Iranian Religious Coping Scale

1. Abstract

The Iranian Religious Coping Scale (IRCS) is a psychometric instrument developed by Abdulaziz Aflakseir and Peter G. Coleman (2011) to assess the specific ways in which Muslim individuals in Iran utilize religious beliefs, rituals, and practices to navigate stressful life events, chronic illness, and existential crises. While general measures of religious coping—most notably the RCOPE and Brief RCOPE developed by Kenneth Pargament—have provided foundational insights within Judeo-Christian contexts, they frequently omit culturally specific theological constructs central to Islamic tradition and Shi’a religious phenomenology. The IRCS was constructed to address this methodological and conceptual gap by integrating culturally grounded Islamic coping behaviors alongside adapted dimensions of universal religious coping.

Comprising 22 self-report items, the IRCS evaluates five distinct, theoretically coherent dimensions: Religious Practice (6 items), Negative Feelings toward God (4 items), Benevolent Reappraisal (6 items), Passive Religious Coping (3 items), and Active Religious Coping (3 items). Responses are captured on a four-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (“Not at all”) to 4 (“A great deal”). Psychometric evaluations demonstrate sound internal consistency reliability across dimensions, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from .72 to .89. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses confirm a robust five-factor structure that accounts for substantial variance in religious coping strategies. The instrument has demonstrated robust convergent, discriminant, and criterion validity through significant correlations with standardized measures of psychological distress, anxiety, depressive symptoms, post-traumatic stress, and subjective well-being. Consequently, the IRCS represents an indispensable, culturally competent psychometric tool for clinical psychologists, behavioral researchers, and sociologists working within Muslim populations in the Middle East and the broader Islamic diaspora.

2. Keywords

Iranian Religious Coping Scale, IRCS, religious coping, Islamic psychology, Muslim mental health, positive religious coping, negative religious coping, RCOPE adaptation, benevolent reappraisal, Shi’a Islamic coping

3. Authors

The Iranian Religious Coping Scale was developed and validated through a collaborative scholarly initiative between clinical and developmental psychologists specializing in psychological well-being, culture, and religious coping mechanisms across the lifespan:

• Abdulaziz Aflakseir, Ph.D.: Department of Clinical Psychology, School of Education and Psychology, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Islamic Republic of Iran. Dr. Aflakseir’s primary research focuses on health psychology, trauma coping among war veterans and survivors of physical disability, cross-cultural psychometrics, and Islamic psychology.
• Peter G. Coleman, Ph.D.: School of Psychology and School of Medicine, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, United Kingdom. Professor Coleman is an internationally recognized authority on gerontological psychology, the psychology of ageing, spirituality, narrative identity, and psychological adaptation in late life.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Iranian Religious Coping Scale is to provide a reliable, culturally sensitive, and theologically accurate psychometric instrument capable of operationalizing religious coping within Islamic societies, with particular sensitivity to the Iranian Shi’a sociocultural milieu. For decades, empirical investigations into the interface between psychological stress and religion relied heavily on Western-developed paradigms. Although instruments such as the RCOPE established that religious coping is a multifaceted phenomenon comprising both adaptive (positive) and maladaptive (negative) pathways, direct literal translations of Western scales into Persian frequently encountered severe structural and construct validity problems. Such translations often failed to capture unique Islamic liturgical rituals, devotional relationships with holy figures, and culturally distinct concepts of divine justice and destiny.

In response to these empirical limitations, the IRCS was designed to fulfill several vital research and clinical objectives:

• Capturing Culturally Specific Rituals and Beliefs: In contrast to standard Western instruments that assess generic behaviors like church attendance or private prayer, the IRCS captures distinctive Islamic practices such as reciting the Qur’an for spiritual consolation, engaging in constant remembrance of God (Dhikr), seeking intercession through the Prophet Muhammad and the Twelve Imams (Tawassul), and undertaking holy pilgrimages (Ziyarat) to sacred shrines during acute distress.
• Differentiating Collaborative vs. Fatalistic Coping Modes: Islamic theodicy contains deep reflections on divine omnipotence (Qadar) and human agency. The IRCS explicitly disaggregates healthy collaborative problem-solving—wherein individuals exert full personal effort before surrendering outcomes to God (Tawakkul)—from fatalistic passivity, in which personal effort is abandoned under the guise of religious resignation.
• Clinical Assessment and Psychospiritual Intervention: In clinical settings, the IRCS enables practitioners to identify whether a patient’s religious worldview serves as a cognitive and emotional resource (e.g., interpreting traumatic suffering as spiritual purification or an opportunity for moral growth) or as a source of spiritual struggle (e.g., feeling abandoned by God or experiencing profound divine anger). Identifying these pathways is essential for formulating culturally syntonic cognitive-behavioral interventions and spiritually integrated psychotherapy.
• Epidemiological and Health Psychology Research: The scale allows behavioral medicine researchers to evaluate how distinct religious coping profiles predict physiological markers, treatment compliance, pain tolerance, and psychiatric morbidity among populations dealing with chronic physical illnesses, oncological diagnoses, amputations, and war-induced post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

5. Psychological Construct

Religious coping refers to the use of cognitive, behavioral, or emotional strategies rooted in religious beliefs, spiritual rituals, or sacred frameworks to prevent, alleviate, or adapt to stressful life circumstances. The Iranian Religious Coping Scale measures this multifaceted construct across five empirically validated dimensions:

Religious Practice (6 Items)

The Religious Practice dimension captures concrete behavioral and devotional actions prescribed by the Islamic faith that believers enact to obtain emotional solace, cognitive grounding, and divine intervention. This subscale transcends mere cognitive belief by assessing overt religious practices common in Iranian Muslim daily life. Items within this factor evaluate behaviors such as reading the Qur’an for guidance and comfort (Item 2), appealing directly for spiritual intercession from the Holy Prophet and the Imams (Tawassul; Item 7), seeking psychological tranquility through the rhythmic remembrance of God (Dhikr; Item 11), reciting specific liturgical supplications (Item 14), petitioning God through formal prayer (Item 17), and undertaking physical pilgrimages (Ziyarat) to sacred shrines or holy sanctuaries when overwhelmed (Item 20). High scores on this subscale reflect high behavioral engagement with religious rituals as a structured coping mechanism.

Negative Feelings toward God (4 Items)

The Negative Feelings toward God dimension assesses spiritual struggle, theological conflict, and negative affective reactions directed toward the Divine during severe distress. Analogous to the negative religious coping constructs described by Pargament, this factor measures profound existential crises wherein an individual experiences a sense of divine abandonment, spiritual disillusionment, or anger. Specific items capture perceptions that God has become indifferent or has forgotten the individual (Item 8), feelings of bitter disappointment regarding God’s grace and mercy (Item 12), the expression of outward anger at God for permitting the crisis to occur (Item 21), and theological alienation manifesting as the belief that God cannot or will not answer one’s prayers (Item 3). In psychopathological research, elevated scores on this factor are consistently associated with higher levels of depressive symptomatology, generalized anxiety, and psychological vulnerability.

Benevolent Reappraisal (6 Items)

The Benevolent Reappraisal subscale measures cognitive reframing strategies that locate suffering, adversity, and loss within a meaningful, transcendent theological narrative. Drawing heavily on the Islamic concepts of divine trial (Imtihan/Bala), patience (Sabr), and spiritual purification, this factor evaluates an individual’s cognitive transformation of negative circumstances into spiritually beneficial experiences. Key items measure viewing one’s situation as the overarching will of God (Item 1), cultivating deliberate patience based on the Qur’anic promise that God is with the steadfast (Item 6), interpreting the adverse situation as a divine test (Item 13), conceptualizing personal suffering as a catalyst for drawing closer to God (Item 16), viewing physical or psychological suffering as a purification of personal sins (Item 18), and perceiving adversity as an agent that ultimately strengthens one’s faith (Item 22). This cognitive strategy represents a primary pathway through which positive religious coping fosters post-traumatic growth and existential resilience.

Passive Religious Coping (3 Items)

The Passive Religious Coping subscale measures an externalized, fatalistic orientation toward problem-solving in which an individual abdicates personal initiative and relinquishes behavioral agency entirely to God. Within psychological literature, this construct aligns with the “deferring” style of religious problem-solving, but in an Islamic cultural context, it frequently reflects theological misconceptions surrounding predestination (Qadr) and fate (Qesmat). The items evaluate behaviors such as refusing to take active steps while expecting God to miraculously resolve difficulties (Item 4), passively accepting a distressing situation without attempting remediation because it was viewed as destined (Item 9), and maintaining passivity under the assumption that God will unilaterally manage the outcome (Item 19). Unlike benevolent reappraisal, high passive religious coping often correlates with lower problem-focused coping, behavioral avoidance, and prolonged distress.

Active Religious Coping (3 Items)

The Active Religious Coping subscale captures a dynamic, collaborative coping strategy reflecting the classic Islamic doctrine of Tawakkul (trusting in God’s ultimate sovereignty only after exercising all available personal human efforts). Rather than generating passivity, this coping mode encourages individuals to use problem-solving skills, medical interventions, and behavioral efforts, followed by a conscious spiritual surrender of outcomes that lie beyond human control. Items measuring this construct evaluate doing everything humanly possible before asking God to handle the situation (Item 5), systematically turning the circumstances over to God after exhausting personal actions (Item 10), and actively fulfilling one’s duty while entrusting the remaining factors to divine providence (Item 15). This active-collaborative stance is generally associated with adaptive coping, emotional regulation, and psychological resilience.

6. Theoretical Framework

The Iranian Religious Coping Scale is theoretically grounded in the convergence of two major paradigms: Richard Lazarus and Susan Folkman’s Transactional Model of Stress and Coping, and Kenneth Pargament’s Psychology of Religion and Coping Framework, adapted to Islamic theological ontology.

The Transactional Model of Stress and Coping

Lazarus and Folkman (1984) conceptualized stress not as an external stimulus or an internal physiological response, but as a dynamic transaction between the person and their environment. When an individual encounters a life stressor, they engage in two levels of cognitive appraisal:

• Primary Appraisal: Evaluating what is at stake (e.g., whether an event represents a threat, a harm/loss, or a challenge).
• Secondary Appraisal: Evaluating available coping resources and behavioral options to manage the demands of the stressor.

Within this transactional framework, religious coping serves as both an appraisal mechanism and a secondary coping strategy. Beliefs about God’s benevolence or wrath shape primary appraisals by determining whether an illness or loss is viewed as a cruel accident, a divine punishment, or a sacred test designed to elevate spiritual rank. Furthermore, religious practices serve as coping activities designed to regulate negative emotional states (emotion-focused coping) or to inspire proactive problem-solving efforts (problem-focused coping).

Pargament’s Model of Religious Coping Control

Kenneth Pargament expanded stress theory into the sacred realm, positing that religion offers a unique search for significance in times of crisis. Pargament identified three primary religious problem-solving styles:

• Collaborative: The individual and God work together as active partners in resolving problems.
• Deferring: The individual abdicates responsibility, waiting passively for God to solve the problem.
• Self-Directed: The individual believes God gave them the intellect and freedom to solve problems independently without divine intervention.

The IRCS operationalizes the collaborative style through its Active Religious Coping subscale and the deferring style through its Passive Religious Coping subscale. Moreover, Pargament’s distinction between Positive Religious Coping (reflecting a secure relationship with God, spiritual connectedness, and benevolent appraisals) and Negative Religious Coping (spiritual struggle, doubts about God’s power, and feeling condemned) provides the conceptual foundation for differentiating between the IRCS’s benevolent reappraisal/practice dimensions and its negative feelings toward God dimension.

Islamic Theodicy and Cultural Specificity

The theoretical framework of the IRCS departs from Western measures by directly integrating Islamic theology and the specific cultural reality of Iranian Shi’ism. In classical Islamic thought, suffering is framed through several interconnected doctrines:

• Bala and Imtihan (Trials and Tests): The Qur’an asserts that believers will inevitably be tested through adversity, fear, hunger, and loss of life or wealth (Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:155). This framing transforms trauma into an expected, spiritually transformative trial rather than an arbitrary catastrophe.
• Sabr (Patience and Steadfastness): Patience in Islam is not fatalistic resignation; it is active emotional and moral perseverance in the face of hardship, rooted in the conviction that God is intimately present with the patient.
• Kaffarah (Expiation of Sins): Suffering carries an expiatory function, cleaning away moral transgressions and purifying the believer’s soul before the afterlife.
• Tawakkul (Reliance on God): The prophetic tradition illustrates this construct through the metaphor of “tying one’s camel first, and then placing trust in God.” This principle underpins the IRCS distinction between active and passive coping.
• Tawassul and Shi’a Intercession: In Iranian Shi’a culture, the Prophet and the Imams (particularly Imam Ali, Imam Hussain, and Hazrat Fatimah) are venerated as sacred intermediaries who intercede with God on behalf of the suffering believer. Incorporating appeals to these holy figures ensures that the IRCS reflects authentic Iranian religious phenomenology.

7. Validity

The psychometric validity of the Iranian Religious Coping Scale has been empirically substantiated across multiple validation investigations involving diverse Iranian cohorts, including university students, hospital patients with chronic physical conditions, individuals with physical disabilities, and military veterans diagnosed with combat-related PTSD.

Construct and Structural Validity

Construct validity was established during initial scale development via factor analysis. The extraction of five distinct dimensions accounted for 54.3% of the total variance, demonstrating that religious coping in this population is multidimensional. Subscale intercorrelations confirm theoretical coherence: Benevolent Reappraisal correlates positively and significantly with Religious Practice (r = .48, p < .001) and Active Religious Coping (r = .44, p < .001), indicating that positive cognitive framing co-occurs with active religious behaviors and problem-focused agency. Conversely, Negative Feelings toward God demonstrates weak or inverse relationships with positive dimensions and correlates positively with passive, fatalistic strategies.

Convergent and Discriminant Validity

Convergent and discriminant validity have been confirmed through systematic correlations with established psychological inventories:

• General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28): In studies evaluating psychological morbidity among disabled individuals and medical patients, the Negative Feelings toward God subscale correlated positively and significantly with the GHQ-28 total score, somatic symptoms, anxiety, and depression subscales (r values ranging from .28 to .42, p < .01). This demonstrates convergent validity with psychological distress. In contrast, Benevolent Reappraisal and Active Religious Coping were negatively correlated with GHQ-28 anxiety and depression scores.
• Depression and Anxiety Inventories: High scores on Negative Feelings toward God correlate positively with Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) scores, confirming that spiritual struggle is linked with affective distress. Religious Practice and Active Religious Coping correlate positively with measures of adaptive coping styles on the Brief COPE, demonstrating clear discriminant validity from purely pathological or avoidant coping mechanisms.
• Life Satisfaction and Well-Being: Both Religious Practice and Benevolent Reappraisal correlate significantly and positively with the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) and subjective happiness inventories (r = .31 to .39, p < .001), validating their function as psychological resources.

Predictive and Criterion-Related Validity

Hierarchical multiple regression analyses have consistently demonstrated the predictive validity of the IRCS. In studies involving Iranian war veterans with physical disabilities and survivors of major medical diagnoses, religious coping dimensions accounted for significant incremental variance in mental health outcomes after controlling for demographic variables, socioeconomic status, and injury severity. Specifically, Benevolent Reappraisal and Religious Practice emerged as significant negative predictors of psychological distress, whereas Negative Feelings toward God emerged as a significant positive predictor of post-traumatic stress symptomatology and depressive severity.

8. Reliability

The Iranian Religious Coping Scale exhibits high reliability across diverse samples. In the foundational validation study by Aflakseir and Coleman (2011), the internal consistency of the instrument was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients across its five subscales:

• Religious Practice: α = .89 (reflecting excellent internal consistency across its 6 behavioral and ritual items).
• Negative Feelings toward God: α = .79 (indicating good reliability for capturing spiritual discontent and theological struggle).
• Benevolent Reappraisal: α = .79 (demonstrating solid internal consistency among cognitive reframing items).
• Active Religious Coping: α = .79 (reflecting good reliability across collaborative agency items).
• Passive Religious Coping: α = .72 (demonstrating acceptable reliability for a brief 3-item subscale).

Subsequent psychometric investigations evaluating the IRCS in independent clinical cohorts—such as Iranian cancer patients, hemodialysis recipients, and university students—have consistently replicated these reliability metrics, reporting Cronbach’s alpha values ranging from .70 to .91 across subscales. Furthermore, test-retest reliability evaluated across a 4-week interval yielded intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) ranging between .74 and .86, demonstrating temporal stability over time while retaining sensitivity to longitudinal shifts in acute crisis contexts.

9. Factor Analysis

The structural composition of the Iranian Religious Coping Scale was empirically derived through rigorous factor analytic methods conducted by Aflakseir and Coleman during instrument development.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

The scale development began with an initial pool of items derived from existing religious coping measures (specifically Pargament’s RCOPE) alongside newly authored items reflecting Islamic practices and Shi’a theological constructs. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) accompanied by both orthogonal (Varimax) and oblique (Promax) rotations was conducted on data collected from a sample of Iranian adults experiencing significant life stress. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy exceeded .84, and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity reached statistical significance (p < .001), indicating the correlation matrix was well-suited for factor extraction.

Based on Kaiser’s criterion (eigenvalues > 1.0) and visual inspection of Cattell’s scree plot, a clear five-factor solution was identified, explaining 54.3% of the total cumulative variance:

• Factor 1 (Religious Practice): Eigenvalue = 5.21; accounted for 23.7% of the variance. Items exhibited high primary factor loadings ranging from .61 to .82 (e.g., reciting the Qur’an, pilgrimage, appealing to Imams, Dhikr).
• Factor 2 (Benevolent Reappraisal): Eigenvalue = 2.48; accounted for 11.3% of the variance. Items demonstrated factor loadings between .54 and .77 (e.g., viewing situation as a trial, seeing suffering as purification, God’s will).
• Factor 3 (Negative Feelings toward God): Eigenvalue = 1.68; accounted for 7.6% of the variance. Factor loadings ranged from .58 to .76 (e.g., feeling God forgot them, disappointment in divine mercy, anger at God).
• Factor 4 (Passive Religious Coping): Eigenvalue = 1.34; accounted for 6.1% of the variance. Factor loadings ranged from .55 to .73 (e.g., didn’t do much and expected God to solve it, fatalistic acceptance).
• Factor 5 (Active Religious Coping): Eigenvalue = 1.23; accounted for 5.6% of the variance. Factor loadings ranged from .60 to .81 (e.g., doing all one can and turning the rest over to God).

Cross-loading criteria were strictly enforced; items failing to achieve a primary loading of at least .40 or displaying cross-loadings greater than .30 on secondary factors were eliminated, yielding the final 22-item scale.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Subsequent validation studies using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) have tested the five-factor oblique model against alternative structural formulations, including a unidimensional model and an orthogonal five-factor model. The oblique five-factor structure consistently demonstrates superior goodness-of-fit indices: χ²/df < 2.2, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = .048 to .056, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = .93 to .96, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = .92 to .95, and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) < .06. These indices confirm that the five-factor model fits empirical data across both community and clinical Iranian populations.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The Iranian Religious Coping Scale (IRCS) is structured as follows:

• Instrument Name: Iranian Religious Coping Scale (IRCS)
• Instrument Type: Self-administered psychological assessment / Multi-dimensional rating scale
• Target Population: Muslim adolescents and adults navigating stress, illness, bereavement, or psychological trauma
• Total Number of Items: 22 items
• Item Origin: Contains culturally original items alongside items adapted from Pargament’s RCOPE (indicated with an asterisk *)
• Subscale Breakdown:
  • Religious Practice (6 items): Items 2, 7, 11, 14, 17, 20
  • Negative Feelings toward God (4 items): Items 3, 8, 12, 21
  • Benevolent Reappraisal (6 items): Items 1, 6, 13, 16, 18, 22
  • Passive Religious Coping (3 items): Items 4, 9, 19
  • Active Religious Coping (3 items): Items 5, 10, 15
• Response Scale: 4-point Likert-type scale:
  • 1 = Not at all
  • 2 = Somewhat
  • 3 = Quite a bit
  • 4 = A great deal
• Scoring Instructions:
  • Subscale scores are calculated by summing the raw item scores corresponding to each specific factor. Alternatively, mean subscale scores can be derived by dividing the sum by the number of items in that subscale (ranging from 1.0 to 4.0).
  • Religious Practice: Sum of items 2 + 7 + 11 + 14 + 17 + 20 (Score range: 6 to 24).
  • Negative Feelings toward God: Sum of items 3 + 8 + 12 + 21 (Score range: 4 to 16).
  • Benevolent Reappraisal: Sum of items 1 + 6 + 13 + 16 + 18 + 22 (Score range: 6 to 24).
  • Passive Religious Coping: Sum of items 4 + 9 + 19 (Score range: 3 to 12).
  • Active Religious Coping: Sum of items 5 + 10 + 15 (Score range: 3 to 12).
  • Total Score: A single global score is generally not recommended because positive and negative dimensions represent functionally distinct psychological processes. Subscales should be interpreted independently.
• Administration Time: Approximately 5 to 10 minutes.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Iranian Religious Coping Scale was developed and published in 2011 by Abdulaziz Aflakseir and Peter G. Coleman. The instrument was formally introduced in the scholarly article entitled “Initial Development of the Iranian Religious Coping Scale” published in the Journal of Muslim Mental Health (Volume 6, Issue 1, pages 44–61).

In accordance with academic standards and open-access conventions of psychological scale dissemination, the IRCS is considered an open-access psychometric instrument for academic, scientific, and non-commercial clinical research purposes. Researchers, healthcare practitioners, and graduate scholars may utilize, reproduce, and administer the scale free of financial charge, provided that appropriate scholarly attribution is accorded to the original authors through formal citation of the 2011 validation article. Commercial enterprises, test publishers, or entities seeking to integrate the scale into for-profit proprietary software must seek written permission directly from the copyright holder and authors.

12. References

• Aflakseir, A., & Coleman, P. G. (2009). The influence of religious coping on the mental health of disabled Iranian war veterans. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 12(2), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674670802422527
• Aflakseir, A., & Coleman, P. G. (2011). Initial development of the Iranian Religious Coping Scale. Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 6(1), 44–61. https://doi.org/10.3998/jmmh.10381607.0006.104
• Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer Publishing Company.
• Pargament, K. I. (1997). The psychology of religion and coping: Theory, research, practice. Guilford Press.
• Pargament, K. I., Koenig, H. G., & Perez, L. M. (2000). The many methods of religious coping: Development and initial validation of the RCOPE. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56(4), 519–543. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(200004)56:4<519::AID-JCLP6>3.0.CO;2-1
• Pargament, K., Feuille, M., & Burdzy, D. (2011). The Brief RCOPE: Current psychometric status of a short measure of religious coping. Religions, 2(1), 51–76. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel2010051

13. Items of the Scale