Journal of Religion, Spirituality & Aging, 26:259–278, 2014Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1552-8030 print/1552-8049 onlineDOI: 10.1080/15528030.2013.867423

Examining Social Connections as a LinkBetween Religious Participation and Well-being

Among Older Adults

JOE D. WILMOTH, CAROLYN E. ADAMS-PRICE, JOSHUA J. TURNER,ABIGAIL D. BLANEY, and LAURA DOWNEYMississippi State University, Mississippi State, Mississippi, USA

Social connections provided through religious participation areassociated with subjective well-being in older populations. Thisstudy investigated how much of this association can be explainedby other social connections, and whether these associations vary byage. A cross-sectional random-sample telephone survey was com-pleted by 1,025 individuals over 55 years of age. The contributionof religious participation was examined using hierarchical multi-ple regression and ANCOVA analyses for the entire sample and forfour age-specific groups: (1) 55–64, (2) 65–74, (3) 75–84, and (4)85+. Religious participation was found to be a significant predictorof subjective well-being for the oldest and youngest groups.

KEYWORDS aging, religion, religiosity, social connections,well-being

Religious participation has been associated with psychological well-beingin multiple studies over the past 20 years (Ellison, Boardman, Williams, &Jackson, 2001; Hackney & Sanders, 2003; Keyes & Reitzes, 2007; Koenig& Larson, 2001). This association seems to be particularly salient for olderadults (Fiori, Brown, Cortina, & Antonucci, 2006). Research has suggestedseveral possible mechanisms for this religious participation—well-being con-nection, including the promotion of healthy lifestyles by religious groups,facilitation of social support of religious organizations by and for members,and providing schema of meaning (Idler, 2004). Although there is not uni-versal agreement regarding the role of these mechanisms in linking religion

Address correspondence to Joe D. Wilmoth, 220-B Lloyd-Ricks-Watson, Mail Stop 9745,Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA. E-mail: jwilmoth@humansci.msstate.edu

259

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

260 J. D. Wilmoth et al.

and well-being, the social resources derived from membership in a religiousorganization often have been suggested as a primary explanation (Byrd, Lear,& Schwenka, 2000; Diener, Tay, & Myers, 2011; Ellison, 1991; Idler, 2004).

This study, which examined a sample of older adults from Mississippi,sought to determine how much of the association between religious partic-ipation and subjective well-being (henceforth referred to as SWB) can beexplained by other forms of social connection. In addition, this study exam-ined the stability of the relationship between religious participation and SWBin older adults in four age groups: (1) 55–64, (2) 65–74, (3) 75–84, and (4)85+. Previous studies have found SWB to be relatively higher in the two mid-dle age groups when compared to the older and younger groups. As such,religious participation may be more important as a buffer for members of theyounger and older groups than for members of the middle group.

RELIGIOUS PARTICIPATION AND WELL-BEING

Research on religiosity generally has relied on simple, often unidimensionalmeasures such as attendance at religious services (Mahoney, 2010) or reli-gious commitment (Kim & Sobal, 2004). Overall, religious participation hasbeen associated with enhanced well-being (Ellison et al., 2001; Keyes &Reitzes, 2007). For example, church attendance has been associated witha positive perception of health among older adults with chronic diseases(Yohannes, Koenig, Baldwin, & Connolly, 2008), increased physical func-tioning (Koenig, George, & Titus, 2004), and less co-morbidity (Koeniget al., 2004; Yohannes et al., 2008). Religious participation also has beenlinked to lower rates of depression (Cruz et al., 2009), lower mortality rates(McCullough, Hoyt, Larson, Koenig, & Thoresen, 2000; Powell, Shahabi, &Thoresen, 2003), and increased longevity (Gartner, Larson, & Allen, 1991;McCullough, Friedman, Enders, & Martin, 2009; Yohannes et al., 2008).

Though functional limitations are more likely to hinder their atten-dance at religious services compared to younger individuals (Benjamins &Finlayson, 2007), older adults are more likely to engage in prayer, attendchurch, and derive greater life satisfaction from their religious practices (Fioriet al., 2006; see also Krause, 2004, for review). In addition, levels of spiritual-ity and religious participation have been found to increase significantly fromearly to middle, middle to old, and old to older adulthood (Wink & Dillon,2002).

There may be several reasons why older adults tend to have higher lev-els of religious participation. First, it has been suggested that the decreasedlevels of mobility that come in late adulthood actually provide opportunityfor the reflection and meditation that can facilitate religious and spiritualactivity (Atchley, 1997; Wink & Dillon, 2002). Furthermore, the sort of agediscrimination that is directed toward older adults in America could drive

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

Religious Participation, Social Connections, and Well-being 261

elder individuals to seek belongingness elsewhere, as in a religious or spir-itual realm (Wink & Dillon, 2002). The health and bereavement losses andother difficulties encountered by those in late life also may contribute to aneed for meaning that is often found in religious participation (McFadden,1996; Wink & Dillon, 2002), and individuals facing these challenges oftenturn to religion for support (Idler, 2004). It also is possible that older adultswho have reached retirement may become Sunday school teachers or assumeother leadership roles within the church that they might not have hadtime for before leaving work or before their children left the home (Cox& Hammonds, 1988), which may, in turn, increase their level of religiousparticipation.

There are questions whether the increased religious participation amongolder adults is the result of developmental processes or cohort differences.For example, in a 30-year longitudinal study, Bengston (2012) found that,although there is some evidence that increased religious participation is afunction of aging, people’s religious participation is largely stable over time,indicating that this increase is the result of cohort effects. Because thesefindings suggest that the pattern of increased religious participation contin-ues throughout the lifespan for this aging generation, it may be worthwhileto investigate these differences in older adults at different stages of olderadulthood and how this is associated with well-being.

AGE AND WELL-BEING

Typically, psychologists use the term “subjective well-being” to describe self-perceived satisfaction with life, and the ratio of positive to negative emotionalstates (Smith, Borchelt, Maier, & Jopp, 2002). Conversely, sociologists andhealth researchers are more likely to use the term “quality of life” (QOL),which includes objective, behavioral indicators (such as functional ability orphysical afflictions) that tend to predict (albeit imperfectly) SWB (Haas, 1999;Schuessler & Fisher, 1985).

Recent research suggests that SWB is lower in late midlife (i.e., ages55–65) and very late life (ages 85+) than it is in the “prime” of old age,ages 65–84 (Baird, Lucas, & Donellan, 2010; Ehrlich & Isaacowitz, 2002,Scheibe & Carstensen, 2010). Scheibe and Carstensen (2010) reviewed theliterature on well-being across the life-span and concluded that adults over65 and under 85 have high SWB because of better regulation of emotions.Adams-Price, Turner, and Warren (2013) reported specifically that 55–64-year-olds had lower SWB than adults aged 65–75 and attributed the lowerSWB to the uncertainty of being in transition to old age and to greater stressand worry. Finally, recent studies have shown low SWB for adults overthe age of 85 (Gerstorf et al., 2010; Kotter-Gruhn, Kleinspehn-Ammerlahn,Gerstorf, & Smith, 2009) due to accumulated losses and poorer physicalhealth. Assuming that both the youngest group and oldest group are at

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

262 J. D. Wilmoth et al.

risk for low SWB, religious participation may play an important role inmoderating their levels of SWB.

SOCIAL CONNECTIONS AND WELL-BEING

The relationship between social context and well-being among older adultshas been explored extensively in the research literature. Although we focuson social connections in our study, this construct is related to and some-times overlaps other constructs such as social support, social resources, socialcapital, and social networks. “Social support,” which can be formal or infor-mal, seems to be the most commonly discussed aspect of social context.Formal support systems can include religious, civic, and volunteer organi-zations and typically are characterized by rational and less intimate socialinteractions (Amato, 1993). In contrast, informal support systems includefamily, friends, and neighbors and typically produce more intimate interac-tions (Mair & Thivierge-Rikard, 2010). Religious organizations can functionas both a formal and informal support system—or serve as a bridge betweenthe two—through the development of intimate social interactions or “connec-tions” (Sherr, Shields, King, & Curran, 2005). This is a unique and importantassociation, as social connectedness has a substantial impact on an individ-ual’s well-being, particularly for the lives of older adults (Mookherjee, 1998).Overall, research in this area has found that developing and maintainingsocial relationships is associated with healthy aging (Karatas & Duyan, 2008).Further, high levels of satisfaction with social resources correlate negativelywith depressive symptoms among older adults (George, Blazer, Hughes, &Fowler, 1989). Krause (2012a) found that older adults who feel more closelyconnected to others are more forgiving, leading to lower levels of depres-sion over time. It also has been suggested that one reason for the associationbetween religious participation and well-being is the enhancement of socialnetworks through activities traditionally associated with religious participa-tion (Lim & Putnam, 2010) or the social capital gained through giving andvolunteering (Yeary, Ounpraseuth, Moore, Bursac, & Greene, 2012).

Indeed, time spent with friends and family, and having social and closerelationships in general, has been found to predict well-being (Lucas &Dyrenforth, 2006; Myers, 1999). More specifically, having both a high fre-quency of contact with friends and family and a larger number of individualsin these groups is associated with better health (Lucas & Dyrenforth, 2006;van der Horst & Coffe, 2012), with the connection between family connect-edness and health being particularly strong (Houltberg, Henry, Merten, &Robinson, 2011; Jose & Pryor, 2010; Kaminski et al., 2010).

Furthermore, engaging in a variety of social activities has been linked towell-being. For instance, in an analysis of older adults in 12 countries, Haski-Leventhal (2009) found a strong positive correlation between volunteeringand well-being and a negative association with depression. In addition,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

Religious Participation, Social Connections, and Well-being 263

Wahrendorf and Siegrist (2010) found that, although there was no evidenceof an increase in the well-being of older adults who engaged in volunteering,these individuals had a significantly lower chance of experiencing a decreasein well-being over time.

Pilkington, Windsor, and Crisp (2012) also found that volunteers in theirstudy had better SWB than non-volunteers; however, these researchers sug-gested that this could be explained partially by volunteers having moreextensive friend and family networks. This mediating effect of social connect-edness on the volunteering—well-being relationship has been documentedby others as well (Brown, Hove, & Nicholson, 2012), and the quality of socialrelationships has been found to be more influential than the frequency ofsocial activity (Litwin & Shiovitz-Ezra, 2006).

While these areas of research could help provide an explanation for thelink between religion and well-being, little research has actually controlledfor social activities or levels of social connections when investigating thisphenomenon. Furthermore, levels of intrinsic religiosity have been foundto act as an additional source of connectedness (Houltberg et al., 2011),and research has found the link between social connections from within-congregation friendship and activity to be contingent on the individual’spossessing a strong religious identity (Lim & Putnam, 2010), underscoringthe important role religion plays in life satisfaction.

THE CURRENT STUDY

There is considerable controversy and uncertainty as to the extent andcausality of the connection between religious participation and well-being(Mahoney, 2010). There are suggestions that the association can be explainedby other confounding variables, such as overall social connectedness (Dieneret al., 2011; Lim & Putnam, 2010). Studies on religion and well-being seldomcontrol for social connections (Green & Elliot, 2009), although a few doaccount for marital satisfaction or friendships (Ellison et al., 2001; Lim &Putnam, 2010; Pollner, 1989; Suhail & Chaudhry, 2004). To fill this gap in theliterature, the present study sought to examine the relationship of religiousparticipation and SWB when controlling for such potentially confoundingvariables as participation in a club or civic group, volunteering, visiting withfamily, and visiting with friends. If older adults are more likely to engage inreligious participation, and religious participation fulfills a more meaningfulrole for older adults, then effects on well-being should be robust regardlessof other forms of social connections for this group. As such, we predictedthat the frequency of religious participation would be associated positivelywith the SWB of older adults, regardless of the role of additional socialconnections.

We also investigated whether the relationship between religious partic-ipation and social connections is the same across age groups. Based on

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

264 J. D. Wilmoth et al.

findings suggesting that religiosity increases with age (Fiori et al., 2006;Wink & Dillon, 2002), religious participation is associated with higher SWB(Williams et al., 1991), and individuals in late midlife and the oldest oldage groups experience lower levels of SWB (Baird et al., 2010; Ehrlich &Isaacowitz, 2002, Scheibe & Carstensen, 2010), we predicted that there wouldbe age-related differences with regards to the relationship between religiousparticipation, social connectedness, and SWB. Specifically, we predicted thatlevels of religious participation would have more of an impact on well-beingfor participants between the ages of 55 and 64 and for participants over theage of 85, because they have a greater need for the emotional buffer thatreligious participation can provide.

METHOD

Participants

Data were collected through a random sample telephone survey of adults inMississippi aged 55 and older (N = 1,025). This survey was one componentof the 2011 Mississippi Older Adult Needs Assessment, a project commis-sioned by the Mississippi Department of Human Services. The main focus ofthis survey was to gauge the levels of service need of older adults; however,the survey also covered a wide range of other topics, including those relatedto individual health and well-being and topics pertaining to the everydayactivities of older adults in the state.

Descriptive statistics show that this group consisted of 279 (27.2%) malesand 744 (72.6%) females. The majority of participants were either Caucasian(72.5%) or African American (25.8%), with only 1.8% of participants indicat-ing another race. For purposes of analysis, the sample was broken downfurther into four separate age groups: (1) 55–64 (n = 352 or 34.3%), (2)65–74 (n = 357 or 34.8%), (3) 75–84 (n = 212 or 20.7%), and (4) 85 andolder (n = 71 or 6.9%). See Table 1.

TABLE 1 Descriptive Characteristics of Sample (N = 1,025)

Gender Percenta

Male 27.2%Female 72.6%

Race=EthnicityCaucasian 72.5%African American 25.8%Other 0.2%

Age Groups55–64 34.3%65–74 34.8%75–84 20.7%85 & Older 6.9%

aPercentages do not total 100% because of refusals or missing data.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

Religious Participation, Social Connections, and Well-being 265

MeasuresSubjective well-being index. The dependent variable for this study is

subjective well-being (SWB), as calculated from responses to four surveyitems that addressed overall life satisfaction and problems with boredom,depression, and loneliness. This more holistic measure was developed by theauthors, accounting for several traditional indicators of psychological well-being (Bowling, Farquhar, & Browne, 1991). Responses to the life satisfactionquestion were self-reported on a scale of 1 to 5, with “1” indicating thelowest (most negative) score possible and “5” indicating the highest (mostpositive) score possible. Responses to the remaining three items were alsoself-reported on a scale of 1 to 5, but with “1” indicating that the item (e.g.,boredom) was not a problem and “5” indicating that it was a major problem;these three items were reverse coded for our analysis. The sum of these fouritems was computed to create the SWB Index. The measure is consistent withpast quality of life studies that emphasize the importance of self-assessmentin rating well-being (Bowling, 1995). The Cronbach’s alpha for this indexwas .793, indicating high inter-correlation and adequate internal reliabilityfor further testing.

Sources of social connection. Four items were used to measure fre-quency of participation in non-religious social activities: (1) participating involunteer activities; (2) participating in a club or civic group; (3) visitingwith family; and (4) visiting with friends. Responses to these four items wereself-reported on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of “1” indicating daily participa-tion, a score of “2” indicating weekly participation, a score of “3” indicatingmonthly participation, a score of “4” indicating yearly participation, and ascore of “5” indicating that the respondent never participated in the activity.Responses were combined to more closely reflect the nature of participationin these activities, and variables were recoded so that a score of “0” indicatedthat the respondent lacked active participation (“never” or “annually”), anda score of “1” indicated monthly, weekly, or daily participation.

Religious participation. Responses to the religious participation itemwere self-reported on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of “1” indicating dailyparticipation, a score of “2” indicating weekly participation, a score of “3”indicating monthly participation, a score of “4” indicating yearly participa-tion, and a score of “5” indicating that the respondent never participated inthe activity. Responses were combined to reflect active participation (weekly,daily, or monthly) or lack of active participation (yearly or never). The vari-ables were recoded so that a score of “0” indicated lack of participation, anda score of “1” indicated active participation.

Control variables. Three variables pertaining to the challenges relatedto one’s physical health, transportation difficulties, and financial issues wereheld constant throughout the analysis because of their anticipated directinfluence on social connections (Benjamins, Musick, Gold, & George, 2003).Variables were coded using a 5-point Likert scale, with a score of “1” indi-cating a minimal challenge and a score of “5” indicating a major challenge.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

266 J. D. Wilmoth et al.

Procedure

Participants were randomly selected using a computer-generated randomdialing service as part of a needs assessment commissioned by the MississippiDepartment of Human Services. Data collection took place between Januaryand March of 2011. Upon contact by a research assistant, participants wereinvited to participate in the survey. Those individuals who were of appropri-ate age and who consented to participate were administered the survey overthe telephone. All research procedures were approved by Mississippi StateUniversity’s Institutional Review Board.

To examine the unique contribution of religious participation in theexplanation of SWB, a hierarchical multiple regression analysis was per-formed. Step 1 examined the relationship between physical health, trans-portation, and financial problems and the SWB index. In Step 2, socialconnection variables related to volunteering, membership in clubs or civicgroups, visiting family, and visiting friends were entered into the equationto control for other types of social connections. Finally, in Step 3, religiousparticipation was entered into the equation. With variance inflation factors allbelow 1.2 and collinearity tolerances all exceeding .84, diagnostics suggestedthat the estimated bs were well established in the following regression model.

RESULTS

Hierarchical Regression

In Step 1, the three control variables pertaining to challenges related to physi-cal health, transportation, and financial problems were regressed on the SWBindex. Results indicated that all three variables were statistically significantand negative predictors of one’s SWB score, with financial problems showingthe strongest relationship (b= –.366, t = –12.62, p < .001). Step 1 explained33.8% of the variance.

In Step 2, the social connection variables were added. In this step, theoriginal control variables remained statistically significant, with financial con-cerns again showing the strongest relationship with SWB scores (b = –.356,t = –12.32, p < .001). Two of the four social connection variables were sig-nificant predictors of SWB scores, as volunteering (b = .065, t = 2.20, p =.03) and visiting with friends (b = .065, t = 2.31, p = .02) both showed apositive relationship with SWB scores. Step 2 yielded a statistically significantR2 change (1 R2 = .011, F(4,993) = 4.33, p = .002) and the total explainedvariance increased to 35.0%. Table 2 provides full results for the hierarchicalregression analysis.

Finally, in Step 3, religious participation was added to the model.Challenges pertaining to physical health, transportation, and financial prob-lems all remained statistically significant predictors of SWB scores. In the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

Religious Participation, Social Connections, and Well-being 267

TABLE 2 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting SubjectiveWell-being (N = 1,001)

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

Variable B SEB � B SEB � B SEB B

Physical Health −.430 .062 −.196∗∗∗ −.391 .063 −.178∗∗∗ −.386 .062 −.176∗∗∗

Transportation −.532 .077 −.196∗∗∗ −.532 .077 −.193∗∗∗ −.525 .076 −.191∗∗∗

Financial −.831 .066 −.366∗∗∗ −.809 .066 −.356∗∗∗ −.800 .065 −.352∗∗∗

Volunteering .391 .177 .065∗ .240 .182 .040Club or Civic Group .197 .183 .031 .135 .183 .021Visiting Family −.506 .484 −.029 −.674 .484 −.039Visiting Friends .807 .349 .065∗∗ .764 .348 .061∗

ReligiousParticipation

.804 .241 .092∗∗

R2 .338 .350 .357F 170.00 76.31 68.84

∗p < .05; ∗∗p < .01; ∗∗∗p < .001.

overall model, financial problems displayed the strongest relationship withSWB scores (b= –.352, t = –12.23, p < .001). With the addition of the thirdmodel, only visiting with friends remained significant among the social con-nection variables (b = .061, t = 2.20, p = .03). Religious participation wasa significant and positive predictor of SWB scores (b = .092, t = 3.33, p =.001). Step 3 also yielded a statistically significant R2 change, 1 R2 = .007,F(1, 992) = 11.12, p = .001. The total explained variance increased to 35.7%.

The same three-step procedure was followed for each of the four agegroups separately. In each step for the three youngest age groups, the threevariables in Step 1 were statistically significant and negative predictors ofSWB. For ages 55–64, Step 1 explained 39.7% of the variance. In Step 2,none of the added variables was a significant predictor of SWB, but thechange in R2 was significant (1 R2 = .018, F(4,339) = 2.59, p = .036); thetotal explained variance increased to 41.5%. In Step 3, religious participationwas significant (b = -.139, t = 3.13, p = .002), and the model yielded asignificant R2 change, 1 R2 = .016, F(1, 338) = 9.79, p = .002.

For ages 65–74, Step 1 accounted for 25.2% of the variance. None of theadditional individual variables in Steps 2 and 3 was a significant predictorof SWB, and neither step yielded a statistically significant addition to thevariance.

For ages 75–84, Step 1 yielded a statistically significant R2 change (1 R2 =.252, F(3,203) = 22.84, p < .001). In Step 2, the addition to the variance wassignificant (1 R2 = .054, F(4,199) = 3.84, p = .005), and volunteering (b =.148, t = 2.15, p = .033), visiting family (b = –.131, t = –2.01, p = .046),and visiting friends (b= .131, t = –1.97, p = .05) were significant predictorsof SWB. In Step 3, religious participation was not a significant predictor ofSWB, and the change in variance was not significant.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

268 J. D. Wilmoth et al.

For ages 85 and older, Step 1 accounted for 42.4% of the variance.Transportation (b = –.399, t = –3.62, p = .001) and financial problems (b =–.267, t = –2.48, p = .016) were significant predictors of SWB, but physicalhealth was insignificant (b = –.150, t =–1.46, p = NS). In Step 2, none ofthe additional variables was a significant predictor of SWB, and the changein variance was not significant. Step 3 added significant variance (1 R2 =.041, F(1,61) = 4.84, p = .032). Financial problems no longer predicted SWB(b = –.191, t = –1.66, p = NS), but religious participation was a significantpredictor of SWB (b= .248, t = –2.20, p = .032).

Analysis of Covariance

To investigate whether these associations between religious participation,social connections, and well-being differed among age groups, an analysisof covariance (ANCOVA) was performed. The effect of religious participa-tion on SWB was tested while controlling for problems with transportation,problems with physical health, financial problems, volunteering, club or civicgroup participation, visiting friends, and visiting family. There was a signif-icant effect of religious participation on levels of SWB after controlling forproblems with transportation, health, and finances and for volunteering, clubor civic group participation, visiting friends, and visiting family, F(1, 956) =7.99, p = .005). As illustrated in Figure 1, higher levels of religious or spiritualactivity were related to higher scores on the SWB index for all age groups.For individuals age 55–64 and those age 85 and older, SWB was noticeablylower for those with little or no religious participation (see Figure 1).

FIGURE 1 Estimated marginal means of quality of life (color figure available online).

Note. Covariates in the model are evaluated at the following values: Volunteer Activity = .50, Club orCivic Activity = .34, Family Visit = .97, Visiting Friends = .94, Problems with Physical Health = 2.48,Problems with Transportation = 1.47, Financial Problems = 1.89.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

Religious Participation, Social Connections, and Well-being 269

DISCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which the asso-ciation between religious participation and SWB can be explained by otherforms of social connections in the lives of older adults in Mississippi andto see whether this association varies by age. Consistent with predictions,we found that religious participation was linked to SWB above and beyondthe influence of other forms of social connections. In other words, socialconnections do not fully explain the association between religious participa-tion and well-being. In addition, religious or spiritual participation predictedwell-being for those ages 55–64 and 85+ but not for those ages 65–74 orthose ages 75–84.

Reasons for these findings remain somewhat unknown. Lim and Putnam(2010) found “little evidence that other private or subjective aspects of reli-giosity affect life satisfaction independent of attendance and congregationalfriendship” (p. 914). If their conclusions are accurate and are generalizableto our sample, the question to be considered might be what about religioussocial networks is different from the benefits of visiting with friends and fam-ily, of volunteer activities, or of participation in civic groups or clubs. Spiritualsupport, rather than social support in general, has been found to be a keyfactor in the link between the support of a religious group and well-being(Krause, 2008; Krause & Hayward, 2012), which could provide one explana-tion for these findings. Furthermore, Krause (2012b) suggests that valuation(i.e., the belief that co-religionists value one’s life experience) contributes tofeelings of belongingness and self-worth among older adults, which can actas a barrier to depression. It has long been argued that belongingness is abasic human need (see Pittman & Zeigler, 2007, for review), so finding waysto fulfill this need in late life could be important for SWB.

Consistent with previous research, these findings confirm that thoseindividuals who maintain at least monthly levels of religious participationreport higher levels of SWB for all age groups. Of particular interest fromthese findings is that those who are younger than 65 and older than 85 andwho are low in religious participation seem to be affected differently by thereligious participation=well-being relationship. Reasons for these differencesamong age groups are uncertain. One possible explanation for these differ-ences is that religion may provide a buffer for the impact of stress, eitherby allowing people to view the stressors in positive ways or by providinga coping strategy (Ellison et al., 2001). For example, Williams et al. (1991)found that attendance at religious services buffered the effects of increasedfrequency of undesirable life events on subsequent psychological distress.Therefore, the difference for the under-65 group could be the result of thisgroup experiencing increased or unique stressors.

This explanation seems plausible, since this group is likely to still be apart of what is known as the Sandwich Generation (those individuals who

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

270 J. D. Wilmoth et al.

simultaneously care for their children and their elderly parents). This gen-eration is at risk for poorer well-being through increased caregiver stress,heightened intergenerational conflict, and diminished caregiver health (seeRiley & Bowen, 2005, for review). In addition, those under 65 are likelyto still be employed and=or preparing for retirement. This transitional stagehas been associated with changes in well-being (see Kim & Moen, 2001, forreview), especially when retirement is unanticipated or involuntary (Marshall,Clarke, & Ballantyne, 2001). Furthermore, research (Keene & Prokos, 2007)has shown that there are an increasing number of individuals in the SandwichGeneration who are also employed, and this combination may amplify theexperience of such stressors.

Among all the variables included in our analysis, financial problems con-sistently were the strongest predictor of SWB. Bateman et al. (2012) foundthat participants linked financial resources to aspects of SWB such as security,anxiety, independence, and a sense of control. Although the rates of povertyamong people age 65 and older began declining significantly after the GreatSociety programs were adopted in the 1960s (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013b),the number of near poor (between 100% and 133% of the poverty threshold)has remained near 15% for this group (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013a). In addi-tion, poverty rates for older adults in Mississippi are among the highest in theUnited States (Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 2013). The role of financesalso may have been exacerbated by the economic recession during whichthe survey was conducted (Fenge et al., 2012).

Similarly, physical health was a significant and negative predictor ofSWB. For the oldest group, serious health complications and the inevitabilityof death likely add to the number of stressors this group experiences, per-haps leaving a gateway for religious participation to buffer these effects. Thecumulative research suggesting that religious participation is more meaning-ful in the lives of older adults fosters the notion that meaning in life maybe particularly important in SWB and that religious participation perhapsprovides one way for individuals to find meaning in their lives. In one qual-itative study, a participant discussed the impact of church on her 85-year oldmother, stating that “[the church] keeps you active: : :it keeps [people] alivebecause they’re part of something that’s vital” (Marks, Nesteruk, Swanson,Garrison, & Davis, 2005). It also should be noted that individuals who par-ticipate in religious activity have been found to live longer lives (Hummer,Rogers, Nam, & Ellison, 1999), so it is possible that those over 85 in oursample were more likely to be religious.

Implications

There are several factors that play a role in successful aging. Arguably, themost crucial factor is that of financial security. A comfortable retirement andadequate resources to address the complications that accompany older age,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

Religious Participation, Social Connections, and Well-being 271

especially those dealing with physical health and mobility, can help explainthe levels of participation in religious or other activities in older adulthood.In the case of older adults residing in Mississippi, financial hardship andpoor physical health are strongly correlated. Older adults in this state alsotend to have some of the highest rates of poverty and morbidity in the nation(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2012). A better understandingof how financial hardships, the physical limitations associated with thesehardships in older age, and their effect on religious participation may be atopic for future research.

Federal and state governmental agencies have increasingly recognizedthe important role religious organizations play in meeting the needs ofAmericans (Ferguson, Wu, Spruijt-Metz, & Dyrness, 2006). Similarly, advo-cacy groups, including The National Council on Aging (NCOA), recognizereligious organizations as a key stakeholder in adult well-being. NCOA hasidentified religious organizations as an important partner in the develop-ment and implementation of evidence-based programs, including healthprograms that support older adults (NCOA, 2012). In fact, it has been sug-gested that community-based interventions that integrate social connectionsprovided through religious organizations can enhance program sustainabil-ity and assist with widespread dissemination of programing (Williams et al.,2013). Although the needs assessment analyzed for this study was conductedfor the benefit of a government agency, it illustrates that clergy can use datasuch as these to help identify needs and design programs for older members.Human service staff with access to such data would do well to disseminatethe findings to clergy and religious organizations.

For those who find their SWB decreasing at this stage of life, regularreligious participation could prove to be beneficial, and support of theirparticipation by family members and agencies seems to be a justifiable useof resources. Given the potential of religious organizations to contribute tothe well-being of aging adults, clergy, and lay members of churches, per-haps with assistance from community social service agencies, could identifyand adopt evidence-based strategies that support older church members’well-being. Such efforts could include telephone reassurance programs,the development of intergenerational connections, and=or special meal andcompanionship programs (NCOA, 2013).

LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

The current research is not without limitations. The participant pool wasrestricted to those living in the state of Mississippi, a region unique for itshigh religious participation and high level of morbidity (Diener et al., 2011).Future research should explore whether the links among religious partici-pation, social connections, and well-being differ among a broader or more

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

272 J. D. Wilmoth et al.

diverse sample. The sample also was limited to those who had telephoneland lines, a limitation less of a problem for older adults than for the generalpopulation since adults over 50 make up the largest portion of landline users(and the smallest portion of cell-phone-only users; Christian, Keeter, Purcell,& Smith, 2010).

In addition, the majority of this sample was Caucasian. It may be benefi-cial to investigate variations in the influence of religious participation on SWBin a more diverse group of individuals. For instance, most African Americans(79%) say that religion is very important in their lives (Pew Research Center,2009), and more African Americans report attending church on a regular basisthan do whites (Newport, 2010), so this group may be affected differentlyby religious participation. Differences in gender also may be worthwhile toinvestigate, as McCullough and colleagues (2009) only found a significantimpact of religious participation and devoutness on longevity for women.

Finally, because this research was conducted using the existing needsassessment survey for the Department of Human Services, the measure forreligious participation was limited to a single item: frequency of participa-tion in a religious or spiritual activity. Our ability to find such an effectbased solely on this item speaks to the strength of the relationship, but themechanisms for the link between social connections (including religious par-ticipation) and SWB are complex and thus were not fully explored throughthe simple variables used in this study (e.g., Koenig & Vaillant, 2009; Maselko,Gilman, & Buka, 2009). When examining the religious participation of olderadults, it may be particularly informative to investigate the influence of suchactivity across many types of religions or denominations. For instance, somereligions require or encourage a higher frequency of religious participation,which may influence well-being differently than those religions which donot (Idler, 2004). Also, nuanced and complex measures of religion and socialconnections, including whether the participation is face-to-face or throughsome other medium, should be used to find more comprehensive explana-tions for the link between religion and SWB. Similarly, the items measuringother sources of social connections could be developed further to take intoaccount variations in the meaning and salience of these activities and=or rela-tionships and to explore how social media and other technological changesare transforming the nature and meaning of concepts such as “connection”and “participation.”

CONCLUSION

Despite the limitations of the current work, this research makes a meaning-ful contribution to the field. While the connection between religiosity andwell-being has been attributed to social resources or social connections inrecent years (Byrd et al., 2000; Diener et al., 2011; Lim & Putnam, 2010), few

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

Religious Participation, Social Connections, and Well-being 273

of the researchers making this claim have controlled for social connections.Although other forms of social connections, such as visiting friends and vol-unteering, partially explain the association between religious participationand SWB in the current study, we show that religious participation remainsa significant predictor of well-being among Mississippi seniors independentof other social activities. In addition, we found that religious participation isparticularly salient for adults in late midlife (ages 55–64) and those older than85, suggesting that religious participation could serve as a buffer to stressorscharacteristic of these ages.

REFERENCES

Adams-Price, C. E., Turner, J. J., & Warren, S. T. (2013). Comparing the future con-cerns of early wave baby boomers with the concerns of young-old adults.Journal of Applied Gerontology. doi:10.1177=0733464813493135

Amato, P. R. (1993). Urban-rural differences in helping friends and family members.Social Psychology Quarterly, 56(4), 249–262. doi:10.2307=2786662

Atchley, R. C. (1997). The subjective importance of being religious and its effect onhealth and morale 14 years later. Journal of Aging Studies, 11(2), 131–141.

Baird, B. M., Lucas, R. E., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010). Life satisfaction across the lifes-pan: Findings from two nationally representative panel studies. Social IndicatorsResearch, 99, 183–203.

Bateman, B., Couldery, M., Drury-Gorham, N., Frayne, J., Hazelgrove, J., Hawkins,...Tonks, F. (2012). Well-being in old age: Findings from participatory research.University of Brighton and Age Concern, Brighton, Hove and Portslade.Retrieved from http://eprints.brighton.ac.uk/10631/1/Well_being_in_old_age_findings_from_participatory_research_full_report.pdf.oai:eprints.brighton.ac.uk:10631

Benjamins, M. R., & Finlayson, M. (2007). Using religious services to improve health:Findings from a sample of middle-aged and older adults with multiple sclerosis.Journal of Aging and Health, 19, 537–554. doi:10.1177=0898264307300972

Benjamins, M., Musick, M. A., Gold, D. T., & George, L. K. (2003). Age-relateddeclines in activity level: The relationship between chronic illness and reli-gious activities. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological SciencesAnd Social Sciences, 58B(6), S377–S385. doi:10.1093=geronb=58.6.S377

Bengtson, V. L. (2012, November). Stability and change in religion and spirituality:Does religiosity increase with age? In M. L. Johnson (Chair), Spiritual dimensionsof later life. Symposium conducted at the Gerontological Society of AmericaSixty-Fifth Annual Scientific Meeting, San Diego, CA.

Bowling, A. (1995). What things are important in people’s lives? A survey of the pub-lic’s judgments to inform scales of health-related quality of life. Social Science &Medicine, 41(10), 1447–1462. doi:10.1016=0277-9536(95)00113-L

Bowling, A., Farquhar, M., & Browne, P. (1991). Life satisfaction and associationswith social network and support variables in three samples of elderly people.International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 6(8), 549–566.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

274 J. D. Wilmoth et al.

Brown, K. M., Hoye, R., & Nicholson, M. (2012). Self-esteem, self-efficacy, and socialconnectedness as mediators of the relationship between volunteering and well-being. Journal of Social Service Research, 38(4), 468–483. doi:10.1080=01488376.2012.687706

Byrd, K. R., Lear, D., & Schwenka, S. (2000). Mysticism as a predictor of subjec-tive well-being. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 10,259–269. doi:10.1207=S15327582IJPR1004_04

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Office of Surveillance,Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services, Behavioral Risk System. (2012).Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data. Atlanta, GA: U.S.Department of Health and Human Services, 2012. Retrieved from http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/brfss/

Christian, L., Keeter, S., Purcell, K., & Smith, A. (2010, May 20). Assessingthe cell phone challenge. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/2010/05/20/assessing-the-cell-phone-challenge/

Cox, H., & Hammonds, A. (1988). Religiosity, aging, and life satisfaction. Journal ofReligion and Aging, 5, 1–21.

Cruz, M., Schulz, R., Pincus, H. A., Houck, P. R., Bensasi, S., & Reynolds, C. F.(2009). The association of public and private religious involvement with severityof depression and hopelessness in older adults treated for major depression.The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 17(6), 503–507. doi:10.1097=JGP.0b013e31819d37a9

Diener, E., Tay, L., & Myers, D. G. (2011). The religion paradox: If religion makespeople happy, why are so many dropping out? Journal of Personality & SocialPsychology, 101(6), 1278–1290. doi:10.1037=a0024402

Ehrlich, B. S., & Isaacowitz, D. M. (2002). Does subjective well-being increase withage? Perspectives in Psychology, 5, 20–26.

Ellison, C. G. (1991). Religious involvement and subjective well-being. Journal ofHealth and Social Behavior, 32, 80–99. doi:10.2307=2136801

Ellison, C. G., Boardman, J. D., Williams, D. R., & Jackson, J. S. (2001). Religiousinvolvement, stress, and mental health: Findings from the 1995 Detroit areastudy. Social Forces, 80, 215–249. doi:10.1353=sof.2001.0063

Fenge, L., Hean, S., Worswick, L., Wilkinson, C., Fearnley, S., & Ersser, S. (2012).The impact of the economic recession on well-being and quality of life of olderpeople. Health & Social Care in the Community, 20(6), 617–624.

Ferguson, K., Wu, Q., Spruijt-Metz, D., & Dyrness, G. (2006). Outcome evaluationin faith-based social services. Are we evaluating faith accurately? Research onSocial Work Practice, 16(X), 1–13. doi:10.1177=1049731505283698

Fiori, K. L., Brown, E. E., Cortina, K. S., & Antonucci, T. C. (2006). Locus of controlas a mediator of the relationship between religiosity and life satisfaction: Age,race, and gender differences. Mental Health Religion & Culture, 9, 239–263.doi:10.1080=13694670600615482

Gartner, J., Larson, D. B., & Allen, G. D. (1991). Religious commitment and mentalhealth: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Psychology and Theology,19, 6–25.

Gerstorf, D., Ram, N., Goebel, J., Schupp, J., Lindenberger, U., & Wagner, G. G.(2010). Where people live and die makes a difference: Individual and geo-graphic disparities in well-being progression at the end of life. Psychology andAging, 25(3), 661–676.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

Religious Participation, Social Connections, and Well-being 275

George, L. K., Blazer, D. G., Hughes, D. C., & Fowler, N. (1989). Social sup-port and the outcome of major depression. British Journal of Psychiatry, 154,478–485.doi:10.1192=bpj.154.4.478

Green, M., & Elliott, M. (2010). Religion, health, and psychological well-being.Journal of Religion and Health, 49, 149–163. doi:10.1007=s10943-009-9242-1

Haas, B. K. (1999). A multidisciplinary concept analysis of quality of life. WesternJournal of Nursing Research, 21(6), 728–742. doi:10.1177=01939459922044153

Hackney, C. H., & Sanders, G. S. (2003). Religiosity and mental health: A meta-analysis of recent studies. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 42(1),43–55. doi:10.1111=1468-5906.t01-1-00160

Haski-Leventhal, D. (2009). Elderly volunteering and well-being: A cross-Europeancomparison based on SHARE data. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary& Nonprofit Organizations, 20(4), 388–404. doi:10.1007=s11266-009-9096-x

The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. (2013). Poverty rate by age. Retrieved fromhttp://kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-age/

Houltberg, B., Henry, C., Merten, M., & Robinson, L. (2011). Adolescents’ perceptionsof family connectedness, intrinsic religiosity, and depressed mood. Journal ofChild & Family Studies, 20(1), 111–119. doi:10.1007=s10826-010-9384-5

Hummer, R., Rogers, R., Nam, C., & Ellison, C. G. (1999). Religious involvement andU. S. adult mortality. Demography, 36 , 273–285.

Idler, E. L. (2004). Religious observance and health: Theory and research. In K. W.Schaie, N. Krause, & A. Booth (Eds.), Religious influences on health and well-being in the elderly (pp. 20–43). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company,Inc.

Jose, P. E., & Pryor, J. (2010). New Zealand youth benefit from being connected totheir family, school, peer group and community. Youth Studies Australia, 29(4),30–37.

Kaminski, J., Puddy, R., Hall, D., Cashman, S., Crosby, A., & Ortega, L. (2010). Therelative influence of different domains of social connectedness on self-directedviolence in adolescence. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 39(5), 460–473.doi:10.1007=s10964-009-9472-2

Karatas, K., & Duyan, V. (2008). Difficulties that elderly people encounter and theirlife satisfaction. Social Behavior and Personality, 36(8), 1073–1084. doi:10.2224=sbp.2008.36.8.1073

Keene, J., & Prokos, A. H. (2007). The sandwiched generation: Multiple caregivingresponsibilities and the mismatch between actual and preferred work hours.Sociological Spectrum, 27(4), 365–387. doi:10.1080=02732170701313308

Keyes, C. M., & Reitzes, D. C. (2007). The role of religious identity in the men-tal health of older working and retired adults. Aging & Mental Health, 11(4),434–443. doi:10.1080=13607860601086371

Kim, J. E., & Moen, P. (2001). Is retirement good or bad for subjective well-being?Current Directions In Psychological Science, 10(3), 83–86. doi:10.1111=1467-8721.00121

Kim, K. H. & Sobal, J. (2004). Religion, social support, fat intake and physical activity.Public Health Nutrition, 7(6), 773–781.

Koenig, H. G., George, L. K., & Titus, P. (2004). Religion, spirituality, and healthin medically ill hospitalized older patients. Journal of the American GeriatricsSociety, 52(4), 554–562. doi:10.1111=j.1532-5415.2004.52161.x

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

276 J. D. Wilmoth et al.

Koenig, H. G., & Larson, D. B. (2001). Religion and mental health: Evidence foran association. International Review of Psychiatry, 13(2), 67–78. doi:10.1080=09540260124661

Koenig, L. B., & Vaillant, G. E. (2009). A prospective study of church atten-dance and health over the lifespan. Health Psychology, 26(1), 117–124. doi:10.1037=a0012984

Kotter-Gruhn, D., Kleinspehn-Ammerlahn, A., Gerstorf, D., & Smith, J. (2009). Self-perceptions of aging predict mortality and change with approaching death: 16-year longitudinal results from the Berlin Aging Study. Psychology and Aging,24(3), 654–667.

Krause, N. (2004). An introduction to research on religion, aging, and health:Exploring new prospects and key challenges. In K. W. Schaie, N. Krause, &A. Booth (Eds.), Religious influences on health and well-being in the elderly(pp. 1–19). New York, NY: Springer.

Krause, N. (2008). The social foundation of religious meaning in life. Research onAging, 30(4), 395–427. doi:10.1177=0164027508316619

Krause, N. (2012a). Parental religious socialization practices, connectedness withothers, and depressive symptoms in late life. International Journal for thePsychology of Religion, 22(2), 135–154. doi:10.1080=10508619.2011.638589

Krause, N. (2012b). Valuing the life experience of old adults and change in depres-sive symptoms: Exploring an overlooked benefit of involvement in religion.Journal of Aging and Health, 24(2), 227–249. doi:10.1177=0898264311412598

Krause, N., & David Hayward, R. R. (2012). Religion, meaning in life, and changein physical functioning during late adulthood. Journal of Adult Development,19(3), 158–169. doi:10.1007=s10804-012-9143-5

Lim, C., & Putnam, R. D. (2010). Religion, social networks, and life satisfaction.American Sociological Review, 74(6), 914–933. doi:10.1177=0003122410386686

Litwin, H., & Shiovitz-Ezra, S. (2006). The association between activity and well-being in later life: What really matters? Ageing & Society, 26(2), 225–242.doi:10.1017=S0144686X05004538

Lucas, R. E., & Dyrenforth, P. S. (2006). Does the existence of social relationshipsmatter for subjective well-being? In K. D. Vohs, & E. J. Finkel (Eds.), Selfand relationships: Connecting intrapersonal and interpersonal processes (pp.254–273). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Mahoney, A. (2010). Religion in families, 1999–2009: A relational spirituality frame-work. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(4), 805–827. doi:10.1111=j.1741-3737.2010.00732.x

Mair, C. A., & Thivierge-Rikard, R. V. (2010). The strength of strong ties for olderrural adults: Regional distinctions in the relationship between social interac-tion and subjective well-being. The International Journal of Aging & HumanDevelopment, 70(2), 119–143. doi:10.2190=AG.70.2.b

Marks, L. D., Nesteruk, O., Swanson, M., Garrison, M. E. B., & Davis, T. (2005).Religion and health among African Americans: A qualitative examination.Research on Aging, 27 , 447–474.

Marshall, V. W., Clarke, P. J., & Ballantyne, P. J. (2001). Instability in the retirementtransition: Effects on health and well-being in a Canadian study. Research onAging, 23(4), 379–409. doi:10.1177=0164027501234001

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

Religious Participation, Social Connections, and Well-being 277

Maselko, J., Gilman, S. E., & Buka, S. (2009). Religious service attendance andspiritual well-being are differentially associated with risk of major depression.Psychological Medicine, 39(6), 1009–1017. doi: 10.1017=S003329170800418

McCullough, M. E., Friedman, H. S., Enders, C. K., & Martin, L. R. (2009). Doesdevoutness delay death? Psychological investment in religion and its associa-tion with longevity in the Terman sample. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 97(5), 866–882. doi:10.1037=a0016366

McCullough, M. E., Hoyt, W. T., Larson, D. B., Koenig, H. G., & Thoresen, C. (2000).Religious involvement and mortality: A meta-analytic review. Health Psychology,19(3), 211–222. doi:10.1037=0278-6133.19.3.211

McFadden, S. (1996). Religion and spirituality. In Encyclopedia of Gerontology (Vol.2, pp. 387–397). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Mookherjee, H. N. (1998). Perceptions of well-being among the older metropoli-tan and nonmetropolitan populations in the United States. Journal of SocialPsychology, 138(1), 72. doi:10.1080=00224549809600354

Myers, D. G. (1999). Close relationships and quality of life. In D. Kahneman, E.Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology(pp. 374–391). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

National Council on Aging. (2013). Senior centers reach the hard to research.Retrieved from http://www.ncoa.org/national-institute-of-senior-centers/nisc-news/senior-centers-reach-the.html

National Council on Aging. (2012). Evidence-based health promotion programs forolder adults: Key factors and strategies contributing to program sustainabil-ity. Retrieved from http://www.ncoa.org/improve-health/NCOA-Health-Promo-Issue-Brief.pdf

Newport, F. (2010, June 25). Americans’ church attendance inches up in 2010:Increase accompanies rise in economic confidence. Gallup. Retrieved fromhttp://www.gallup.com/poll/141044/americans-church-attendance-inches-2010.aspx

Pew Research Center. (2009, January 30). A religious portrait of African-Americans. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/a-religious-portrait-of-african-americans.aspx

Pilkington, P. D., Windsor, T. D., & Crisp, D. A. (2012). Volunteering and sub-jective well-being in midlife and older adults: The role of supportive socialnetworks. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological Sciences AndSocial Sciences, 67B(2), 249–260. doi:10.1093=geronb=gbr154

Pittman, T. S., & Zeigler, K. R. (2007). Basic human needs. In A. W. Kruglanski & E.Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed.) (pp.473–489). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Pollner, M. (1989). Divine relations, social relations, and well-being. Journal ofHealth and Social Behavior, 30, 92–104. doi:10.2307=2136915

Powell, L. H., Shahabi, L., & Thoresen, C. E. (2003). Religion and spirituality:Linkages to physical health. American Psychologist, 58(1), 36–52. doi:10.1037=0003-066X.58.1.36

Riley, L. D., & Bowen, C. (2005). The Sandwich Generation: Challenges and cop-ing strategies of multigenerational families. Family Journal, 13(1), 52–58. doi:10.1177=1066480704270099

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014

278 J. D. Wilmoth et al.

Scheibe, S., & Carstensen, L. L. (2010). Emotional aging: Recent findings and futuretrends. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and SocialSciences, 65B(2), 135–144.

Schuessler, K. F., & Fisher. G. A. (1985). Quality of life research and sociology.Annual Review of Sociology, 11, 129–149.

Sherr, M. E., Shields, G., King, W., & Curran, M. A. (2005). Informal vs. formalsupport networks among the elderly and the role of religion. Social Work &Christianity, 32(4), 341–353.

Smith, J., Borchelt, M., Maier, H., & Jopp, D. (2002). Health and well-being in theyoung old and oldest old. Journal of Social Issues, 58(4), 715–732.

Suhail, K., & Chaudhry, H. R. (2004). Predictors of subjective well-being in an east-ern Muslim culture. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 359–376.doi:10.1521=jscp.23.3.359.35451

U.S. Census Bureau. (2013a). Table 12. Persons 65 and over with incomes below125 percent of the poverty threshold, and the near poor, by race: 1975 to2011. Retrieved from U.S. Census Bureau website http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/ historical/people.html

U.S. Census Bureau. (2013b). Table 3. Poverty status of people, by age, race, andHispanic origin: 1959 to 2011. Retrieved from U.S. Census Bureau websitehttp://www.census.gov/ hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/people.html

van der Horst, M., & Coffe, H. (2012). How friendship network characteristicsinfluence subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 107(3), 509–529.doi:http:==dx.doi.org=10.1007=s11205-011-9861-2

Wahrendorf, M., & Siegrist, J. (2010). Are changes in productive activities of olderpeople associated with changes in their well-being? Results of a longitudinalEuropean study. European Journal of Ageing, 7(2), 59–68. doi:10.1007=s10433-010-0154-4

Williams, D. R., Larson, D. B., Buckler, R. E., Heckmann, R. C., & Pyle, C. M. (1991).Religion and psychological distress in a community sample. Social Science &Medicine, 32(11), 1257–1262. doi:10.1016=0277-9536(91)90040-J

Williams, L. B., Sattin, R. W., Dias, J., Garvin, J. T., Marion, L., Joshua, T., : : :Narayan, K. M. (2013). Design of a cluster-randomized controlled trial of adiabetes prevention program within African-American churches: The Fit Bodyand Soul study. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 34(2), 336–347. doi:10.1016=j.cct.2013.01.002

Wink, P., & Dillon, M. (2002). Spiritual development across the adult life course:Findings from a longitudinal study. Journal of Adult Development, 9(1), 79–94.doi:10.1023=A:1013833419122

Yeary, K., Ounpraseuth, S., Moore, P., Bursac, Z., & Greene, P. (2012). Religion, socialcapital, and health. Review of Religious Research, 54(3), 331–347. doi:10.1007=s13644-011-0048-8

Yohannes, A. M., Koenig, H. G., Baldwin, R. C., & Connolly, M. J. (2008). Healthbehaviour, depression and religiosity in older patients admitted to intermediatecare. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 23(7), 735–740. doi:10.1002=gps.1968

Dow

nloa

ded

by [M

ississ

ippi

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rarie

s], [

Joe

D. W

ilmot

h] a

t 11:

39 2

2 A

pril

2014