Journal of Adolescence 43 (2015) 171e180

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Adolescence journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jado

Relations between youths' conceptions of spirituality and their developmental outcomes* Anthony G. James a, *, Mark A. Fine b a b

Department of Family Studies and Social Work, Miami University, United States Department of Human Development and Family Studies, University of North Carolina e Greensboro, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Available online 29 June 2015

This study uses a positive youth development (PYD) approach to explore whether differences in youths' conceptions of spirituality were linked to patters of difference regarding 6 domains of PYD. Using data from the 4-H Study of Positive Youth Development, findings revealed a consistent trend across 6 domains of positive development. Youth who had coherent conceptions of being spiritual generally scored highest on measures of positive development, whereas youth in the ambiguous spirituality group (i.e., less coherent) scored the lowest. However, follow-up analyses reveal that such relations did not hold over time. Implications of findings include youth development professionals aiming to nurture the spiritual growth of youth should encourage more coherent notions of spirituality among the youth they serve. © 2015 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Spirituality Religion Positive youth development

Generally, spirituality among youth is thought of as beneficial for their development. Previous mixed methods research found that the extent to which youth perceived themselves as spiritual is indeed positively correlated with indicators of positive youth development (PYD), both concurrently and longitudinally (James, Fine, & Turner, 2012). Qualitative data from that study found that youth conceptualize being spiritual in 10, somewhat mutually exclusive, ways. However, the quantitative correlations did not take into account the different ways that youth conceptualized being spiritual, which can inaccurately suggest that spirituality e regardless of how it is conceived e relates to PYD. This study builds on the previous study by testing the following question. Are qualitative differences in conception of spirituality linked to differences in PYD? Additionally, this study provides a broad three group model of how youth conceptualize spirituality. Theoretical background: strength-based perspective A recent theory of PYD (Lerner et al., 2005), with a foci on advancing adaptive developmental regulations, conceptualizes PYD in its 5 C (competence, confidence, character, connection, caring/compassion) model; it asserts that over time youth develop on a course that is characterized by thriving. Thriving is conceptualized as the 6th C (contribution), or

* This study represents research conducted in partial fulfillment the Ph.D. from Department of Human Development and Family Studies, University of Missouri. * Corresponding author. Miami University, Oxford, OH, 45056, United States. Tel.: þ1 513 529 2323; fax: þ1 513 529 6468. E-mail address: [email protected] (A.G. James).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.05.014 0140-1971/© 2015 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

172

A.G. James, M.A. Fine / Journal of Adolescence 43 (2015) 171e180

youth making meaningful contributions to self, family, community, and other institutions in his/her environment. The promise of this theory is that youth have inner strengths or assets (5 Cs) that can be developed and nurtured by persons and institutions in their environment. In turn, youth use those same strengths to make meaningful contributions in their social, civil, and political worlds (Lerner, 2004), which is reflective of advanced developmental regulations. Lerner et al. (2005) operationalized the 5 C model, providing a method for measuring the Cs in empirical research. Competence emphasizes youths' positive perceptions of their own actions among various domains (e.g., social, academic), whereas Confidence refers to youths' internal sense of their efficacy or worth. Connection refers to positive bonds that occur through personeenvironment interactions, with Character referring to the youths' respect for societal and cultural rules, exhibiting moral behavior, and integrity. Caring refers to a sense of sympathy and empathy for others. The sixth C (Contribution) represents the thriving, and evidenced by the youth using the inner C strengths to make positive contributions to self, family, and community. Spirituality and PYD With the growth of PYD research, scholars have tested the role of spirituality in this model, with findings confirming correlations between PYD and youths' spirituality (Dowling et al., 2004; James et al., 2012; Warren, Lerner, & Phelps, 2012). However, a lingering issue is the myriad of ways spirituality is conceptualized, raising the question of whether spirituality, regardless of its conceptualization, is good for youth or whether youth with different conceptualizations of spirituality have different patterns of PYD. The purpose of this study is to extend the literature base by examining if youths' differing conceptions of spirituality have different patterns of adjustment. James et al. (2012) found that youth conceptualized spirituality in 10 ways. Using data from Waves 6 and 7 of the 4-H Study of PYD (Lerner, Lerner, Phelps, & Colleagues, 2009), they found that youths' self-ratings were linked to each of 6 C PYD factors, however, they did not examine how differences in conception of spirituality are linked to youths' PYD scores. Therefore, it is unknown whether youth with different conceptions of spirituality differ with regard to their levels of PYD. Building on that work, we sought to investigate this gap in the literature. Our approach to conceptualizing spirituality in this study was to construct a definition that was broad enough to be inclusive, yet specific enough to be somewhat distinct from other markers of PYD. Thus, we constructed a smaller number of broader groupings of spirituality that both subsume the 10 spiritual categories from James et al. (2012) and align with how scholars typically conceptualize youths' spirituality. Broader groupings of spirituality and links to PYD A thorough review of the literature revealed that scholars usually conceptualize child and youth spirituality in three ways: spirituality as a source of transcendence and/or finding meaning (Damon, 2008; Hyde, 2008; Lerner et al., 2009), spirituality as a pathway toward virtue and generosity toward others (Warren et al., 2012), and spirituality being an unspoken, yet essential or guiding force, in one's life (Berryman, 2001). Thus, we used this as our guide for defining the construct in this study. Established meaning in life The first broad spiritual group emphasizes a spiritual life that is defined by a primary purpose of finding or establishing meaning in life. Meaning refers to “significance” or that there is something more to life than one's own motives and desires; further, being spiritual is related to life having a particular significance that transcends the self. While the source of that meaning may vary (e.g., art, ministry), the youth have identified a purpose that they can commit to, which is one indicator of positive development (Damon, 2008). Having established meaning also aligns with Lerner et al.'s (2009) and Hyde's (2008) positions on youths' spirituality in that it emphasizes transcendental and behavioral aspects of life that advance PYD. Additionally, youths' awareness of their inner and external lives facilitates transcendence and finding meaning in life (Schnell & Becker, 2006), while Hyde's (2008) work indicated that spirituality is the stitch that helps youth establish meaning in their lives, likely through their interactions with others. Being a good young person The next broad spiritual group emphasizes virtue and generosity toward others, which aligns with Warren et al.'s (2012) belief that generosity is inextricably linked with being a spiritual young person. More specifically, this group emphasizes a spirituality where virtue, being welcoming and personable, and possess a generally positive disposition are emphasized. According to Warren et al. (2012) and Lerner et al. (2009), when youth have a strong spiritual life, they are more likely to be generous, which inspires or motivates them to contribute to the greater good of society, which parallels the goas of thriving in the PYD model. Ambiguous spirituality The final broad group defines a spirituality that is not clearly or coherently articulated, where individuals use vague or ambiguous language to conceptualize the term. In actuality, this type of spirituality is not uncommon. According to

A.G. James, M.A. Fine / Journal of Adolescence 43 (2015) 171e180

173

Berryman's (2001) postulation, though many youth have non-verbal and unexplainable spirituality, we should not dismiss their notions of spirituality because of an inability to clearly articulate what it means. Even though they may be unable to articulate one's conception of spirituality, spirituality may still be linked to PYD. The need to study spirituality in addition to religiosity Both lay persons and scholars have historically used the terms religiosity and spirituality interchangeably due to the interrelated nature of the concepts (e.g., religious contexts serve as a primary pathway to youths' spiritual growth; Dowling et al., 2004). However, this practice impedes scholars' ability to identify the unique contribution that each construct makes to youth outcomes. Studying religion alone, or aggregating it with spirituality, masks any distinct linkages between spirituality and PYD. This suggests that spirituality serves important, and independently, role in youths' development. Thus, we acknowledge the spirituality-religious connection (Roehlkepartain, Benson, Scales, Kimball, & King, 2008), yet also view them as constructs that can operate independently. Methods Participants For this study, Wave 6 (collected in 2008) and Wave 7 (collected in 2009) data from the 4-H Study of PYD (Lerner et al., 2009) were used. The total sample size for WAVE 6 was N ¼ 1876, though we only used data where youth answered the spirituality question which resulted in a sample pool of n ¼ 1842, with ns ¼ 683 (achieve meaning; mean age of 15.80), 294 (good person; mean age of 15.79), and 865 (ambiguous spirituality; mean age of 15.71) in the respective spirituality groups. Missing data comprised less than 5% of the data, which is inconsequential to final analyses (Schafer, 1999). The youth likely did not answer the spirituality items because they do not see themselves as spiritual. See Tables 1 and 2 for the means and standard deviations on the spirituality score and age for the groupings. Youth ranged in age from 10 to 18 years. Sixty-four percent of the sample was female, with European American comprising the majority of youth in the sample (79%) followed by Hispanic/Latino (6%), African American (5%), and Multiethnic (3%), with Asian/ Table 1 Sample size and mean ages for spiritual groups. Group

N

Mean Age (SD)

1. Established meaning in life 2. Be a good young person 3. Ambiguous spirituality

683 294 865

15.80 (1.2) 15.79 (1.2) 15.71 (1.3)

Means and standard deviations are based on Wave 6 spirituality scores. Youth were asked how they defined being a spiritual young person. Based on their answer, they were coded into one of the spiritual groups. Table 2 Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations among the study variables. 1 1. Gender 2. Rel_ID 3. Spirituality 4. W6 competence 5. W6 confidence 6. W6 connection 7. W6 character 8. W6 caring 9. W6 contribution 10. W7 competence 11. W7 confidence 12. W7 connection 13. W7 character 14. W7 caring 15. W7 contribution Mean Standard Deviation

2

1 .01 .00 .00 .00 .00 .01 .03 .02 .01 .03 .00 .01 .03 .00 .67 .55

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

1 .14* .06* .06* .14* .11* .12* .10* .30* .08 .11 .43* .36* .73*

1

.85 .35

3.49 1.3

.20* .18* .25* .28* .20* .25* .17* .17* .18* .22* .13* .07

1 .56* .48* .35* .22* .41* .71* .44* .37* .25* .17* .33* 56.7 13.5

1 .50* .33* .13* .28* .39* .68* .66* .21* .08 .15* 67.4 18.9

1 .50* .38* .52* .41* .34* .66* .34* .23* .40* 69.7 15.6

1 .61* .56* .25* .22* .33* .63* .41* .41* 72.8 14.9

1 .44* .18* .08 .21* .40* .55* .31* 75.3 17.9

1 .30* .08 .38* .43* .36* .73* 60 17.5

1 .59* .50* .37* .25* .37* 58.8 12.5

1 .44* .33* .13* .18* 69.5 17.9

1 .44* .26* .46* 72.7 13.7

1 .55* .49* 76.1 13.3

1 .42* 78.6 15.6

1 64.5 16.6

Notes: N ¼ 1842. The correlation coefficients between spirituality and the 6 Cs do not include control variables. Rel_ID: Youth who identified with a religious denomination were assigned a “1” and youth who did not identify with a religious denomination were assigned a “0”. Gender: Girls ¼ “1” and Boys ¼ “0”. W6 ¼ Wave 6. W7 ¼ Wave 7. *p < .01.

174

A.G. James, M.A. Fine / Journal of Adolescence 43 (2015) 171e180

Asian American, Native American, and “other” each comprising less than 3% of the sample. Fourteen percent identified as atheist, with 39% identifying as Protestant, 27% Catholic, and 18% as Other, with the remaining religious groups each comprising less than 2% (i.e., Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim). Overall, this sample appears to be of a higher than average socioeconomic status, with a median family income (based on parent reports at Wave 6) of $60,000, and a median maternal education level of 14 years. Measures Creating spiritual groups Each youth was asked the open ended question of “what does it mean to be a spiritual young person”. As explained above, we relied on the youth development literature to create three broad spiritual groups based on how youth conceptualize being spiritual. Next, each author used directed content analysis approach (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005) to code each respondent into one of the three categories; then, using undergraduate students, we overlapped 10 percent of the sample to run reliability checks on our coding. Any discrepancies in coding were discussed until an interrater agreement rate of 90% was reached. Next, we dummy coded the variables, using ambiguous spirituality as the referent group. To create the “established meaning” dummy variable, all youth in that group were assigned a “1.” All youth who were not assigned to this category received a “0.” To create the “be a good young person” dummy variable, all youth in that group were assigned a “1.” All remaining youth, for this dummy coded variable, were assigned a “0.” These two dummy coded variables were used to examine whether the relation between spirituality and youth outcomes varied depending on the spirituality group that youth were in. Means, standard deviations, and sample sizes for each of the spiritual groups can be found in Table 1. Youth development The dependent variables in this study were the 6 C traits (i.e., Competence, Confidence, Character, Connection, Caring and Compassion, and Contribution) of the PYD framework (Lerner et al., 2005). Competence Competence is a composite of 5 subscales: scholastic competence (5 items), social acceptance (5 items), close friendship (5 items), athletic competence (5 items), and grades (1 item). Items for the first four subscales were drawn from Harter's (1988) Self-Perception Profile for Adolescents (SPPA). For the grades subscale, the youths' grades ranged from .5 (mostly below Ds) to 4.0 (Mostly As). The Cronbach's alpha for the composite scale, based on the means of the 5 subscales, was .72 at Wave 6 and .76 at Wave 7. Confidence Confidence is composed of two subscales, positive identity (Theokas et al., 2005) and self-worth. This variable was constructed from a total of 11 items from the SPPA and from Benson, Leffert, Scales, and Blyth's (1998) Profile of Student LifeAttitudes and Behaviors Survey (PSLA-BS). A sample item from this subscale includes “On the whole I like myself,” with responses ranging from (1) strongly agree to (5) strongly disagree. The Cronbach's alpha, based on the means of the two subscales, was .81 at Wave 6 and .91 at Wave 7. Character Character is a composite of 4 subscales: Social conscience (6 items), values diversity (4 items), personal values (5 items), and conduct morality (5 items). The first three subscales are indexed from the PSL-AB, with the latter from SPPA. An example item includes “telling the truth, even when it's not easy,” with a response set that ranged from not important (1) to extremely important (5). Cronbach's alpha for the character composite scale, based on the means of the 4 subscales, was .89 at Wave 6 and .88 at Wave 7. Connection Connection is a composite of 4 subscales: connected to family (6 items), connected to neighborhood (5 items), connected to school (7 items), and connected to peers (4 items), the first three drawn from PSL-AB and the latter from Armsden and Greenberg's (1987) Peer Support Scale. Response options ranged from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (5) or (1) always true to (5) never true. Scores were reverse coded so that higher scores were indicative of more connection. The Cronbach's alpha for connection was .89 at Wave 6 and .90 at Wave 7. Caring This variable consists of nine items. Five items were from the Eisenberg Sympathy Scale (ESS; Eisenberg et al., 1996), with the remaining four items indexed from the Empathic Concern Subscale of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI; Davis, 1983). A sample item from this scale includes “When I see another person who is hurt or upset, I feel sorry for them,” with a response set of Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (5). The Cronbach's alpha for the caring scale, based on the composite score of the 9 items, was .83 at Wave 6 and .81 at Wave 7. Contribution Contribution is constructed from two components: ideological (6 items) and action (6 items). Items were drawn from Benson et al.'s (1998) Beyond Rhetoric Project and Small and Rogers's (1995) Teen Assessment Project. An example item used to

A.G. James, M.A. Fine / Journal of Adolescence 43 (2015) 171e180

175

construct this variable includes “I often thinking [sic] about doing things so that people in the future can have things better” with a response set of Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (5). The Cronbach's alpha for the composite contribution scale was .79 at Wave 6 and .81 at Wave 7. Procedure Data collection The 4-H study of PYD was an 8 year (2002e2010) longitudinal study that examined factors associated with youths' positive development (Lerner et al., 2009), with over 8000 youth located throughout the United States. The subsample for this study are drawn from Waves 6 (2008) and 7 (2009). For those waves, potential participants were recontacted (e.g., email, phone) and asked to participate in the follow-up, electronic, surveys. Analytic plan ANOVAs were used to examine differences in PYD scores among the three broad spiritual groups, and independent sample t tests to examine whether age and gender differences existed in the mean scores across the three groups. Lastly, we also tested whether any of the six PYD scores were significantly related to other demographic variables (i.e., religious affiliation [i.e., not affiliated, Protestant, Catholic] and identification [ID], maternal education level, and household income). A graphic representation of differential patterns of PYD acorss the spiritual groups is shown in Fig. 1. Results Findings revealed no gender, religious ID or affiliation, maternal education level, or household income based differences in scores on any of the PYD indicators. With the exception of the competence and confidence scores, for the established meaning group only, there were no age based effects on the PYD scores across the spirituality groups. An independent-samples t-test revealed significantly different competence scores between younger youth (M ¼ 57.92, SD ¼ 13.23) and older youth (M ¼ 60.16, SD ¼ 12.17); t(570) ¼ 2.11, p < .05. Additionally, results reveled a significant difference in confidence scores between younger youth (M ¼ 67.22, SD ¼ 18.87) and older youth (M ¼ 70.45, SD ¼ 17.89) t(571) ¼ 2.10, p < .05. Competence Results revealed significant differences in competence scores across the spiritual groups, F (2, 1719) ¼ 12.36, p < .001. Differences were due to youths in the established meaning (EM) group scoring significantly higher in competence (M ¼ 59.33; SD ¼ 12.88) than their peers in both the being a good person (BGP; M ¼ 56.79; SD ¼ 13.11) and ambiguous spirituality (AS; M ¼ 54.43; SD ¼ 13.71) groups, and youth in the BGP spiritual group scoring significantly higher than youth in the AS group. Confidence Results revealed significant differences in confidence scores across the spiritual groups, F (2, 1777) ¼ 5.67, p < .01. Differences were due to youths in the EM group having significantly higher confidence scores (M ¼ 69.07; SD ¼ 18.69) when compared to their peers in the AS group (M ¼ 65.82; SD ¼ 19.13). The confidence scores (M ¼ 68.05; SD ¼ 18.55) of the BGP group did not differ significantly from the other two groups. Character Results revealed significant differences in character scores F (2, 1774) ¼ 6.06, p < .01, due to youth in both the EM (M ¼ 75.17; SD ¼ 13.27) and BGP (M ¼ 74.56; SD ¼ 13.90) groups having significantly higher character scores than youth in the AS category (M ¼ 70.31; SD ¼ 15.94). Connection Results revealed mean differences in connection scores across the three spiritual groups F (2, 1712) ¼ 12.00, p < .001. Youth in both the ES (M ¼ 72.92; SD ¼ 13.67) and BGP (M ¼ 71.56; SD ¼ 13.07) groups scored higher than their peers in the AS group (M ¼ 66.55; SD ¼ 17.18). Caring Group differences in caring scores were revealed in our analysis, F (2, 1772) ¼ 9.48, p < .001. Youths in both the EM (M ¼ 77.95; SD ¼ 15.84) and BGP (M ¼ 77.86; SD ¼ 16.80) groups scored significantly higher in caring and compassion than youths in the AS group (M ¼ 72.24; SD ¼ 19.27).

176

A.G. James, M.A. Fine / Journal of Adolescence 43 (2015) 171e180

Contribution Significant differences in contribution scores were found across the three groups F (2, 1752) ¼ 14.533, p < .001, due to youth in both the EM (M ¼ 63.68; SD ¼ 16.23) and BGP (M ¼ 61.58; SD ¼ 15.97) groups having higher mean contribution scores than youth in the AS group (M ¼ 56.50; SD ¼ 18.32).

Fig. 1. Patterns of PYD across spiritual groups.

A.G. James, M.A. Fine / Journal of Adolescence 43 (2015) 171e180

177

Fig. 1. (continued).

Discussion Research provides empirical support for the notion that youths' self-perceived spirituality is an additional internal developmental asset (James et al., 2012; Warren et al., 2012). However, those studies did not consider how differences in spiritual conception relate to PYD. To address this gap, youth in this study were categorized into three groups, which aligned with how other scholars have conceptualized spirituality, to ascertain any differential patterns of PYD relative to differential notions of spirituality.

178

A.G. James, M.A. Fine / Journal of Adolescence 43 (2015) 171e180

Differentiated patterns between spiritual conceptions and PYD This study found that PYD differed based on the spiritual group they resided in, providing empirical support for the notion that how youth conceptualize spirituality is related to differential patterns of PYD. We discuss these findings in the context of positive relations between spiritual conception and PYD indicators, the patterned difference between more coherent and less coherent notions of spirituality, and the pattern of slight difference between the two more coherent notions of spirituality. Explaining positive relations between broad groups and PYD indicators It is important to point out that youth have more positive development when they perceive that spirituality is an asset in their lives (James et al., 2012). This means that youth who consider themselves to be spiritual scored higher on indicators of PYD. We briefly explain why this was the case for each of the three groups in this study. Established meaning in life The PYD framework hinges on the notion that there are certain strengths that can be developed and nurtured that place youth on a pathway towards thriving (Lerner et al., 2009), with spirituality being a possible robust inner strength to help youth thrive (James et al., 2012; Lerner et al., 2009; Warren et al., 2012). One remaining question is how the different conception of spirituality would be related to PYD? Previous works have argued that spiritual development involves transcending or connecting to a power source that is greater than the self (Hay & Nye, 2006; Lerner et al., 2009; Roehlkepartain et al., 2008). Importantly, those studies suggest that as youth internalize a type of spirituality that helps them think about and aid others in their social worlds, their prosocial tendencies are likely to be developed and/or strengthened. The findings of the current study provide empirical support for the power of an internalized belief that spirituality involves establishing meaning in life, particularly, in that it correlates with PYD. One possible explanation is that spirituality is the source that helps these youth orient their lives in a way that promotes educational achievement and socioemotional development (Hyde, 2008; Nye & Hay, 1996). Thus, it makes sense that this type of spirituality was highly related to each of the C indicators of the PYD model (James et al., 2012). Being a good young person Scholars believe that spirituality is the undergirding factor in youths' empathic and altruistic behavior (Hyde, 2008), which supports the idea that youth with this conception of spirituality would display behaviors that have more “prosocial tendencies” (Carlo, Fabes, Laible, & Kupanoff, 1999). Additionally, youth in this spiritual group possess a conceptualization of spirituality that encompasses being a generous young person. According to Warren et al. (2012), being generous is the foundation of spirituality, which has implications for youths' positive development because it is a virtue that is highly valued in societies across culture and history (Dahlsgaard, Peterson, & Seligman, 2001). This spiritual conceptualization, with its focus on youths being virtuous, having a positive disposition, and being non-conformist, closely resembles the very goals of PYD, which explains why these youths performed well on the PYD measures. Ambiguous spirituality The final spirituality group was ambiguous spirituality. Youth in this group had significantly lower PYD scores on all of the domains. According to Berryman (2001), spirituality has an unspoken quality; however, that does not take away from its potential importance to the lives of youths. But his argument suggests that this type of spirituality may exist on a continuum because he urges those with a vested interest in youths' spirituality to help nurture spiritual growth. Assuming spirituality exists on such a continuum, the cognitive processes (e.g., language development, more refined understanding of the self) that help youth coherently articulate their notion of spirituality can possibly help increase those same youths' levels of PYD. Though, because this study was correlational, the reverse could also be true. Coherent vs. non-coherent notions of spirituality Though youth can have spiritual orientations (established meaning, being a good person) that relate to PYD, how those orientations are defined matter. This is why different patterns of relations emerged in this study. We discuss this in terms of coherent vs. non coherent conceptions of spirituality and differences within coherent conceptions of spirituality. Each spiritual group defined in this study has literature to support theoretical links to PYD, raising the issue of whether all of the groups of spirituality operate similarly in their relation to PYD. The answer is no. Our view is that coherency in understanding of the construct explains the different patterns of relations between the PYD scores of youth in the coherent conceptions of spirituality (established meaning and being a good person) compared to youth with non-coherent notions of spirituality (ambiguous spirituality). Youth who had more coherent notions of spirituality likely had a better understanding of what spirituality meant to them, which explains their ability to clearly articulate it in the study. A clearer understanding of spirituality possibly increases their confidence, helping them commit to their beliefs. Conversely, youth with less coherent notions may suffer a reduced

A.G. James, M.A. Fine / Journal of Adolescence 43 (2015) 171e180

179

confidence in their belief systems, and become less likely to commitment to it. Not having a firm commitment to the internal spiritual belief system, impairing its relation to PYD, may partially explain the differential relations to PYD across the groups. Differences within coherent notions For most of the PYD indicators, there were no significant differences in scores across the youth in the two coherent spirituality groups. However, youth in the established meaning group scored significantly higher than youth in the being a good person category. Further, though not always significantly different, youth in the established meaning group scored higher than youth in the being a good kid on each of the PYD indicators. What explains these two differences? According to Lerner (2007), one of the architects of the PYD framework, competence “is the ‘C’ that anchors all of the others” (p. 73). The rationale behind this is that competence is what provides youth with the ability to perform well in the world. This particular conceptualization of spirituality appears to be undergirded by cognitive processes that help the youth gain a perspective about the world that helps them orient their lives in a particular way. It is precisely that worldview that gives them the needed confidence to commit to certain behavioral standards, which aligns with research showing that people are more confident in their decisions when they feel competent in given situations. Unique contributions made by this study The main takeaway finding from this study is that not all conceptions of spirituality can be treated as equal in regards to relations to PYD. One remaining question is how or whether this pattern, between conceptions of spirituality and PYD, changes over time. We ran an additional test to see how differences in conception were linked to long term PYD (i.e., one year later), but results revealed no significant associations. Several plausible reasons help explain the lack of significant longitudinal findings. First, notions of spirituality may not be a continuously salient factor in the lives of youth, therefore dampening its relation to PYD over time. Future studies should develop and employ methodologies that first test whether the saliency of spirituality changes across time and space and possibly measure spirituality at times when it is particularly salient to get a better understanding of the relation between spirituality and youths' positive adjustment. Secondly, trying to understand the spirituality ↔ PYD relation is admittedly an arduous task, especially when considering that the development and stability of spirituality is likely a process. Thus, notions of spirituality may fluctuate over time so one snapshot may not reflect its form later in life, nor its relation to PYD (and its changing nature) over the course of time. Limitations and future directions One limitation of this study is the lack of developmental findings that paints a picture of the pattern of relation between spirituality and PYD over time. With the foundation of adolescence being change; it is likely that youths' potentially changing notions of spirituality are complexly linked to PYD over time. Future studies should explore the developmental course of spirituality and its relation to change in PYD. Secondly, our sample was largely from upper-middle SES strata. Future studies should include more economically diverse youth, to elucidate an understanding of spirituality in PYD among all youth. Similarly, youth in these studies (because they were recruited from after school programs) may have already been on a positive trajectory. Future studies can examine selfperceived spirituality's potential transformative power. For instance does spiritual development change the course of a delinquent youths' developmental course from negative to positive? Also, our study relies on cross-sectional data. However, it is likely that similar to other aspects of adolescent development, youths' spirituality changes over time. Future studies should collect longitudinal spirituality data to examine its change in relation to change in PYD. Relatedly, cross-sectional data do not allow us to make inferences about the direction of the relationship between the spiritual groups and PYD. Additionally, many of the youth in this study were recruited from after school programs, which may privilege higher resourced youth and may not be representative of youth who are not enrolled in after school programs. Another possible limitation relates to how we categorized participants into 3 spirituality groups. We did it based on only a single self-report item, and it is not clear what youth in the ambiguous group really think of spirituality. Future studies can explore deeper meanings of spirituality within this broad group. Finally, all of the data obtained in this study were self-reported by the youth themselves, and multi-reporter data about youths' spirituality and their development may more accurately reflect the spirituality ↔ PYD relation and may avoid the potential biases inherent in using exclusively data from one informant per family. Conclusions Previous research has established that youths' perceived spirituality is an additional internal developmental asset that is linked to thriving behaviors (James et al., 2012; Warren et al., 2012); however, what this study found is that when examining the spirituality ↔ PYD relationship, the way youth conceptualize spirituality should also be considered. Of particular concern is whether youths' notions of spirituality are coherently articulated. Our study supports that having more coherent notions of one's spirituality is related to higher levels of PYD. Thus, it is important for practitioners and/or parents to help youth clarify

180

A.G. James, M.A. Fine / Journal of Adolescence 43 (2015) 171e180

their notions of spirituality. Based on our findings, the extent to which youth use their inner strengths to meaningfully contribute to social institutions in their environments are partly dependent upon how youth conceptualize being a spiritual young person. It is our belief that such processes may allow youth to increase their confidence in their internal standards, guiding their ability to thrive in their social worlds. Acknowledgments We send our sincere thanks to Jean Ispa, Duane Rudy, Russell Ravert, and Richard “Chip” Callahan for their invaluable feedback during the early phases of this study. This research was supported in part by a grant to Richard M. Lerner, Tufts University, from the National 4-H council. References Armsden, G. C., & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer attachment: individual differences and their relationship to psychological wellbeing in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 427e454. Benson, P. L., Leffert, N., Scales, P. C., & Blyth, D. A. (1998). Beyond the “village” rhetoric: creating healthy communities for children and adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 2, 138e159. Berryman, J. (2001). The non-verbal nature of spirituality and religious language. In J. Erricker, C. Ota, & C. Erricker (Eds.), Spiritual education. Cultural, religious, and social differences: New perspectives for the 21st century (pp. 9e21). East Sussex, UK: Sussex Academic Press. Carlo, G., Fabes, R. A., Laible, D., & Kupanoff, K. (1999). Early adolescence and prosocial/moral behavior II: the role of social and contextual influences. Journal of Early Adolescence, 19, 133e147. Dahlsgaard, K., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2001). Shared virtue: the convergence of valued human strengths across culture and history. Review of General Psychology, 9, 203e213. Damon, W. (2008). The path to purpose: Helping our children find their calling in life. New York: Free Press. Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 13e126. ttir, S., Anderson, P. M., von Eye, A., Almerigi, J., & Lerner, R. M. (2004). Structural relations among spirituality, religiosity, and thriving Dowling, E. M., Gestsdo in adolescence. Applied Developmental Science, 8, 7e16. Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Murphy, B. C., Karbon, M., Smith, M., & Maszk, P. (1996). The relations of children's dispositional empathy-related responding to their emotionality, regulation, and social functioning. Developmental Psychology, 32, 195e209. Harter, S. (1988). Manual for the self-perception profile for adolescents. Denver, CO: University of Denver. Hay, D., & Nye, R. (2006). The spirit of the child. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277e1288. Hyde, B. (2008). Children and spirituality: Searching for meaning and connectedness. Philadelphia, PA: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. James, A., Fine, M. A., & Turner, J. (2012). An empirical examination of youths' self-perceived spirituality as an internal developmental asset during adolescence. Applied Developmental Science, 16, 181e194. Lerner, R. M. (2004). Liberty: Thriving and civic engagement among American youth. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lerner, R. M., Lerner, J. V., Almerigi, J., Theokas, C., Phelps, E., Gestsdottir, S., et al. (2005). Positive youth development, participation in community youth development programs, and community contributions of fifth grade adolescents: findings from the first wave of the 4-H Study of Positive Youth Development. Journal of Early Adolescence, 25, 17e71. Lerner, R. M. (2007). The good teen. New York: Three Rivers Press. Lerner, R. M., Lerner, J. V., Phelps, E., & Colleagues. (2009). Waves of the future: Report of the findings from the first six years of the 4-H study of positive youth development. Tufts University. Retrieved on August 28, 2013 from http://ase.tufts.edu/iaryd/documents/4HStudyWavesOfFuture2009.pdf. Nye, R., & Hay, D. (1996). Identifying children's spirituality: where do you start without a starting point? British Journal of Religious Education, 18, 145e156. Roehlkepartain, E. C., Benson, P. L., Scales, P. C., Kimball, L., & King, P. E. (2008). With their own voices: A global exploration of how today's young people experience and think about spiritual development. Minneapolis, MN, USA: Search Institute. Retrieved on July 23, 2013 on from http://www.searchinstitute.org.php53-2.dfw1-2.websitetestlink.com/research/spiritual-development. Schafer, J. L. (1999). Multiple imputation: a primer. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 8(1), 3e15. Schnell, T., & Becker, P. (2006). Personality and meaning in life. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(1), 117e129. Small, S. A., & Rodgers, K. B. (1995). Teen Assessment Project (TAP) Survey Question Bank. Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison. Theokas, C., Almerigi, J., Lerner, R. M., Dowling, E. M., Benson, P. L., Scales, P. C., et al. (2005). Conceptualizing and modeling individual and ecological asset components of thriving in early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 25, 113e143. Warren, A. E., Lerner, R., & Phelps, E. (2012). Thriving and spirituality among youth: Research perspectives and future possibilities. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley.