JPT_text:JPT_41n4
11/22/13
2:53 PM
Page 298
Copyright 2013 by Rosemead School of Psychology
JOURNAL OF PSYCH OLOGY & THEOLOGY
Biola University, 0091-6471/410-730
2 0 1 3 , Vo l . 4 1 , N o. 4 , 2 9 8 –3 1 4
Spiritual Satisfaction of Basic
Psychological Needs and
Psychological Health
Maureen Miner
Director of Research, Wesley Institute & Adjunct Research Fellow, University of Western Sydney
Martin Dowson
Academic Director, Wesley Institute
Kim Malone
Southern Cross Counselling & Psychological Services
theoretical and theological interest, but also practical psychological interest as well.
According to Self Determination Theory, psychological
health and well-being depend on the satisfaction of basic
psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Significant others differentially contribute to the
perceived satisfaction of basic psychological needs. God is
a significant Other for Christians, but there is no published
research investigating perceptions of God meeting basic
psychological needs. This paper considers psychological
and theological evidence concerning Christian perceptions that God could meet basic psychological needs. It reports evidence from a study of 225 Australian Christians
testing the hypotheses that: (1) God will be perceived as
meeting basic psychological needs uniquely in the context
of significant others meeting needs, and (2) attributions to
God meeting basic psychological needs will be negatively
related to psychological ill-health. Results suggest that
God is perceived as meeting basic psychological needs to a
small but significant extent in the context of the effects of
significant human figures. Further, lower symptoms of depression and stress are reported when God is perceived to
meet needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness.
The study provides preliminary evidence that God’s perceived capacity to meet basic psychological has not only
There is ongoing interest in the academic literature
concerning personal and social contributors to psychological health and well-being. One approach to health
and well-being that has continued relevance in light of
contemporary work in positive psychology is selfdetermination theory—SDT (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
According to SDT, a necessary condition of optimal
well-being is that basic psychological needs are met.
Research into SDT has investigated many human
agents and situations, but has not yet addressed the
question of whether, for believers, God can meet basic
psychological needs, and thus promote believer psychological well-being in addition to, or perhaps instead
of, human agents. This paper considers psychological
and theological evidence concerning Christian-believer perceptions that God meets basic psychological
needs. Further, it reports findings concerning the validation of a measure of spiritual need satisfaction using
data from Christian believers.
Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction
Self-determination theory is a motivational analysis
of human behaviour. It examines “the degree to which
human behaviors are autonomous or self-determined,
as well as the personal and contextual factors that de-
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr
Maureen Miner, Director of Research, Wesley Institute, PO Box
534, Drummoyne, NSW 1470 Australia
Email: maureen.minerbridges@wi.edu.au
298
JPT_text:JPT_41n4
11/22/13
2:53 PM
Page 299
MINER, DOWSON, a nd M AL O N E
termine personal self-determination“ (Ntoumanis, Edmunds & Duda, 2009, p. 252). The theory proposes
that individuals are predisposed to learn, seek challenges and master their environments: people innately
possess intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985/
2002). However, this evolutionary-based propensity
for intrinsic motivation has to be supported by a nurturing environment in which basic psychological needs
are met. In this context, a basic psychological need is
defined as “an energizing state that, if satisfied, conduces toward health and well-being but, if not satisfied,
contributes to pathology and ill-being” (Ryan & Deci,
2000, p. 74). There is strong research support: (a) in
both experimental and field studies, (b) across domains
as diverse as education, business, sports, unemployment, and parenting, and (c) with respect to a wide
range of outcome variables (such as learning and
knowledge integration, optimal performance, persistence, positive mood, adaptive personality change, and
cooperative behavior) for considering SDT to be a
powerful theory of human well-being (Vansteenkiste
& Sheldon, 2006, p. 64).
Basic Psychological Needs
Within SDT, three needs in particular are held to
be foundational, or basic, to subsequent well-being
(Ryan & Deci, 2000). The first—autonomy—refers to
an internal locus of causality, a sense of agency and volitional action. The second—competence—denotes a
sense of efficacy, or the capacity to carry through projects to successful completion. Finally, relatedness refers
to a sense of belonging, being connected to others and
nurtured by them. A description of these needs is later
given by Ntoumanis et al. (2009,):
Autonomy reflects a desire to engage in activities of one’s
choosing and to be the origin of one’s own behavior.
Competence refers to individuals’ need to interact effectively with their environment and to experience a sense of
effectance in producing desired outcomes and preventing
undesired events. Finally, relatedness is the need to feel
connected to and accepted by others in a social milieu.
(p. 252)
A core tenet of self-determination theory is that when
these basic psychological needs are met, people are able
to utilize intrinsic motivation even where goals are set
by others, thus maintaining self-determination and experiencing greater well-being. However, if basic psychological needs are not met, the capacity for self-determination is compromised and positive development
is thwarted (Sheldon, Ryan, Deci, & Kasser, 2004).
299
Basic psychological needs (BPNs) can be met to a
greater or lesser degree by individuals within the person’s social or occupational environment. The need for
autonomy can be satisfied when peers or those in authority acknowledge the person’s perspective, provide
meaningful explanations to support informed actions,
and allow the person to make choices. Competence
needs can be met when others provide a clear and coherent structure for tasks. Hence, peers or senior figures can communicate clear expectations, set appropriate challenges, and provide constructive feedback.
Finally, relatedness needs can be met when others give
time, energy, and affection to the individual (Ntoumanis et al., 2009). In a relational setting, a sensitive,
caring other, such as a marriage partner, may respond in
a manner that results in all three fundamental psychological needs being satisfied (La Guardia, Ryan,
Couchman, & Deci, 2000).
Specific Versus Generic BPN Satisfaction
An important theoretical issue for SDT is whether
others are seen as interchangeable with respect to meeting particular BPNs (the so called “generic,” or “between persons” needs satisfaction profile) or whether
specific others are sought in order to meet particular
BPNs (the “specific” or “within persons” needs satisfaction profile; see La Guardia et al., 2000). Generic BPN
satisfaction indicates a state of having one’s needs satisfied in the context of experiences with many different
individuals. From a generic perspective, it is likely that
reports of particular BPN satisfaction will be relatively
consistent over time and across specifically nominated
others (e.g., mother, father, best friend, etc.). On the
other hand, proponents of specific BPN satisfaction argue that certain others are perceived to differ in their
capacity to meet particular basic needs. From the perspective of specific BPN satisfaction, individuals would
be expected to report different levels of BPN satisfaction with respect to different nominated others.
In two different studies examining self-reported
BPN satisfaction by mother, father, romantic partner,
and best friend, there were significant differences in reported BPN satisfaction across the specific figures (La
Guardia et al., 2000, p. 374). In both studies the highest level of BPN satisfaction was attributed to best
friend, followed by mother and romantic partner, and
then father. Further, satisfaction of BPNs was significantly associated with reports of relational security and
well-being. These results support the specific model of
BPN satisfaction and indicate the importance of considering within-person variability in the reported satisfaction of BPNs.
JPT_text:JPT_41n4
300
11/22/13
2:53 PM
Page 300
SPIR IT U AL SAT ISFAC T IO N OF B A S I C P S YC H O L O G I C A L N E E D S A N D P S YC H O L O G I C A L H E A LT H
Spiritual Satisfaction of BPNs
Christians believe that God is a spiritual person
who can meet needs in unique, spiritual ways. God is
deemed able to meet all needs of humans because of inexhaustible divine resources (Phil. 4:19, KJV). Further,
Christians believe that God will meet human needs. In
the Sermon on the Mount, for example, Jesus taught
that God would supply all material needs (food, shelter, clothing etc.) for those whose primary focus was on
spiritual concerns. The discourse is summarized in
Matthew 6:33 where the injunction is to seek “the
kingdom of God,” or the spiritual realm in which God’s
purposes are realized in the Lordship of Christ (see
commentary by Jamieson, Fausset, & Brown, 1871),
and God’s righteousness, or “holiness of heart and purity of life which God requires of those who profess to
be subjects of that spiritual kingdom” (Clarke, 1831).
Moreover, there are biblical accounts showing that
God does meet the material needs of people who give
priority to God’s revealed (spiritual) purposes. For example, Joseph remained faithful to God during captivity in Egypt and so became the means for supplying his
family and all Egypt with food during a severe drought
(Genesis 41–42). After Elijah obeyed God and prophesied to idolatrous King Ahab that a drought would occur, God sent ravens to supply Elijah with food as he
hid by a brook east of the River Jordan (1 Kings 17).
The narrative continues with an account of God providing flour and oil to both Elijah and the widow of
Zarephath for the remainder of the drought. The
recorded miracles of Jesus, who perfectly obeyed God,
include the provision of food (the feeding of the 5,000
in John 6) and the turning of water into wine ( John 2).
Through Jesus, God met the material needs of many
people.
The satisfaction by God of psycho-spiritual needs is
also a firm promise to believers. Just as material needs
represent states of deficiency (e.g. lack of food, water,
shelter etc.) that must be alleviated for physical health,
psycho-spiritual needs represent states of deficiency
(lack of forgiveness, salvation, peace, etc.) that must be
alleviated for psycho-spiritual health. God satisfies
spiritual needs through spiritual gifts and provisions.
For example, there is the promise of forgiveness and salvation to those who believe in the Son of God in the
well-known verse, John 3:16. That forgiveness and salvation are gifts of God is emphasized in Ephesians 2:8.
Jesus extended forgiveness and salvation to a paralyzed
man (Luke 5:23), a prostitute who poured perfume on
Jesus’ feet (Luke 7: 48), an adulteress about to be killed
by stoning ( John 8:1–11), soldiers and all concerned in
crucifying him (Luke 23:34), and a thief who was close
to death by crucifixion (Luke 23:43). These gifts resulted in spiritual life and precisely met each person’s
deepest psycho-spiritual need.
As another example, Jesus also promises the gift of
peace to his followers, a special kind of peace that can
be distinguished from mundane peace ( John 14:27).
Although the blessing of peace is a Jewish benediction,
on the lips of Jesus it is far deeper, as Clarke (1831)
states: “To his followers Jesus gives peace, procures it,
preserves it, and establishes it. He is the author, prince,
promoter, and keeper of peace.” There are many biblical
accounts of people receiving God’s peace. The Psalmist
reported that God gave him safety and peace (Psalms
4:8, 55:18, 85:10, 147:14). The old man, Simeon, was
able to die in peace after he held the infant Jesus in his
arms (Luke 2:29). The letters of Paul, Peter, and John
pronounce God’s grace and peace to their readers (e.g.
1 Thessalonians 1:1, 2 Peter 1:2, 2 John 1:3), and
members of the early church experienced peace and
strengthening after the conversion of Saul (Acts 9:31).
Spiritual peace counters the fear and anxiety that otherwise deplete spiritual resources. Clearly, biblical passages indicate that God provides both psycho-spiritual
and material gifts to meet human needs; but, is there
evidence that God meets the BPNs specified in selfdetermination theory—autonomy, competence, and
relatedness?
Autonomy Needs Met By God
Autonomy, or the freedom to engage in self-chosen
behavior, could be deemed antithetical to God’s sovereign power over humans and other created beings. For
this reason Christian theologians have struggled to account for human freedom (implying moral autonomy)
and God’s control of specific events (as exemplified in
debates between Calvinist and Arminian positions—
see Jonathon Edwards, 1754, and Jacobus Arminius,
1853). Nevertheless, both human freedom and God’s
sovereignty are recognized in various forms of theological interaction across Orthodox, Protestant and Roman Catholic works. In particular, moral choices represent a (perhaps the) key domain of human autonomy
in Christian theology. In the case of moral choices, a
common theme in Christian theology is that all moral
autonomy is based upon God’s providing the capacity
for moral choices to human creatures. This theme
draws from Augustine’s influential teaching that a human being is an immortal soul using a mortal body, and
Aquinas’s view that the distinctively human faculties of
the soul are those of intellect and will which together
enable morality (as discussed by Brown, Murphy, &
Malony, 1998, ch.1). Through these faculties, God sup-
JPT_text:JPT_41n4
11/22/13
2:53 PM
Page 301
MINER, DOWSON, a nd M AL O N E
301
plies the capacity for human freedom, and creates the
conditions under which moral autonomy can be exercised.
Further, a Christian perspective on autonomy also
recognizes the need for submission to the will of God.
Indeed, theologically, the greatest challenge for humans is to submit voluntarily (and, hence, autonomously) to the moral will of God—not in some act
of blind obedience, but by means of engaging one’s
mind and will. Such autonomy, defined by rational
submission to God, is necessary for full (spiritual)
growth and development within a world order created
by God, as argued by Cottingham (2005):
man error and willful wrongdoing. The presence of suffering and imperfections in the world can be seen as an
indicator of divine withdrawal in order to ensure human freedom:
If God has laid down an objective moral order, we still
have to use our critical rational powers to determine what
it is, and how we should act . . . ‘Thy will be done’ is a way
of focusing on the objective moral order towards which
our lives need to be oriented if they are to have value and
meaning. And the prayer is not to lose sight of that order
in some blind act of servility but rather to remain in
touch with that order, and to ask that it may be fulfilled in
our lives. (p. 45)
Divine self-emptying, then, provides space for genuinely autonomous human actions for good or ill. It is
only by such active withdrawal that human needs for
autonomy can be fully met.
Here, God is depicted as meeting the human need for
autonomy by creating a moral order in which human
choice is essential to the perfection of that order.
Hence, “to orient ourselves progressively and ever more
closely towards the true, the beautiful, and the good” is
not “a sacrifice of autonomy properly understood;
rather it is its culmination” (Cottingham, 2005, p. 43).
The critical, rational dimension of morality requires
information on which to base choices. According to
Christian theology, God meets this need for information through self-revelation within the natural universe
and in human history (cataphatic, or positive tradition) whilst maintaining the ultimate mystery and
transcendence of the Ultimate (apophatic, or negative
tradition). The language that bridges the cataphatic
and apophatic traditions is the symbolic or image-bearing language of the life of Christ (Turner, 1995).
Through the life of Christ, God reveals the moral order
in word and deed. Hence, there is ample information
on which to choose and act within God’s moral universe and God’s revelation meets autonomy needs by
preparing humans for autonomous thought and action.
A further criterion for the exercise of autonomy is
that the individual is allowed sufficient freedom to take
meaningful action—including the freedom to make
mistakes. If God is to provide human autonomy in the
same sense as people provide autonomy to each other,
then God must allow the negative consequences of hu-
One is reminded here of Simone Weil’s discussion of the
self-giving divine nature as one that allows space, that
makes room: and this in turn links up with the theology
of kenosis (emphasis in original), the idea of a divine selfemptying, which is found in Pauls’ letter to the Philippians (2:7). Divine creation, it seems, necessarily involves
letting go, allowing for the unfolding of the material
world. (Cottingham, 2005, p. 33)
Competence Needs Met By God
The creeds of the Christian church focus on spiritual needs for salvation and forgiveness of sins rather
than motivational needs for competence. Nonetheless,
religion and spirituality are as much about activities as
theories, and praxis as much as formal doctrine (Cottingham, 2005, p.3). The activities of the Christian
faith are enacted in the service of inner transformation,
of becoming more and more Christ-like, in order that
outward behavior is genuinely Christian. Hence, the
competencies of the Christian life are related to activities indicative of, and leading to, inner transformation
and behavioral integrity, such as faith-ing, hoping and
loving (1 Cor. 13:13). These competencies, however,
are not within the reach of finite beings as they depend
on empowering action by God. Specifically, God: (1)
provides the grounds for faith, hope and love through
trustworthy, good and loving actions in the world (for
example, as seen in Israel’s history, and the Incarnation,
death and resurrection of Jesus); (2) reveals the need
for hope that inspires faith (Hebrews 1:1), and thence
love of God and one’s neighbor (Matt 22:37–39); and,
(3) augments with divine power human attempts to believe, hope and love (“I believe, help my unbelief ”—
Mark 9:24; “Beloved, let us love one another; for love is
of God”—1 John 4:7). Thus, God’s prior and ongoing
actions are essential if human needs for spiritual competence—to be able to show faith, hope and love—are
to be met. When God allows, enables and assists people to be competent in these three spiritual areas, God
is meeting their spiritual competency needs.
In addition, God meets human needs for competence in ways that are analogous to human mentors
JPT_text:JPT_41n4
302
11/22/13
2:53 PM
Page 302
SPIR IT U AL SAT ISFAC T IO N OF B A S I C P S YC H O L O G I C A L N E E D S A N D P S YC H O L O G I C A L H E A LT H
(or, perhaps more properly from a theological point of
view, are the pattern for human mentors). Human
mentors provide clear expectations, constructive challenges, and relevant feedback and they enhance
competence in familial, social, personal, and work
contexts. Expectations concerning Christian transformation and the spiritual life are provided by God in
precepts (such as the Ten Commandments), modeled
in interactions with individuals and groups, and analyzed and applied in Old and New Testament writings.
Life challenges that are allowed by God also develop
spiritual competencies, as illustrated in the account of
Job’s suffering and vindication. Job’s experiences of material and familial losses prompted the mental and
spiritual suffering of questioning his assumptions of a
just world in which moral conduct is rewarded and sin
is punished. His suffering taxed, but did not destroy,
his faith in God; eschatological hope and the presumptuous, if well-meaning, care of his friends were
not sufficient answers to Job’s predicament. Eventually
it was the dramatic revelation of God—God’s presence
and power—that satisfied Job’s quest for knowledge of
God and of himself. Such experiential knowledge
must have been transformative: “Job’s final contentment is inexplicable unless he found in the valley of
the shadow of death a place of spiritual growth” (Andersen, 1984, p.72). Hence, Job developed spiritual
competencies of faith and hope in God’s ultimate vindication of moral conduct through life challenges, and
deeper love of God through God’s special revelation to
him.
With respect to relevant feedback to enhance spiritual competence, God convicts individuals and groups
with respect to sin, righteousness and judgment
through the work of the Holy Spirit ( John 16:8 NIV).
Matthew Henry’s (1706b) Concise Commentary on
John 16:8 observes:
The Holy Spirit is our Guide, not only to show us the way,
but to go with us by continued aids and influences. To be
led into a truth is more than barely to know it; it is not
only to have the notion of it in our heads, but the relish,
and savour, and power of it in our hearts. He shall teach
all truth, and keep back nothing profitable, for he will
show things to come.
Hence, the Holy Spirit provides complete and fully relevant feedback throughout the whole of an individual’s
life.
The account of Saul’s conversion (Acts 9:1–25) is a
good example of God meeting his needs for spiritual
competence. Saul’s prior faith and hope were mis-
guided, and his persecution of the early Christians was
distinctly unloving. Through a personal encounter
with the resurrected Christ and temporary blindness,
Saul was forced to reflect on his misguided spirituality.
Inferring from Saul’s post-encounter behaviors, this reflection was presumably efficacious in terms of developing and/or strengthening Saul’s competencies in
humility, accurate self-reflection, and repentance. Subsequently, for example, Saul, having regained his sight
and the gift of the Holy Spirit, exercised his new faith
by undergoing baptism. Saul then exercised his renewed faith, hope, and love by staying with Christian
disciples and preaching about Christ in the synagogues
of Damascus. Through further feedback from God
Saul became stronger in his faith and preaching, and
was saved from the murderous plots of his new enemies. Hence, God acted in ways that reinforced the
newly converted Saul’s spiritual competencies in faith,
hope and love.
Relationship Needs Met By God
According to biblical theology, God is the ground of
human and human-divine relationships and hence the
only One who can meet all human needs. A central
theme of the biblical narrative is God’s creation of humans as relationally dependent on God; a subsequent
declaration of independence by humans; consequent
disruption of the relationship between humans and
God; God’s restoration of a close relationship with humans through Christ; and the promise of a future spiritual kingdom under Christ and marked by relationships
characterised by peace and love (Goldsworthy, 1988).
Under this interpretation of the gospel (“The gospel
is a restoration of relationships between God, man and
the world”—Goldsworthy, 1988, p.101) God both
creates in people a need for relationship with God and
others, and fulfills this need by salvific actions.
Further insight into the understanding of God as
the ground for meeting all relational needs is derived
from Trinitarian theology. Contemporary Trinitarian
theology holds that God is essentially relational: the
Christian God is distinct but inter-relating persons
(Edwards, 1999; Gunton, 2002; McGrath, 1997; Volf,
1996). People share with God qualities of relationality
by virtue of their creation in the image of God. La
Cugna (1991) states, that:
Persons are essentially interpersonal, intersubjective. The
doctrine of the Trinity is the sine qua non for preserving
the essentially relational character of God, the relational
nature of human existence, and the interdependent quality of the entire universe. (p. 288)
JPT_text:JPT_41n4
11/22/13
2:53 PM
Page 303
MINER, DOWSON, a nd M AL O N E
The inherent relationality of humans is a means for
people to be attuned to God through the actions of the
Spirit of God. It is the third Person of the Trinity who
seeks and maintains relationship with humans, uniting
humans, God, and humans with God by the ties of love
(Gunton, 2002). In this manner, God, who is inherently relational and loving, can fully meet human needs
for a nurturing spiritual relationship and provide the
grounds for interpersonal relationships.
According to many of the psalms of David (who
found God to be caring, sheltering, and restoring) God
meets human needs for a loving relationship: “I called
to you for help and you healed me” (Ps. 30:2), “I will be
glad and rejoice in your love, for you saw my affliction
and knew the anguish of my soul. You have not handed
me over to the enemy but have set my feet in a spacious
place” (Ps. 31:7–8), “You have searched me and you
know me” (Ps. 139:1), “You are my refuge, my portion
in the land of the living” (Ps. 142:5), and “The Lord is
faithful to all his promises and loving toward all he has
made” (Ps. 145:13). Further, Christians have yearned
for a close relationship with God, and found fulfillment when drawn to God by the Holy Spirit. Saint Augustine (394/1998) found in his own heart a longing
for God—a spiritual restlessness that was not satisfied
until it encountered God. Similarly, C.S. Lewis (in Surprised by Joy, 1955) wrote about his own deep yearning
for God, and the sweetness of Christian conversion,
which initiated a deep relationship with God. More recent biographies that testify to God’s nurturing love include works by Corrie Ten Boom (1971), Catherine
Doherty (2007), and John Dear (2008).
Summary, Measurement Issues, and Hypotheses
There is consistent evidence from biblical texts,
contemporary theology, and Christian writings that
Christians in the past and present perceive God in a
personal sense and, thus, as meeting both material and
psycho-spiritual needs. God can be, and is, perceived as
meeting specific BPNs for autonomy, competence, and
relatedness, and often with greater scope than human
figures because God as Spirit is fully able to meet needs.
Individual differences in perceptions of God meeting
specific BPNs are expected because of individual differences in experiences of God—differences that may be
related to different Christian traditions. Hence, it is
meaningful to measure varying perceptions of God as
meeting basic needs in both general terms, and in the
specific terms of SDT.
A measure of needs satisfaction based on SDT was
developed by La Guardia et al. (2000). It comprises 9
items covering the three domains of autonomy, compe-
303
tence, and relatedness needs, with an average score indicating total needs satisfaction across domains. The
items are written in a manner that can be applied to different sources of need satisfaction (e.g., mother, father,
best friend), such as: When I am with my . . . I feel free to
be who I am (autonomy); When I am with my . . . I feel
like a competent person (competence); and, When I am
with my . . . I feel loved and cared about (relatedness).
When applied to different close figures such as mother,
father, best friend, or romantic partner items displayed
high alpha reliabilities (from .85 to .94), and the items
loaded satisfactorily onto the expected three needs satisfaction factors according to confirmatory factor
analysis (RMSEA = .10; CFI = .96).
Since Christians report experiencing God as relationally responsive in prayer, worship, or other life situations, it is plausible to assume that Christians when responding to the items used by La Guardia et al. (2000)
might report a degree of autonomy, competence, and
relatedness with respect to their relationship with God.
Consistent with the findings of La Guardia et al., it
might also be expected that people would report some
similarities between human figures and God in satisfying their BPNs, but also some important differences,
indicating the relative independence of spiritual and
human sources of need satisfaction. Furthermore, consistent with La Guardia et al., the satisfaction of needs
by God, as well as by humans, should be associated
with indicators of well-being such as positive selfreports and/or minimal endorsement of psychological symptoms. Therefore, if a measure of spiritual BPN
satisfaction is valid and useful it will evidence effects
that are: (a) not redundant with BPN satisfaction by
humans, and (b) associated with important psychological outcomes such as indicators of psychological
health.
Underpinning many acute psychological disorders
are symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress. The
vulnerability-stress hypothesis is a well-attested account of the origins of many Axis I disorders, and suggests that there is extensive co-morbidity between
anxiety, depression, and other acute psychological syndromes such as eating disorders, drug and alcohol disorders, sleep disorders etc. (e.g., Barlow, 2002). Hence,
symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress are indicators of core underlying problems that can compromise
psychological health across many domains. Therefore,
high scores on measures of depression, anxiety, and
stress can indicate foundational disturbances of psychological health and well-being. Proceeding from this
discussion, the hypotheses of the present study are
that:
JPT_text:JPT_41n4
304
11/22/13
2:53 PM
Page 304
SPIR IT U AL SAT ISFAC T IO N OF B A S I C P S YC H O L O G I C A L N E E D S A N D P S YC H O L O G I C A L H E A LT H
1. God is perceived as a unique contributor to satisfying BPNs: Attributions to God meeting
BPNs of autonomy, competence and relatedness will be uniquely identifiable even in the
context of attributions to human figures meeting these basic needs.
2. Perceptions of God satisfying multiple BPNs reduce reported negative psychological symptoms: Attributions to God meeting basic psychological needs will be negatively related to
indicators of psychological ill-health, namely
stress, anxiety and depression.
3. Perceived satisfaction of needs by God has a
unique and substantive effect on reported negative psychological symptoms: Attributions to
God meeting needs for autonomy, competence
and relatedness will be negatively related to indicators of psychological ill-health, even in the
context of attributions to human figures also
meeting these basic needs.
Method
Participants
Two hundred and twenty-five (N = 225) Christians, ranging in age from 18 to 65, participated in the
study. The mean age of participants was 35, with a
mode of 18 years. Women were over-represented in the
sample—91 men and 134 women. Forty-three per cent
(43%) of participants belonged to Charismatic and
Pentecostal denominations, 22% were Anglicans, 7%
Baptists, 7% Uniting Church, 5% Church of Christ,
4% Roman Catholic, and the remainder reported no
formal church affiliation (6%) or other Protestant denominations. Although church membership was not a
prerequisite for participation, it was necessary that
each participant did have a practising belief in God.
Eighty-five per cent (85%) of participants considered
their belief in God as very important, while 35% of participants scored at the highest point (absolutely true)
on a question relating to considering oneself as a spiritual person.
Measures
The Need Satisfaction Scale (NSS; La Guardia et
al., 2000) was used to assess perceived satisfaction of
basic needs. This nine-item scale comprises three items
each representing the needs of autonomy, competence,
and relatedness, respectively. Participants were asked to
rate how well each of five target figures—mother, father, romantic partner, best friend, and God—met
their basic needs on a seven-point Likert scale. Sample
items include: “When I am with my mother I feel free
to be who I am” (autonomy), “When I am with my
mother I feel like a competent person” (competence),
and “When I am with my mother I feel loved and cared
about” (relatedness). Participants rated their perceptions of God meeting basic needs on exactly the same
items (e.g., “When I am with God I feel free to be who
I am”). Co