25748 F20101112_AABMET arnold_r_Page_44.QC.jpg
b9d10b2b44ce3ec9fe14fca3a73896bd
5465fa2374b451b3d39692ca86e4e40160ed0ed5
22497 F20101112_AABLXV arnold_r_Page_07.pro
99f5ee2106e5440079f0a770729b16cb
345797d31ed85fcfd959b504607f1972ce9084bd
28173 F20101112_AABLQA arnold_r_Page_32.QC.jpg
0cb71e373cf54367d02aafeb83d60f0d
60c2576150e46640e06e1b9f0c2d50a26b375a43
85078 F20101112_AABLSY arnold_r_Page_68.jpg
ca14d394dd37b3bcb48a8276c0db6ec4
fb1c475549768d25eec3cacf8af07c0311ef0cd3
27249 F20101112_AABMEU arnold_r_Page_41.QC.jpg
903412578fe38f5b37e0fba177f06746
2e6ea409e924ade804ccecb43c477840a9381f12
45451 F20101112_AABLXW arnold_r_Page_08.pro
246b45929b89c7763d9a2a72631cb1e9
3f9d8cf0541863db76479a3afde868d4817e37b9
99014 F20101112_AABLQB arnold_r_Page_75.jpg
a4fc7fd3c6ba50ed756c6aed9b16e650
dc22e0a13f964f22c74988a5ec2e9187d89858b7
84992 F20101112_AABLSZ arnold_r_Page_69.jpg
24342f22b7dca2ec03b274a16cffd967
89d94510d9e020c535129eec062a022509c9fcf0
13210 F20101112_AABMEV arnold_r_Page_57.QC.jpg
de64ed33e99e3fd60c6e5db344f71125
c060f871ddceca878f6b44876f7650225f0060d9
52509 F20101112_AABLXX arnold_r_Page_09.pro
786044ffa4c13ffbd04518ab3c4675e5
08aacaf7a23469e0644c76d0bf4ba747f8d9fb3f
1051920 F20101112_AABLQC arnold_r_Page_29.jp2
7ce78e09be2733bc3552ad52f71f9fae
a00c0cc5a5b5330c4959c02b493e491cac99b38a
7240 F20101112_AABMEW arnold_r_Page_18thm.jpg
ce9d80290c1b6690ae9c6ff8803aa439
0705791caf24bf45dabec433e9c21c660639f1b3
1051976 F20101112_AABLVA arnold_r_Page_61.jp2
b34dc0f036bdcb2d285e145f97eba621
584a8c06c44b143a41807f0c4ce659531a0efac4
53464 F20101112_AABLXY arnold_r_Page_11.pro
5289fd3ed0e4a3d962c0d764ff711823
06bc9a0b399b2ee869da29bbfb54ffb3586d91df
1051871 F20101112_AABLQD arnold_r_Page_42.jp2
f8215edde6f7b5009cea9453dc9be243
a90094cdedef087483e5deaba6c4b081606cd681
26578 F20101112_AABMEX arnold_r_Page_26.QC.jpg
add712deeb936304b4fab49ed01d0824
93298709a3765d0bed9377fa8a09cfdcf9b7531e
F20101112_AABLVB arnold_r_Page_62.jp2
287a7c27e59a3685f5534d7eb48b66a8
0fd7b4544effdf58409c5bf5f45a8cce2cff032a
50240 F20101112_AABLXZ arnold_r_Page_12.pro
64595a37080fddd8ec3b5f7ca73edf25
030e99ca73e04ac2b949b21e32ab29e3a0981dce
F20101112_AABLQE arnold_r_Page_49.tif
25f3cfb4d1c265522a7bf7f9e90226d3
d1b41bab75bf02f44e70a802c2298a80315c64e3
25606 F20101112_AABMEY arnold_r_Page_12.QC.jpg
aca81a4a34136311836906dc4f60120e
83ebf6a7b1d2179916cd4d51c9223296c6eda515
1051985 F20101112_AABLVC arnold_r_Page_64.jp2
24a12d11fc221237c2e8476d8236898e
f9ce5ccdd2b3b4f5a5598419b37e68738918eb37
52996 F20101112_AABLQF arnold_r_Page_64.pro
e6551324d31d1ff3fb56c83e232a9f9d
555462298e33bf4249319e4343708d261e881700
30449 F20101112_AABMEZ arnold_r_Page_74.QC.jpg
640133d03e1860ccdfc9f4e51463c4d0
bf491ab8486767338d4efb91e8e25f7a8d797c1b
1051966 F20101112_AABLVD arnold_r_Page_66.jp2
8382a5d7fb739d6691b51fabdf85e81c
58da72836747a77cb9aa93fa4e6ce828a1d201f5
26754 F20101112_AABLQG arnold_r_Page_16.QC.jpg
9f12bba8df88337be71fa8ac9c6f0091
466a59c108e6d4a6cbc536f55346a0b643161444
2076 F20101112_AABMCA arnold_r_Page_66.txt
bb796eb7008309da814e638e8beac1e7
456788bcc4ad771e0252430253c0d6469b83fdae
F20101112_AABMCB arnold_r_Page_68.txt
2bdf6e7381354ddac6e60c55212d2dce
30116eea22eefb98c221a7670dbc183312dfebd5
1051968 F20101112_AABLVE arnold_r_Page_67.jp2
d47f87be2ea546215126a054972c4d4a
22881520a43a6f121b36436db1425f653b396e1a
2124 F20101112_AABLQH arnold_r_Page_25.txt
cd4bf6fa412ae082f31fa54a9f420b13
055823829b5966250d1d71818892b3707cc52a1c
26642 F20101112_AABMHA arnold_r_Page_25.QC.jpg
d6275c4187419ae85dcd7e1341925c04
8910baddb0ef11f8019dd1fc2483c2ed05b79101
2196 F20101112_AABMCC arnold_r_Page_69.txt
26dd7329da2ad547e31d876867b82dc3
b7ac8a8a655229ed7f435687b70acc303f4dd5c9
1051973 F20101112_AABLVF arnold_r_Page_68.jp2
c3e3cbee419a1afac9cacc10380a01aa
c970a85e94d7cf9d058ec9559b732e60c104b313
F20101112_AABLQI arnold_r_Page_46.tif
d66ed22c500fa1ae96eef96a05c7a1e7
e105e3858fd101c0906e7a3fc502e806bc3c58cb
2210 F20101112_AABMCD arnold_r_Page_70.txt
0ebf4a8d7614d9338427cc6e47050e6b
82ce917e8545db5b503e704c036920fe59841bab
1051984 F20101112_AABLVG arnold_r_Page_69.jp2
87b589e8826c4c9833985eacee18f4a8
3feb2c97ca3212a475a4ad913ba7ab6d42029d26
7394 F20101112_AABLQJ arnold_r_Page_11thm.jpg
c2a8bee36ffbe34cdba3327170d69ee9
f151551f1162cad9ba9e4adcb16b6a6ab7ebccbe
6780 F20101112_AABMHB arnold_r_Page_28thm.jpg
22b64c6a81fedcbb5d3e3d842fc832c1
dcfe2e5b8864294ff6abae14997a6a32c96e6f38
1113 F20101112_AABMCE arnold_r_Page_71.txt
b69d8a6b54792738323701f2ef21d57f
1b507cd558cfb9a34b97a841eded35c52b79704a
F20101112_AABLVH arnold_r_Page_72.jp2
55862268336d80cf6e6d3017fd51f0e8
251d2e52d98cffa38f3a8e09cacc9a71e3c0ea09
57673 F20101112_AABLQK arnold_r_Page_14.pro
3f6401c4dcee780f805169132f1ac868
a051ff4d43b146a50a65caaf3fbc9204bcee87c3
7205 F20101112_AABMHC arnold_r_Page_40thm.jpg
73e17f559433ffaffa79317673fbf932
9dfd7130627984baea07bcfb2c8e541db4032ba1
2525 F20101112_AABMCF arnold_r_Page_72.txt
d35420cfccdad3ae30e6d6401615a96b
a2028fa82fdfd176ba4e71c490526c3fab665ccd
1051924 F20101112_AABLVI arnold_r_Page_74.jp2
c4b99a724e97270515f26dd7d9f5d0d2
bb1d37ff84df1f948b2c17ec64ece0626401fc02
26286 F20101112_AABMHD arnold_r_Page_42.QC.jpg
2a9e084f103070290b8143a3da12bd1e
58cd1749d97be92fefd9d7ebcd30e8dee1a6e1cf
2630 F20101112_AABMCG arnold_r_Page_73.txt
d9dcbe768cdd57db8a2397b2f8bd1288
c042a83fddcd72ba0e36b568629ecf9dc8b75706
F20101112_AABLVJ arnold_r_Page_76.jp2
1837f608b609ae977a776d07c7168d5e
584dc188f2d8b38d77f288793cd34581f2ef5ba2
825 F20101112_AABLQL arnold_r_Page_04.txt
7555fb56c52cd2543389553f7de17796
c00048f01459329d3dc809fea11da8ac6af251bb
6862 F20101112_AABMHE arnold_r_Page_50thm.jpg
9e744c1a1ab1c5907fd913a3afef3c10
7ebc5dae9b220cf1df95b6f3c18b2b6bc072465b
2664 F20101112_AABMCH arnold_r_Page_74.txt
7ba94098ae3227b7190d59352b213ee9
18b35eb6ceb6fd15d19fb6728959796d9d3300fe
459255 F20101112_AABLVK arnold_r_Page_77.jp2
2d9b037be5961ebaba0270a3f049162c
a9ef416088abb79adf332627275f0b19911e39f4
7183 F20101112_AABLQM arnold_r_Page_65thm.jpg
1404c6783311f714a31102c4bc9902ed
2941b1539d7b571a6c660db97126dd047b4ed730
21952 F20101112_AABMHF arnold_r_Page_51.QC.jpg
fed10aee3560601bd139b86553139af2
48af7bd5939e034aad202e4a7b79d044ccb22ce2
2651 F20101112_AABMCI arnold_r_Page_75.txt
91d7e649ba73c00f0c3685ce9e4c4ff3
3e50582476df0db2dc43d9b64c7fe61d02c82cd7
F20101112_AABLVL arnold_r_Page_01.tif
a2d6c9965d4b1822ff0030cbafba2367
18ea3cfc1d19106b262e00e89c5c76d3aa760d02
F20101112_AABLQN arnold_r_Page_41.tif
c5ead0a6ebadca92d72783d9a564241d
d78b1496ebd17f8d02643b4bd45200702188916a
6279 F20101112_AABMHG arnold_r_Page_52thm.jpg
1b0f3c016c5a1535806e92dd4a9588b4
405f87f2722015bf2e399ed913159a2518d3ec16
2055 F20101112_AABMCJ arnold_r_Page_76.txt
9ff6addba3c58dcd3ca0e53f8fef202d
9cd5fc5136b990b25ee1656bea2b97f8c7b4ac03
1051932 F20101112_AABLQO arnold_r_Page_73.jp2
73328aeab2f36e63c7124785932c74a3
83baa2845896dc75cde1ae57beb3429f6f75b1e0
F20101112_AABLVM arnold_r_Page_02.tif
5a8ae3d540227df70e8bb6b210f787db
9b69293d42e21d5e084daa363f52aff41e240f1d
6674 F20101112_AABMHH arnold_r_Page_54thm.jpg
b8ab37f3d9e2c66288d1051e21c821f3
72e848a503174eac6de3a7637f7a511445d1ca54
802 F20101112_AABMCK arnold_r_Page_77.txt
bdace7f128cd1f8e803ae1001ed669e4
6c1b48fa338f05f57694ade4576577938142cdac
2295 F20101112_AABLQP arnold_r_Page_14.txt
ffd1bdaca04b56c087ea8b50a51180b0
7b4c5bd41842be155e2f2502111f6e00df836a2f
F20101112_AABLVN arnold_r_Page_03.tif
d2cb42cf3b8ba6f5f374c97f83ff47cc
88e8cd7ff38c7f330f755f7074ebc44bf4c8ed63
7304 F20101112_AABMHI arnold_r_Page_62thm.jpg
a24a7353d214bad156621ccee58c6972
e271144c1d7c1fe3f1fe90561565b39376960f1c
282579 F20101112_AABMCL arnold_r.pdf
b8dbb23a5215b1702d8a614a987996d7
7bdfd913f9d7b36994d3c74d23090eefd246cd98
90433 F20101112_AABLQQ UFE0019401_00001.mets
7d989a80659da610a2b98af691ba8d0f
b0aeedfa8b546a705d3761ba2111086e395452bf
F20101112_AABLVO arnold_r_Page_04.tif
41c5c6509d8539fafb905496adffa37d
e2308556f03de7dd8e5ddfdd8f7c981c294e497a
7316 F20101112_AABMHJ arnold_r_Page_66thm.jpg
9c32e548a4065f779c58a07aa841ca8c
d4a2f0f690af984cb69378f28922b2a6b910bdbe
26078 F20101112_AABMCM arnold_r_Page_66.QC.jpg
e643f01797fe1d398c10055d77db9ddf
5ba0d5544d4630856248bc7e7091f39a24490f32
F20101112_AABLVP arnold_r_Page_05.tif
9eea9ef0a07c0d548dc32733d64720a7
77345d23606974a774381f705435e61dcef94d19
F20101112_AABMHK arnold_r_Page_67thm.jpg
e038fe3ddb67f6ad301059eccf5dbdcc
848b323ec24f012a3ebe0fed6edb669f8a994155
1296 F20101112_AABMCN arnold_r_Page_03thm.jpg
d418d34357cc666b956d08a7eee51419
fa65cc2a1f26495dc6521e557dca9afcb9af0726
26453 F20101112_AABMHL arnold_r_Page_68.QC.jpg
7b5c409c46c088a3673af012e967de49
4cf75886112465b67980f195bf8860d579c6ed08
7509 F20101112_AABMCO arnold_r_Page_64thm.jpg
e5d0504d0f736be1d8bfdf919b72e92a
c40f9254f00f1bff7f19652468b20fa19e075d1c
27023 F20101112_AABLQT arnold_r_Page_01.jpg
311548b3e9a13a511898e13884f99e4d
18ebd921dfcfc576e814a8070c41b9d2dc7089be
F20101112_AABLVQ arnold_r_Page_06.tif
d52dcf838f1fcd59c033626ddf4de29e
ca94ec5d1652321752ab83382734e3faf5a6c169
15250 F20101112_AABMHM arnold_r_Page_71.QC.jpg
849246972a66148b2e1352a03661defe
1dfbf78847528aa9c6c9a11fbe446a3c0e652682
26784 F20101112_AABMCP arnold_r_Page_33.QC.jpg
affd070885f3b3f1bf6d3477d205ac4f
04cbd3af04321f8dfaf55275bce9c8bbdf95ca2b
9522 F20101112_AABLQU arnold_r_Page_03.jpg
ba074fb7da878c48189f6726f6f79faf
03e375527027c5a9442e94fecb29369cfdbf5b3c
F20101112_AABLVR arnold_r_Page_07.tif
72b15cf79d7058f4aedcc626ea119078
9e1dd41fe7da6fc63f913fadc317fda8181d962e
27257 F20101112_AABMCQ arnold_r_Page_34.QC.jpg
36a571005a0899807c4ed82a56ee7910
54141b71933ae2221849d7c177b84a47d2ae22ce
38213 F20101112_AABLQV arnold_r_Page_04.jpg
4df1712af21c7beb32663eb90a9ebf39
61b17031b37fae032e416cb4f779de505a335dab
F20101112_AABLVS arnold_r_Page_09.tif
4f972d3c5b0b02dcad6521679a44563e
b85c6afdedbc51c3de2bd69e159fc221924b6815
1338 F20101112_AABMCR arnold_r_Page_02thm.jpg
4be6a210d421f45b38aa631e235de338
2a1608024c01d56300f071c4ddba7280fb21d423
80378 F20101112_AABLQW arnold_r_Page_05.jpg
bd591f9f60a9c790d04122d966cc7c90
9db798a2594fe9221959c3ea4c647990b4bd49fc
F20101112_AABLVT arnold_r_Page_10.tif
a41ec9dc810535307c34c02d9f73a39e
66c9d23bb4a639c42190f413744e39298ee3fc0b
28087 F20101112_AABMCS arnold_r_Page_63.QC.jpg
7203d6b8289ef53a04199bacf4171164
b1d7fd18dfacb25a7d97a3c3518e67e80d71f8d7
49098 F20101112_AABLQX arnold_r_Page_06.jpg
b99db093198c7feef0ddcb8ccb943c7e
d1de02eec6e11f5fae88dee39ae8b606208101c9
F20101112_AABLVU arnold_r_Page_11.tif
dc1d263eeb0b26010a5cc285e63bfec5
2d4583074685422c22f8cf27088c80670fa7884a
4301 F20101112_AABMCT arnold_r_Page_71thm.jpg
2233a07b1282124799ed60bfb097f66e
96597518f45593497ab09e1cb6071a79ba897810
77472 F20101112_AABLQY arnold_r_Page_08.jpg
7f6f3dd8d8d7b0372a2c23418176eee6
a0ca3a9bd22b65a4275e70db85c419db09fed89b
F20101112_AABLVV arnold_r_Page_12.tif
b0f4fa8ce656e673a72f6163ced768e9
d31271e1ac777f641f913297af6f7b4b5f3c084d
53597 F20101112_AABLOA arnold_r_Page_68.pro
7f2649cac97a774bab17bf0a9090fd8f
daf2f4007e3fb9839bbcf36368d2c4edf770be29
27019 F20101112_AABMCU arnold_r_Page_35.QC.jpg
7366408dbada3d52b37a7aa52879aa85
97d84201f422e066b8fdb7186106d750ae908288
85624 F20101112_AABLQZ arnold_r_Page_09.jpg
2f9ce2842683214a463e363b842bef9d
dfa069516234cb773244e8530cd3e14fa543fb8e
F20101112_AABLVW arnold_r_Page_13.tif
0bd6cc2c54dc2edb6b8e41ce4bf82eda
f8e61515e2fb4024c87177c72479b0f12aee414a
7430 F20101112_AABLOB arnold_r_Page_32thm.jpg
e23b0f9cc97eb7494ece30d895ebedf3
889b653efd8dfb0c74bd86a7d26152606b1e54bf
7468 F20101112_AABMCV arnold_r_Page_27thm.jpg
77f4c36f66fed8561a833832395c063c
cd22472c2e0b21bb664f575ed121b28bd340ba42
F20101112_AABLVX arnold_r_Page_15.tif
2bb153347f1bd821c1df89c74dad6a10
c5a63939de4ae9dce21d92b886f4c2a762490d35
1810 F20101112_AABLOC arnold_r_Page_54.txt
14a40820ae1aadb65c3056118c4ea074
06b0279033288269e777b33cca49a179bd1bbf28
23796 F20101112_AABMCW arnold_r_Page_54.QC.jpg
cd82ba140f691b61f802ec3b1d996f36
88fa5a94c16359ca430d0e1a9596dcc726c260d4
47698 F20101112_AABLTA arnold_r_Page_71.jpg
4a4b8d6259b6387055ce1d7b921ee519
068e44f2fb753b6426525ece769506ea26fe67ea
F20101112_AABLVY arnold_r_Page_16.tif
41dcf4a1ac865b501dae49ca14efa153
3899c8b70e5f304b3bc010190aa439d0e5c2c7a1
F20101112_AABLOD arnold_r_Page_17.tif
56a34c362d97b7ed3da1d38ca2e7e8cd
eb745bbf00fd6fff907dbbe8d411573b38f375e5
29647 F20101112_AABMCX arnold_r_Page_73.QC.jpg
cc55bf0e7336835d7ae7adafb1c72dce
028edefbc015264deb3e18862b0ccdf24630e525
99227 F20101112_AABLTB arnold_r_Page_72.jpg
40bd4367e8f1b035599926f651f145de
c3b5fbbcacefca7e748769c89783cadc7b0caa57
F20101112_AABLVZ arnold_r_Page_18.tif
1b10ae444a4057f0675d5ede023e406b
61cfbea691a04f54660272b155da0eb02f4aa7bc
84453 F20101112_AABLOE arnold_r_Page_16.jpg
aa5efc261c1d4649668d8cfb54067065
5d5d0694c3103116dcfd203b8265fe7447827e2a
7168 F20101112_AABMCY arnold_r_Page_49thm.jpg
f7cddc58389108e863dd879e942c8be3
7ca1a3e2b1de81bf416030bd109139202c10c09a
107567 F20101112_AABLTC arnold_r_Page_73.jpg
5dc1b6d75ee05221ffdad6de199dac74
05a790ae739acda5a733deb22b38af07f6269bb6
F20101112_AABLOF arnold_r_Page_21.jp2
98c53a12ed26bfe77f95dcb2135e989c
d363a216eda69aa58b4187326b7f30e9f74cbf77
26990 F20101112_AABMCZ arnold_r_Page_69.QC.jpg
bc66bedada6e4aec1258ea9a728d6d82
9b96ef6a15a87db1440bb7a28a880f4270470e10
54606 F20101112_AABLYA arnold_r_Page_13.pro
5777fc67e165c4f05cd753cef0303b24
93f7dedd74a024b41353f830d0cf9f00b6a01a08
73 F20101112_AABMAA arnold_r_Page_03.txt
f83aaa69435a5b149dd75819cb70583b
254d08823ac65a2466db1e083e256a89e43f9cb1
104367 F20101112_AABLTD arnold_r_Page_74.jpg
31bd5a38523073f415c35ce8eeb501c2
f7971b333a9652a7027be70e00c904672807e73d
50773 F20101112_AABLOG arnold_r_Page_47.pro
5c8d5c7f858b89fd607fa0dcc7436259
ea072a36ad0b190bdd4b3f230b953cceec9bcc9c
53326 F20101112_AABLYB arnold_r_Page_15.pro
23304413c28f52e3bc6d682fa31d15bb
a73617ac67a3c188cbdee275815c0c8ff0ec9d2f
2994 F20101112_AABMAB arnold_r_Page_05.txt
5dcd472dee32dbe35bb3340fd245c127
273574742c02a54b9d0c7a6b49a815289dc5a9a6
37789 F20101112_AABLTE arnold_r_Page_77.jpg
6a820eb83bd4c862c4a3463b6459f7c7
f638a45fd41a57e0a6dc7b8f27196e9a16cf5d82
83596 F20101112_AABLOH arnold_r_Page_42.jpg
c7e3e7793ebf2c023794bc220b357da4
7f52aa800a6473e971ca7449b9dbb06e5fd5b786
52430 F20101112_AABLYC arnold_r_Page_16.pro
bae6079b3d8eef3ab04bb83a96bf20a0
638cb14b146f8e24ec3c1166e64be451a8a10476
938 F20101112_AABMAC arnold_r_Page_07.txt
aaafa4d2e204ac4c581211f0b8d72ec1
144e735f18e79ab8799dff65b2f53bbed0e81ed1
266749 F20101112_AABLTF arnold_r_Page_01.jp2
9d20fd06c7b191ccb691d37b51416b8e
a9a41577a48327d2abf4096de860e53746cf26b5
53719 F20101112_AABLOI arnold_r_Page_65.pro
10139411595e4157bf85fda74d9dac9d
6cb7450825646b2c09d0a5f3c4287275cb7c6edd
8084 F20101112_AABMFA arnold_r_Page_74thm.jpg
e7b7bbe792d311174f0e34520f7afe47
84b1b5238a9a9a9c3ba54ee6d29183f3b2f69e48
54681 F20101112_AABLYD arnold_r_Page_18.pro
e982ffe23569e4072ce4a230475f89dd
0479a2c6b1ee6aff9338e4d9338084ea1f7fb058
1940 F20101112_AABMAD arnold_r_Page_08.txt
5e394daa1e764ca9b561a7afc5b15c99
68e143b9fcdf20533c6f4a170685142e69e90e9e
28947 F20101112_AABLTG arnold_r_Page_02.jp2
32231a642c9f0c3cacda92cb10276036
022c4f93f9072d77aa20d0f8a8e83c4145e852e2
23645 F20101112_AABMFB arnold_r_Page_08.QC.jpg
b0874bbdd61381ce58cc41a7e4b07138
fbf0bfdb3c8173e039c68749ad3e729fec5bcb56
54960 F20101112_AABLYE arnold_r_Page_19.pro
bb811930ba5671a42ecacb3f931d4f47
b179712641a20f366e2dfe89cf6ce0fdf141654a
2116 F20101112_AABMAE arnold_r_Page_09.txt
ffcae21233a4115f667ca157dc772ded
0dea716295e8e606c50fcf6360b9dfb7c8b5ecd7
17115 F20101112_AABLTH arnold_r_Page_03.jp2
b1b5cefe78a92af9db3cef3f16443772
9331a27aab87e031fea19f7f881061e817a0c5fd
1051978 F20101112_AABLOJ arnold_r_Page_70.jp2
6705b698e0f1b3b78fd9c12563185369
bba2c7301cf5736789f204fda5dae53d555bdd12
28013 F20101112_AABMFC arnold_r_Page_39.QC.jpg
e6f21ee80fc1887811df2f4ccf4d870e
c0409776d642d93a6d0fed5970fb7e807cf8f53a
55853 F20101112_AABLYF arnold_r_Page_20.pro
6962fdefcdc665febcd224f04a75b871
53b0cb5f7fd48b61a6f9fc8576b1df54af70dd5b
2069 F20101112_AABMAF arnold_r_Page_10.txt
453a4161db5131d2c402e5861de4d0f7
6c323c3cac6d41f9a672468a7ee800b21e91b4df
1051950 F20101112_AABLTI arnold_r_Page_05.jp2
fc7aee8bc8dae973c8cecac1bd51eb42
64328d9e5cea7e8652ed693013e0d4d45e709615
2470 F20101112_AABLOK arnold_r_Page_01thm.jpg
c3e5b2109ac5fb90b96f6c5c62283f93
4af433c5f1f6c42704edd20cec3813652cd339c5
23820 F20101112_AABMFD arnold_r_Page_50.QC.jpg
ae103d6b47857d0c8dc55514c4b55bef
f46c7b1fedb3c3d208ff3108b9c145a4f66f4858
56806 F20101112_AABLYG arnold_r_Page_21.pro
602c578090f375622a5b9668d82ddfdb
90d2034029b7759aead3a8eae5897cc51d9d116a
F20101112_AABMAG arnold_r_Page_11.txt
f4db02dea7327d3aed2ba80ed0be88af
f58962fbfd67a0596272f717a6cf5c88aa019265
1051983 F20101112_AABLTJ arnold_r_Page_06.jp2
805366a8c8878c7956b80596f39b03ac
e9e3fa17b93f9494a58cce5bcb4da11968f9951d
7193 F20101112_AABLOL arnold_r_Page_26thm.jpg
f9092fd9b98df1baab90b6fd79e2cdd7
1e0ed29972d5ac1a7feecc9edc89c5e5c6e8ebf8
7068 F20101112_AABMFE arnold_r_Page_47thm.jpg
a4d41fec23bacfa5a4385a00437e4510
6c4fc531634c2dbffcfb33b4353fda7581e1c299
55174 F20101112_AABLYH arnold_r_Page_22.pro
91c3557788493377ffcfc7ab51772f05
ab08d1248190cfbabdc70ff44bc06d8b87c4eb04
2088 F20101112_AABMAH arnold_r_Page_12.txt
954e592ae44b8fb9a8a8d7c15c3d71ed
bf0837542e0ed440b22b10a0ce56949653bed692
913734 F20101112_AABLTK arnold_r_Page_07.jp2
5d4ed3072b1ce2fb7a7987198f24a5fb
82fc859f82c56c91e69b07d8cb461b2ae613c0aa
49391 F20101112_AABLOM arnold_r_Page_06.pro
735d31e4f3581817e1981fb4998bb7f4
7ae93b69104db7ad931132a133bc11631d186e1d
7489 F20101112_AABMFF arnold_r_Page_72thm.jpg
fd7232a70d84720904c9f3191534d29f
47c1a3736d524043e53a0e941e9419258c53a922
2146 F20101112_AABMAI arnold_r_Page_13.txt
bddbc991679c6a4ed6b4b8adb81519ef
e0b0f74b57a7cdb48c781da2fa55f876479975d2
F20101112_AABLTL arnold_r_Page_08.jp2
975b5fb6a9197c088e03cfa5e3fdf7c5
d694f495a5ba8449096320f4dce21e6883611ae5
11587 F20101112_AABLON arnold_r_Page_46.QC.jpg
7d4b4e44b61d6d824d8cc4da2f473c5c
7a725dfaf4ee8e87166814a8362e64744ebc5471
50300 F20101112_AABLYI arnold_r_Page_24.pro
860fcf47c1f04361d538e3d97b97e60a
1a348e84c0fa2866f6021fdf2697cc221453e913
23157 F20101112_AABMFG arnold_r_Page_56.QC.jpg
b5dfbf249085e7a12405cf854f010825
8cce051d0b4c1d05107d53eef94cfdf94e8bf3fb
2100 F20101112_AABMAJ arnold_r_Page_15.txt
f12e7649a78c00921cde66da2ed3aa6e
b1027bd462f1598b46c97f2260e4a86c6a440ee6
1051917 F20101112_AABLTM arnold_r_Page_09.jp2
4ec6d6a5f6bbe1874f9cbbf6df2d2b7b
613108aab9230b0f085a2d830b2472c55a4fc4ef
52360 F20101112_AABLOO arnold_r_Page_23.pro
307a71f7ddeb9180ddd02800344a84f5
2ad06da35b2f2eab2fc4961d4f1748e96be47a82
53663 F20101112_AABLYJ arnold_r_Page_25.pro
7994448c797ba30d509c53e782732301
53d5a53946b3b7adf444a908682c8ca42cd85ef6
20762 F20101112_AABMFH arnold_r_Page_05.QC.jpg
c68129e7b1f0bff4e7f8b662a181cbe1
7355cee5d87d70739e8f4d0645377c069135a546
2062 F20101112_AABMAK arnold_r_Page_16.txt
f472402b6c50d0f4b79344988963adac
e1f22165bc9e432b92fbdf760c7c717d6e7192b9
1051934 F20101112_AABLTN arnold_r_Page_10.jp2
6e8a23b0c291c6f5edc9c5d4321646c5
f472226a4684be7178f04ee7db8ebb01ad37a5fc
2111 F20101112_AABLOP arnold_r_Page_40.txt
e15c706dd1bb29429393e1a05742e1ca
ddc6cf61bd7188186802c6133b9d075350f71e43
54914 F20101112_AABLYK arnold_r_Page_27.pro
8c86d1afbc211fa5b4384f8ed7e0435b
936f423e361a0abd91bde8f8529f767de5aff65e
7455 F20101112_AABMFI arnold_r_Page_21thm.jpg
eb49b5304961c80d134fea92c61ed65f
76b9070120a043bfaec0ba441febaf07935698b1
2125 F20101112_AABMAL arnold_r_Page_17.txt
5ed24b9b4fb72c1e5cb336dd25491435
e8b2a81c806ba79469ca38c0c317e5ae95fcd177
10263 F20101112_AABLOQ arnold_r_Page_02.jpg
118d99779687e2047970aa4e59e2eaf0
b216fbab9e4352492372fa9159eab65bea2f7024
51277 F20101112_AABLYL arnold_r_Page_28.pro
9e54804afa27058476d44541b36a5d29
b5be7063d68da74697b7630402087838dca8aa27
3361 F20101112_AABMFJ arnold_r_Page_06thm.jpg
c54bfb621331f9d5846c6b5619718510
2631854960a3885247c817fa170340678f688dd0
2149 F20101112_AABMAM arnold_r_Page_18.txt
34ac19ad9327be69345b9db07f970d1a
4017c13c5d639c9224976b6302ddcd63ef530eef
1051943 F20101112_AABLTO arnold_r_Page_12.jp2
9f2fc18ead21334e44555d2a54f20d77
0a92f2027180708c893387831268c88f9d047c9c
F20101112_AABLOR arnold_r_Page_22.tif
4600d72616900b5c2c5b62cf352c341b
6a7dccfef0c21185043169f73a6fb9582e700ccd
55580 F20101112_AABLYM arnold_r_Page_29.pro
8697b887454233f95f83545c7a49db5c
9a5e1153548b99825fe2c9399771229eccbf67ce
25986 F20101112_AABMFK arnold_r_Page_10.QC.jpg
3db919fd8f6162f06ea8917b78a984be
58823a2ded31301a36f59a56487c7bff5a316fc8
2189 F20101112_AABMAN arnold_r_Page_20.txt
d27cff9375f095766b54b1a35b8770ba
60c0df316bac7316285d931c096f6915b7e787f8
F20101112_AABLTP arnold_r_Page_13.jp2
bcf5ccdcfd15c7b4a6d40ea06fd2cd58
b15fc337c4866eae55b90ec6ac163d7f4545d999
1051977 F20101112_AABLOS arnold_r_Page_11.jp2
9e07063ae14dfd698b8ae595754944e4
cfcfb3d017c8c7653d0aa086e2c75fe92ba2d1cc
54965 F20101112_AABLYN arnold_r_Page_30.pro
bf4e3f8fcd9270d1179bd314707b5ce2
d75d68e38c6ccb096b33b228ff7c8bc7d238c63f
7345 F20101112_AABMFL arnold_r_Page_44thm.jpg
85131db39c661012e0cd3aee3e6b6179
eb8d3807484271dda4cba7176da00d98ae9735c3
2222 F20101112_AABMAO arnold_r_Page_21.txt
085336b9867aed5ec147eea08d03ee4d
e1b917c769e2917e6d7fbb2490506eea4b09534c
1051946 F20101112_AABLTQ arnold_r_Page_14.jp2
552b5b77fc7f2192abe494abbb9dc688
2dc90698134f4f92fb28d2cc8c380730d8241f25
25159 F20101112_AABLOT arnold_r_Page_76.QC.jpg
57ba7ff4c15c67258e5c9346723b2cac
3fb6c014119f6076c8bdb397f5c8cdb79e63d0ab
56792 F20101112_AABLYO arnold_r_Page_31.pro
5e3713d913e516c972551e637604137a
6a0895579f6fc3fe30d963268664e248c4499f20
7283 F20101112_AABMFM arnold_r_Page_09thm.jpg
309421723c0b8a6172c08c54d1e809f5
6beaa624141fa3cd65709d1bd4276e68b3b3fa5b
1051972 F20101112_AABLTR arnold_r_Page_15.jp2
90e02398aea22bb5e3fac372734b76da
ecc815011a7165a065d50b77a024a8ccf38f67f3
37342 F20101112_AABLOU arnold_r_Page_07.jpg
41808b8b5ed4c5f0f77d30cf18d36263
085c529e7021a6383a126403c5887b6513b7afe5
52269 F20101112_AABLYP arnold_r_Page_33.pro
616539a1eb6f435562a132919c951929
346deae2b2361e578595dbc4cc9748370890afbf
2172 F20101112_AABMAP arnold_r_Page_22.txt
fb2d84c85c1ddd1dbf7259d25ae488f8
13c3d36197829e6d51de908898d5dd0fb1b86551
7198 F20101112_AABMFN arnold_r_Page_33thm.jpg
219df54db81ff5f800e1ac7df12b6649
b082ae05cb345ae3c7ce5be7c5171c890768d19e
1051986 F20101112_AABLTS arnold_r_Page_16.jp2
1727d3f50013bdf9b1bda136fb80c367
8626616ebdca438901b84aa5a00df00a30e8582f
631059 F20101112_AABLOV arnold_r_Page_71.jp2
11088ef1f2eb01a5d5c9d31a6a373545
43df4734da8a8d22e166fb30009d4c990c19a662
55792 F20101112_AABLYQ arnold_r_Page_36.pro
71729237153df25640a9d5713d442f24
7e74b7685549d548d9dedf85b1f537de1f9e3e90
2066 F20101112_AABMAQ arnold_r_Page_23.txt
5a688d575fc5a0ce4e33d7104249adb4
a92a314cdf64ab02a3bd46145847d76c69e082b0
6476 F20101112_AABMFO arnold_r_Page_55thm.jpg
77baa779ea523882c56e7cfe6797a46d
2bbf9145a0908ffaaece1d33c6e843eb8c4095b1
F20101112_AABLTT arnold_r_Page_17.jp2
c9c2babd4c89003ab1ec31cbcf66b9da
c4e527b565a8f5b03dbb89c5612989f2e92453ec
3539 F20101112_AABLOW arnold_r_Page_04thm.jpg
2d7378f0a68526ec152d7fc05cd5cfe3
7c6219178a20b2735b2615c82add07e34a6a4df9
44778 F20101112_AABLYR arnold_r_Page_37.pro
826cf422a8efbf03122383cf880948d7
855745bb5d513b823d3585716b08ed396ad0f432
2158 F20101112_AABMAR arnold_r_Page_27.txt
84bcca4f4698a85a0b00b4fa67236e82
5398582072cbaae5513a7bc87ba0a875ceae63d8
7452 F20101112_AABMFP arnold_r_Page_34thm.jpg
e00c7abf78ef5395405c7cdca82b7f6f
81ebffd95c9714d644c36b6b6f96c08dfb14a641
F20101112_AABLTU arnold_r_Page_18.jp2
97cb97c0c67b11928cbf4d944049f830
633aa9fbbaaf43daf16ee5c215f61ab70d1c4ff4
26743 F20101112_AABLOX arnold_r_Page_64.QC.jpg
9d81b9d93260112cc498d16284188b01
9f2470ccb1a7a4f409e679eef5d51a343ab50016
52961 F20101112_AABLYS arnold_r_Page_38.pro
ea209f195cfb4451decfbd9e10bf6fe4
d9c04b7e8896403513f39844dc68a485a210f3ca
2063 F20101112_AABMAS arnold_r_Page_28.txt
f3bf4c8debb0c95c3821ae48573917e5
39f412cb7849cd93945d3e6431fa6885080cced0
11140 F20101112_AABMFQ arnold_r_Page_60.QC.jpg
1940b96f97495bae11b99e9f3d52ca49
ea3f8034493808d68697552e1323ff8dbd8d44df
1051959 F20101112_AABLTV arnold_r_Page_19.jp2
726b6b6db27653277a35d05f53e290a4
dec906375f45ebdb4d1f6117231686057a6aa8da
793695 F20101112_AABLOY arnold_r_Page_45.jp2
97ba03ef7b024db8f3b7fafd9ba604ee
df3fad966c706433ca12c8472cf978c7d29c2c66
2182 F20101112_AABMAT arnold_r_Page_29.txt
58ad82e97ea038df579ddb3595ec07c2
a5a9f7f0c006e488107b70404d02510aae4cb12b
27921 F20101112_AABMFR arnold_r_Page_20.QC.jpg
d29d6820f2adf0985c30cc9ff691dc4b
25ba666354311f1aab2f0f4da640ea90db944911
1051936 F20101112_AABLTW arnold_r_Page_20.jp2
3cca8d3a1290066ce6926ad89cddae06
8ab6f68c8845db91f0b5fe367f7318adfa7e85e2
F20101112_AABLOZ arnold_r_Page_14.tif
e79bc0f630db5bcb0aee91ba73aa55f3
e2efd1376f7a07783373dd357964e59807601bd1
55603 F20101112_AABLYT arnold_r_Page_39.pro
0456d171bea2128f56c63f483624b529
c81f7c1195861f364712afe2a9a4b8c1c67a9ba0
2162 F20101112_AABMAU arnold_r_Page_30.txt
cf7f61a0145f5d868c923b559d9d8e9f
c5b9a75f6ecb830980a86fc9901f00a0efbff908
7268 F20101112_AABMFS arnold_r_Page_19thm.jpg
6b45c272f672f05cd1eb502a9acd61e3
f2f0d60007f0be1c3daaa95f16bac402f19e3d92
1051905 F20101112_AABLTX arnold_r_Page_22.jp2
a91a4552df5e16ab6c60a692d0d1c169
4450a65f4166a118534d3f72137856fafa9ca3ff
53592 F20101112_AABLYU arnold_r_Page_40.pro
67a8c680c4d1784ec61ac9c73711a132
e8488b8b6f18997a4d13da5a7821f42b6165aee0
F20101112_AABMAV arnold_r_Page_31.txt
77be53ac430b65ac2dc0329eeda748ed
ef9eb9150edea23a88294e87cc172f693c80737d
3098 F20101112_AABMFT arnold_r_Page_07thm.jpg
5a11f27fed13d76fbc92575b1030e6a5
b376d65c0a3b40bf360e98671ddca82dc4ca42db
F20101112_AABLTY arnold_r_Page_23.jp2
98e33236811b654e5682c2eba0b924cf
d8bbd034908ec53a1bd55c13b818b60fb2a28e7f
54531 F20101112_AABLYV arnold_r_Page_41.pro
172b4c7f988cc4c7a6dae92c80086c23
349e22880fb0af7b86b105c91eaea536c8c7b910
2188 F20101112_AABMAW arnold_r_Page_32.txt
49f5f3e811082a8862f71d4f6fa0769a
7e0af93c8e560d58bb35ac56d1093454667e3a71
83488 F20101112_AABLRA arnold_r_Page_10.jpg
e4afc54699cfcefdbef46a8a9e7a24d6
3cee61ba10ef7ebc916edddaa177f1895136138c
7355 F20101112_AABMFU arnold_r_Page_41thm.jpg
78ed2a7a55965597c8289bdfc767ec7a
caf26e2587bbc0a9350ff3ab941d9b296296450b
F20101112_AABLTZ arnold_r_Page_25.jp2
312dca511bf5c9cbec27ce327f4d2540
28d536267822d5fd798040087ff2483df6f06f7e
52772 F20101112_AABLYW arnold_r_Page_42.pro
bc10e842561a37fc772a5eabe10d3bf3
601aabdb13f7c5298f5aab98cfaa57d48f607c4d
2071 F20101112_AABMAX arnold_r_Page_33.txt
5f243f9f8247bcbd028c2a650d573a3b
92bd4f58fdfe310c9245cdea8a84cda67f3a04d7
85095 F20101112_AABLRB arnold_r_Page_11.jpg
474d87cb9228f7208fdda3b4b5a7bd19
ed44b33fe5c1cfc326ddb7927dc404077852a755
28354 F20101112_AABMFV arnold_r_Page_31.QC.jpg
5844d8925b5387e732df5c83d3f8b883
d79b67cd19afca1fb7410d87cae58c134f5425ea
52159 F20101112_AABLYX arnold_r_Page_43.pro
17d65e898bf60029606c0a4c84d3796a
0117fb67c0631addf2c7aa4496d8fe970bae4f74
2190 F20101112_AABMAY arnold_r_Page_34.txt
9a9091c3f1d1a1f6d39bd59296cda4f9
40f6fd97c3c57dec7dcb2020f6f09f0d6b83a884
81883 F20101112_AABLRC arnold_r_Page_12.jpg
bfa8347a6cd5b34e23f50636c19561e6
c71d97f169f8d994031592c1e90a881129359c33
7199 F20101112_AABMFW arnold_r_Page_42thm.jpg
fbf54a26cb690941539826e83edf0b1d
78fc29e9d1015051791dbffe196ba83e55e381e3
F20101112_AABLWA arnold_r_Page_20.tif
072d32b232906ae244e3ff8c369b64bf
791524995b8c27ed0246699972a36703bc2f1d0c
52243 F20101112_AABLYY arnold_r_Page_44.pro
a597f79bec74d4b942cda754ea1c4b9e
40736560f6304e154d82fdc02a464db85c05a9a0
2260 F20101112_AABMAZ arnold_r_Page_35.txt
27cd02593fa81a9c1e5861d96fe603f2
35c8acece650ccfaa8db82775a12f3dd67224e58
84537 F20101112_AABLRD arnold_r_Page_13.jpg
e4004423de16184477cfb82c5e10cf50
53e00841e99b1b5dac71c16ceefff55ba8a14ab8
7579 F20101112_AABMFX arnold_r_Page_39thm.jpg
df284b4f13d443dc2c2862dad9f06623
1c94a409822a2fdf30631fc196bc2f4f1ecedd6d
F20101112_AABLWB arnold_r_Page_23.tif
a9a64f2cf25a169179fb5600174d997b
c850cc0c4347209da11902699e22ff03e3cec5ca
34095 F20101112_AABLYZ arnold_r_Page_45.pro
5cbf97affc553b653c88cf3ba9a003bb
cb69e616492d9612e078cdcf2b30c51e474de295
90097 F20101112_AABLRE arnold_r_Page_14.jpg
24768143a663b46d1dea1f54617d3992
df9e9c00e0cbaa0d60b19de4bd88ac4c19aff15e
7590 F20101112_AABMFY arnold_r_Page_73thm.jpg
b6b366381339c45b60efa2dab6842448
1cdd0c5df5739967a6bd17ddafbeff6e979e71e6
F20101112_AABLWC arnold_r_Page_24.tif
5816c34c3e2cc1433e60299b80e647db
0e84e071839dfb8a44ef7bd882439824c9ca0a86
83135 F20101112_AABLRF arnold_r_Page_15.jpg
a3f1347f50fc02db7840a6a8f6f9019e
71cc11797e7ba6c7b97cf1bd12893c9a4e5413b0
27771 F20101112_AABMFZ arnold_r_Page_36.QC.jpg
3fec36608ec2f8a3dbf86bb5871aeb41
4188f6520ef0be2bf6e56769a2ecad43fa77986f
3518 F20101112_AABMDA arnold_r_Page_60thm.jpg
eaffeaf21b008e768e9809ca321f04b7
66ee7f5476ae594c2a33e1a6aa1dac27470fc05a
F20101112_AABLWD arnold_r_Page_25.tif
ae0e51e9103ef249ad325dc57580de98
117f33c45be7281fbf4e18a095db4a3658ca679f
84636 F20101112_AABLRG arnold_r_Page_17.jpg
a074426a11584207a657aa56989423dd
1c29c2ea15b6accc530b16280ee4dc8883ebf05c
28097 F20101112_AABMDB arnold_r_Page_21.QC.jpg
a9dfd3ddbb0e5e898630d28d7783e52a
13246456070f4b94fc9093598d31ce074bc5dd48
F20101112_AABLWE arnold_r_Page_26.tif
95abbf5051825b8347e83b8cd71d76c1
c352bdf708ad2ad2a061ea2efd0bbc352aaa1d5d
84648 F20101112_AABLRH arnold_r_Page_18.jpg
2291734fc27cccb991e165bafebbaebe
3e64a5091995e09d35b4c4ae5bdbdb44d62c4906
28842 F20101112_AABMDC arnold_r_Page_75.QC.jpg
f6b051b59c618f97cd912d536e45b9d1
133016c3dbf20ae41cbac5f41d737a023e9dbb72
F20101112_AABLWF arnold_r_Page_28.tif
9293da16f9b0e6e98a53a81e54aa74c5
67374c6eace600066f790a8a684d32a817ef9144
85563 F20101112_AABLRI arnold_r_Page_19.jpg
49df7c4bc3b1900d35ed1f9b34ea5d4d
f7c4b12fa188c2a294a3571de211f4fb7ce455c6
7251 F20101112_AABMDD arnold_r_Page_69thm.jpg
37b9731cf7d540b9fb9984b34eb43de1
f0a142ec01a1abbdd55e4c23b32145f5dfc7bb4a
F20101112_AABLWG arnold_r_Page_30.tif
82d350417185d27bb03e70d9f6be01c2
e4beb8b1167b6e6f62d455126fec2a8f1cc00dde
87954 F20101112_AABLRJ arnold_r_Page_20.jpg
8393af0efd08c00f696a55fd0c85ef60
b2a0be96e98f33fa4606b748ca6596d862216a24
7458 F20101112_AABMDE arnold_r_Page_63thm.jpg
4ec4b2d17974226e2987b3382e753e5d
de276b946f13156fe56558b264b5c274d687f828
F20101112_AABLWH arnold_r_Page_31.tif
d5a5927761dcad1be109d2811b811fbb
b6101ef9daa962ea3e85f3745e243adb9d1a48b0
88437 F20101112_AABLRK arnold_r_Page_21.jpg
490dd781a8bd4ad3f0883a283639b817
14703c1f74d8ee03b46fcd2cd14ff1c526f36f3a
3330 F20101112_AABMDF arnold_r_Page_46thm.jpg
0860d03bad54317066bdca1dce5f54a4
269878fbf17446a1a854ba0077f70ed49249d77a
F20101112_AABLWI arnold_r_Page_32.tif
fcabe97b4b2e4b70d9a4b9ea48edba93
dca849b5a0ad913bafaae3908c19f44f46a844ad
87566 F20101112_AABLRL arnold_r_Page_22.jpg
0f0feb6c6ec8128fa67f4732c68481f3
bace0ef85c117e4081f110dab935532da424ff6c
7407 F20101112_AABMDG arnold_r_Page_43thm.jpg
b752214bbd067f019cff404bfff4a2c4
1b3248e08255c248918a5f15931134c7cec96386
F20101112_AABLWJ arnold_r_Page_34.tif
5de28360a7c0de22184f978377c8fe15
2250f6ff5f136cd403b7fc88cae35185eb55b9dc
26129 F20101112_AABMDH arnold_r_Page_49.QC.jpg
f0f918bfb6868ecd92ad02b06310effb
233d31395e5264f33efdac14991142813a921426
2086 F20101112_AABLMP arnold_r_Page_42.txt
715ef1f57b9826ed0eb3e659fbcb6eeb
6b5b1bf7fc486c80f69007e59c03cbcf67b77cda
F20101112_AABLWK arnold_r_Page_36.tif
b0c5c070655495a97afa885443e4b1f8
390d1fa38265661e48cd0e4ef5b75534c9bb95c9
82692 F20101112_AABLRM arnold_r_Page_23.jpg
c9213a94764c914291221cbf4fa4eb0c
f54b0aba8f90cfbc10330f8257b9eb510231801c
6229 F20101112_AABMDI arnold_r_Page_51thm.jpg
5fc17cc01e1ffe9f4a28a85dfd61dcb4
3d7afee08c7900c4a73f6da557c78fcf321bdf34
27712 F20101112_AABLMQ arnold_r_Page_71.pro
db1751fb37acf5a62cbec9749b0e5176
f9e3a81d71c9e0143440c5181da5df938f80f7fa
F20101112_AABLWL arnold_r_Page_37.tif
3f9199b2f1a882cac30c9c5337935ffd
6ef41912957dd5f4aed20bcb2679e1887a2b9c5b
78271 F20101112_AABLRN arnold_r_Page_24.jpg
710f4c4f45601ed501aa726d76bc7cd1
ca9be9321a310e888d92551dd08d04e86e065481
7301 F20101112_AABMDJ arnold_r_Page_48thm.jpg
7c6d9a78535968d6be8dfe35dc078c33
fa8f02257410da2829e2ed1881bfae2aadc20c68
2057 F20101112_AABLMR arnold_r_Page_06.txt
193f57abfaae40d0bda801262edbb073
7ee44ff3ba891df5943fbf5a7ee77e5b6f91cc3f
F20101112_AABLWM arnold_r_Page_38.tif
b47833c211d28d7286f890000d1b1805
e38d8861045291158dca373b4b5e4471ccb9791b
83492 F20101112_AABLRO arnold_r_Page_25.jpg
d515aae637457adc1de85be915ca0138
212b3aa7175994d44446fe040d7c5a09deaec02f
22988 F20101112_AABMDK arnold_r_Page_53.QC.jpg
2d1c38403eae76cec4a7b8f2848b3e90
3ba73bcb8ce0235ca3d1c8d47be30c2c8d69cbac
23972 F20101112_AABLMS arnold_r_Page_55.QC.jpg
0f56580f88de3446becd62bdf6fdf14b
e02b0700bf2148a5a9315851744822b0a7fdbc1e
F20101112_AABLWN arnold_r_Page_39.tif
f91cb49de12b62ed85fc5e008d1183e1
30beab43c604b0aa35b8a6f3f9e7056223511169
85150 F20101112_AABLRP arnold_r_Page_26.jpg
419d3ff7e208b49440871b1f28447dc3
8a447554ba5f8ed7196b78e5f924cfe217982f1c
26837 F20101112_AABMDL arnold_r_Page_13.QC.jpg
a3a4248e71ae327a0311d957f0b351be
b885e6b6a17a3029fe50fdb7261189f3f8bec11f
85791 F20101112_AABLMT arnold_r_Page_76.jpg
042da7d6168753c1ffba1d8f1116fb84
62eeb100783984533ea78ee481d2508728043d7e
F20101112_AABLWO arnold_r_Page_40.tif
eab8047a31ae8693df7a876978166f74
0112d5bf19c029df46e8a78c847fdca8ce6af80d
86715 F20101112_AABLRQ arnold_r_Page_27.jpg
51c35492cc318fe59c8d9348f4ff2b6f
8d45b63fc628ae2758e4fffe0d7f2f9f0e5285fd
12474 F20101112_AABMDM arnold_r_Page_06.QC.jpg
9f12d84b215adec35688183e0c6f7f9e
537698b3dabd8f9ed978275498dd4540de11e69d
462915 F20101112_AABLMU arnold_r_Page_04.jp2
34ebd5f08aa7845071864d12caa7e8e3
be5e292a3185211a60e96dfdc14efa72c239f204
F20101112_AABLWP arnold_r_Page_42.tif
562a095c460ed900aafad6a4ae734560
aac08c424d03431617d988429c983bb625494ca4
81372 F20101112_AABLRR arnold_r_Page_28.jpg
261d0656bb0b8fe0928de808d8b96e3d
8323960dd745bafb50a212ac8a7a14838467fca7
28160 F20101112_AABMDN arnold_r_Page_72.QC.jpg
2707efd657888674d350dda6966f2074
e3bcca46629660134dd0d894f2a5d157b34e2204
F20101112_AABLMV arnold_r_Page_27.tif
f23327d44975b086966e9462108e2eef
a0c9607a4f69b6dd1fdec4103847168e31b54edf
F20101112_AABLWQ arnold_r_Page_43.tif
02690168143b3be9b86dba1b60568e9c
4b13ecb1b069384ac849eb92a109eff2b47c2798
87020 F20101112_AABLRS arnold_r_Page_29.jpg
5c0e304677b7baefd505ff890dbd3395
a0abd6931ecdd07a7eb29af4681f35a07be8a67c
27869 F20101112_AABMDO arnold_r_Page_30.QC.jpg
c432cbe8d5cd22ade3279d12c78a4932
62dc69f4f7f146be8239d730d6895d58ee7592e2
F20101112_AABLMW arnold_r_Page_55.tif
8f31a3406bae6fbb6596c7393973b77f
733945f541e8d3c6bf042c419e264f0f91b270fd
86164 F20101112_AABLRT arnold_r_Page_30.jpg
acb39538a7984e07f945a4393e84e841
a626f3309cadbc497196197dcb018b533d29ea12
7165 F20101112_AABMDP arnold_r_Page_17thm.jpg
24f613d85a4546a43ffee843dfc15249
0e26bb02b991a901291721479225afb525eab100
F20101112_AABLWR arnold_r_Page_44.tif
58f8d3d47924e936dfa2adfc286257de
1e109f06b3f080723970bee00fd1d27b91b7b5b7
89154 F20101112_AABLRU arnold_r_Page_31.jpg
3f2791221cea69c983ef6e45b3553c4e
9c91d0abb06d0a8c2f3a79e74910b9d182274a72
F20101112_AABLMX arnold_r_Page_44.jp2
4da693e78970a58c9db401e551172e43
354c91d4c5714fc0cc8a79006d86a6b7d0faef00
27185 F20101112_AABMDQ arnold_r_Page_27.QC.jpg
a94951a55aea22c7b6be65d348f687da
63d0480605bdd3a55d37416c75eabb29e7b3b3f2
F20101112_AABLWS arnold_r_Page_45.tif
e414330c5597c40715c2ccb9e8324aec
c2b55dcabca096d6e61bab8d56b14f59eb471f59
89027 F20101112_AABLRV arnold_r_Page_32.jpg
f86164cde2043e52ce37484a9b141743
04d9ffd7952ad514f189d16556780de4543f23d5
48792 F20101112_AABLMY arnold_r_Page_50.pro
1e4ad3add5d515e53edaf0adb0560282
6f1c96fb5432fa5f1661b7f6f0b752f916acecd3
27797 F20101112_AABMDR arnold_r_Page_22.QC.jpg
52a251b92e5bbf0300e6c89822136006
7b723bf64ae3dc56f0ebd89941d6605162f413c1
F20101112_AABLWT arnold_r_Page_47.tif
d2ca16a1716d6b1bec9320f2a35cceee
188a690e24444709c483823f47d563ba812c1ee2
87939 F20101112_AABLRW arnold_r_Page_34.jpg
498f5b48eb294aa0ca9daa2bab3e3e10
1ae6dbfaed1baf433b96f54bb7863a87b18991dd
25072 F20101112_AABLMZ arnold_r_Page_47.QC.jpg
0f11e0f9dfa7b2c395d5873b5bcd6a39
55a319a999c227d6605ff29bf7ee6318509bf6a8
6601 F20101112_AABMDS arnold_r_Page_37thm.jpg
8c81f6e36899c7e07100d93e824ba3a7
d72a9e03198105e4695f193f7c69879a73a9c125
F20101112_AABLWU arnold_r_Page_52.tif
5b57dd7ba8d14d0d50ab2504bd74b897
468f38ceb408d69aa512ec7850036b136d0c9076
87321 F20101112_AABLRX arnold_r_Page_36.jpg
91058af955c741ded294dac953789a78
74a2cce5042835c6b01471e4a616b8b99ea3e5be
2849 F20101112_AABMDT arnold_r_Page_58thm.jpg
369314c94e4811a02b6ba52a13248029
3c9cc1e0638a92867af683db69d9602d315ac0fb
F20101112_AABLWV arnold_r_Page_53.tif
3133782883734858b2da1ceeb609a67b
c753a38efbdcf90301e3fc25ddfea6b47b11b2a2
F20101112_AABLPA arnold_r_Page_29.tif
a4724b290e2b2d4de5e232fe2afeb45e
2c3901a6583e1ec6b1102fdbee248a929cc2a2aa
73105 F20101112_AABLRY arnold_r_Page_37.jpg
a5e93250b6d76c5ad44a58abe241dafc
d7e93b57d55556bce241f7a054dbbd54e1a7453f
7516 F20101112_AABMDU arnold_r_Page_36thm.jpg
4a946294d8c363e71809b9cebc92abd7
b90c4e6aa4b6ac097a8cb0de233fabd3e5d9e75b
F20101112_AABLWW arnold_r_Page_54.tif
15cfe28bfa78082a6e4dd42446c0ce6d
600baeda2800bba2f2a8b77f7ad68e9c914cc4ce
F20101112_AABLPB arnold_r_Page_50.tif
02f145dae427a17aa0cf1c78a77c4cf4
4a86515604c63b7f08906a4a76e14dbd572ccf38
84356 F20101112_AABLRZ arnold_r_Page_38.jpg
216289244a29204b7a322ec836913a68
118b7b16de9ba3bf49ba18daf2dc6659624405b6
27112 F20101112_AABMDV arnold_r_Page_48.QC.jpg
6bfa2c75219ba2e6410cba931506f411
ab5b29cf9075c38381f95e307f21fed69a9ba9c5
F20101112_AABLWX arnold_r_Page_56.tif
8e124a41f1ede4fbc4a221b305f161db
de64e6530227e5cc948ab64600d72200a9cd2138
F20101112_AABLPC arnold_r_Page_24.jp2
1d49987a0b573ac5476c9b30b301325d
a4d870f4f08055f25102e78cc66cf99c19a1239a
23153 F20101112_AABMDW arnold_r_Page_37.QC.jpg
d15e785949a7829dd7acca7ee7bcb323
49c88171da4c20780585c305731b10973ba085f8
25265604 F20101112_AABLWY arnold_r_Page_58.tif
87b67906ac1cfcf3320fc33963164a81
24db150e0d7b1ef673a24df93812331c7cf2fbed
F20101112_AABLPD arnold_r_Page_51.tif
555b846c4458b7581fb7cc66f3624f07
3bc90c4c61b39ef37a73fa0357a9c0c8647a7060
F20101112_AABLUA arnold_r_Page_26.jp2
27d06860d5a44bc70f68d05b82d8c29d
94656deb47a63fd253c3aa1d300fd2a1e03250ca
27238 F20101112_AABMDX arnold_r_Page_18.QC.jpg
90572fe81245e9904b02fb025c3431b7
c9dac60fa6353e9c444db2980431329f58f39404
F20101112_AABLWZ arnold_r_Page_59.tif
e774d3b71fdec3194f64e443030508af
51c7e8768271f499a578aa9b85f1c017c73fa37f
7172 F20101112_AABLPE arnold_r_Page_38thm.jpg
45de1a99315421a92caaa91ab852b1a3
590020ce362b1d51360b5b1daf88e4eec521d49d
F20101112_AABLUB arnold_r_Page_27.jp2
889a12b542709cd8811ad268e25eb4ca
ffc88607049b1a716dd6e9463ebc82ecc3ee9deb
26700 F20101112_AABMDY arnold_r_Page_38.QC.jpg
8dd420c358d2060a70f4da08b610871b
73496e003cc956c1b85c5796cc57af7f9f3f870a
F20101112_AABLPF arnold_r_Page_57.tif
71931f9dd736dccd852d24a381c36f1a
85f55583e706b071926166bedf7c3df0659fa76c
F20101112_AABLUC arnold_r_Page_28.jp2
980cb53361a3424fb2215570bc1419ca
304c2bef5b1d12a69355ca4c4fcccd893b411c36
7419 F20101112_AABMDZ arnold_r_Page_31thm.jpg
a6d51fa7e31556e14311d64180b5eda9
0f70512c0ac8f9b064944acc1d8ee76a87ffcff8
55698 F20101112_AABLPG arnold_r_Page_32.pro
4a9379533b72bca21f9383ef6ba8518a
ab4a2cd15dffe571b094de51a1562f0e97383730
20695 F20101112_AABLZA arnold_r_Page_46.pro
ad202720125c098dc24c8474825c772f
11207a08956a376e443454ec6954fd11a479f225
2225 F20101112_AABMBA arnold_r_Page_36.txt
f01d93686ebbde14001506a1126a93d5
272c3ca0ada338a2a19303e610b8db38edeefd6d
F20101112_AABLUD arnold_r_Page_30.jp2
79b3654bb29ee6976f9a7033ef2a3de6
84cd3e929e6f9739706525baa18d0731fec7312d
59881 F20101112_AABLPH arnold_r_Page_45.jpg
f82c447eee901bfb98b8392f19d50e35
0b1552675c7e71e013ccffed8f08109e60019c02
54966 F20101112_AABLZB arnold_r_Page_48.pro
350e2fa615d8a555ebb60c225414341a
f7b3482c0ef7eb04d4e72b8db42edb1bdd545a66
F20101112_AABMBB arnold_r_Page_37.txt
91debfdc00518a4ceb9404eac623436b
01e095cd16fc306c4c427783ea4299951add5634
1051964 F20101112_AABLUE arnold_r_Page_31.jp2
2fc6394879588d53ea7d8b13faa3c2f7
be798754652ff2d2d7630c65cecdccbebd77ea49
F20101112_AABLPI arnold_r_Page_35.tif
9bd137843b3a4abfd4f7d04c37575cf1
d7ab3bd104bb10ab2e77e9f4424f948df3985a23
53328 F20101112_AABLZC arnold_r_Page_49.pro
b95d18ad7be885ea94be378ce9c74773
7b0163731216066a18a4ec32309ad7a101811cde
2093 F20101112_AABMBC arnold_r_Page_38.txt
e21f73131823d9a7fd60fef25060b018
7ba22cc804ee240530be5a766bf1e3df94293fa9
F20101112_AABLUF arnold_r_Page_32.jp2
a47e252cf99f021e0694f903cde3ea29
ae6958e03f89867a92781fcfa79418620eb2c167
11739 F20101112_AABMGA arnold_r_Page_77.QC.jpg
702d520db9e9362229ba1b6996f5062e
2bb7fda456ecebac0b606480cbc2726e87179bfd
26795 F20101112_AABLPJ arnold_r_Page_40.QC.jpg
37830f4052cb9137eb578ad01539a144
a55edeb3361fe6b51f18e024da41e3b9a34dcf22
44427 F20101112_AABLZD arnold_r_Page_51.pro
ccb3f63dbd02688b2639011465bc04fe
f209bce11b6d739b6c907c7bfc906a43236b8715
2180 F20101112_AABMBD arnold_r_Page_39.txt
8a85d6286511e36345d35217664c2de5
496a57f30f3da8773b7a07d123ab1fed1e624ab7
1051980 F20101112_AABLUG arnold_r_Page_33.jp2
f14bcab00675b0dfa634c4f598dfacd8
480da01c4b269396908cb3e52cddb8d79af2217a
28333 F20101112_AABMGB arnold_r_Page_67.QC.jpg
6746afcea128d8db4bd79edc389a89d5
fa7962bec4a5cd168402319fc39ca976fec5ba29
43735 F20101112_AABLZE arnold_r_Page_52.pro
0c2c1226837e70f864741971db75b7c8
81d4e4d4d602f30706625743f3d65a4cefbce507
2098 F20101112_AABMBE arnold_r_Page_43.txt
c52530873b62240aa51cf414d7a69cb0
d3516e2b4974fedfad1d63dad8446782c6f84dce
1051941 F20101112_AABLUH arnold_r_Page_34.jp2
5113fa2f1f3f87e85d45ce93a28e2c8b
3ac71ce3cb25ba1d12c8589abdf0dfed08096357
7130 F20101112_AABMGC arnold_r_Page_12thm.jpg
f52a7b9dea08871a4a080956a65c9f0d
0123baf6cca8f86c86b0a896be3a01a7948e37f8
69192 F20101112_AABLPK arnold_r_Page_53.jpg
6e5718e1b159de5410f29f2a2fec086a
a321cd59bc7c490ae40804662e0ab825e52289a1
45208 F20101112_AABLZF arnold_r_Page_53.pro
2d69efa99180ae680cff18a2820e9d10
0d29935815355d9183d7c70df6f09fb8d91c8237
2106 F20101112_AABMBF arnold_r_Page_44.txt
6756a7248fbbb3c3902ea6bb8e68f327
4e71404c09a211752f533fb4f9b02cc84c50f33a
1051951 F20101112_AABLUI arnold_r_Page_35.jp2
079fa93a87e9cc54071fcafe661d4883
b7598f2ed0f4e06c80c7206ffb81669735556b65