Abstract

The aim of this study is to analyse the effect of religiosity on psychological well-being via meta-analytical method. In addition, the presence of moderator variables that may cause the influence quantity which was calculated as a result of meta-analytical process, is analysed. For these aims, studies that are suitable for the criterion of choice were identified. Within this context, without applying a criterion for date, the influence quantity of 10 thesis studies were calculated, which analyse the correlation between religiosity and psychological well-being, and which include the number of samples used in meta-analysis and the number of pearson correlation coefficient (r) valu. Regarding the theses included in this study, 3 (30%) of them doctoral theses and 7(70%) of them are master’s theses. The number of people in samples is 5.914, 3.848 (65,06%) of which are from doctoral, and 2.066 (34,94%) of which are from master’s theses. For the analysis of the data, CMA (Comprehensive Meta-Analysis 2.0) statistical package program was used. The publication bias of the researches covered in this study was analysed via “Funnel Plot Graphic”, “Classic fail-safe N”, “Begg and Mazumdar rank correlations” and “Egger’s regression test” statistics methods. As a result of these statistical analyses, no evidence of publication bias has been found. Heterogeneity test was conducted to identify which model is to be used in measuring the influence quantity of the researches included in the study. The Q(sd=9) statistical value for its heterogeneity was measured as 114,90 (p0,05). According to this, it was concluded that the sample groups in the studies covered in the meta-analysis did not have a moderator role in the relationship between religiosity and psychological well-being. In addition, the average influence quantity for scientific publication types in Fisher’s z is respectively.193 for PhD, and.118 for master’s degree. The average influence quantity for these subsample groups was not considered to be statistically significant (QB=0,384; p>0,05), either. In other words, the type of publication does not play a moderator role in the relationship between religiosity and psychological well-being.