Big meta-analysis: Religious people self-report higher well-being, specially in more religious societies

A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being. Suzanne Hoogeveen et al. Religion, Brain & Behavior, Jul 6 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2022.2070255

Abstract: The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N=10,535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β=0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β=0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates.

Keywords: Healthmany analystsopen sciencereligion

5. Summary

In the current project, 120 analysis teams were given a large cross-cultural dataset (N=10,535, 24 countries) in order to investigate two research questions: (1) “Do religious people self-report higher well-being?” and (2) “Does the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depend on perceived cultural norms of religion?.” In a two-stage procedure, the teams first proposed an analysis and then executed their planned analysis on the data.

Perhaps surprisingly in light of previous many-analysts projects, results were fairly consistent across teams. For research question 1 on the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being, all but three teams reported a positive effect size and confidence/credible intervals that exclude zero. For research question 2, the results were somewhat more variable: 95%$95\text{\%}$ of the teams reported a positive effect size for the moderating influence of cultural norms of religion on the association between religiosity and self-reported well-being, with 65%$65\text{\%}$ of the confidence/credible intervals excluding zero. While most teams used (multilevel) linear regression, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variable, the dependent variable, and the included covariates.

A further discussion of these results including limitations and broader implications, as well as a reflection on the many-analysts approach is covered in the closing article (Hoogeveen et al., 2022). There, we also address the commentaries written by some of the analysis teams.