Saturday, December 21, 2019

The Paradox of Hope at Advent



I’ve been thinking about hope this year. I wrote about hope in Living Well. And I‘ve studied hope based on Charles R. Snyder’s hope theory.

I’m writing about hope because I am organizing some thoughts about hope as found in the four themes of advent: hope, peace, love, and joy. Although typically depicted by four candles around a Christ candle in a wreath, I think a diagram makes more sense, though clearly less picturesque.


The Christmas story links hope to Mary's child, Jesus. When Jesus arrives, he comes with a message of love, which is linked to joy and peace. 

Then, the paradox of hope occurs. When the hoped for person arrives, hope ends. 

This is the paradox of hope.

Hope disappears when it is fulfilled, 
but love, joy, and peace are enduring qualities.

Hope is powerful when Snyder’s identified twin components are present: (1) a goal, which is a focused desire that energizes our quest and (2) a pathway to reach that goal. I put hope first for two reasons. First, hope has content. In the advent tradition, people hope for joy, peace, and love. And in Christianity, that hope is embodied in Jesus presented as a baby. The whole scene is easy for most of us to appreciate. Parents and grandparents look forward to the birth of a child. When the baby arrives, and mother and child are safe, there are many positive emotions. Central is the love of mother for her child. And simultaneously, there is joy and peace. Love radiates among those present. Family members want to hug and hold the newborn. Joy is evident on the faces. And there is peace of mind when all are safe and well.

My second reason for putting hope on the outside is the paradox of hope. When the desired person has come or the hoped-for event has arrived, hope is gone. The paradox of hope is that it always has an end. We are now left with the reality of the person or event. Christmas has come. Will we experience the complex of joy, peace, and love? If so, hope has been fulfilled.

Of course, it won’t be long before we hope for something else. And embodied in that hope is a fear, a worry that things might not turn out so well. Sometimes that happens, which is the downside of hope represented in that troubling quote attributed to Nietzsche: 


“Hope in reality is the worst of all evils
because it prolongs the torments of man.”

There is a warning against giving people false hope, which truly leads to mental and spiritual struggles. True hope keeps people alive and motivates a quest for fulfillment. When realized, true hope yields wellbeing. False hope produces anguish and leads to despair—hopelessness.

More about hope

Snyder’s concept of hope can be seen in the Hope Scale, which has two components. The Hope Scale post also includes a reference to Snyder’s book on hope.

Read more about Snyder's hope theory at Hope Theory.

Find out how hope is related to positive counseling and psychotherapy outcomes in one of our studies. It is a free download.



Read about faith, joy, hope, and love in the book, Living Well.



Connections

   My Page    www.suttong.com
   My Books   AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE
   FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton
   TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

Publications (many free downloads)
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)



Tuesday, December 3, 2019

2019 in the USA Massive Survey of Attitudes and Opinions




The Economist/YouGov Poll takes the pulse of several attitudes relevant to the leadership and direction of the United States. This poll is from November 2019.

There are lots of interesting data in the 457-page pdf report, which is much more than I would care to blog about. However, those who teach statistics and research methods may find the data interesting to some students. And others may just find the results interesting for a myriad of social media posts—like this one. (Scroll down for the viral post about the best president--Lincoln or Trump.)

Are we on track or off track?

The survey begins with a railroad journey metaphor. Are we headed in the right direction or off on the wrong track?

Overall, most Americans say we’re off on the wrong track, 56%. Only people in related grouping variables think we are going in the right direction (Republicans, Trump voters, conservatives). People in the other grouping variables report being off track (gender, age, race, income, region, registered voters).

[Now for a lesson—please ignore if you are not interested in stats and research. In the behavioral sciences, the terms male and female refer to sex, not gender as the pollster’s reported. Age groups are interesting but arbitrary. The labels below “race” probably should be called ethnic groups and nowadays so many of us have a mixed heritage.]

Who are our friends and our enemies?

What do Americans think about people in other countries, that is, are they an ally, friendly, unfriendly, an enemy, or not sure? An interesting question with the aforementioned categories available for those wanting detail.

   BEST FRIENDS (my label based on over 75% responding as "ally" + "friendly"): 
            Canada 85%, United Kingdom (77%)

   Generally fine: Israel (64%), Japan (72%), South Korea (65%), Mexico (58%), France (74%, close right?), Germany (70%)

   Not so good: China, Iran, North Korea, Russia

   Quite mixed: Saudi Arabia, Ukraine


  • I’m thinking English speakers are winners. Perhaps the perception of understanding helps? And, old combatants are just fine—Japan, Germany. France should probably be up there if I considered margin of error.
  • Also, rhetoric works when it comes to those nation not faring so well in the eyes of the American public.
  • Worth a look—if you have time, it’s worth a look to see how Americans in various categories view other nations. Some countries like the UK do well in many categories e.g., Clinton (86%) and Trump (89%) voters. But, look at how 2016 voters favorably view Mexico: Clinton 78% vs. Trump 56%.

How important is it if other countries interfere with our elections?

Interference matters a lot to most Americans, 66% and 25% to some, but 9% responded it “Doesn’t matter at all.”

There's so much more

There’s a lot more to learn about attitudes toward government leaders and beliefs about Russian or Ukrainian interference in U.S. elections.

And there are details relating to impeachment—the interest level of Americans in the hearings is quite divided overall: Very 30%, Somewhat 33% and Not interested 37%. A lot of pages deal with the impeachment hearings and testimony. The perception of witness honesty is great stuff for psychology students. Trump supporters remain supportive and loyal.

There are some interesting questions about the favorability of many politicians in addition to the president e.g., Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren.

Trust in Government

There’s agreement (sort of) among the party members in responding to the question: How much of the time do you think you can trust the government in Washington to do what is right? For the response, “Just about always” Democrats 6%, Republicans 5% and for the choice, “Most of the time” Democrats 25%, Republicans 19%.

Crooks in DC?

Overall, most Americans believe there are “Quite a few” crooked people running our government (63%).

How smart are our leaders?

About half or us think government officials don’t know what they are doing (51%), 21% aren’t sure, and 28% report they “Know what they’re doing.”

Are we better off now than four years ago?

It’s a close split with 37% believing we are better off now and 42% thinking we were better off four years ago. You might guess there’s a political divide here—see page 120.

Predictions—the 2020 election

I like predictions. I suppose it’s human to try to predict the future despite the fact that polls can be wrong—especially this far from the election.

About Trump

Given all the stuff about impeachment, it’s natural to wonder if people think Trump will lose the 2020 election. Not unexpectedly, Americans are divided with 55% on the likely side and 39% on the not likely side. I have a problem with the wording here. Participants can get confused with negatively worded questions. Check it out on page 130. Republicans strongly support Trump compared to Weld and Walsh.

The Democrats

Currently, Democratic voters are likely to vote for the following: Warren, Biden, Sanders, or Buttigieg. Warren and Biden are close. Younger voters prefer Sanders. Black and Hispanic voters prefer Biden. Joe Sestak doesn’t have much support. Have you heard about him?
There’s a lot more in this section dealing with political candidates.

About the UK (nice of them to ask)

There are questions about American perspectives on the UK. How does the Queen fare? Quite favorable it seems—69%, only 12% unfavorable. And Prince Charles? Not so well at 42%, but not so bad (34% unfavorable). Prince William beats his dad at 63% favorable and Kate’s a winner too at 61%. Prince Harry ties his brother at 63% and his wife, Meghan does ok at 58%.

HEADLINES!

So, this datum made headlines: 55% of 2016 Trump voters believe Donald Trump was a better president that Lincoln.
Overall, Americans endorse Lincoln at 75%. See page 267 for details.
George W. Bush does better than Trump overall (62%) but not among 2016 Trump voters (78%). 

However, Regan trumps Trump overall 78% and among 2016 Trump voters, 60%. It’s interesting to see how others fare e.g, Eisenhower.

[Student note: Datum is the singular of data, but you won’t see that in most news stories where writers write “data is” instead of “data are.”]

I write about surveys. Here's my ad, buy Creating Surveys on AMAZON worldwide.




Very Important Issues-- Here's the percentage rating an issue "very important"

Economy 70%
Immigration 52%
Environment 50%
Terrorism 57%
Gay rights 23%
Education 59%
Health care 69%
Social Security 66%
Budget deficit 46%
War in Afghanistan 29%
Taxes 57%
Medicare 62%
Abortion 45%
Foreign policy 41%
Gun control 55%
International Trade & globalization 36%

[Question: Based on the data, what would you expect politicians to talk about?]
I’m thinking savvy politicians will say different things to different audiences—especially likely voters in states with large electoral college votes.]

Even more stuff

There are pages on pages of data about the issues and how they are being handled. Of course, you could also see the details by level of importance and category of participants.

Several pages ask for opinions about Trump’s personality characteristics such as “bold” and “inspiring.”

Stock Market Predictions

Only 22% believe the market will be lower next year. I think this is a fool’s game, but people with retirement funds hope for the best. Even among those with 100k or more income, only 25% predict a lower market. By the way-- the market is down two days in a row as I write! [Almost done, page 441 of 457.]

Your job

Very few people are unhappy with their current job (9%) or very unhappy (5%). That’s good news for most people and their companies. I wonder what the 26% “very happy” people are doing.

A few facts about the survey on page 457.

Dates 24-26 November 2019
The survey was a stratified random sample.
The sample size of 1500 was adequate.
Registered voters were 1189.

Note--

The internet may have limited participation.

I don’t know how they corrected for response set and response bias. Check out the link for more information on problems of bias in surveys.

I could have made a mistake in reporting the numbers. Kindly let me know so I can correct any errors.


   My Page    www.suttong.com

   My Books   AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE
  
FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton
   TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

Publications (many free downloads)
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)



Tuesday, November 26, 2019

Reverse Advent Calendar Expressing Gratitude and Generosity

Image result for helping poor newborns




I first learned about a Reverse Advent Calendar from English friends who were collecting items for a local charity. There are several helpful sites online, which offer ideas on how to create your own calendar.

The idea is to help children approach Christmas with an attitude of giving rather than getting. Of course, the lesson is important for adults as well.

Families can do something as simple as putting a pound or dollar (or more) in a container each day, which will be donated to a local food pantry or other community charity at the end of December.

Another approach is to place food items or clothes in baskets for each day leading up to Christmas and donate them to a charity.

Another suggestion is to organise four bags or baskets to hold items related to nativity themes as suggested by https://buildfaith.org/reverse-advent/. The themes focus on the newborn Jesus and his need for food, warmth, care for the parents and care for the newborn. These themes translate into food, clothes, toiletries, and baby items.

Likely some readers will have other ideas.

Engaging children in the nativity story might have better learning benefits than would simply reading the story, hearing an advent message, or watching a play.

You could meditate on frankincense and myrrh, but you could also deliver diapers, blankets, and tissues may be more useful.

The activities likely promote gratitude, generosity, and empathy, which is an aspect of love and compassion.

Read more about gratitude, generosity, and compassion in Living Well available from AMAZON







Links to Connections

Checkout My Page    www.suttong.com

  

My Books  AMAZON          and             GOOGLE STORE

 

FOLLOW me on   FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton   TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

 

PINTEREST  www.pinterest.com/GeoffWSutton

 

Articles: Academia   Geoff W Sutton   ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton 

 

 

Subscribe to my Travel Channel on YouTube

 



Tuesday, November 12, 2019

Why is Queen Elizabeth II so popular? Psychology of Leadership


On Remembrance Sunday, I shared a post about Queen Elizabeth II being the only living Commander in Chief who served in World War II. As a young woman she served in a way that women were welcomed in uniform in those days.

What amazed me is the number of people who gave my post a like or "love" in a short period of time. At one point, the post got a positive click about every minute, which is much higher than my usual posts. Of course, the group was composed of people of British origin. Still, the question may be asked why is she so popular? And, is there anything leaders may learn from such high levels of public support?

Oh, by the way, Queen Elizabeth II and her family are of great interest to many Americans as well so, it's not just the British.


Princess Elizabeth WW II service













The Queen's popularity ratings run above 80% in various surveys. That's high for a national leader. Most leaders won't be kings or queens or even presidents or prime ministers so, what seems to work?

I have written a few posts about leadership. A recent one provides a list of what people respect in a leader. In this post, I'm going to look at Queen Elizabeth II and possible reasons for her enduring popularity.

1. Military Service. Military service in itself probably accounts for a meaningful percentage of her popularity in the UK and in many of the Commonwealth countries. She "did her bit" as the British say. There are a lot of veterans, so there must be more to her appeal than military service.

2. Identity. The Queen represents the UK. She's not just a symbol like a mammal or bird on a coin or an official seal. It's far easier to identify with a person, if the person has qualities you respect. A head of state can make people feel proud or ashamed of their country. This feeling can be personally experienced when a number of people within and outside your nation respect or disrespect your head of state. I think this is true for corporations having respectable figure heads. Identity is an argument for keeping some people on a board even when the day-to-day business is run by lesser known officials. Companies and organizations with good reputations tied to a respected leader may wish to think how they manage retirement and leadership transitions.

3. Appearance. Leaders are expected to appear a certain way in any given culture. The Queen appears as a dignified and kindly grandmother. At times, she wears a crown, which adds to the value of her appearance. However, not all cultures respect older citizens. So, the elegant grandparent only goes so far. Age is only one factor. People have expectations of the way their leaders should dress and behave. Appearance matters despite its superficiality. But appearance is relevant to one's group. The expected appearance of music stars, tech industry leaders, and religious leaders can be quite different.

3. Wealth. People in many cultures respect wealthy people. The Queen's jewels, palaces, and castles represent wealth. She has a decent income from her investments. She's not wealthy like an American billionaire but she does very well. And she has an acceptable attitude--she doesn't draw attention to the wealth. People used to think wealthy people were blessed by God or gods. Perhaps they still do.

4. Confidence. She's met a lot of world leaders over the years. And she's met a lot of children and people from many cultures. We expect leaders to show confidence. Confidence can be learned through experience in meeting people and giving talks to various audiences.

5. Commitment. We respect leaders who are committed to their country or organization and to their assigned tasks. Queen Elizabeth II certainly meets these expectations. You don't have to be a royal to demonstrate commitment.

6. Authentic faith.  From what we can see, Queen Elizabeth's faith is genuine. Of course she would be expected to appear a Christian as head of the Church of England, but we all know people who don't seem very sincere. Regardless of religiosity, I think people can respect leaders whose faith doesn't appear put on for a show or worse, a way of garnering votes, power, or wealth. I think it better to be an honest atheist or agnostic than put on a sham show of faith.

7. Caring. People respect leaders who care for others and support charitable causes. The tearful photo above is a popular one on social media. I suspect it's popular because it shows a quiet empathy. We want to believe leaders are caring people. I think leaders in businesses and organizations must be aware that people are quick to identify hypocrisy. Only some leaders can fool some people with fake caring.

8. Culture Factor. British humor can be biting and sarcastic. And some Brits resent the money spent on the monarchy. Yet, there are long cultural traditions of showing respect to the Queen by bowing to her and in the singing of the national anthem, "God Save the Queen." But culture can be undone by monarchs behaving badly, so there must be more to her support than just culture. And, as already noted, the data support high levels of popularity in the US--not just the UK or the Commonwealth. The bottom line for corporations and organizations is to create a culture of respect for all people.

9. Longevity. Longevity of a leader or leaders can represent stability in a nation or corporation. Nations with presidents like the US change leaders every 4 or 8 years. That's not a bad idea. But it can lead to major changes in policy and some ugly politics between warring parties. Of course, the same happens in the UK, but in a different way. The Queen does not have the power of the prime minister and parliament where the political fights take place. However, the Queen does offer a psychological sense of stability as one who cares about the nation and remains "above" politics.

*****
I realize Queen Elizabeth II has an advantage over many leaders. Many in western cultures read exciting stories about kings and queens and princes and princesses as children. Children's movies portray dazzling castles and a fantastic lifestyle. Royalty has a mystique. But as I wrote above, some monarchs behave despicably and don't get much respect.


There's probably more reasons for her popularity. If you have a positive contribution, please comment.

Links to Related Posts

What do people respect in a leader?

Psychology of Respect



Connections

   My Page    www.suttong.com
   My Books   AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE
   FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton
   TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

Publications (many free downloads)
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)

















Monday, November 11, 2019

What do people respect in a leader?





Respect consists of the ways people treat their leaders and other group members. Core features of respect include social status and likeability (See Psychology of Respect).

Honesty
In a 2014 survey by Kouzes and Posner of over 100,000 people, honesty was the highest quality (CEO). Honest communication is often supported by facts that can be checked by others. Honesty promotes trust and credibility. One major lapse in integrity can dash a career. Apologies may help but for many, trust is gone forever.

Politicians often get little respect because they fail to deliver on their promises. A CEO will be ousted when a promised result doesn’t happen. But politicians seem to get away with failed promises when they can blame the failure on a competitor, opposition party, or foreign power.

Golden Rule
Leaders gain or lose respect depending on how people perceive them as following the Golden Rule- Treat others as you would like to be treated. Respect is a relational concept. Most people respond with warmth to kindness, politeness, and fair treatment. And people tend to respond in kind to disrespectful treatment. Politicians and corporate leaders who deal in “dirty tricks” can expect retaliation.

Confidence
People respect leaders who appear confident. Confidence in a leader is obviously important in times of crisis such as war and disaster. Troops appear to have a knack of discovering poor leadership. This loss of confidence can happen in politics, industry, and other organizations, including churches. Of course, confidence must be supported by results. Confident leaders who lead people in the wrong direction can expect to lose respect.

Fair Treatment
Young children have a sense of fairness when it comes to following the rules of a game. Cheaters are penalized. Some cheaters are ostracized. Adults continue to live by a sense of fair play. Leaders must be careful when promoting and awarding raises to members or employees. Some people who have been treated unfairly can be motivated by revenge and wreak havoc in a family, an organization, or a nation—especially when they have a high level of respect in the eyes of a sizeable minority.

Commitment
We respect leaders and group members who are committed to the goals of a group, company, organization, or nation. People who do not show commitment are treated with low respect. Commitment involves acting in ways that advance one’s group. Some commitments are symbolic like standing to sing a national anthem or showing you like a friend’s social media post.
Other commitments are more tangible like volunteering to decorate for an organization’s social event or working on a project that improves the social standing of a business. A high degree of respect is show by the commitment to serve in a nation’s military.

Caring
People respect leaders who demonstrate social responsibility. A fascinating survey of MBA students by Montgomery and Ramus found that 90% cared more about working for a company that demonstrated social responsibility than about financial benefits (2003). Of course, there’s nothing like participating in an activity to show a level of sincerity beyond a brief photo-op.

Consistent, Clear, Communication
My wife and I have been on several tours. One particular leader stood out for confusing communication. You could hear a constant buzzing within our group concerning where we are going, when we are supposed to meet, and what we are supposed to bring with us. The leader won respect for kindness, honesty, and caring, but was so easily distracted when giving instructions that it was hard to know what to expect.

Consistent communication also links back to honesty and integrity. Credible leaders do what they say they will do. Simple explanations for failure may get a pass on occasions, but not on a regular basis.

On-Time
In western cultures, respect for time is a two-way street. We expect leaders and group members to be punctual. There is no such thing as “fashionably late” when it comes to respect. Lateness represents disrespect for the value of a person’s time and whatever they are communicating. People can maintain respect following an occasional lateness when a socially acceptable reason is provided as long as lateness is not habitual.



Connections

   My Page    www.suttong.com
   My Books   AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE
   FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton
   TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

Publications (many free downloads)
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)



Sunday, November 10, 2019

Forgiveness and Acetaminophen as Pain Relievers



Much has been written about the power of forgiveness to help people reduce their current distress from hurts, which may have lasted for years. Studies have demonstrated that forgiveness has biological correlates related to stress. The hurts addressed by forgiveness have been called "social pain."

Acetaminophen is a commonly used effective medication for physical pain. A new study by George Slavich and his colleagues looks at the interaction of forgiveness and acetaminophen on the reduction of social pain. Their article is an editor's choice selection in the current Annals of Behavioral Medicine (December, 2019).

Following is a quote from their article abstract.


Results
As hypothesized, acetaminophen reduced participants’ social pain levels over time but only for those exhibiting high levels of forgiveness (i.e., 18.5% reduction in social pain over 20 days).
Conclusions
These data are the first to show that forgiveness and acetaminophen have interactive effects on experiences of social pain, which is one of the most common and impactful of all human experiences.

Read more about the Psychology of Forgiveness


See the article link above for details of the study in Annals of Behavioral Medicine.


Connections

   My Page    www.suttong.com
   My Books   AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE
   FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton
   TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton
   

Publications (many free downloads)
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)

Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Deliverance from Evil Spirits: An Exorcist’s File





In Christian texts, people may be possessed by demons. When possessed they act in ways that scare others and cause harm. The demons speak to other humans. And in response to Jesus Christ, or the apostles, the demons may be “cast out” of a person. In contemporary Christianity, the “casting out” has been known as deliverance or exorcism.

Some groups believe that a place may be possessed by evil spirits thus, deliverance or exorcism may apply to both people and places. In general, protestant Christians use the term deliverance and Catholics use the term exorcism and follow a particular process (a rite) of exorcism.

The term possessionists has been used to refer to people who believe in the phenomenon of people possessed by evil spirits even if they are not possessed (Giordan & Possamai, 2016).

About Devils and Demons

A 2016 Gallup poll report indicated that 89% of Americans believe in God, but this is lowered by 10% if given the option that they are not sure about their belief, thus, the belief number is 79%. But what about the devil? The devil comes in with 61% believers, 12% unsure, and 27% unbelievers.

A few years earlier (2013), a YouGov survey asked Americans about possession. The results for belief in a devil are close to the Gallup results (57% believe in the existence of the devil). When asked if they believed “someone can be possessed by the devil or some other evil spirit,” 51% responded “yes” (“No” 28%, “Don’t Know” 20%). For the most part, the participants rarely thought people were possessed (45%) but 29% did endorse the thought “occasionally.” What about exorcism? Nearly half believed in the power of exorcism (46%) to drive out the devil or evil spirits—only 19% did not believe in exorcism and 36% reported “don’t know.”

More Exorcists Needed

In 2014, the Vatican officially recognised the International Association of Exorcists, which grew in response to a gathering of priests interested in sharing their experiences.  The association grew when early leaders brought exorcists together in response to an increase in satanism and the occult (ncronline, 2014). Giordan and Possamai (2016) estimated there were as many as 300 exorcists in Italy.

In the United States, Bob Larson founded an International School of Exorcism having various levels, each with its own curriculum: Apprentice, Warrior, and Exorcist (https://internationalschoolofexorcism.org/enrollment/ ).

Over-Policing Effect

We might wonder why there is an increase in demand for exorcists or at least reports of possession by evil spirits. Giordan & Possamai (2016) employ an explanatory concept known as over-policing. Here’s a quote from their article.

The more the over-policing of the devil is practiced, the more people are likely to believe in possession and exorcism (that is, become possessionists) and in the increase of the presence of the devil. (p. 453).

Case Files

An interesting set of data became available to Giordan and Possamai (2016). A Catholic priest who was asked to serve as an exorcist by his bishop kept data on calls for nearly 10 years. The number of consultations totaled 1,075. Most people only came for one visit (648), 215 came for two consultations and another 97 came for three. When they graphed the data, they found an increase in visits near two holidays: Easter and All Saints’ Day / Halloween.

This particular exorcist suggested a variety of interventions to callers. He recommended 140 see a psychologist and 5 obtain medical treatment. He also recommended other faith interventions such as blessings (206), confession (16), religious homework (500), prayers (188), and rituals of liberation (142). His records showed a broad approach to understanding people’s needs. For example, he included their drug therapies and family history.

So, how many needed an exorcism? He identified 55. Of these, 21 were taking medication for a mental disorder during their spiritual treatment. The records also include considerable details about their encounters with supernatural evil such as Voodoo and Wicca rituals, black masses, blood pacts, satanic music, and so forth. Interestingly, 18 reported “a strong and violent repulsion to the sacred (p. 458).” For example, they reported feeling sick if trying to pray.

How effective was exorcism? What is impressive here is the record of results rather than the success rate. Recovery was noted for 22 people (40%). Other notes document how many exorcisms were performed and what various outcomes.

Some Thoughts for Psychotherapists and Clergy

The survey data suggest that some form of spirituality could be important to Americans. Although less believe in supernatural evil, about one in two do believe in the devil and close to half believe in the value of exorcisms. Thus, regardless of their personal beliefs, clinicians and clergy ought to consider consultees’ spiritual worldviews when they are seeking counseling or guidance.

The article by Giordan and Possamai (2016) is valuable for its summary of the work of the exorcist. The over-policing concept is somewhat interesting, but I don’t find sufficient evidence to support the concept as an explanatory idea.
Although the authors offer a sociological perspective, there are sufficient details about the people seeking an exorcism for psychotherapists and clergy to seriously consider the concerns of people seeking help for what they identify as problems caused by a supernatural evil agent.

The priest’s recognition of multiple causes for personal distress such as medical and psychological concerns is noteworthy. Too often clergy and mental health professionals fail to account for multiple sources of distress as I have witnessed in years of reading mental health treatment records. Spiritual concerns are rarely given much space in clinical notes. Helping people includes a multimodal theobiopsychosocial approach to assessment and treatment (e.g., Sutton, 2017) even if the result ends up being a fairly restrictive diagnosis and treatment protocol.

The glimpse of collaboration between the priest and a psychiatrist also shows an appreciation of different approaches to different needs.

Thinking of conducting a survey? Check out Creating Surveys on AMAZON and other distributors around the world.







References

Click on the hyperlinks to locate the articles cited in the text.

Related Posts




Connections


   My Page    www.suttong.com
   My Books   AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE
   FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton
   TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

Publications (many free downloads)
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)