Mehmet Eskin1, Nazlı Baydar2, Mayssah El-Nayal3, Nargis Asad4, Isa Multazam Noor5, Mohsen Rezaeian6, Ahmed M Abdel-Khalek7, Fadia Al Buhairan8, Hacer Harlak9, Motasem Hamdan10, Anwar Mechri11, Ulker Isayeva12, Yousef Khader13, Aqeel Khan14, Alaa Al Sayyari15, Albaraa Khader13, Bahareh Behzadi6, Cennet Şafak Öztürk9, Hazem Agha10, Laifa Annisa Hendarmin16, Murad Moosa Khan4. 1. Koc University, College of Social Sciences and Humanities, Department of Psychology, Istanbul, Turkey. Electronic address: meskin@ku.edu.tr. 2. Koc University, College of Social Sciences and Humanities, Department of Psychology, Istanbul, Turkey. 3. Beirut Arab University, Faculty of Arts, Department of Psychology, Beirut, Lebanon. 4. Aga Khan University, Medical College, Department of Psychiatry, Karachi, Pakistan. 5. Dr Soeharto Heerdjan Mental Hospital, Jakarta, Indonesia. 6. Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan Medical School, Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, Rafsanjan, Iran. 7. Alexandria University, Faculty of Arts, Department of Psychology, Alexandria, Egypt. 8. Al Dara Hospital and Medical Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA. 9. Aydin Adnan Menderes University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Department of Psychology, Aydin, Turkey. 10. Al-Quds University, School of Public Health, Jerusalem, Palestine. 11. Department of Psychiatry, University Hospital of Monastir, Monastir, Tunisia. 12. Khazar University, Department of Psychology, Baku, Azerbaijan. 13. Jordan University of Science & Technology, Department of Community Medicine, Public Health and Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Irbid, Jordan. 14. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Faculty of Social Sciences & Humanities, Johor, Malaysia. 15. The Center for Health Research Studies, Saudi Health Council, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; King Abdullah International Medical Research Center / King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Population Health Research Section-Hospital-MNGHA, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 16. Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, Faculty of Medicine, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study investigated the associations of religiosity, religious coping and suicide acceptance to suicide ideation and attempts in 7427 young adults affiliating with Islam from 11 Muslim countries. METHOD: A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect the data. We used F and χ2 tests and correlation analyses to report descriptive statistics. Multi-group path models with (i) a zero-inflated Poisson distribution and, (ii) a Binomial distribution were used to model the number of occurrences of suicidal ideation, and occurrence of a suicide attempt, respectively. RESULTS: Religiosity was negatively associated with acceptability of suicide, but it was positively related to punishment after death across the 11 countries. Religiosity was negatively associated with ever experiencing suicidal ideation, both directly and indirectly through its association with attitudes towards suicide, especially the belief in acceptability of suicide. Neither positive nor negative religious coping were related to suicidal ideation. However, religiosity was negatively related to suicide attempts among those who experienced suicidal ideation at least once. This association was mediated through the belief in acceptability of suicide and religious coping. Negative religious coping was positively associated with suicide attempts probably because it weakened the protective effects of religiosity. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study suggest that the effects of religiosity in the suicidal process operate through attitudes towards suicide. We therefore conclude that clinical assessment as well as research in suicidology may benefit from paying due attention to attitudes towards suicide.
OBJECTIVE: The study investigated the associations of religiosity, religious coping and suicide acceptance to suicide ideation and attempts in 7427 young adults affiliating with Islam from 11 Muslim countries. METHOD: A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect the data. We used F and χ2 tests and correlation analyses to report descriptive statistics. Multi-group path models with (i) a zero-inflated Poisson distribution and, (ii) a Binomial distribution were used to model the number of occurrences of suicidal ideation, and occurrence of a suicide attempt, respectively. RESULTS: Religiosity was negatively associated with acceptability of suicide, but it was positively related to punishment after death across the 11 countries. Religiosity was negatively associated with ever experiencing suicidal ideation, both directly and indirectly through its association with attitudes towards suicide, especially the belief in acceptability of suicide. Neither positive nor negative religious coping were related to suicidal ideation. However, religiosity was negatively related to suicide attempts among those who experienced suicidal ideation at least once. This association was mediated through the belief in acceptability of suicide and religious coping. Negative religious coping was positively associated with suicide attempts probably because it weakened the protective effects of religiosity. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study suggest that the effects of religiosity in the suicidal process operate through attitudes towards suicide. We therefore conclude that clinical assessment as well as research in suicidology may benefit from paying due attention to attitudes towards suicide.