ISSN 2215-3535
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), july-december, 2024, 18-32
DOI: 10.15517/ap.v38i137.58610
Esta obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional.
www.revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/actualidades
Universidad de Costa Rica
Eect of Spiritual Health and Resilience on Aggressiveness in
a Sample of Active Christian Young Adults
El efecto de la salud espiritual y la resiliencia en la agresividad en una muestra
de jóvenes adultos cristianos activos
Ruth Priscila Badilla Torres 1
https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9509-511X
Carlos Marcelo Moroni 2
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4148-7663
1,2,3,4 Facultad de Psicología, Universidad de Montemorelos, Nuevo León, México
1 ruthbadilla@um.edu.mx 2 carlosmarcelo@um.edu.mx 3 zcovarr@um.edu.mx 4 rrodriguez@um.edu.mx
Received: January 30th, 2024. Accepted: July 18th, 2024.
Abstract. Objective. This study evaluated the adequacy of a structural equation model examining the relation-
ship between spiritual health, resilience, and aggressiveness. Method. Four hundred young individuals (aged
18-30) from Costa Rica and Mexico (66.5% females, 33.5% males) actively involved in religious congregations
completed Spiritual Health, Mexican Resilience, and Aggression Questionnaire scales. Data was analyzed using
a structural equation model. The analysis revealed a statistically signicant but suboptimal t (χ2 = 224.333,
df = 51, p < .001). Nevertheless, the estimated t indices exhibited reasonably satisfactory t (CFI = .912, TLI =
.886, RMSEA = .092, SRMR = .060). Results. Spiritual health positively aects resilience and negatively aects
aggressiveness, while resilience negatively impacts aggressiveness. Consequently, fostering spiritual health may
enhance the positive response in challenging situations.
Keywords. Spiritual health, resilience, aggressiveness, young adults, structural equation model
Resumen. Objetivo. Este estudio evaluó el ajuste de un modelo de ecuaciones estructurales que examina la re-
lación entre la salud espiritual, la resiliencia y la agresividad. Método. Cuatrocientos jóvenes (de 18 a 30 años) de
Costa Rica y México (66.5% mujeres, 33.5% hombres) activamente involucrados en congregaciones religiosas
completaron las escalas de Salud Espiritual, Resiliencia Mexicana y Cuestionario de Agresión. Los datos fueron
analizados utilizando un modelo de ecuaciones estructurales. El análisis reveló un ajuste estadísticamente signi-
cativo pero subóptimo (χ² = 224.333, gl = 51, p < .001). No obstante, los índices de ajuste estimados mostraron
un ajuste razonablemente satisfactorio (CFI = .912, TLI = .886, RMSEA = .092, SRMR = .060). Resultados. La salud
espiritual afecta positivamente la resiliencia y negativamente la agresividad, mientras que la resiliencia impacta
negativamente en la agresividad. En consecuencia, fomentar la salud espiritual puede mejorar la respuesta
positiva en situaciones desaantes.
Palabras clave. Salud espiritual, resiliencia, agresividad, jóvenes adultos, modelo de ecuaciones estructurales
Zandra Covarrubias 3
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4685-1359
Raúl Rodríguez 4
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6766-4133
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
19
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
Introduction
As individuals mature, they gradually develop skills
that enhance their decision-making ability and solve
problems. Interaction with external factors, such as su-
pport from their social and familial networks, reinforces
specic skills. Conversely, others evolve intrinsically, as
seen in attributes like personal security, organization,
strength, structure, and social competence. Authors
like Palomar and Gómez (2010) have proposed these
concepts when dening the dimensions of resilience,
which they characterize as the capacity to eectively
confront and surmount challenges, ultimately leading
to personal growth and increased strength.
In the Latin American context, numerous adverse
experiences are encountered due to high levels of
aggressiveness. According to the ndings of Dalby
et al. (2022), an examination of the rankings for the
most violent cities in the world in 2021 reveals that a
signicant majority of the cities with the highest ho-
micide rates, precisely 38 out of the top 50, were in
this particular region. Notably, Mexico emerged as
the leader in this ranking, with nine out of the top 10
cities and 17 cities within the top 50. Consequently,
Mexico can be considered the global epicenter of
urban homicidal violence, with a homicide rate of
26.1 per 100,000 inhabitants (Pérez, 2023).
Regarding Costa Rica, there has been a concer-
ning surge in violence in recent years. The homicide
rate escalated from 12.5 per 100,000 inhabitants in
2022 to 17.2 in 2023, representing a 38% annual in-
crease nationwide. However, when examined by spe-
cic regions, the province of Limón registered a rate
of 45 per 100,000 inhabitants, and the increase in
violence for San José, the country’s capital, was 86%
(Pérez, 2024). Some experts indicate a direct inuence
between the national homicide trends in México and
those in Central America over the last decade (Pérez,
2023). Furthermore, it is noteworthy that Latin Ame-
rica and the Caribbean region collectively contribute
to 44% of the total number of homicides worldwide
despite comprising only 8% of the global population
(Muggah & Aguirre, 2018).
Unfortunately, these conditions signicantly in-
uence the emergence of aggressive behaviors, as
highlighted by previous research (Aroyewum et al.,
2022; Ferguson et al., 2009). Aggressiveness, a com-
plex and multifaceted phenomenon elucidated by
Card and Little (2007), involves a spectrum of actions
directed at causing harm to others (Sadeghifard et
al., 2020). This encompassing concept manifests in
diverse forms, such as physical aggressiveness, ver-
bal aggressiveness, as well as expressions of anger
and hostility (Buss & Perry, 1992).
The demographic most signicantly aected by
these circumstances is the younger generation. Ac-
cording to Muggah and Aguirre (2018), a study con-
ducted in 2017 revealed that nearly 50% of homicide
victims in Latin America belonged to the age group
of teenagers and young adults, specically ranging
from 15 to 29 years old. Notably, the age distribution
of the perpetrators exhibited a similar pattern. Con-
sequently, a noticeable increase in aggressive beha-
vior occurs during youth, peaking in early adulthood.
For this reason, protective factors are of vital
importance (Miranda et al., 2019), and among the-
se factors is the protective inuence of spirituality
in mitigating interpersonal violence (Gonçalves et
al., 2023), which is usually present in the context of
material and existential insecurity (Turrell and Almá-
si-Szabó, 2022). Spirituality, as a protective factor, not
only helps to reduce the incidence of violent beha-
viors but also provides a framework of reference and
emotional support that contributes to the overall
well-being of individuals in situations of adversity.
Some organizations have a primary objective of
promoting positive engagement among young in-
dividuals. Specically, religious groups implement
leadership and service initiatives to strengthen their
spiritual health. Studying specically spiritual health,
rather than simply spirituality, is crucial due to this
concept’s complexity and comprehensive nature.
Spiritual health is dened as “a state of well-being
in which the individual is in harmony with what they
consider sacred or superior, with themselves, with
others, and with nature. It involves experiencing a
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
20
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
monstrated by studies conducted by Crawford et al.
(2006), Jones et al. (2015), and Schwalm et al. (2021).
Additionally, Zardoshtian et al. (2017) conducted
research that unveiled the pivotal role of resilience
as a mediator in the relationship between spiritual
intelligence and aggression. To be more specic,
the study found that resilience acts as a mitigating
factor for aggressiveness by fostering increased to-
lerance towards adversities and stress, thereby har-
nessing the potential of spiritual intelligence.
Resilience has been highlighted in the literatu-
re as a protective feature against aggressiveness,
as indicated by substantial negative associations
observed in several studies, including those con-
ducted by Kim et al. (2015), Pachi et al. (2023), and
Sadeghifard et al. (2020). Likewise, the inclusion
of spirituality has been acknowledged as a factor
that provides a safeguard against violent behavior,
as indicated by statistically signicant inverse as-
sociations in several studies, including those done
by Baloochi et al. (2018), Kong & Seo (2010), and
Shorey et al. (2016).
This research aimed to evaluate the adequa-
cy of a structural equation model examining the
relationship between spiritual health, resilience,
and aggressiveness in a sample of active Christian
young adults. The study focused on a cohort of in-
dividuals actively involved in a Christian religious
organization between 18 and 30 years of age. Data
collection for this study occurred during the fourth
quarter of 2022. In this study, the researchers pro-
posed four hypotheses (see Figure 1):
H1: Spiritual health has a direct and positive eect
on resilience.
H2: Spiritual health has a direct and negative
eect on aggressiveness.
H3: Resilience has a direct and adverse eect on
aggressiveness.
H4: Resilience serves as a mediator in the relations-
hip between spiritual health and aggressiveness.
transcendent sense of life and an ultimate purpose
according to their belief system” (Korniejczuk et al.,
2020, p. 570). This holistic approach acknowledges
the interconnectedness of personal, communal, en-
vironmental, and transcendental domains, ultimately
contributing to overall health and well-being. Recog-
nizing and nurturing spiritual health can thus help in-
dividuals achieve greater harmony within themselves,
their communities, and the natural world, leading to
a more fullled and balanced life (Fisher, 2011).
This state of well-being encompasses three fun-
damental dimensions: the relationship with a Su-
preme Being, the relationship with oneself, and the
relationship with the environment (Moroni et al.,
2021). The relationship with a Supreme Being invol-
ves devotion and connection with a higher entity,
providing strength and a transcendent sense of life
in times of diculty. The relationship with oneself is
based on knowledge and coherence with one’s va-
lues and principles, generating harmony and inner
peace. On the other hand, the relationship with the
environment focuses on commitment and compas-
sion towards others and nature, promoting patience,
respect, and love (Moroni et al., 2022).
Numerous research studies have investigated
the impact of the variables mentioned above. For
instance, Borji et al. (2019) identied spirituality as
a signicant factor in promoting resilience. They
discovered that spirituality is closely linked to reli-
gious coping, encompassing practices and beliefs
that positively aect various health dimensions du-
ring stress. The authors utilized factorial analysis to
examine the relationship between spiritual health,
resilience, and self-esteem in their study. While they
did not nd a signicant direct association between
spiritual health and resilience, they did observe a
strong correlation between these two constructs
(r² = 0.45). As a result, the researchers suggest that
further investigation is necessary to explore this
connection in greater depth, especially considering
the potential mediating inuence of self-esteem.
Other researchers have emphasized the con-
nection between spirituality and resilience, as de-
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
21
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Method
Research design
This research used a non-experimental
cross-sectional design (Spector, 2019; Thompson &
Panacek, 2007) and employed structural equation
modeling. Consequently, this study can be classified
as predictive correlational research since its primary
objective is to assess the extent of the relationship
between different constructs (Hernández-Sampieri
et al., 2014).
Participants
Four hundred individuals from a Christian reli-
gious organization participated in this study. They
reported active involvement in spiritual activities
and living in 18 Mexican Republic states and seven
Costa Rica provinces. The demographic information
can be seen in Table 1.
According to Hoelter (1983), researchers should
consider a sample size of 200 or more cases ade-
quate for evaluating a structural equation model.
Kline (2011) mentions that this sample size threshold
corresponds to a medium sample size for structural
equation modeling studies. Furthermore, based on
the computational recommendations of Preacher
and Coman (2006), assuming a statistical power of
.80, a null hypothesis value for the RMSEA of .06, 50
degrees of freedom, and a signicance level of .05,
a minimum sample size of 389 cases was obtained.
Therefore, the sample size obtained for this study
was considered sucient.
The decision to include participants of both na-
tionalities was based on previous research on sam-
ples from the same organization, where similar re-
sults were found for all three variables. In the case
of Mexico, Covarrubias and Aguilar (2022) identied
the following values: (a) spiritual health (M = 135.86,
SD = 19.00), (b) resilience (M = 141.00, SD = 18.40)
and (c) aggressiveness (M = 53.20, SD = 13.56). As
for Costa Rica, Moroni et al. (2023), the results were:
(a) spiritual health (M = 131.82, SD = 20.38), (b) re-
silience (M = 141.49, SD = 18.86) and (c) aggressive-
ness (M = 58.08, SD = 13.41).
Spiritual Health
Aggresiveness
Resilience
H2
H1
H3
Figure 1. Proposed research model
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
22
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
kert scale, ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to
“strongly agree” (5).
For the evaluation of internal consistency validi-
ty, the authors reported the following Cronbach’s
alpha values: (a) strength and self-condence
(REFO) α = .92, (b) social competence (RECS) α
= .87, (c) family support (REAF) α = .87, (d) social
support (REAS) α = .84, and (e) structure (REES) α
= .79. The total internal consistency index had a
value of α = .93.
Aggression Questionnaire
The aggressiveness was evaluated using the Ag-
gression Questionnaire, a tool developed by Buss
and Perry (1992). This questionnaire consists of 29
items divided into four dimensions. Participants
were required to express their level of agreement
with each item on a ve-point Likert scale, ranging
from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (5).
For the assessment of internal consistency vali-
dity, the authors reported the following Cronbach’s
alpha values: (a) Physical Aggression (AGAF) α =
.85, (b) Verbal Aggression (AGAV) α = .72, (c) An-
ger (AGEN) α = .83, and (d) Hostility (AGHO) α
= .77. The total internal consistency index had a
value of α = .89.
Materials
Spiritual Health Scale
The spiritual health assessment was conducted
using the Spiritual Health Scale, developed by Kor-
niejczuk et al. (2020). This scale consists of 39 items
categorized into three dimensions. Participants
were required to indicate their level of agreement
with each item on a ve-point Likert scale, ranging
from “strongly disagree” (0) to “strongly agree” (4).
For the assessment of internal consistency va-
lidity, the authors reported the following Cron-
bach’s alpha values: (a) Relationship with a Supre-
me Being and spiritual beliefs (SESS) α = .949, (b)
Relationship with oneself (SECM) α = .938, and (c)
Relationship with others and with nature (SECE) α
= .921. The total internal consistency index had a
value of α = .901.
Mexican Resilience Scale (RESI-M)
The assessment of resilience level was conduc-
ted using the Mexican Resilience Scale, a tool de-
veloped by Palomar and Gómez (2010). This scale
consists of 43 items categorized into ve dimen-
sions. Participants were asked to indicate their
agreement level with each item on a ve-point Li-
Demographics Description Number Percentage
Age 18-20 138 35.4
21-25 162 40.5
26-30 48 25.0
Total 400 100.0
Gender Male 134 33.5
Female 266 66.5
Country México 200 50.0
Costa Rica 200 50.0
Total 400 100.0
Religion Seventh Day Adventist 400 100
Table 1. Demographic information
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
23
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
the study revealed satisfactory convergent validity for
the three measurement scales used, as evidenced by
Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values exceeding
.50, as Hair et al. (2014) recommend.
Moreover, the Fornell-Larcker criterion was em-
ployed to establish the presence of satisfactory dis-
criminant validity. This criterion compares the Average
Variance Extracted (AVE) square root with the corre-
lations between dierent constructs. In line with For-
nell and Larcker (1981), the results indicated in Table 2
showed that the square root of the AVE for each scale
exceeds the correlations between the constructs, con-
rming acceptable discriminant validity.
Before estimating the model parameters, the
assumption of multivariate normality was assessed
using the multivariate Shapiro-Wilk test. The results
of this analysis indicated a violation of the norma-
lity assumption (W = .925, p < .001). Consequent-
ly, the t of both the measurement and structural
models was evaluated using Maximum Likelihood
estimation with robust standard errors, and the
Satorra-Bentler scaled Chi-square test (Satorra &
Bentler, 1994).
The analysis revealed substantial evidence that
the test statistic for the measurement model’s t with
the sample data was statistically signicant, sugges-
ting suboptimal t (χ2 = 224.333, df = 51, p < .001).
Nevertheless, based on the estimated t indices, the
measurement model exhibited reasonably satis-
factory t (Comparative Fit Index [CFI] = .912, Tuc-
ker-Lewis Index [TLI] = .886, Root Mean Square Error
Procedures and analysis
For data collection, the youth leaders of a religious
organization were contacted. They received a brief
about the research and informed consent previously
approved by the university’s Ethics Committee of the
researchers. This consent encompassed information
regarding the objectives, procedures, privacy and
condentiality measures, potential risks, voluntary
participation, and information about the researchers.
Upon obtaining the approval of youth leaders,
the form was shared with the participants during
virtual meetings throughout the last quarter of
2022. They were briefed on the purpose of the re-
search and invited to participate voluntarily. The
form initially presented the informed consent, and
only those who agreed could proceed to the sub-
sequent sections containing the instruments. The
platform used was Google Forms.
In terms of data analysis, a robust approach was
employed, using computational tools to process
and interpret the gathered information, including
IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 25), R (R Core Team,
2023), the Lavaan package for R (Rosseel, 2012), and
Microsoft Excel®.
Results
The study’s ndings suggest that all three measure-
ment instruments exhibited satisfactory levels of inter-
nal consistency reliability, as assessed through Cron-
bach’s Alpha and McDonald’s Omega. Additionally,
Variable M SD α ω AVE Correlations
1 2 3
1. Spiritual Health 133.32 19.596 .901 .917 .793 .891
2. Resilience 141.61 18.360 .722 .807 .547 .555 .739
3. Aggressiveness 55.87 13.937 .837 .850 .594 -.332 -.350 .771
Note. M: mean, SD: standard deviation, α: Cronbach’s Alpha, ω: McDonald’s Omega, AVE: Average Variance Ex-
tracted. The values in bold on the diagonal represent the square roots of the Average Variance Extracted (AVE).
Table 2. Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations of the study variables
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
24
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
tween the congural and metric invariance models
and the chi-square dierence between the metric
and scalar invariance models were statistically sig-
nicant (χ2 = 28.654, df = 9, p < .001; χ2 = 43.426,
df = 9, p < .001, respectively).
On the other hand, Cheung and Rensvold
(2002) suggest that changes less than or equal
to .01 for the CFI values indicate that the null
hypothesis of invariance should not be rejected.
Therefore, changes in the CFI index (ΔCFI) were
calculated between the following pairs of models:
congural-metric and metric-scalar. For both ca-
ses, the value of ΔCFI is slightly greater than the
threshold value of .01 (see Table 3). In addition,
values for the SRMR and RMSEA indices were cal-
culated for the congural, metric, and scalar mo-
dels (see Table 3). For all the cases, the values of
the SRMR indices are lower than the desired value
of .08, meaning an acceptable t of the models
(Hu and Bentler, 1999). On the other hand, the
RMSEA index is greater than the threshold of .06,
as recommended by Hu and Bentler (1999) for a
good t of the models. However, it is less than the
value of .10, which indicates that the models can-
not be considered to have a poor t (Tabachnick
and Fidell, 2013).
Based on the previous results, it can be con-
cluded that the measurement model shows ac-
ceptable congural invariance, which is the base-
line model against the metric and scalar models
are compared. Standardized estimates of factor
of Approximation [RMSEA] = .092 [.081, .103], Stan-
dardized Root Mean Square Residual [SRMR] = .060).
Because the sample included participants from
two countries, a set of invariance tests for the mea-
surement model (congural, metric, and scalar) were
performed using Multigroup Conrmatory Factor
Analysis. These tests check the change in the good-
ness-of-t index when cross-group constraints are
set for the measurement model (Cheung & Rensvold,
2002; Kline, 2011). Congural invariance was tested by
specifying the same measurement model across the
two groups, but no constraints were imposed. For
this test, the chi-squared statistic was signicant (see
Table 3). Nevertheless, approximated goodness-of-t
indices were calculated because of the well-known
sample dependence of the chi-square statistic, which
could reject acceptable models. These indices suggest
acceptable congural invariance, which means that
the factor structure is similar for the two groups of
participants (CFI = .912, TLI = .886, and SRMR= .060).
Construct-level metric invariance was tested
by imposing cross-group equality constraints on
the factor loadings (Kline, 2011) and comparing
the chi-squared dierence test for the congural
and metric models. Scalar invariance was tested
by constraining the intercepts of the regression
equations for the observed variables to be similar
across the two groups (Schmitt & Kuljanin, 2008)
and by comparing the chi-squared dierence test
for the metric and the scalar models. The results
showed that both the chi-square dierence be-
Model χ2df CFI ΔCFI SRMR RMSEA (90% CI)
Unconstrained 224.333*51 .912 .060 .092(.081, .092)
Congural invariance 272.358*102 .915 .003 .061 .091(.080, .103)
Metric invariance 301.418*111 .904 -.011 .074 .093(.081, .104)
Scalar invariance 337.836*120 .893 -.011 .077 .095(.084, .106)
*p < .001
Table 3. Values for selected tests about measurement invariance for samples from México and Costa Rica
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
25
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
The analysis of the global Chi-square statistic
indicated no signicant evidence to support the
hypothesis that the sample covariance matrix is a
good t for the theoretical model covariance matrix
(χ² = 201.891, df = 50, p < .001). An analysis of the
approximate t indicators revealed the generally ac-
ceptable t quality (CFI = .923, TLI = .898, RMSEA =
.087 [.076, .099], SRMR = .058).
Moreover, the statistical signicance of the regres-
sion coecients for the structural relations, included in
the model as shown in Table 5, validates the formula-
ted hypotheses. This study’s ndings indicate a strong
relationship between spiritual health and resilience, as
well as a negative relationship between spiritual heal-
th and aggression. Additionally, a negative association
was found between resilience and aggressiveness.
The present study concludes by examining the
standardized indirect eect of spiritual health on
aggression, with resilience acting as a mediator.
Using the values reported in Table 5, this eect was
estimated as the product of the two paths, resul-
ting in .656 x -.249 = -.163. Furthermore, the overall
standardized eect of spiritual health on aggressi-
veness is determined to be -.351. Conversely, the
unstandardized indirect eect of spiritual health on
aggression is .307 x -.338 = -.103. This suggests that
aggressiveness decreases by approximately 0.10
points for each point increase in the variable of spi-
ritual health in its original metric, mediated through
its prior eect on resilience.
The Sobel test (Baron & Kenny, 1986; Kline, 2011)
was utilized to assess the signicance of the indi-
rect eect. This analysis used the unstandardized
regression coecients and standard errors in Table
5. The results indicated that the indirect eect of
spiritual health on aggressiveness, with resilien-
ce as a mediator, was signicant (Z = -2.669, p =
.008). Moreover, because the assumption that the
product of the coecients for the indirect eect
follows a normal distribution, which is required for
the Sobel test, may not be valid, a bootstrap resam-
pling with a replacement approach was performed
(Hayes & Scharkow, 2013; Preacher & Hayes, 2004).
loadings for this model are provided in Table 4. In
addition, some evidence was found for not rejec-
ting the hypothesis of metric and scalar invariance
of the measurement model.
Variable Costa Rica México
AGAF .65 .74
AGAV .80 .75
AGEN .82 .86
AGHO .74 .80
SECE .77 .86
SECM .95 .94
SESS .86 .91
REAF .60 .67
REAS .51 .59
RECS .67 .68
REES .56 .77
REFO .85 .75
Table 4. Standardized parameter estimates of the con-
gural model of Mexican and Costa Rican responses to
Spiritual Health, Resilience, and Aggressiveness items
The indicator variables used to validate the struc-
tural model were the total scores obtained for the
items within each dimension of the three constructs
included in the model, as shown in Figure 2. Re-
viewing the model t, it was decided to correlate the
Family Support (REAF) and Social Support (REAS)
dimensions, considering that the attachment for-
med from early childhood is fundamental for the
subsequent emotional development of the indivi-
dual (Bowlby, 1969). As people grow, they seek and
depend on dierent sources of support within their
social environment (Bowlby, 1980). From the life cy-
cle theory perspective, McGoldrick and Carter (2011)
describe how youth is a stage where both the pri-
mary network (family) and the secondary network
(social support) signicantly inuence well-being and
help in facing adversities.
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
26
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
Discussion
This study aimed to evaluate the adequacy of a
structural equation model examining the relations-
hip between spiritual health, resilience, and aggres-
siveness in a sample of active Christian young adults.
To address the research objectives, the study formu-
Using 1000 bootstrap samples, the indirect eect of
spiritual health on aggression, with resilience acting
as a mediator, was estimated as -.104, 95% CI [-.190,
-.022]. Since this condence interval does not con-
tain zero, it can be concluded that the indirect eect
is signicantly dierent from zero.
Hypothesis Relationship β1 SE β2 p
H1 Spiritual Health → Resilience .307 .044 .656 < .001
H2 Spiritual Health → Aggressiveness -.119 .048 -.188 .013
H3 Resilience → Aggressiveness -.338 .117 -.249 .004
Note. β1: Unstandardized regression coecient; SE: Standard Error; β2: Standardized regression coecient.
Table 5. Structural relationships between variables
Resilience
Spiritual Health Aggressiveness
REAF REAS RECS REES REFO
SECE
SECM
SESS
AGAF AGAV AGEN AGHO
.82
.66
.68
.50
.59
.81
.93
.88
.66 -.25
-.19
.69 .78 .85 .77
.28
Figure 2. Standardized parameter estimates of the structural model
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
27
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
as compassion, forgiveness, gratitude, a sense of
divine purpose, and appreciation toward a higher
authority. These characteristics clearly distinguish
themselves from negative emotional states and de-
liberate hostile behaviors.
In conjunction with maintaining spiritual health,
resilience plays a pivotal role in regulating aggressive
tendencies. The development of resilience, encom-
passing attributes such as strength, self-assurance,
and interpersonal skills, contributes to the acquisition
of procient problem-solving capabilities and emo-
tional regulation aptitude. It enhances the capacity
of people to cope eectively with stress and navigate
interpersonal conicts, thereby fostering the deve-
lopment of positive behaviors, as evidenced by the
ndings of Reich et al. (2010).
Both spiritual health and resilience are signi-
cantly inuenced by external sources of support,
as exemplied by the initiatives undertaken by reli-
gious organizations. These programs play a funda-
mental role as protective elements, eectively mi-
tigating the emergence of aggressive behaviors, a
notion corroborated by the research of García-Vega
and Domínguez-de la Ossa (2013).
Concerning the nal hypothesis, ndings in-
dicate that resilience can indeed be considered a
mediating variable for mitigating aggressiveness
in this sample. This may be attributed to resilience,
enabling young individuals to manage stress and
conict situations better, leading to less aggressi-
ve behavior (Williams & Taylor, 2021). Other studies
have also examined resilience as a mediator, such
as Cerquera et al. (2020), who concluded that it can
mediate the relationship between coping strategies
and aggressiveness, and Aldao et al. (2010), who su-
ggest that resilience plays a signicant role in how
individuals cope with stressful life events, such as
the death of a loved one.
Among the limitations of this study is that the
ndings are specic to Christian young adults acti-
vely engaged in religious congregations, which may
constrain the generalizability of the results to other
populations. The inherent characteristics of the
lated the following hypotheses: (a) spiritual health
positively aects resilience; (b) spiritual health nega-
tively aects aggressiveness; (c) resilience negatively
aects aggressiveness; and (d) resilience acts as a
mediator connecting spiritual health with aggressi-
veness. The information obtained from the sample
data supported all the hypotheses and the model.
These ndings suggest a signicant relationship
between spiritual health and resilience, primarily when
individuals draw upon their spiritual resources du-
ring challenging circumstances. According to Huerta
and Rivera (2017), higher levels of spiritual health are
positively correlated with an increased wealth of re-
sources, highlighting the fundamental role of spiritual
health in fostering eective coping strategies.
Furthermore, as observed by Brooks and Goldstein
(2004), it fosters the development of qualities that be-
net the broader social structure. This includes promo-
ting empathy, generating proactive and meaningful
contributions to society, and cultivating a purposeful
existence driven by intentional values. Moreover, it
encourages a constructive perception of individuality,
characterized by a reduced focus on oneself, thereby
signicantly amplifying its impact through the promo-
tion of personal agency.
Similarly, Cosmas et al. (2022) highlight the in-
tricate interrelationship between resilience and spi-
rituality in their connection to quality of life. Their
research unveils a substantially relevant interaction,
thus emphasizing that robust spirituality facilitates
more eective time management, heightened mo-
tivation, adept emotional handling, and more eec-
tive social interaction. This set of skills leads to more
enriching relationships with oneself and others.
The current study’s ndings align with the re-
search of Alorani and Alradaydeh (2017), which
found that spirituality plays a crucial role in reducing
aggressive behavior. The study’s results demonstra-
ted a statistically signicant inverse relationship be-
tween elevated levels of spiritual health and redu-
ced levels of aggression across its four dimensions.
Additionally, Jang et al. (2018) emphasize that
spirituality strongly correlates with qualities such
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
28
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
sample, including high levels of spiritual health and
resilience, may have inuenced the outcomes. Mo-
reover, the reliance on self-reported data introdu-
ces potential biases, such as social desirability and
subjective interpretation of survey questions. Futu-
re research should consider incorporating diverse
samples and objective measures to validate these
ndings. Additionally, comparing the results of this
research by including religions other than Christia-
nity would be benecial.
Some researchers have examined additional fac-
tors associated with spirituality and aggression that
could potentially serve as mediators for future investi-
gations. These factors include happiness, as explored
by Kong and Seo (2010), self-esteem, as investigated
by Borji et al. (2019), and moral identity, as examined
by Hardy et al. (2012). Finally, substantial evidence has
been found regarding negative correlations between
aggressiveness and self-control (Peker & Yildiz, 2021),
prosocial behavior, and empathy (Llorca et al., 2014),
as well as self-esteem (Rill et al., 2009).
Furthermore, it is essential to continue exploring
the specic mechanisms through which spiritual re-
sources enhance survival strategies. Investigating
these mechanisms could yield valuable insights for
developing targeted interventions to strengthen
spiritual health to promote resilience.
Recognizing the role of external support, espe-
cially from religious organizations, in inuencing
spiritual health and resilience, practitioners and
policymakers should collaborate with these entities
to design and implement programs that promote
spiritual health and resilience. These initiatives may
involve educational seminars, community engage-
ment activities, and support networks to eectively
enhance individuals’ capacity to address challenges.
Finally, longitudinal studies that allow for a more
comprehensive exploration of the nature and direc-
tion of the relationship between spiritual health and
aggression over time should be conducted. Similarly,
specic interventions to strengthen spiritual health
are proposed as a potential strategy for reducing
aggression in clinical and community settings. The-
se recommendations aim to enrich understanding of
the interaction between the spiritual dimension and
aggressive behavior and guide the development of
eective interventions in this domain.
This study underscores the signicant roles of
spiritual health and resilience in reducing aggressi-
ve behaviors among young Christian adults actively
involved in religious congregations. These insights
suggest that fostering spiritual health through tar-
geted interventions may be an eective strategy
for promoting resilience and mitigating aggression.
Collaboration between practitioners, policymakers,
and religious organizations is essential to design
and implement programs that enhance spiritual
health and resilience, ultimately contributing to po-
sitive behavioral outcomes.
References
Aldao, A., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Schweizer, S. (2010).
Emotion-regulation strategies across psychopa-
thology: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psycholo-
gy Review, 30, 217-237.
Alorani, O. I., & Alradaydeh, M. F. (2017). Depression,
aggression and spiritual well-being among the
university students in Jordan. European Scienti-
c Journal January, 13(2), 269-280. http://dx.doi.
org/10.19044/esj.2016.v13n2p269
Aroyewum, B. A., Adeyemo, S. O., & Nnbuko, D. C. (2022).
Aggressive behavior: Examining the psychological
and demographic factors among university stu-
dents in Nigeria. Cogent Psychology, 10(1), 2154916.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2022.2154916
Baloochi, A., Abazari, F., & Mirzaee, M. (2018). The relationship
between spiritual intelligence and aggression in medi-
cal science students in the southeast of Iran. Interna-
tional Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 32(3),
20170174. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijamh-2017-0174
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator
variable distinction in social psychological research:
Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.
Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6),
1173-1182. http://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
29
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
partian, P. E. King & P. L. Benson (Eds.), The Han-
dbook of Spiritual Development in Childhood and
Adolescence (pp. 355-370). Sage Publications.
Covarrubias, Z. E., & Aguilar, F. L. (2022). Salud espiritual,
agresividad y resiliencia en una muestra de jóve-
nes adventistas mexicanos. Psico Sophia, 4(1), 16-
22. http://psicosophia.um.edu.mx/ojs/index.php/
psicosophia/article/view/40/32
Dalby, C., Asmann, P., & Gorder, G. (2022, March 24).
Why does Latin America dominate the World’s
most violent cities list? InSight Crime. https://
insightcrime.org/news/latin-america-strangle-
hold-world-most-violent-cities-list/
Ferguson, C., San Miguel, C., & Hartley, R. D. (2009). A mul-
tivariate analysis of youth violence and aggression:
The inuence of family, peers, depression, and me-
dia violence. The Journal of Pediatrics, 155(6), 904-
908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2009.06.021
Fisher, J. (2011). The Four Domains Model: Connecting
spirituality, health and well-being. Religions, 2(1),
17-28. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel2010017
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equa-
tion models with unobservable variables and mea-
surement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1),
39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
García-Vega, M. C., & Domínguez-de la Ossa, E. (2013).
Desarrollo teórico de la resiliencia y su aplica-
ción en situaciones adversas: una revisión ana-
lítica. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias So-
ciales, Niñez y Juventud, 11(1), 63-77. https://doi.
org/10.11600/1692715x.1113300812
Gonçalves, J. P. B., Lucchetti, G., Maraldi, E. O., Fernandez,
P. E. L., Menezes, P. R., & Vallada, H. (2023). The role
of religiosity and spirituality in interpersonal violen-
ce: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Brazi-
lian Journal of Psychiatry, 45(2), 162-181. https://doi.
org/10.47626/1516-4446-2022-2832
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E.
(2014). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed.). Pearson
Education Limited.
Borji, M., Memaryan, N., Khorrami, Z., Farshadnia, E., &
Sadighpour, M. (2019). Spiritual health and resilien-
ce among university students: The mediating role
of self-esteem. Pastoral Psychology, 69(1), 1-10. ht-
tps://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-019-00889-y
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss: Volume 1. Attach-
ment. Basic Books
Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 3. Loss. Sad-
ness and Depression. Basic Books
Brooks, R., & Goldstein, S. (2004). The Power of Resilience.
McGraw-Hill.
Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. (1992). The aggression questionnai-
re. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(3),
452-459. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.3.452
Card, N. A., & Little, T. D. (2007). Studying aggression
with structural equation modeling. In D. Flannery,
A. Vazsonyi & I. Waldman (Eds.), The Cambridge
Handbook of Violent Behavior and Aggression (pp.
727-739). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.
org/10.1017/CBO9780511816840.038
Cerquera, A. M., Matajira, Y. J., & Peña, A. J. (2020). Es-
trategias de afrontamiento y nivel de resiliencia
presentes en adultos jóvenes víctimas del conic-
to armado colombiano: un estudio correlacional.
Psykhe, 29(2), 1-14. https://dx.doi.org/10.7764/
psykhe.29.2.1513
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating good-
ness-of-t indexes for testing measurement inva-
riance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidiscipli-
nary Journal, 9(2), 233-255. https://doi.org/10.1207/
S15328007SEM0902_5
Cosmas, G., Gussago, L., Seok, C. B., & Ading, C. (2022).
The eects of resiliency on university students’ ha-
ppiness and life eectiveness amid the COVID-19
pandemic: Religious faith stands as a moderator. The
International Journal of Religion and Spirituality in
Society, 12(2), 29-41. https://doi.org/10.18848/2154-
8633/CGP/v12i02/29-41
Crawford, E., O’Dougherty, M., & Masten, A. S. (2006).
Resilience and spirituality in youth. In E. C. Roehke-
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
30
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural
Equation Modeling (3a ed.). The Guilford Press.
Kong, E. S., & Seo, H. S. (2010). A study on the relations-
hip among spiritual well-being, aggression, and
happiness of the students in Christian universities.
Journal of the Korean Society of School Health, 23(2),
266-275. http://www.jkssh.or.kr/journal/view.ht-
ml?spage=266&volume=23&number=2
Korniejczuk, V. A., Moroni, C. M., Quiyono, E., Rodríguez,
J., Valderrama, A., Charles-Marcel, Z. L., Barriguete,
J. A., & Córdova, J. Á. (2020). La salud espiritual, su
evaluación y su papel en la obesidad, la diabetes
mellitus y otras enfermedades crónicas no trans-
misibles. En J. M. Abdo, C. A. Aguilar, F. Alillaire &
T. Barrientos (Comps.), Nutrición, obesidad, BDM,
HTA, dislipidemias, TCA y salud mental (pp. 561-
586). Producciones Sin Sentido Común.
Llorca, A., Mesurado, B., & Samper, P. (2014). El rol me-
diador de la empatía, la conducta prosocial y la
conducta agresiva en la depresión y la ansiedad.
Ansiedad y estrés, 20(2), 245-256. https://ri.conicet.
gov.ar/bitstream/handle/11336/33565/CONICET_
Digital_Nro.e8e64be6-3e95-4e65-b995-990e3c-
69da86_A.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
McGoldrick, M., & Carter, B. (2011). The expanded family
life cycle: Individual, family, and social perspectives.
Pearson Education
Miranda, R., Oriol, X., & Amutio, A. (2019). Risk and pro-
tective factors at school: Reducing bullies and pro-
moting positive bystanders’ behaviors in adoles-
cence. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 60(2),
106-115. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12513
Moroni, C. M., Olmedo, L. A., & Korniejczuk, V. (2022). Sa-
lud espiritual, clima organizacional y funcionamien-
to familiar. Revista de Psicoterapia, 33(122), 143-156.
https://doi.org/10.33898/rdp.v33i122.994
Moroni, C. M., Olmedo, L. A., Manzano, M., Korniejczuk,
V. A., Guerrero, D. A., Quiyono, E., & Gugliandolo,
M. C. (2021). Spiritual health, family functioning and
symptoms of depression and anxiety among adults
from a sample of northeastern Mexico. Cogent Psy-
Hardy, S. A., Walker, L. J., Rackham, D. D., & Olsen, J. A.
(2012). Religiosity and adolescent empathy and ag-
gression: The mediating role of moral identity. Psy-
chology of Religion and Spirituality, 4(3), 237-248.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027566
Hayes, A. F., & Scharkow, M. (2013). The relative trustwor-
thiness of inferential tests of the indirect eect in
statistical mediation analysis: Does method really
matter? Psychological Science, 24(10), 1918-1927. ht-
tps://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613480187
Hernández-Sampieri, R., Fernández, C., & Baptista, M. P.
(2014). Metodología de la investigación (6a ed.). Mc-
Graw Hill Education.
Hoelter, J. W. (1983). Factorial invariance and self-esteem:
Reassessing race and sex dierences. Social Forces,
61(3), 834-846. https://doi.org/10.2307/2578137
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cuto criteria for t indexes
in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria
versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Mode-
ling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.
org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Huerta, Y., & Rivera, M. E. (2017). Resiliencia, recursos fami-
liares y espirituales en cuidadores de niños con dis-
capacidad. Journal of Behavior, Health & Social Issues,
9(2), 70-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbhsi.2018.01.005
Jang, S. J., Johnson, B. R., Hays, J., Hallett, M., & Duwe, G.
(2018). Existential and virtuous eects of religiosity on
mental health and aggressiveness among oenders.
Religions, 9(6), 182. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel9060182
Jones, K., Simpson, G. K., Briggs, L., & Dorsett, P. (2015).
Does spirituality facilitate adjustment and resilience
among individuals and families after SCI? Disability
and Rehabilitation, 38(10), 921-935. https://doi.org/
10.3109/09638288.2015.1066884
Kim, J., Seok J., Choi, K., Jon, D., Hong, J. H., Hong, N., & Lee,
E. (2015). The protective role of resilience in attenua-
ting emotional distress and aggression associated with
early-life stress in young enlisted military service can-
didates. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 30(11), 1667-
1674. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2015.30.11.1667
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
31
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
R Core Team. (2023). R: A language and environment for
statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical
Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
Reich, J. W., Zautra, A. J., & Stuart, J. (2010). Handbook of
Adult Resilience. The Guilford Press.
Pérez, M. (2024, January 02). Costa Rica cierra el 2023
como el año más violento de su historia. El Econo-
mista. https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/
Mexico-con-la-novena-tasa-mas-alta-de-homici-
dios-en-America-20231211-0013.html
Rill, L., Baiocchi, E., Hopper, M., Denker, K., & Olson, L.
N. (2009). Exploration of the relationship between
self-esteem, commitment, and verbal aggressi-
veness in romantic dating relationships. Com-
munication Reports, 22(2), 102-113. https://doi.
org/10.1080/08934210903061587
Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R Package for structural
equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software,
48(2), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Correction to test sta-
tistics and standard errors in covariance structure
analysis. In A. Von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent
Variable Analysis: Applications for Developmental
Research (pp. 399-419). Sage Publications.
Sadeghifard, Y. Z., Veisani, Y., Mohamadian, F., Azizifar, A.,
Naghipour, S., & Aibod, S. (2020). Relationship be-
tween aggression and individual resilience with the
mediating role of spirituality in academic students.
A path analysis. Journal of Education and Health
Promotion, 9(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.
jehp_324_19
Schwalm, F. D., Zandavalli, R. B., de Castro, E. D., & Luc-
chetti, G. (2021). Is there a relationship between
spirituality/religiosity and resilience? A systematic
review and meta-analysis of observational studies.
Journal of Health Psychology, 27(5), 1218-1232. ht-
tps://doi.org/10.1177/1359105320984537
Schmitt, N., & Kuljanin, G. (2008). Measurement invarian-
ce: Review of practice and implications. Human Re-
source Management Review, 18(4), 210-222. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.03.003
chology, 8(1), 1980259. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331
1908.2021.1980259
Moroni, C. M., Covarrubias, Z., & Badilla, R. P. (2023).
Spiritual health, aggression and resilience in
a sample of young Costa Ricans. South Flori-
da Journal of Health, 4(1), 45-60. https://doi.
org/10.46981/sfjhv4n1-005
Muggah, R., & Aguirre, K. (2018). Citizen Securi-
ty in Latin America: Facts and gures. Igarapé
Institute. https://igarape.org.br/wp-content/
uploads/2018/04/Citizen-Security-in-Latin-Ame-
rica-Facts-and-Figures.pdf
Pachi, A., Kavourgia, E., Bratis, D., Fytsilis, K., Papageorgiu, S.
M., Lekka, D., Sikaras, C., & Tselebis, A. (2023). Anger
and aggression in relation to psychological resilience
and alcohol abuse among health professionals du-
ring the rst pandemic wave. Healthcare, 11(14), 1-25.
https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11142031
Palomar, J., & Gómez, N. (2010). Desarrollo de una es-
cala de medición de la resiliencia con mexicanos
(RESI-M). Interdisciplinaria, 27(1), 7-22. http://www.
scielo.org.ar/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pi-
d=S1668-70272010000100002
Peker, A., & Yildiz, M. N. (2021). Mediating role of
self-control in the relationship between aggressi-
veness and cyber bullying. Psychiatry and Behavio-
ral Sciences, 11(1), 40-49. https://doi.org/10.5455/
PBS.20210114051215
Pérez, M. (2023, December 11). México, con la novena
tasa más alta de homicidios en América. El Econo-
mista. https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/
Mexico-con-la-novena-tasa-mas-alta-de-homici-
dios-en-America-20231211-0013.html
Preacher, K. J., & Coman, D. L. (2006). Computing power
and minimum sample size for RMSEA [Computer
software]. http://quantpsy.org/
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS pro-
cedures for estimating indirect eects in simple
mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Ins-
truments, & Computers, 36(4), 717-773. https://doi.
org/10.3758/BF03206553
Spiritual Health, Resilience and Aggressiveness in Young Adults
Actualidades en Psicología, 38(137), 2024.
32
INTRO METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
Turrell, J., & Almási-Szabó, L. (2022). Insecurity and reli-
giosity in Central America: A comparative study. The
International Journal of Religion and Spirituality in
Society, 13(1), 79-97. https://doi.org/10.18848/2154-
8633/CGP/v13i01/79-97
Williams, R., & Taylor, M. (2021). Psychological resilien-
ce and aggression in emerging adulthood. Deve-
lopmental Psychology, 57(4), 210-225. https://doi.
org/10.9101/dp.2021.78901
Zardoshtian, S., Karimi, J., & Hosseini, M. (2017). Explain
the relationship between spiritual intelligence and
aggression with mediating role of resiliency in be-
tween Asian Kung Fu workers. Organizational Be-
havior Management in Sport Studies, 5(1), 55-62.
https://journals.pnu.ac.ir/article_3594_4f65d7e81c-
c0a8276f1d7f03729fb0dc.pdf
Shorey, R. C., Elmquist, J., Anderson, S., & Stuart, G. L.
(2016). The relationship between spirituality and
aggression in a sample of men in residential subs-
tance use treatment. International Journal of Men-
tal Health and Addiction, 14(1), 23-30. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11469-015-9565-y
Spector, P. E. (2019). Do not cross me: Optimizing the use
of cross-sectional designs. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 34(1), 125-137. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10869-018-09613-8
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using Multivariate
Statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
Thompson, C. B., & Panacek, E. A. (2007). Research study
designs: Non-experimental. Air Medical Journal,
26(1), 18-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amj.2006.10.003
