Psychology
2012. Vol.3, No.1, 116-122
Published Online January 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/psych) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2012.31017
116
The Spirituality Questionnaire: Core Dimensions of
Spirituality
Jochen Hardt1*, Sonja Schultz1, Carola Xander2, Gerhild Becker2, Malgorzata Dragan3
1Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Clinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy,
University Medical Center, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
2Psychotherapy, Univer sit y Medical Center, University of Mai nz , Mainz, Germany
3Faculty of Psychology, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Received September 2nd, 2011; revised October 9th, 2011; accepte d November 18th, 2011
Various approaches are used to assess spirituality via questionnaires, ranging from one-dimensional scales
to highly multidimensional models. For the present investigation, a—in spirituality research unorthodox
—factor analytic method was chosen: principal axis analysis with oblique rotation. An item collection
was examinated and cross-validated via internet. The spirituality questionnaire contains four dimensions:
belief in God, search for meaning, mindfulness, and feeling of security. They present with high internal
consistencies. The factorial structure of the four dimensions was confirmed. Based on the better fit of this
method of extraction the authors assume that these dimensions may depict the concept of spirituality more
precisely than the previously used factor analytic methods, i.e. the principal component analysis (PCA)
with orthogonal rotation.
Keywords: Questionnaire Assessment; Religiousness; Spirituality; Mindfulness
Introduction
Psychological research on spirituality and religiousness was
strongly influenced by some of Allport’s early work. He dis-
tinguished between internal and external religiousness (IR vs.
ER), “the extrinsically motivated individual uses his religion,
whereas the intrinsically motivated lives his” (Allport & Ross,
1967). When the IR-ER concept was related to mental health, it
was found that internal religiousness was positively associated
with mental health, external religiousness negatively (James &
Wells, 2003). Examining more complex models of religious-
ness shows that various aspects of spirituality are generally
positively associated with mental health and well-being, i.e. any
form of belief seems to help patients (Mohr & Huguelet, 2004;
Mofidi, Devellis, et al., 2006; Mofidi, DeVellis, et al., 2007).
Studies on the influence of religiousness and spirituality on
physical health were mainly performed on cancer patients and
show that religiousness or spirituality is important for the vast
majority of patients (Balboni, Vanderwerker, et al., 2007). Gall
(2011) states that “religious and spiritual beliefs in relation to
one’s connection to a greater significance can aid in the
creation of life meaning and purpose. Spiritual beliefs help
individuals make sense of suffering”.
Lawler-Row and Elliott interpreted this in a way that reli-
giosity and spirituality provide an overarching interpretive
scheme for making sense of live. “Every person has the ‘will’
to seek meaning in life or to achieve purpose in life” (Ishida,
2011). Furthermore positive affected spiritual interaction has
strong influence on the patients quality of life, and existential
well-being is strongly related to all outcome health measures
(Lawler-Row & Elliott, 2009). Even the effectiveness of psy-
chotherapeutical treatment can depend on “the match or mis-
match between a client’s religious or spiritual (R/S) beliefs and
the type of psychotherapy.” (Worthington, Hook, et al., 2011)
For a patient who believes in religion or spirituality, a
psychologist discounting these issues as not important may not
be the right therapist. As Hall (2010) states “The psychologist’s
position on spirituality is not irrelevant to setting the tone of the
practice enviroment. From those who endorse spirituality to
those who reject it, there will be an impact in a myriad of ways”
(p. 49). In his study on Mestizo spirituality, Cervantes (2010)
comes to a similar conclusion, noting that “the interested
(therapeutic) practitioner (should) be familar with Mexican/
Mexican American populations and the related indigeneous
spiritual background” (p. 536).
Today, with the increasing secularisation in many western
countries, the authors see the focus in society moving away
from religiousness towards spirituality. In spite of an ancient
tradition connecting science, medicine and religiousness, there
is not much doubt that modern western medicine has not con-
centrated much on the religious and spiritual needs of patients
but has widely left this field to alternative medicine (Koenig,
McCullough, et al., 2001). However, there recently are some
large studies concerning the impact of spirituality and relig-
iousness on physical health. As Nicholson et al. state in an in-
ternational comparative study “There are extensive data linking
religious involvement with better health” (p. 1). Using multi-
level logistic regression models, Nicholson et al. depicted reli-
gious participation as an indicator for the individual medical
condition (Nicholson, Rose, et al., 2010). Apart form spiritual-
ity, at least a tendency is visible in medicine that for some spe-
cial patient groups it becomes realized that a mechanical model
alone does not suffice to explain the patients complaints (e.g.
chronic fatigue: Van Houdenhove & Luyten, 2011), others have
shown that the coherence of the meaning system in mind is
*Correspo n ding author.

J. HARDT ET AL.
lower in psychiatry patients than in psychotherapists (Löffler,
Knappe, et al., 2010).
Apart from Allport’s concept of the IR-ER religious orienta-
tion, a variety of questionnaires has been developed to measure
spirituality and/or religiousness (Monod, Brennan, et al, 2011).
Some consider it a one-dimensional construct (Koenig, Park-
erson, et al., 1997) while others use a multidimensional ap-
proach. Considering the widely individual character of spiritu-
ality, the authors think that a multidimensional approach is
necessary to capture the various aspects of spirituality ade-
quately. Büssing (2006), for example, identified 24 dimensions
in religiousness and spirituality. Among others, the latter com-
prises “asking for the meaning of life”, “transcendence”,
“search for insight and wisdom”, “prayer”, “trust in God”.
However, it must be stated, that there is not much congruence
between the various approaches. One possible explanation
would be in the statistical method used. The vast majority of
researchers relied on factor analysis to develop the dimensions.
In doing so, research on religiousness and spirituality has al-
most totally applied principal component analysis (PCA) with
orthogonal rotation. It has been shown that PCA is not ideal for
extraction, i.e. it overestimates the item loadings and results in
unstable models (Gorsuch, 1997). Orthogonal rotation means
that the factors are forced to be uncorrelated. With respect to
the dimensions of spirituality this assumption maybe question-
able (Heszen-Niejodek, 2003). It would be more realistic to
assume some positively correlated factors.
Hence, the aim of the present paper was to develop a multi-
dimensional questionnaire on spirituality using a different fac-
tor analytic method that maybe more suitable for a model de-
scribing spirituality, i.e. principal axis factoring with oblique
rotation. Here, the communality of each item is first estimated
by the highest correlation to any other item. The extracted fac-
tors are later rotated without any fixed angles between them so
that the assumption of independent factors is no longer neces-
sary.
For this purpose, the items of the Kwestionariusz Samoopisu
(Heszen-Niejodek, 2003) were translated from Polish into
German by a native German speaker and supplemented by
other items reflecting various aspects of spirituality. The sup-
plemented item set was then translated back into Polish by a
native Polish speaker. Those items originally formulated in
German were translated back into German again by the native
German speaker. The back translations were checked by JH and
MD and modified to become identical in both languages and
comprehensive for our understanding of spirituality. The thus
developed item pool comprises items about belief in God,
search for meaning, mindfulness and consciousness and feeling
of security.
A pilot study was performed on medical students. Although
the pilot questionnaire was long (61 items), it was well ac-
cepted. Feedback from the students was largely positive, it was
said that it was interesting to fill out. Hence, all 61 items were
applied to sample 1 via internet. Factor analysis resulted in four
dimensions: 1) belief in God; 2) search for meaning; 3) mind-
fulness and 4) feeling of security, comprising 27 of the 61
original items. No other scale could be constructed out of the
item pool that contained at least five items. For the 27 items,
the questionnaire was cross-checked again to ensure that every
item was clearly phrased in a modern everyday language and
that it focused on one single topic only. This was done to dis-
cover precisely which aspects of spirituality constitute our di-
mensions. If necessary, minor reformulations of the items were
performed again. The questionnaire was then shortened to 20
items, retaining only those 5 items for each dimension that were
most specific. All scales were to be answered on a five-point
Likert scale with the categories “not true at all”, “hardly true”,
“don’t know” “rather true” and “absolutely true”. This new
questionnaire was then cross-validated in a new sample of 500
participants via internet again. It can be viewed at http://www.
screening4you.de
Method
Samples
Subjects were asked via Internet to fill out a questionnaire
containing about 280 items. They were registered participants
at a company that mainly performs marketing research. The
ethic commissions of the University of Düsseldorf and for
Rheinland-Pfalz approved the project (Nr. 3063 and 6281).
Data collections were performed in January and October 2008
by a professional marketing institute (http://www.linequest.de).
Participants were about 40 (sample 1) to 45 (sample 2) years
old on average, and about 50% female (see Table 1). The ma-
jority of participants of both samples were living in a partner-
ship. About 48% in the first sample and 61% in the second
sample were members of one of the German Christian churches.
The differences between sample 1 and 2 are likely to be largely
an effect of age.
Procedure
The spirituality questionnaire was located in the middle of
the item set. Participants registered at a commercial company to
fill out online questionnaires, mostly for marketing research.
They were informed that the present questionnaire served re-
search purposes and that the authors were interested in mental
health in combination with various life circumstances. During
data collection, information was put onto the homepage of the
University of Mainz to enable participants to verify the scien-
tific background of the study. Participants received a compen-
sation of about € 4.30 for filling out the questionnaire. Even if
the questionnaire was long, some individual feedback was
rather positive, it was told that it was interesting to fill out the
questionnaire. Particularly the questions about spirituality and
about childhood received posi tive evaluation .
Statistical Analysis
The items of the spirituality questionnaire were coded from
zero to four. Sub score scales of the spirituality questionnaire
were calculated as the mean of their respective items. There
were no missing items in the internet surveys, because the pro-
gramme prompted the respondents for an answer when an item
was left open.
The first step of the analysis was to compare convergent and
discriminant item correlations in both samples (for a detailed
description of the methods, see Hardt, Petrak, et al., 2003). In a
second step, item and sub score means between samples 1 and 2
were compared via t-tests. Finally, correlations between the
subscales were computed. The alpha level for all statistical tests
was set to .01 (two-tailed). Hence, effect sizes for mean com-
parisons (Cohen, 1988) of d < .15 were non-significant in the
present sample. This alpha levelalance statistical was set to b

J. HARDT ET AL.
118
Table 1.
Sample description.
Sample 1 Sample 2
N 500 500 Test for differences
Gender (% fe male) 55.4 50.0 2
(1)
x
= 2.93, p = .087
Age:
x
(sd) 39.3 (11.2) 44.8 (16.1) t998 = 6.27, p < .001
Confession (%)
Christian 48.2 60.8
Other 2.8 1.6
None 49.0 37.6
2
(4)
x
= 16.42, p < .001
Nationality (%)
German 94.2 97.4
Other 5.8 2.6
2
(2)
x
= 6.36, p = .012
Living in Partnershi p (%) 84.0 70.0 2
(2)
x
= 27.67, p < .001
Job (%)
High grade professional 7.4 4.2
Lower grade professional 17.8 30.2
Skilled non-manual employee 38.4 33.0
Skilled manual employee 3.4 5.2
Partly skilled worker 20.0 10.8
Unskilled labourer 6.0 6.2
Housewife/ housemen 7.0 10.4 2
(6)
x
= 41.46, p < .001
Mean Differences
and clinical significance. Even if d < .15 is not a common stan-
dard, the authors think it made sense to set the significance at
this level in the present study. It means, that in a two group
comparison about 10% of the variance are different (Cohen,
1988: p. 20). Trends were not interpreted. Calculations were
performed using ITAMIS (Kohr, 1978), SPSS 14.0 (SPSS) and
STATA 11.0 (StataCorp, 2009).
The means of the scales “belief in God”, “search for mean-
ing” and “mindfulness” did not differ significantly between the
two samples. However, in the scale “belief in God”, two items
had significantly lower means in sample 2 (item 12 “My belief
in God helps me to get along with difficult situations in life”, t
= 4.42, p = .001; item 3 “I turn to God”, t = 3.46, p = .001. In
item 3 the significance of the difference is attributable to the
shortening of the item). Likewise, in the scale “search for
meaning”, two items had significantly lower means in sample 2
(item 7 “My life is a constant searching and questioning”, t =
6.83, p < .001; item 13 “I try to expand my soul”, t = 4.65, p
< .001), another item had a significantly higher mean (item 9 “I
look for insight and coherence in life”, t = 4.33, p < .001).
Likewise, in the scale “mindfulness”, one item had a significant
lower mean in sample 2 (item 16 “I try to help others”, t = 6.23,
p < .001). The scale “feeling of security” had a significantly
higher mean in sample 2 (t = 4.09, p < .001), with an effect size
of d = .25. On this scale, all but one items showed significantly
higher values in sample 2 (items 6, 5, 8, 19; see Table 3).
Results
Scale Structure
As a result, the four subscales were confirmed as originally
designed: 1) belief in God, 2) search for meaning, 3) mindful-
ness, 4) feeling of security. The subscales presented with good
reliabilities (.78  Cronbachs   .97) and medium positive
intercorrelations (.26  r  .52). All items except two had
higher convergent than discriminant correlations. Item 13 (“I
try to expand my soul”) had one marginally higher value on a
foreign scale in sample 2 (see Table 2). Differences between
the two samples on the structural level were minimal. Except
for the scale “belief in God”, the convergent correlations as
well as Cronbach’s alpha were smaller in sample 2. The scale
“search for meaning” had a Cronbach’s alpha of about .78 in
sample 2, which was considerably lower than in sample 1. The
other scales represented with good to excellent internal consis-
tencies in both samples.
Age- and Gender Effects
Computing a regression analysis, for the subscale “belief in
God”, an age effect was found ( = 0.12; t = 3.71; p < .001;
Table 3), indicating that older persons have a stronger belief in

J. HARDT ET AL.
Table 2.
Item parameter.
Sample 1 Sample 2
Item Abbreviation God SfM Min Sec God SfM Min Sec
Belief in God .97 .96
15 I trust in God .90 .35 .25 .27 .93 .47 .23 .41
12 My faith help s to cope w. problems .93 .41 .24 .28 .92 .47 .26 .42
18 I trust in my faith for decisions .90 .43 .25 .31 .81 .50 .25 .48
14 I feel the love of God .93 .46 .23 .38 .89 .53 .26 .47
2 I feel that God is my friend .90 .44 .27 . 44 .88 .46 .23 .41
Search for meaning .93 .78
7 My life means searching and asking .32 .73 .28 .24 .11 .39 .19 –.05
9 I look for insight and co herence .33 .79 .31 .31 .22 .55 .46 .30
10 I try to open my mind .36 .81 .34 .46 .35 .63 .36 .43
13 I try to expan d my soul .46 .87 .35 .4 0 .64 .61 .36 .43
3 I search for the spiri t .47 .86 .33 .43 .51 .62 .35 .31
Mindulfness .89 .83
17 I try to deal consciously with others .25 .22 .71 .34 .20 .34 .72 .20
1 I deal consc i o usly with environment .26 .32 .74 .39 .17 .30 .51 .17
16 I try to help others .18 .29 .74 .32 .27 .42 .67 .27
11 I try to be patient and tolerant .24 .28 .75 .42 .16 .32 .60 .16
4 I try to be empathetic with others .17 .40 .71 .44 .21 .40 .65 .21
Feeling of Security .88 .83
6 I feel peace deep inside me .42 .42 .49 .74 .33 .25 .26 .66
7 My life is peace and joy .29 .22 .42 .71 .27 .24 .30 .71
8 I fe el one with the world .40 .37 .37 .69 .38 .39 .30 .64
19 I see a friendly world around me .17 .30 .26 .70 .29 .19 .32 .56
20 I feel there is a lot of love in the world .19 .42 .36 .73 .52 .41 .37 .55
God than younger ones. For the subscale “search for meaning”,
an age effect was also found ( = 0.09; t = 2.77, p = .006).
Though small, it also indicates higher values on this scale for
older persons. Additionally, a sample effect was found ( =
0.11; t = 3.35, p = .001), demonstrating higher values on this
scale in the first sample. Age also affected the values of the
subscale “mindfulness” significantly ( = 0.11; t = 3.35, p
= .001), again older persons exhibited higher values. For the
subscale “feeling of security”, two factors have significant in-
fluence: age ( = .22; t = 7.18, p < .001), indicating higher val-
ues for older persons and sample ( = 0.08; t = 2.62, p = .009),
demonstrating higher values for people of the sample 2. Mem-
bership of a Christian Church is highly associated with belief in
God, but marginally with the other scales (Table 4).
Discussion
In general, the spirituality questionnaire shows similar item
characteristics in both samples. Convergent item-test score
correlations were good for all items but two, and discriminant
correlati ons were considerably lower for almost all items. From
a test-statistical view, the questionnaire demonstrates good
qualities. The first two scales of the spirituality questionnaire,
“belief in God” and “search for meaning” can be regarded as
core dimensions of spirituality, as understood by most re-
searchers. The scale “belief in God” represents the traditional
western concept of spirituality. The phrasing of the items of the
scale “belief in God” in this questionnaire has the advantage of
not specifying which God the participant believes in, i.e. fol-
lowers of all religions that incorporate deism are included.
A second scale of the spirituality questionnaire is the quest
for meaning and sense in life as comprised by the scale “search
for meaning”. The search for meaning is an essential question
for self-reflecting individuals (Fromm, 1950). In psychotherapy,
it was Frankl (1964) who emphasised the importance of
searching for meaning. He described the “noetic” dimension as
the “spiritual” core of man’s personality. Within this dimension,
human beings find their quest for a meaningful existence, and
the ability to overcome existential suffering. In the field of
spirituality research, the quest approach was established by

J. HARDT ET AL.
Table 3.
Means of the subscales and items.
Sample 1 Sample 2
Scale and items
x
sd
x
sd t998 p
Belief in God 1.35 1.31 1.20 1.21 1.88 p = .060
I trust in God 1.43 1.43 1.13 1.35 3.46 p = .001
My faith help s me to cope w. problems 1.48 1.46 1.18 1.33 3.42 p = .001
I trust in my faith for decisions 1.22 1.34 1.09 1.24 1.62 p = .106
I feel the love of God 1.29 1.33 1.15 1.26 1.73 p = .084
I feel that God is my friend 1.30 1.40 1.43 1.35 1.47 p = .141
Search for meaning 2.12 1.08 1.99 0.84 2.15 p = .032
My life means searchin g and asking 2.40 1.18 1.89 1.17 6.83 p < .001
I look for insight and co herence 2.34 1.22 2.64 0.97 4.33 p < .001
I try to open my mind 2.13 1.22 2.22 1.13 1.24 p = .215
I try to expand my soul 1.91 1.26 1.54 1.23 4.65 p < .001
I search for the spiri t 1.84 1.22 1.66 1.22 2.29 p = .022
Mindfulness 2.98 0.68 2.95 0.63 0.80 p = .424
I try to deal consciously with others 2.90 0.79 2.98 0.81 1.66 p = .097
I deal consciously with environment 2.96 0.76 2.96 0.76 0.04 p = .967
I try to help others 3.19 0.72 2.87 0.90 6.23 p < .001
I try to be patient and tolerant 2.94 0.88 3.02 0.78 1.48 p = .140
I try to be empathetic with others 2.94 0.93 2.93 0.84 0.18 p = .858
Feeling of security 1.71 0.93 1.93 0.81 4.09 p < .001
I feel peace deep inside me 1 .73 1.17 2.01 1.01 4.03 p < .001
My life is pe ace and joy 1.98 1.15 2.25 0.98 4.09 p < .001
I feel one with the world 1.40 1.11 1.77 1.02 5.41 p < .001
I see a friendly world around me 1.22 1.34 1.09 1.24 4.14 p < .001
I feel there is a lot of love in t he world 1.74 1.09 1.65 1.15 1.19 p = .236
Table 4.
Pearson-Correlati ons among the subscales and b et w e en the subsc a les and gender, age an d m embership of a Christian Church.
Sample 1 Sample 2
God SfM Min Sec God SfM Min Sec
Meaning .44 .51
Mindfulness .67 .39 .26 .46
Security .36 .42 .45 .47 .39 .40
Age .03 .06 .09 .25 .18 .12 .05 .22
Gender .10 .06 .09 –.17 -.01 .00 .16 .05
Church .48 .21 .01 –.05 .47 .14 .06 .13
r > .12 is significant at p < .01.
120

J. HARDT ET AL.
Batson and Ventis (1985) to assess to what degree a religious
person incorporates an open-ended responsive dialogue with
existential questions raised by the contradictions and tragedies
of life.
Mindfulness, the third subscale, assesses the conscious per-
cepti on of others and th e environment . The concept is re flected
in various eastern reliagions, particularly in Buddhism (Suzuki,
Fromm, et al., 1972). In recent time, it has found some entrance
into psychotherapy research (Kabat-Zinn, 1990; Lakey, Camp-
bell, et al., 2007). In brief, it describes the development of
equanimity (one of the four divine states in buddhism), over-
coming emotional reactivity and developing friendliness, toler-
ance, gentleness, placidity, acceptance and (Grossmann and
Grossmann, 2007). Mindfulness also includes conscious and
attentive contact with others. Various questionnaires exist to
assess mindfulness, i.e. the Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness
Skills (KIMS: Baer, Smith, et al., 2004), the Freiburger Frage-
bogen zur Achtsamkeit (FFA: Walach, 2006) and the Mindful
Attention and Awareness Scale (MAAS: Brown, 2003). There
is some evidence that mindfulness is linked with physical as
well as mental health. Carlson and Brown (2005) found nega-
tive correlations of the MAAS with mood disturbances and
stress. In a study of Carmody and colleagues (2008), increases
in mindfulness and spirituality were associated with decreases
in psychological distress and reported medical symptoms. Fur-
thermore, programmes on mindfulness based stress reduction
aim to improve chronic disorders like pain, cancer, depression,
anxiety and overall quality of life in patients as well as in
non-clinical groups (Grossman, Niemann, et al., 2004; Flugel,
Colle, Vincent, et al., 2010). However, further research assess-
ing long-term outcomes are needed. Kohls (2009) identified
two mechanisms that are mainly imortant for the positive ef-
fects: equanimity and overcoming emotional reactivity.
Finally, the fourth subscale, “feeling of security”, chara-
cterises a feeling of safety and trust in the world, a feeling of
being at home in the world. In developmental psychology,
Erikson (1995) drew a parallel to our scale with his concept of
“sense of basic trust”. Due to Erikson, a child develops this
“sense of basic trust” within the first few years of life as a
foundation for further development of personality. With “feel-
ing of security”, a dimension found entrance into the question-
naire that seems to be conceptually underdeveloped in western
culture.
The authors observed small but consistent age-effects; the
older the respondent was, the higher the reported spirituality.
Effects were relatively strong for the feeling of security (.22  r
 .25), but considerably smaller for most other dimensions (see
table 4). These results are consistent with earlier studies (e.g.:
Idler, Musick, et al., 2003; Flannelly & Galek, 2006). They
point to the likelihood that spirituality tends to increase during
later adulthood (Moberg, 2005).
Gender effects were also small, and furthermore inconsistent.
The latter was surprising because previous studies have sug-
gested that, regardless of a person’s religious identification,
women tend to be more religious and spiritual than men (Flan-
nelly & Galek, 2006). However, our findings appear to pro-
vide a challenge to this often accepted notion of gender differ-
ences, as others recently have (Büssing, 2006).
The present study has several limitations. 1) The four ex-
tracted dimensions by no means represent the huge variety of
aspects contributing to the concept spirituality. They are fac-
tor-analytically derived, and an old critique of factor analysis
already states: “In factor analysis you only get out what you put
in before” (Eysenck 1985, cited after Schumann, 2009). This
means that although items describing many facets of spirituality
were included, it is possible that some aspects were not repre-
sented by at least five items and did not constitute a separate
factor. Adding more questions about these aspects to the data
set would probably have led to an additional factor. Despite our
endeavour to apply techniques that correspond with the subject
(PAF with oblique rotation), the item selection remained sub-
jective. Indeed, the authors were surprised that only four factors
could be retained from our relatively large item pool. 2) The
present data were collected via internet. Sample 1 was not rep-
resentative while sample 2 was representative concerning age
and gender. It is still not known how Internet users differ from
the general population. This may have caused a bias in the re-
sults. 3) The attempt to assess spirituality utilising a question-
naire may be regarded dubiously by other researchers. It can be
argued that this field is intrinsically idiosyncratic and may not
be subject to quantitative research. On the other hand, the pre-
sent data demonstrate that there is considerable congruence
between different subject groups, otherwise such a clear factor
structure would not have emerged.
With the limitations given above, the authors believe that the
spirituality questionnaire represents a valid instrument to assess
four core dimensions of spirituality. Even in the event of weak
loadings, which was not the case in the present investigation,
the sample sizes were large enough to give valid results. All
scales present with good reliability and a clear structure almost
identical in the two samples. The questionnaire is easy to apply,
and respondents usually have no problems filling it out. Items
are clearly worded and the answering categories seem adequate.
The authors hope that the spirituality questionnaire will en-
courage others to do research in a field which is important for
many patients but has been almost overlooked in medical re-
search.
Acknowledgement
This work was supported in part by the Heigl-Stiftung
Düsseldorf and by the Köhler Stiftung Essen.
REFERENCES
Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Religious orientation and prejus-
tice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 432-443.
doi:10.1037/h0021212
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., et al. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by
self-report: The Kentucky inventory of mindfulness skills. Assess-
ment, 11, 191-206. doi:10.1177/1073191104268029
Balboni, T. A., Vanderwerker, L. C., et al. (2007). Religiousness and
spiritual support among advanced cancer patients and associations
with end-of-life treatment preferences and quality of life. Journal of
Clinical Oncology, 25, 555-560. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.07.9046
Daniel Batson, & Larry Ventis, W. (1985). Misconception of quest: A
reply to hood and morris. Review of Religious Research, 26, 398-407.
doi:10.2307/3511053
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, M. (2003). The benefits of being present: The
role of mindfulness in psychological well-being. Journal of Persona-
lity and Social Psychology, 8 4, 822-848.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822
Büssing, A. (2006). Spirituality—what are we talking about?
[Spiritualität—Worüber reden wir? ] In A. Büssing, T. Ostermann, &
Matthiesen, P. F. (Eds.), Spirituality, disorder and cure—Meaning
and expression of spirituality in medicine [Spiritualität, Krankheit

J. HARDT ET AL.
und Heilung—Bedeutung und Ausdrucksformen der Spiritualität in
der Medizin] (pp 11-24). Frankfurt am Main: VAS- Verl ag.
Büssing, A., Ostermann, T., & Matthiesen, P. F. (2006). Distinct ex-
pressions of vital spirituality. Journal of Religion and Health, 46,
267-286.
Carlson, L. E., & Brown, K. W. (2005). Validation of the mindful at-
tention awareness scale in a cancer population. Journal of Psycho-
somatic Research, 58, 29-33. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2004.04.366
Carmody, J., & Baer, R. A. (2008). Relationships between mindfulness
practice and levels of mindfulness, medical and psychological
symptoms and well-being in a mindfulness-based stress reduction
program. Journal of Be ha vi or al Me di ci ne , 31, 23-33.
doi:10.1007/s10865-007-9130-7
Cervantes, J. M. (2010). Mestizo spirituality: Toward an integrated
approach to psychotherapy for Latina/OS. Psychotherapy (Chic), 47,
527-539. doi:10.1037/a0022078
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for behavioural sciences.
Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Erikson, E. H. (1998). The life cycle completed. New York, NY: W W
Northon & Co. [Der vollständige Lebenszyklus (1995). Frankfurt am
Main: Suhrkamp].
Flannelly, K. J., & Galek, K. (2006). Discipline and sex differences in
religiosity and spirituality among health care professionals. Psycho-
logical Reports, 99, 803-804.
Flugel Colle, K. F., Vincent, A., et al. (2010). Measurement of quality
of life and participant experience with the mindfulness-based stress
reduction program. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice,
16, 36-40. doi:10.1016/j.ctcp.2009.06.008
Frankl, V. (1964). The image of man of psychotherapy. In M. Friedman
(Eds.), The worlds of Existentialism (pp. 462-468). New York, NY:
Random House.
Fromm, E. (1950). Psychoanalysis and und Religion. New Haven: Yale
University Press.
Gall, T. L., Charbonneau, C., et al. (2011). The relationship between
religious/spiritual factors and perceived growth following a diagnosis
of breast cancer. Psychology & Health, 26, 287-305.
doi:10.1080/08870440903411013
Gorsuch, R. L. (1997). Exploratory factor analysis: Its role in item
analysis. Journal of Personalit y Assessment, 68, 532-560.
doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6803_5
Grossman, P., Niemann, L., et al. (2004). Mindfulness-based stress
reduction and health benefits. A meta-analysis. Journal of Psycho-
somatic Research, 57, 35-43. doi:10.1016/S0022-3999(03)00573-7
Grossmann, K. E., & Grossmann, K. (2007). The development of psy-
chological security in attachment—Results and conclusions for ther-
apy [Die Entwicklung psychischer Sicherheit in Bindungen—Er-
gebnisse und Folgerungen für die Therapie]. Zeitschrift für Psycho-
somatische Medizin und Psychotherapie, 53, 9-28.
Hall, R. (2010). Intervention with Muslim Filipino families: The impli-
cations of spirituality fo r psychology. Psychology , 1, 45-49.
doi:10.4236/psych.2010.11007
Hardt, J., Petrak, F., et al. (2003). What does the FKV measure? An
examination of the Freiburger Fragebogen zur Krankheitsverarbei-
tung in patients with varying diseases [Was misst der FKV? Eine
Überprüfung des Freiburger Fragebogens zur Krankheitsverarbeitung
bei Patienten mit unterschiedlichen Erkrankungen]. Zeitschrift für
Klinische Psychologie und Psyc h o therapie, 32, 41- 50.
doi:10.1026//1616-3443.32.1.41
Heszen-Niejodek, I. (2003). Illusory assumptions of self-report ques-
tionnaires. [Iluzorycznosc zalozen kwestionariuszy samoopisowych]
In M. Fajkowska-Stanik, K. Drat-Ruszczak, & M. Marsza-Wis-
niewska (Eds.), Methodological traps in empirical studies [Pulapki
metodologiczne w badaniach empirycznych] (pp. 50-59). Warzawa:
Academica Wydawnictwo SWPS.
Idler, E. L., Musick, M. A., et al. (2003). Measuring multiple dimen-
sions of religion and spirituality for health research. Research on
Aging, 25, 327-365. doi:10.1177/0164027503025004001
Ishida, R., & Okada, M. (2011). Factors influencing the development of
“purpose in life” and its relationship to coping with mental stress.
Psychology, 2, 29-34. doi:10.4236/psych.2011.21005
James, A., & Wells, A. (2003). Religious orientation and mental health:
towards a cognitive behavioural framework. British Journal of
Health Psychology, 8, 359-376.
doi:10.1348/135910703322370905
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of
your body and mind to face stress, pain and illness. New York, NY:
Delacorte.
Koenig, H. G., McCullough, M. E., et al. (2001). Handbook of religion
and health. Oxford: O xford University Press.
doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195118667.001.0001
Koenig, H. G., Parkerson Jr., G. R., et al. (1997). Religion index for
psychiatric research. American Journal of Psychiatry, 154, 885-886.
Kohls, N. S., & Walach, S. (2009). Facets of mindfulness—Results of
an online study investigating the Freiburg mindfulness inventory.
Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 224-230.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.10.009
Kohr, H. U. (1976). ITAMIS. A user oriented Fortran-program for test-
and questionnaire analysis [ITAMIS. Ein benutzerorientiertes For-
tran-Programm zur Test- und Fragebogenanalyse]. Berichte aus dem
Sozialwissenschaftlic hen Institut der Bundeswehr.
Lakey, C. E., Campbell, W. K., et al. (2007). Dispositional mindfulness
as a predictor of the severity of gambling outcomes. Personality and
Individual Differences, 43, 1698-1710.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.05.007
Lawler-Row, K. A., & Elliott, J. (2009). The role of religious activity
and spirituality in the health and well-being of older adults. Journal
of Health Psychology, 14, 43-52. doi:10.1177/1359105308097944
Moberg, D. O. (2005). Research in spirituality, religion and aging.
Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 45, 11-40.
doi:10.1300/J083v45n01_02
Mofidi, M., Devellis, R. F., et al. (2006). Spirituality and depressive
symptoms in a racially diverse US sample of community-dwelling
adults. Journal of Nervous and Me ntal Disease, 194, 975-977.
doi:10.1097/01.nmd.0000243825.14449.de
Mofidi, M., DeVellis, R. F., et al. (2007). The relationship between
spirituality and depressive symptoms: Testing psychosocial mecha-
nisms. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 19 5 , 681-688.
doi:10.1097/NMD.0b013e31811f4038
Mohr, S., Huguelet, P. (2004). The relationship between schizophrenia
and religion and its impli cati ons for care. Swiss Medical Weekly, 134,
369-376.
Monod, S., Brennan, M., Rochat, E., Martin, E., Rochat, S., & Bula, C.J.
(2011). Instruments measuring spirituality in clinical research: A
systematic review. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 26, 1345-
1357. doi:10.1007/s11606-011-1769-7
Nicholson, A., Rose, R., et al. (2010). Associations between different
dimensions of religious involvement and self-rated health in diverse
European populations. Heal th Psychology, 29, 227-235.
doi:10.1037/a0018036
Schumann, S. (2009). Eysenk and Schumann had a correspondence in
the mid 80’s about problems in factor analysis. The cited comment
was made by Eysenck in one of the letters, Personal Communication.
Suzuki, D. T., Fromm, E., et al. (1974). Zen-Buddhism and psycho-
analysis. Norfolk, Bertrams Print on Demand. [Zen-Buddhismus und
Psychoanalyse (1972). Frankfurt, Suhrkamp.]
Walach, H. (2006). Measuring mindfulness—The Freiburg Mindfulness
Inventory (FMI). Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1543-
1555. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.025
Van Houdenhove, B., & Luyten, P. (2011). Listen to the story: Chronic
fatigue syndrome patients do not live in a vacuum. Psychother Psy-
chosom, 80, 113-115. doi:10.1159/000320974
Worthington Jr., E. L., J. N. Hook, et al. (2011). Religion and spiritual-
ity. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67, 204-214.
doi:10.1002/jclp.20760
122