Sensory processing sensitivity is associated with religiosity and spirituality

The study investigates whether sensory processing sensitivity (SPS), a hereditary trait marked by heightened responsiveness to stimuli and deeper information processing, is associated with dimensions of religiosity and spirituality (R/S). Prior theory and evidence suggest SPS relates to both vulnerabilities (e.g., stress, anxiety, depression) and strengths (e.g., empathy, creativity, meaning-making), which could intersect with R/S engagement and experiences. Given the multidimensional nature of R/S—encompassing behaviors (e.g., attendance), beliefs, attachment to God, coping styles, and spirituality—the authors aim to examine associations between SPS and multiple R/S facets, including religious attendance, self-identified religiosity, daily spiritual experiences, images of God, negative religious coping (NRC), and religious conspiracy theories (RCT). The research focuses on adults in the highly secular Czech Republic to clarify potential links and their implications for health and clinical practice.

The introduction reviews SPS as a trait affecting 15–20% of the population, linked to heightened awareness, empathy, and deeper processing, but also to overstimulation and poorer mental health under adverse conditions. It cites literature suggesting a conceptual bridge between SPS and R/S: HSPs often discuss spiritual themes in psychotherapy; heightened sensitivity may predispose to deeper spiritual experiences; and extensive spiritual practices (e.g., meditation) may modulate neural circuits relevant to sensory processing. R/S is framed as multidimensional (beliefs, practices, attachment to God, coping), with mixed health effects. Attachment theories (correspondence and compensation) are reviewed to explain how God images relate to attachment security and mental health. NRC is highlighted as a risk factor for poorer mental health. The authors identify a gap: few studies have comprehensively examined SPS in relation to multiple R/S domains, particularly including both positive and negative aspects (e.g., NRC, negative God images, conspiracy beliefs).

Design and participants: Two cross-sectional online surveys of Czech adults (ages 18–97/92) were conducted by a professional panel in April 2020 (Sample 1) and April 2021 (Sample 2), aiming for age and gender distributions close to national characteristics. Exclusion criteria (Sample 2) removed 166 respondents for very short completion time and uniform response patterns. Final samples: N1=1406 (mean age=48.05, SD=16.42; 49.4% female) and N2=1494 (mean age=50.67, SD=15.79; 44.1% female). Ethics approval was obtained (Palacký University, No. 2020/06); informed electronic consent was required. Measures: - Religiosity: single item self-identification (believer as church member; believer not a member; non-religious; convinced atheist). Dichotomized as religious vs. non-religious (believers=religious). - Religious attendance: frequency of attending church/religious sessions; dichotomized as attending at least weekly vs. less. - Spirituality: 15-item Czech DSES measuring daily spiritual experiences (Likert items; total 15–88). Dichotomized at ≥51 as spiritual. - Images of God: 12 adjectives (critical, distant, ever-present, fatherly, forgiving, gentle, loving, motherly, punishing, wrathful, just, absolute) from the Baylor Religion Survey; responses dichotomized as perceiving vs. not. Religious respondents rated God as they perceive; non-religious rated their perception of how believers view God. - Negative religious coping (NRC): Czech NRC subscale of Brief RCOPE (7 items; 1–4). Each item dichotomized (1–2=no; 3–4=yes); a summary dichotomous variable=1 if any item endorsed. - Religious conspiracy theories (RCT): six COVID-19-related religious conspiracy statements; each rated 0–4; RCT summary=1 if any item endorsed at 3–4. - Sensory processing sensitivity: Sensory Processing Sensitivity Questionnaire (SPSQ; total 16 items across sensory and other sensitivity domains; 0–10 per item; total 0–160; higher=higher SPS). Sensory subscale (SPSQ-S) also used. SPSQ validated in Czech settings and correlated with HSPS (r=0.61, p<0.001). - Sociodemographics: age, gender, education, marital and economic status. Statistical analysis: Descriptive statistics characterized samples. Normality was rejected via Shapiro–Wilk. Binary logistic regressions assessed associations of standardized (Z-score) SPSQ total and SPSQ-S with religious attendance, religiosity, spirituality, and NRC, adjusted for age, gender, and education. Similar models examined associations with each of 12 God images. Finally, SPSQ-S was regressed on RCT items and summary. Analyses used IBM SPSS v21. Data are publicly available (https://osf.io/z8pfv/).

- Sample characteristics: About one-third identified as religious (34.1% in Sample 1; 31% in Sample 2). - SPS and attendance/religiosity/spirituality/NRC (adjusted ORs per 1 SD increase in SPS): • Religious attendance: not significant (SPSQ OR=1.06, 95% CI 0.78–1.43; SPSQ-S OR=1.07, 95% CI 0.79–1.45). • Religiosity: SPSQ OR=1.38 (95% CI 1.22–1.56); SPSQ-S OR=1.29 (95% CI 1.14–1.45). • Spirituality: SPSQ OR=1.61 (95% CI 1.33–1.96); SPSQ-S OR=1.57 (95% CI 1.29–1.92). • NRC summary: SPSQ OR=1.25 (95% CI 1.02–1.52); SPSQ-S OR=1.25 (95% CI 1.02–1.53). - SPS and images of God (adjusted ORs, SPSQ total): higher SPS associated with perceiving God as forgiving (1.26; 95% CI 1.13–1.41), gentle (1.22; 95% CI 1.10–1.37), loving (1.26; 95% CI 1.13–1.42), ever-present (1.19; 95% CI 1.07–1.33), fatherly (1.17; 95% CI 1.05–1.31), motherly (1.18; 95% CI 1.05–1.32), just (1.17; 95% CI 1.05–1.30), absolute (1.17; 95% CI 1.05–1.31), and punishing (1.14; 95% CI 1.02–1.27). No significant associations for critical, distant, or wrathful. Similar but slightly weaker patterns were observed for the sensory subscale (SPSQ-S). - SPS and religious conspiracy theories (COVID-19-related): no significant associations for RCT summary or any individual RCT items with SPSQ-S (all adjusted ORs non-significant).

Findings indicate that higher SPS is linked to greater odds of self-identified religiosity and higher daily spiritual experiences, but not to regular religious attendance. This pattern suggests that highly sensitive individuals may engage more with internal or personal aspects of faith and meaning rather than organized religious participation. SPS also predicted greater likelihood of using negative religious coping, aligning with literature that both SPS and NRC are associated with poorer mental health; this highlights a potential vulnerability among highly sensitive individuals to struggle spiritually under stress. SPS was associated predominantly with positive images of God (forgiving, loving, gentle, ever-present, parental, just, absolute), consistent with attachment-based theories and the possibility that HSPs may view God as a secure base or safe haven; a smaller association with a punishing image also emerged, reflecting the complex nature of spiritual appraisals among HSPs. No association was found between SPS and religious conspiracy beliefs regarding COVID-19, possibly reflecting HSPs’ deeper processing of information that does not favor simplistic conspiratorial explanations. Overall, the results address the research question by demonstrating robust associations between SPS and multiple R/S domains, suggesting clinical relevance for integrating spiritual themes and coping in work with highly sensitive individuals, especially in secular contexts like the Czech Republic.

SPS is associated with several dimensions of religiosity and spirituality but not with regular religious attendance. Higher SPS relates to increased odds of self-reported religiosity and spirituality, a tendency toward NRC, and predominantly positive images of God (ever-present, fatherly, forgiving, loving, motherly, just, absolute), with a smaller association with a punishing image. No association was found with religious conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19. These findings suggest that for highly sensitive persons, internal faith and spirituality may be especially salient, with implications for well-being and clinical practice. Future research should compare results across religious vs. secular contexts and examine potential mediators and moderators such as attachment style, self-esteem, personality traits, emotion-related variables, and neural correlates.

- Cross-sectional design precludes causal inference. - Self-reported data may be affected by information and social desirability biases. - Online survey methodology excludes individuals without internet access and may introduce selection bias. - Data collection during the COVID-19 pandemic may have temporarily elevated R/S inclinations, affecting generalizability. - Low prevalence of regular religious attendance in the secular Czech context may have reduced statistical power to detect associations with attendance.