神职人员和牧师的职业倦怠、创伤影响和幸福感:指导最佳实践的系统回顾和建议

IF 0.8 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Pastoral Psychology Pub Date : 2024-06-21 DOI:10.1007/s11089-024-01150-x
Kristen R. Hydinger, Xiaodi Wu, Laura E. Captari, Steven J. Sandage
{"title":"神职人员和牧师的职业倦怠、创伤影响和幸福感:指导最佳实践的系统回顾和建议","authors":"Kristen R. Hydinger, Xiaodi Wu, Laura E. Captari, Steven J. Sandage","doi":"10.1007/s11089-024-01150-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Religious leaders (i.e., clergy and chaplains) face unique, ongoing stressors that can increase risks for psychosocial and vocational vulnerabilities. Emerging evidence indicates concerning prevalence rates of distress and attrition among these professionals, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, most empirical work has focused on compromised functioning among religious leaders. Utilizing a more holistic approach, this systematic review explores individual, relational, and organizational factors associated with diverse outcomes. Following the PRISMA methodology, we identified 82 empirical articles investigating (a) risk and protective factors related to burnout, trauma impacts, spiritual distress, and other occupational hazards and/or (b) factors associated with well-being and flourishing, over and above distress reduction. We summarize the state of the available evidence, distinguishing between <i>risk increasers</i>, <i>protective factors</i>, and <i>well-being enhancers</i>. Attention is given to three domains: <i>individual</i> (e.g., demographics, personality factors, virtue development, coping and formation practices), <i>relational</i> (e.g., peer, family, and collegial supports; navigation of conflicts and polarized issues in one’s community of care), and <i>institutional</i> (e.g., role ambiguity or clarity, resource availability, systemic expectations and demands). We identify notable gaps to be addressed in future research; for example, most studies are cross-sectional, lack diversity in religion, gender, and geography, and operationalize well-being as the absence of symptoms rather than the presence of positive states and functioning. Considering the available evidence, we present best practices to guide psychological practitioners, denominational bodies, and others involved in religious leaders’ formation.</p>","PeriodicalId":19961,"journal":{"name":"Pastoral Psychology","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Burnout, Trauma Impacts, and Well-Being Among Clergy and Chaplains: A Systematic Review and Recommendations to Guide Best Practice\",\"authors\":\"Kristen R. Hydinger, Xiaodi Wu, Laura E. Captari, Steven J. Sandage\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11089-024-01150-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Religious leaders (i.e., clergy and chaplains) face unique, ongoing stressors that can increase risks for psychosocial and vocational vulnerabilities. Emerging evidence indicates concerning prevalence rates of distress and attrition among these professionals, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, most empirical work has focused on compromised functioning among religious leaders. Utilizing a more holistic approach, this systematic review explores individual, relational, and organizational factors associated with diverse outcomes. Following the PRISMA methodology, we identified 82 empirical articles investigating (a) risk and protective factors related to burnout, trauma impacts, spiritual distress, and other occupational hazards and/or (b) factors associated with well-being and flourishing, over and above distress reduction. We summarize the state of the available evidence, distinguishing between <i>risk increasers</i>, <i>protective factors</i>, and <i>well-being enhancers</i>. Attention is given to three domains: <i>individual</i> (e.g., demographics, personality factors, virtue development, coping and formation practices), <i>relational</i> (e.g., peer, family, and collegial supports; navigation of conflicts and polarized issues in one’s community of care), and <i>institutional</i> (e.g., role ambiguity or clarity, resource availability, systemic expectations and demands). We identify notable gaps to be addressed in future research; for example, most studies are cross-sectional, lack diversity in religion, gender, and geography, and operationalize well-being as the absence of symptoms rather than the presence of positive states and functioning. Considering the available evidence, we present best practices to guide psychological practitioners, denominational bodies, and others involved in religious leaders’ formation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19961,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pastoral Psychology\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pastoral Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-024-01150-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pastoral Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-024-01150-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

宗教领袖(即神职人员和牧师)面临着独特而持续的压力,这些压力可能会增加心理社会和职业脆弱性的风险。新出现的证据表明,这些专业人员的困扰和流失率令人担忧,尤其是自 COVID-19 大流行以来。迄今为止,大多数实证工作都集中在宗教领袖的功能受损方面。本系统性综述采用更全面的方法,探讨了与不同结果相关的个人、关系和组织因素。按照 PRISMA 方法,我们确定了 82 篇实证文章,调查(a)与职业倦怠、创伤影响、精神痛苦和其他职业危害相关的风险和保护因素,和/或(b)与幸福和繁荣相关的因素,而不仅仅是减少痛苦的因素。我们总结了现有证据的状况,区分了风险增加因素、保护因素和幸福增强因素。我们关注了三个领域:个人(如人口统计学、个性因素、美德发展、应对和形成实践)、关系(如同伴、家庭和同事支持;在个人护理社区中处理冲突和两极分化问题)和机构(如角色模糊或清晰、资源可用性、系统期望和要求)。我们发现了未来研究中需要解决的显著差距;例如,大多数研究都是横断面研究,缺乏宗教、性别和地域的多样性,并且将幸福感操作化为没有症状,而不是存在积极的状态和功能。考虑到现有的证据,我们提出了指导心理从业者、教派机构和其他参与宗教领袖培养的人员的最佳实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Burnout, Trauma Impacts, and Well-Being Among Clergy and Chaplains: A Systematic Review and Recommendations to Guide Best Practice

Religious leaders (i.e., clergy and chaplains) face unique, ongoing stressors that can increase risks for psychosocial and vocational vulnerabilities. Emerging evidence indicates concerning prevalence rates of distress and attrition among these professionals, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, most empirical work has focused on compromised functioning among religious leaders. Utilizing a more holistic approach, this systematic review explores individual, relational, and organizational factors associated with diverse outcomes. Following the PRISMA methodology, we identified 82 empirical articles investigating (a) risk and protective factors related to burnout, trauma impacts, spiritual distress, and other occupational hazards and/or (b) factors associated with well-being and flourishing, over and above distress reduction. We summarize the state of the available evidence, distinguishing between risk increasers, protective factors, and well-being enhancers. Attention is given to three domains: individual (e.g., demographics, personality factors, virtue development, coping and formation practices), relational (e.g., peer, family, and collegial supports; navigation of conflicts and polarized issues in one’s community of care), and institutional (e.g., role ambiguity or clarity, resource availability, systemic expectations and demands). We identify notable gaps to be addressed in future research; for example, most studies are cross-sectional, lack diversity in religion, gender, and geography, and operationalize well-being as the absence of symptoms rather than the presence of positive states and functioning. Considering the available evidence, we present best practices to guide psychological practitioners, denominational bodies, and others involved in religious leaders’ formation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
25.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: Pastoral Psychology, founded in 1950, is one of the most well-established and respected journals in the field of psychology and religion/spirituality. Pastoral Psychology is an international forum that publishes scholarly, peer-reviewed original articles that address varied aspects of religion and spirituality from physical, human science, and interfaith perspectives. Historically, the word “pastoral” has referred to the care of individuals, families, and communities. Today, we additionally consider “pastoral” in terms of lived experience as it relates to embodiment, the social-political, economic, spiritual, and environmental dimensions of life. All theoretical perspectives are welcome, as Pastoral Psychology regularly publishes articles from a variety of schools of thought, including, but not limited to, psychoanalytic and other dynamic psychologies, cognitive psychologies, experimental and empirical psychologies, humanistic psychology, transpersonal psychology, and cultural psychology. Insights from existential perspectives, intersectional theories, philosophical and theological theories, gender and queer studies, sociology, anthropology, public mental health, and cultural and empirical studies are welcome. Theoretical contributions that have direct or indirect relevance for practice, broadly construed, are especially desirable, as our intended audience includes not only academics and scholars in religion and science, but also religious and spiritual leaders, as well as caregivers, chaplains, social workers, counselors/therapists, clinical psychologists, psychiatrists, and persons interested in matters of religion/spirituality and psychology. Pastoral Psychology welcomes scholarship and reflection from all religious and spiritual traditions. In addition to scholarly research papers, the journal welcomes thoughtful essays on a wide range of issues and various genres of writing, including book reviews and film reviews. The community of scholars represented in its pages has demonstrated that the life challenges the journal seeks to address are universally shared, yet also reflect individual social, cultural, and religious locations. The journal, therefore, welcomes submissions from scholars from around the world.
期刊最新文献
Finding One’s Way Through the Gender Expanse: Examining the Use of Metaphors in Gender-Affirming Care as a Step Toward More Inclusive Spiritual Care Practices Perceptions of Self-Love Among Orthodox Christians: Clinical and Pastoral Implications Perceptions of Motherhood Among Israeli Religious and Haredi Mothers of Children on the Autism Spectrum: From “I feel Like with Him I’m Lost” to “It’s a Gift in My Life” Testing the AQ10 as a Predictor of Poor Work-Related Psychological Wellbeing Among Newly Ordained Anglican Clergy in England How North American Immigrant Churches Can Support Congregants With Severe Chronic Diseases
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1