Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105

www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

Belief in the paranormal, coping and emotional intelligence

Paul Rogers *, Pamela Qualter, Gemma Phelps, Kathryn Gardner
Department of Psychology, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire PR1 2HE, UK

Received 11 November 2005; received in revised form 11 April 2006

Available online 14 June 2006

Abstract

Previous research suggests that belief in the paranormal serves as a mechanism for coping with stress
(Irwin, 1992) and that it is positively associated with high emotional intelligence or EI (Dudley, 2002).
The present study extends this research by examining the extent to which coping strategy predicts, and
EI moderates, belief in the paranormal. A general population sample of 253 predominantly Caucasian
respondents completed psychometrically sound measures of each construct. Hierarchical multiple regres-
sion was performed on paranormal belief scores with predictors entered in four steps i.e. demographics,
then three sub-types of coping strategy (active-cognitive, active-behaviour or avoidant), four sub-types
of EI (optimism/mood regulation, appraisal of emotions, social skills, and utilisation of emotions) and
12 coping · EI interaction variables. Findings suggest a tendency not to use active-behavioural coping is
moderated by low emotional appraisal in predicting global paranormal beliefs. Further, a tendency to
use avoidant coping is moderated by a high utilisation of emotions in predicting the endorsement of
new age philosophies. Results are discussed in relation to a ‘paranormal coping’ framework.
 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Belief in the paranormal; Coping; Emotional intelligence; Moderators

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1772 894 473; fax: +44 1772 892 925.
E-mail address: progers@uclan.ac.uk (P. Rogers).

0191-8869/$ - see front matter  2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.04.014
1090 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105

1. Introduction

Interest in the psychology of paranormal belief has grown steadily since the late 1970s with sev-
eral theoretical frameworks claiming they serve to compensate against social marginality, form
part of a wider esoteric worldview or are the consequence of various cognitive deficits (see Irwin,
1993, 2004; for reviews). According to Irwin (2004), overall findings point towards a needs-serving
model in which belief in the paranormal performs some kind of psychodynamic coping function.
Evidence that survivors of childhood physical and/or sexual abuse (French & Kerman, 1996;
Irwin, 1992; Lawrence, Edwards, Barraclough, Church, & Hetherington, 1995; Perkins, 2000;
Ross & Joshi, 1992), alcoholic parents (Irwin, 1994) and unsettled home environments (Lawrence
et al., 1995) all report higher levels of paranormal belief than matched controls adds further sup-
port to Irwin’s (1992) ‘psychodynamic functions hypothesis’.

1.1. Coping and belief in the paranormal

In effect, the psychodynamic functions hypothesis implies that belief in the paranormal is akin
to an avoidant coping strategy for dealing with (post-traumatic) stress (cf. Holahan & Moos,
1987) via the use of fantasy-driven distraction. Callaghan and Irwin (2003) examined the relation-
ship between belief in the paranormal and coping, and found a weak but significant relationship
between paranormal belief and both the use of avoidant coping (i.e. denying or distracting oneself
from problems), and the non-use of task-orientated coping (i.e. not actively attempting to change,
eliminate or overcome problems). In contrast, no significant relationship was found with emo-
tional-orientated coping (i.e. attempting to manage levels of emotional distress). Callaghan and
Irwin claimed these data suggest paranormal believers tend to shy away from confronting their
problems directly, preferring instead to deny or be distracted from—rather than manage—emo-
tional distress.
But ignoring or distancing oneself from a problem is a passive form of coping and as such does
not sit comfortably with Irwin’s (1992) claim that paranormal belief is used to provide a sense of
mastery over unpredictable events (see also Irwin, 2000). In line with this view, Perkins (2000)
found that individuals with a history of severe physical abuse employed more control-orientated
paranormal beliefs (i.e. the acceptance of psi, precognition, and spiritualism) than they did non-
control orientated paranormal beliefs (i.e. superstitious thinking, witchcraft and the acceptance of
extraordinary life forms). Thus, it seems that belief in the paranormal may reflect a more active
mechanism for coping with distress.
A second criticism is that Callaghan and Irwin (2003) utilise a trait measure of coping, namely
Endler and Parker’s (1994, 1999) Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS). Recently, the
notion of coping as a stable disposition or ‘style’ has been challenged with critics calling for more
contextually-driven measures (see Krohne, 1996; Schwarzer & Schwarzer, 1996). Thus, another
way to conceptualise coping is to treat it as a behavioural ‘strategy’ for dealing with specific prob-
lems. Further Holahan and Moos (1987) distinguish between active-behavioural, active-cognitive
and avoidant coping strategies. Active-behavioural coping refers to the use of overt behaviours
(e.g. seeking advice or making action plans) to deal directly with a stressor and is thus akin to
the aforementioned task-orientated approach. In contrast, active-cognitive coping refers to the
use of cognitive (re)appraisal strategies (e.g. drawing on past experiences and positive self-talk)
 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105 1091

to help change the perceived stressfulness of a situation whilst avoidant coping again refers to
denying or repressing behaviours (e.g. refusing to accept the truth or using alcohol and/or drugs
to relieve tension).
To date, no research has examined the relationship between paranormal belief and coping strat-
egy. Following Callaghan and Irwin’s (2003) findings, one might expect a significant positive rela-
tionship between paranormal belief and avoidant coping strategy. However, one might also expect
a similar relationship with active-cognitive coping, with paranormal believers reframing negative
life events in terms of some supernatural process such as extrasensory perception1 or life-after-
death in an attempt to explain, and thus come to terms with, a seemingly random but nonetheless
distressing life event (cf. Perkins, 2000). As Perkins states, paranormal beliefs ‘‘appear to be
employed by such individuals in an attempt to cognitively defend against the threat of an incom-
prehensible and unpredictable world’’ (Perkins, 2000; p. ii–iii; italics added). Indeed, similar mech-
anisms are also thought to underlie various forms of religious coping (Holland, Passik, Kash,
Russak, & Gronert, 1999).

1.2. Coping and emotional intelligence

One factor that impacts on people’s ability to cope with emotional distress is their level of
emotional intelligence or EI (e.g. Taylor, 2001). With this in mind, it is also possible EI has a
moderating impact on any relationship between coping and paranormal belief.
According to Mayer and Salovey (1997), EI is a multi-dimensional construct which can be di-
vided into (a) the perception, appraisal and expression of emotion, (b) the emotional facilitation
of thinking, (c) the understanding, analysing and employing emotional knowledge and (d) the
reflective regulation of emotions to aid emotional and intellectual development. Schutte et al.
(1998) have since developed a self-report measure of EI which assesses four facets of Mayer
and Salovey’s original model, namely (a) optimism/mood regulation, (b) appraisal of emotions,
(c) social skills, and (d) the utilisation of emotions (see also Mayer, 2003; Petrides & Furnham,
2000).
Previous studies suggest low EI is associated with more maladaptive coping, more adult psy-
chopathology and more post-traumatic symptomatology (e.g. Ciarrochi, Deane, & Anderson,
2002; Engleberg & Sjoberg, 2003; Hunt & Evans, 2004; Taylor, 2001). In one study, Engleberg
and Sjoberg (2003) found that individuals with less accurate perceptions of others’ emotions
(low EI) had poorer social adjustment than those with more accurate perceptions (high EI). Sim-
ilarly, the inability to manage one’s own or others’ emotional states has been shown to correlate
significantly with poor social interaction skills (Lopes et al., 2004) and on a person’s ability to
form intimate and supportive social networks for help during times of stress (Ciarrochi et al.,
2002). Interestingly social alienation (Emmons & Sobal, 1981; Wuthnow, 1976) and social lone-
liness (Rogers et al., unpublished manuscript) have both been associated with more pronounced
paranormal beliefs.

1
Extrasensory perception (ESP) is defined as the alleged ability to obtain information by non-sensory means and is
said to comprise (a) telepathy i.e. non-sensory communication between separated individuals, (b) clairvoyance i.e. the
non-sensory awareness of some scene or object and (c) precognition i.e. the non-inferential awareness of future event or
state of affairs (Beloff & Henry, 2005).
1092 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105

Emotional intelligence has also been linked to various coping strategies (Furnham, Petrides, &
Spencer-Bowdage, 2002; Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004; Salovey, Stroud, Woolery, & Epel,
2002). Salovey and colleagues claim that individuals who are unable to perceive and appraise their
own feelings (low EI) are also poor at directing their attention toward adaptive coping and thus
employ more passive (e.g. avoidant) coping strategies when faced with stressful life events. In line
with this view, Furnham et al. (2002) found that high EI individuals tend to use adaptive (rational,
detached) as opposed to maladaptive (emotional, avoidant) coping strategies when dealing with
stress. Thus, one possibility is that those low on emotional intelligence are more likely to turn
to paranormal beliefs—either as avoidant coping (e.g. negative life events are caused by Karmic
retribution and thus cannot be changed) or as a specific type but nonetheless maladaptive form of
active-cognitive coping (e.g. casting spells to protect against negative life events)—in order to deal
with their distress.

1.3. Emotional intelligence and belief in the paranormal

Very few studies have examined the role EI plays in the onset and maintenance of paranormal
belief. In the single study to date, Dudley (2002) found a small but significant positive correlation
such that individuals with high EI had a more pronounced acceptance of the paranormal. These
findings contradict previous evidence that paranormal believers have poorer psychological adjust-
ment (Irwin, 1993, 2004) and moreover, fail to support the hypothesised notion that belief in the
paranormal reflects a unique form of maladaptive coping (cf. Callaghan & Irwin, 2003; Perkins,
2000).
But several criticisms can be levied against Dudley’s (2002) paper. First, Dudley sampled col-
lege students and thus, his findings cannot be generalised to the general population (although see
Farha & Steward Jr., 2006). Second, Dudley treats EI as a unitary construct and thus fails to con-
sider various sub-categories of emotional intelligence (cf. Petrides & Furnham, 2000; Saklofske,
Austin, & Minski, 2003). Finally, Dudley fails to offer a satisfactory explanation of his findings.
Whilst he hypothesised that ‘people who followed their ‘‘hearts’’ rather than their ‘‘heads’’ are
more likely to believe in paranormal phenomena’, he later referred only to ‘some type of associ-
ation between paranormal belief and emotions’ (p. 665–6).2
As yet, no studies have explored the possible interaction between EI, choice of coping strategy
and belief in the paranormal. Given previous evidence linking adult psychopathology to both low
EI (Ciarrochi et al., 2002) and belief in the paranormal (Irwin, 2004), it seems reasonable to sug-
gest that individuals low in at least some facets of EI are more likely to endorse paranormal beliefs
as an alternative mechanism for coping with stress.

1.4. Study overview and hypotheses

The present study examines the extent to which coping strategy is moderated by (subscales of)
emotional intelligence in predicting global belief in the paranormal. Several hypotheses are for-

2
Instead, Dudley (2002) focused his discussion on an apparent ‘order effect’ whereby respondents who completed a
self-report measure of paranormal beliefs before one of emotional intelligence scored lower EI than those completing
the same measures but in the opposite sequence.
 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105 1093

warded. First, both avoidant and active-cognitive coping will be significant and positive predictors
of global belief in the paranormal. Second, all four EI subscales (cf. Petrides & Furnham, 2000)
will be significant and negative predictors of global belief in the paranormal. Third, both avoidant
and active-cognitive coping strategies will be moderated by lower EI such that individuals who
adopt avoidant or active-cognitive coping strategies and who are poorer at mood regulation, emo-
tional appraisal, social skills and/or the utilisation of emotions will have a more pronounced belief
in the paranormal. Finally, similar trends are expected for endorsing both a new age philosophy
as well as to (more) traditional paranormal beliefs (cf. Lange, Irwin, & Houran, 2000; see below
for further discussion).

2. Method

2.1. Participants

A total of 253 participants (38.7% female) took part in the study. Age ranged from 17 to 82
years (mean = 38.5 years; sd = 12.5 years) with most participants Caucasian (88.2%) and em-
ployed (92.8%). No other demographic data was collected.

2.2. Design

This study employed a correlation design and included subscales of global paranormal belief,
emotional intelligence and coping strategy (see below for details) with participant gender, age
and ethnicity were also included as potential correlates.

2.3. Materials

A booklet containing standardised instructions, three psychometrically validated question-

naires and a final debriefing sheet was constructed. Questionnaires were as follows:
The Revised Paranormal Belief Scale (RPBS; Tobacyk, 1988) is an amended version of Tobacyk
and Milford’s (1983) original Paranormal Belief Scale. The RPBS consists of 26-items examining
peoples’ beliefs about several ostensibly paranormal phenomena such as psi, precognition, spiri-
tualism, witchcraft, superstition, extraordinary life forms and traditional religious beliefs. Items
are measured along a 7-point Likert scale from 1 ‘strongly disagree’ to 7 ‘strongly agree’ with
higher RPBS scores reflecting greater paranormal belief.
Despite its limitations, the RPBS and is still the most popular measure of paranormal belief
available (Holden & French, 2000). Tobacyk (1988) argues it contains seven orthogonal factors
whilst others claim this should be reduced to five (Lawrence & De Cicco, 1997; Lawrence, Roe,
& Williams, 1997), four (Hartman, 1999) and even two (Lange et al., 2000) latent factors. The
present study follows the most recent two-factor model in which global belief in the paranormal
is divided into ‘new age philosophy’ (NAP) which reflects beliefs about the validity of precogni-
tion and astrological prediction versus ‘traditional paranormal beliefs’ (TPB) which explores
beliefs about the existence of Heaven, Hell, the Devil and the efficacy of spells.
1094 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105

The Ways of Coping Questionnaire (WCQ; Folkman & Lazarus, 1988) consists of 32-items de-
signed to assess the strategies people use to help them cope with stressful situations. Respondents
are asked to imagine a stressful situation (e.g. an impending exam) and indicate the extent to
which they employ various coping strategies. Items are rated on a 7 point scale from 1 ‘never’
to 7 ‘always’. Holahan and Moos (1987) report three internally reliable WCQ sub-scales reflecting
the use of ‘active-cognitive’ (a = .61), ‘active-behavioural’ (a = .74) and ‘avoidance’ (a = .60)
coping.
The Self-Report Emotional Intelligence Test (SREIT; Schutte et al., 1998) is a 33-item self-re-
port measure of ability EI which assesses peoples’ awareness, understanding and use of emotions.
Whilst Schutte et al. report a highly reliable (a = .90) one-factor model, Petrides and Furnham
(2000) claim the SREIT has a clear four factor structure comprising ‘optimism/mood regulation,
‘appraisal of emotions, ‘social skills, and ‘utilisation of emotions’. Unfortunately, Petrides and
Furnham fail to report reliability (alpha) coefficients and later comment on the potential instabil-
ity of their four factor solution (p. 318–9). However, more recent research has since confirmed this
as both a valid and best-fitting model with reliabilities (alpha’s) for at least three of the four EI
subscales in excess of .70 (Ciarrochi et al., 2002; Saklofske et al., 2003). Thus the four factor solu-
tion is retained.
Demographics: Participants were also asked to indicate their age, gender, ethnicity, and occu-
pational status.

2.4. Procedure

Participants were sampled from six randomly selected suburbs of Preston (Plunginton, Lytham
St. Annes) and Birmingham (Castle Vale, Edgbaston, Sutton Coldfield, Erdington), cities in the
North West and Midland areas of England respectively. Questionnaires were delivered via ‘cold
calling’ to participant’s houses and workplaces where both verbal and/or written briefs were pro-
vided. A detachable debrief sheet was also supplied. Completed questionnaires were collected a
day later without any form of payment being made. All aspects of the study adhered to depart-
mental ethics with participation voluntary and both anonymity and confidentiality assured.

3. Results

3.1. Preliminary analyses

Mean and standard deviation scores, frequency data and internal reliability (alpha) coefficients
for all variables are given in Table 1.
Criterion variable: As Table 1 shows, the Revised Paranormal Belief Scale (RPBS) had a high
degree of internal consistency. Further the scale was normally distributed (K S = 1.06;
p = .214; ns) with no outliers identified. Examination of scatterplots (of standardized residuals
versus predicted values) revealed both linearity and homoscedasticity could also be assumed thus
rendering it suitable for multiple regression analysis (see Tabachnik & Fidell, 2001).
Predictor variables: As Table 1 also shows, those measures for which alpha coefficients could be
calculated all presented at least moderately high reliability coefficients with the single exception of
 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105 1095

Table 1
Means (sd), frequency and reliability (alpha) coefficients for all (sub)scales
Scale and subscales Mean (sd) Alpha
1. Paranormal belief (RPBS) 3.15 (1.23) .95
a. New age philosophy 3.06 (1.33) .91
b. Traditional paranormal beliefs 3.27 (1.47) .83
2. Coping strategy (WCQ) 3.86 (.57) .77
a. Active-cognitivea 4.45 (.74) .63
b. Active-behavioural 4.17 (.77) .74
c. Avoidance 2.72 (.95) .75
3. Emotional intelligence (SREIT) 5.00 (.67) .91
a. Mood regulation/optimism 5.04 (.82) .78
b. Appraisal of emotions 4.85 (.77) .78
c. Social skills 5.13 (.73) .78
d. Utilisation of emotions 5.18 (.95) .72
4. Demographics
a Gender (female) 38.74% % n/a
b Age (years) 38.53 (12.46) n/a
b Ethnicity (Caucasian) 89.20% % n/a
a
One item removed from initial subscale to improve reliability: final alpha shown (n = 253).

the active-cognitive sub-scale of the WCQ (a = .61). However, removal of one item improved
internal reliability to the satisfactory level shown in Table 1. Diagnostic analyses revealed that
active-cognitive coping (K S = 1.50; p = .022), avoidant coping (K S = 1.81; p = .003), mood
regulation (K S = 1.45; p = .030) and the utilisation of emotions (K S = 1.62; p = .009) were
all skewed from normality. Subsequent removal of 18 outliers across these four measures led to
both active-cognitive coping and mood regulation—but neither avoidant coping nor utilisation
of emotions—to become normally distributed (final n = 235). Avoidant coping and the utilisation
of emotions were thus transformed into dichotomous (high versus low) variables via mean split
analysis.

3.2. Correlations

Correlations between criteria and predictor variables are presented in Table 2. As Table 2
shows, global paranormal belief (RPBS) ratings correlated positively with respondent (female)
gender and negatively with all four EI subscales. In contrast, RPBS scores failed to correlate with
respondent age, respondent ethnicity (Caucasian versus non-Caucasian) and any of the three cop-
ing measures. Predictor inter-correlations were all less than .80 implying an absence of
multicollinearity.

3.3. Multiple regression

Global Paranormal Beliefs: Hierarchical (sequential) multiple regression was performed on

all measures to examine the extent to which they predicted—or were moderators of—global
 1096
P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105
Table 2
Correlations (r) between global paranormal belief (RPBS), demographic, coping strategy and emotional intelligence (sub)scales
Paranormal Respondent Respondent Respondent Active- Active- Avoidance Mood Appraisal Social
belief gender  age ethnicity  cognitive behavioural coping  regulation of emotions skills
coping coping
Gender  .13*
Age .01 .18*
Ethnicity  .04 .05 .27***
Act-cognitive coping .03 .06 .12* .02
Act-behav coping .03 .08 .08 .07 .56***
Avoidance coping  .00 .04 .14* .17** .09 .09
Mood regulation .17** .13* .02 .02 .32*** .34*** .15*
Appraisal of emotions .17** .08 .10 .05 .26*** .25*** .01 .58***
Social skills .15* .07 .12* .08 .33*** .39*** .02 .63*** .66***
Utilisation of emotions  .16** .03 .02 .02 .34*** .22*** .03 .58*** .39*** .48***
Sig. to *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001 (one-tailed).
Note:  Dichotomous variables hence rpb (n = 231).
 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105 1097

paranormal belief (RPBS) scores. In line with methodological guidelines for testing moderator ef-
fects (Baron & Kenny, 1986; Frazier, Tix, & Barron, 2004; Holmbeck, 1997), continuous predic-
tors and moderators were centred to eliminate potential multicollinearity, with dichotomous
measures also subjected to effects coding (i.e. codes of 1, 1), prior to being entered into regres-
sion analysis. Variables were entered into regression in four blocked steps. To factor out possible
demographic influences, respondent gender, age and ethnicity (Caucasian versus Non-Caucasian)
were entered in Step 1. Then the three coping variables were entered in Step 2 with the four EI
subscales entered in Step 3. Finally, 12 coping · EI (cross-product) interaction scores were com-
puted and entered in Step 4. Inspection of tolerance statistics confirmed the absence of multicol-
linearity (all T’s > 2.8).
Table 3 presents the final hierarchical model for RPBS ratings showing unstandardised regres-
sion (b), standard error (s.e.b) and standardised regression (beta) coefficients plus t and p values
for all predictor measures together with R2, adjusted R2 and change in R2 statistics for all steps in
regression.
Analysis revealed a significant one predictor model which accounted for 15.0% of the total var-
iance in RPBS scores. The single significant predictor was the active-behaviour coping · appraisal
of emotions interaction, which had a moderately negative association with global paranormal
beliefs.
Inclusion of the three demographic measures alone explained just 2.0% of the total variance in
RPBS scores and was not a significant first step in regression analysis (F3,227 = 1.50; p = .215; ns).
Subsequent inclusion of the three coping measures in Step 2 explained no additional variance in
RPBS whatsoever (0.0%) and thus, unsurprisingly, was another non-significant step in analysis
(F3,224 = .19; p = .91; ns). Inclusion of the four EI subscales in Step 3 however accounted for
3.8% of RPBS variance and was a near-significant step (F4,220 = 2.25; p = .065). Finally, inclusion
of the 12 coping · EI cross-product interactions in Step 4 added a further 9.0% of RPBS variance
and was a significant step in analysis (F12,208 = 1.84; p = .044).
Multiple regression analyses on the ‘new age philosophy’ (NAP) and ‘traditional paranormal
beliefs’ (TPB) subscales of the RPBS (cf. Lange et al., 2000) revealed similar trends as shown
in Tables 4 and 5 respectively.3
New Age Philosophy: A one predictor model, accounting for just under 15.0% of the total
variance in new age philosophy ratings, was also found. This single predictor, the avoidant
coping · utilisation of emotions interaction, had a moderately negative association with NAP
scores (see Table 4).
Inclusion of the three demographic measures alone explained just 2.0% of the total variance in
NAP scores and was not a significant first step in regression analysis (F3,227 = 1.14; p = .333; ns).
Inclusion of the three coping measures in Step 2 explained just 1.0% more variance in NAP and
again, was not a significant step (F3,224 = .64; p = .591; ns). Inclusion of the four EI subscales in
Step 3, by comparison, accounted for 4.0% of RPBS variance and was a near-significant step
(F4,220 = 2.33; p = .057; ns). Finally, inclusion of the 12 coping · EI cross-product interactions
in Step 4 added a further 8.6% of NAP variance and was another near-significant step in analysis
(F12,208 = 1.76; p = .057; ns).

3
Correlation tables for both NAP and TPB subscales are excluded due to space limitation but are available from the
first author (PR).
 1098
Table 3
Predictors and moderators of global paranormal belief (RPBS) ratings: final model
Step Predictor entered b (s.e.b) beta t p Step Cum R2 Cum Adj R2 Change R2

P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105

1. Gender (female)b .17 .09 .13 1.92 .056a 1. .02 .01 .02
Respondent age .00 .01 .04 .62 .538
Ethnicity (Caucasian) .10 .13 .05 .76 .450
2. Active-cognitive coping .06 .16 .03 .37 .713 2. .02 .00 .00
Active behavioural coping .08 .15 .04 .51 .609
Avoidant copingb .02 .09 .01 .18 .859
3. Mood regulation .07 .18 .04 .36 .719 3. .06 .02 .04a
Appraisal of emotions .27 .17 .16 1.62 .107
Social skills .09 .19 .05 .48 .631
Utilisation of emotionsb .00 .11 .00 .04 .969
4. Act-cognitive coping · mood regulation .26 .33 .09 .81 .421 4. .15 .06 .09*
Act-cognitive coping · appraisal of emotions .39 .33 .14 1.18 .241
Act-cognitive coping · social skills .36 .30 .12 1.20 .230
Act-cognitive coping · utilisation of emotions .13 .19 .07 .70 .485
Act-behav coping · mood regulation .20 .26 .08 .78 .434
Act-behav coping · appraisal of emotions .64 .27 .24 2.41 .017*
Act-behav coping · social skills .03 .30 .01 .11 .912
Act-behav coping · utilisation of emotions .05 .17 .03 .29 .770
Avoidant coping · mood regulation .13 .17 .07 .73 .464
Avoidant coping · appraisal of emotions .13 .16 .08 .81 .420
Avoidant coping · social skills .08 .18 .04 .44 .658
Avoidant coping · utilisation of emotions .20 .11 .17 1.89 .060a
ANOVA: F22,208 = 1.67; p = .035
Sig. to *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.
a
Approaches sig. (two-tailed): sig. predictors in bold continuous variables centred.
b
Dichotomous variables; figs to 2 d.p. (n = 231).
Table 4
Predictors and moderators of new age philosophy (NAP) ratings: final model
Step Predictor entered b (s.e.b) beta t p Step Cum R2 Cum Adj R2 Change R2

P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105

1. Gender (female)b .14 .09 .10 1.47 .144 1. .01 .00 .01
Respondent age .01 .01 .05 .73 .466
Ethnicity (Caucasian) .15 .14 .07 1.08 .280
2. Active-cognitive coping .03 .18 .01 .15 .882 2. .02 .00 .01
Active behavioural coping .03 .16 .02 .21 .837
Avoidant copingb .00 .09 .00 .04 .968
3. Mood regulation .12 .20 .07 .61 .540 3. .06 .02 .04a
Appraisal of emotions .18 .18 .10 1.02 .309
Social skills .25 .21 .12 1.17 .243
Utilisation of emotionsb .04 .12 .03 .37 .709
4. Act-cognitive coping · mood regulation .44 .35 .14 1.23 .219 4. .15 .06 .09a
Act-cognitive coping · appraisal of emotions .46 .36 .16 1.30 .196
Act-cognitive coping · social skills .29 .32 .09 .90 .369
Act-cognitive coping · utilisation of emotions .16 .20 .07 .80 .423
Act-behav coping · mood regulation .07 .28 .02 .25 .801
Act-behav coping · appraisal of emotions .50 .29 .17 1.72 .087
Act-behav coping · social skills .07 .32 .02 .22 .828
Act-behav coping · utilisation of emotions .11 .18 .06 .61 .543
Avoidant coping · mood regulation .21 .19 .11 1.13 .259
Avoidant coping · appraisal of emotions .11 .18 .06 .65 .517
Avoidant coping · social skills .09 .20 .04 .44 .660
Avoidant coping · utilisation of emotions .25 .12 .19 2.14 .033*
ANOVA: F22,208 = 1.66; p = .037
*p
Sig. to < .05; **p< .01; ***p
< .001.
a
Approaches sig. (two-tailed): sig. predictors in bold continuous variables centred.
b
Dichotomous variables; figs to 2 d.p. (n = 231).

1099
 1100
Table 5
Predictors and moderators of traditional paranormal beliefs (TPB) ratings: final model
Step Predictor entered b (s.e.b) beta t p Step Cum R2 Cum Adj R2 Change R2

P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105

1. Gender (female)b .22 .10 .15 2.18 .031* 1. .03 .01 .03
Respondent age .00 .01 .03 .44 .658
Ethnicity (Caucasian) .03 .16 .01 .17 .868
2. Active-cognitive coping .12 .20 .05 .60 .551 2. .03 .01 .00
Active behavioural coping .30 .18 .14 1.69 .092
Avoidant copingb .02 .10 .01 .20 .843
3. Mood regulation .16 .22 .08 .73 .464 3. .06 .01 .02
Appraisal of emotions .25 .20 .12 1.23 .219
Social skills .02 .23 .01 .07 .946
Utilisation of emotionsb .01 .13 .00 .05 .964
4. Act-cognitive coping · mood regulation .02 .39 .00 .04 .967 4. .14 .05 .09a
Act-cognitive coping · appraisal of emotions .33 .39 .10 .82 .411
Act-cognitive coping · social skills .62 .36 .18 1.76 .081
Act-cognitive coping · utilisation of emotions .11 .23 .05 .50 .616
Act-behav coping · mood regulation .51 .31 .16 1.66 .099
Act-behav coping · appraisal of emotions .91 .32 .28 2.85 .005**
Act-behav coping · social skills .01 .36 .00 .03 .973
Act-behav coping · utilisation of emotions .01 .20 .00 .03 .975
Avoidant coping · mood regulation .02 .21 .01 .09 .928
Avoidant coping · appraisal of emotions .21 .19 .10 1.07 .286
Avoidant coping · social skills .05 .22 .02 .24 .812
Avoidant coping · utilisation of emotions .17 .13 .12 1.31 .193
ANOVA: F22,208 = 1.56; p = .059
Sig. to *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.
a
Approaches sig. (two-tailed): sig. predictors in bold continuous variables centred.
b
Dichotomous variables; figs to 2 d.p. (n = 231).
 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105 1101

Traditional Paranormal Beliefs: Finally, multiple regression of TPB revealed a near-significant

two predictor model which explained just over 14% of variance in traditional paranormal beliefs
(see Table 5).
The first significant predictor was respondent gender with females having higher TRB scores
than males. The second was the active-behaviour coping · appraisal of emotions interaction
which had a moderately negative association with TPB.
Inclusion of the three demographic measures alone explained 3.0% of the total variance in TPB
scores and was not a significant first step in regression analysis (F3,227 = 2.09; p = .103; ns). Inclu-
sion of the three coping measures in Step 2 explained just 0.4% of TPB variance and again, was
not a significant step (F3,224 = .34; p = .797; ns). Likewise, inclusion of the four EI subscales in
Step 3 accounted for 3.0% of TPB variance and again, was a non-significant step (F4,220 = 1.44;
p = .221; ns). Finally, inclusion of the 12 coping · EI cross-product interactions in Step 4 ex-
plained a further 8.5% of TPB variance and was, by comparison, a near-significant step in analysis
(F12,208 = 1.72; p = .064; ns).

4. Discussion

Contrary to expectations, active-cognitive and avoidant coping strategies were not, in their own
right, significant predictors of global paranormal belief. Nor was active-behavioural coping.
Taken together, these data suggest that paranormal believers are just as likely to use cognitive
reframing techniques to alter event perceptions, just as likely to shy away from facing up to their
problems, and just as likely to take direct action to overcome or eliminate their problems (cf. End-
ler & Parker, 1994, 1999; Holahan & Moos, 1987) as are paranormal sceptics and so fail to sup-
port previous claims that paranormal belief is associated with a greater tendency to shun active
problem-solving behaviours in favour of more avoidance coping strategies (Callaghan & Irwin,
2003). One possibility is that paranormal coping reflects a unique coping style (Callaghan & Irwin,
2003; cf. Endler & Parker, 1994, 1999) rather than strategy (Holahan & Moos, 1987). However,
because coping style reflects a general disposition—and is presumably employed more than a cop-
ing strategy which is contextually driven—this seems rather unlikely. Thus a second, albeit tenta-
tive interpretation is that belief in the paranormal reflects a unique way of coping which is
distinctly different from more the ‘traditional’ cognitive-behavioural strategies (cf. Irwin, 2000;
Perkins, 2000) examined here. Further, these paranormal coping strategies (e.g. visiting a fortune
teller or medium)4 may be employed in very specific circumstances when life events seem random,
chaotic and uncontrollable (cf. Irwin, 1992) and/or when all other coping strategies are presumed
to be fruitless (e.g. following bereavement). More research, via the development of a new ‘para-
normal coping questionnaire’, is needed to investigate this claim more fully.
Interestingly, none of the four subscales of emotional intelligence were significant predictors of
global paranormal belief either. Thus, paranormal believers were just as poor (good) at regulating
their moods, at appraising their own and/or other peoples’ emotions, at employing appropriate
social skills and at utilising their emotions in a positive and self-serving way as were non-believers.

4
Here, actively visiting a fortune teller medium is contrasted with merely believing in the validity of fortune telling
(hence extrasensory perception), or mediumship (hence life-after-death).
1102 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105

At first glance, these data seem to contradict earlier claims that EI and paranormal belief are pos-
itively related (Dudley, 2002) and imply that the widespread acceptance of paranormal phenom-
ena is not necessarily associated with having fewer of the non-cognitive skills needed to cope
effectively with environmental stressors i.e. low EI (Bar-On, 1997).
One possibility is that paranormal belief is associated with low EI, but only when measured by
some performance-based measure. The present study utilises a self-report measure of EI, namely
the SREIT (Schutte et al., 1998). However, tests such as the Multifactorial Emotional Intelligence
Scale (MEIS: e.g. Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 2000) and the more recent MSCEIT (e.g. Mayer,
Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios, 2003) assess participants’ emotional responses hence actual EI
against a predetermined, objective EI criteria. As such they differ markedly from the purely sub-
jective, self-report measure employed here (see Ciarrochi, Chan, Caputi, & Roberts, 2001). Future
research using performance measures of EI therefore seem warranted.
Despite the above, regression analysis did offer some support for a ‘good fitting model’ (cf.
Lawrence et al., 1995) in which the impact of active-behaviour coping on belief in the paranormal
was, to some extent, moderated by low EI. Specifically, a tendency not to use active-behavioural
coping—and thus, to make no attempt at eliminating or acting on a particular problem—is mod-
erated by low emotional appraisal. Thus, for those unable to recognise or understand their own or
others’ emotional states paranormal concepts such as extrasensory perception or life-after-death
may serve as a way of making sense of and/or coming to terms with any uncontrollable life events
for which a direct behavioural response is seen as being futile. These data offer further support for
Irwin’s (1992) psychodynamics functions hypothesis.
Within the traditional ‘ability EI’ framework (e.g. Mayer & Salovey, 1997), individuals low on
EI are expected to have problems either perceiving other peoples’ emotions, using these percep-
tions to direct their own behaviours or managing their own or others’ emotional states in order
to promote discussion and change. Given that the ability to recognise and adjust to how other
people are feeling is a key requirement for successful personal relationships (Ciarrochi et al.,
2002), it seems inevitable that those low on EI will struggle socially. With this in mind, findings
from the present study may also help to explain other correlates of paranormal belief, namely why
believers tend to feel more alienated (Emmons & Sobal, 1981; Wuthnow, 1976) and lonely (Rog-
ers et al., unpublished manuscript) than non-believers.
Finally, whilst identical conclusions can be drawn for individuals with more pronounced tradi-
tional paranormal beliefs (cf. Lange et al., 2000), a slightly different pattern of results was found for
those endorsing a new age philosophy (NAP). First, in line with previous research (see Irwin, 2004)
women were more likely to endorse a new age philosophy than were men. Second, a tendency to use
an avoidant coping strategy—and thus to deny or repress a particular problem—is moderated by a
high utilisation of (positive) emotions in predicting the endorsement of new age philosophies. It
seems that for individuals able to employ (positive) moods to their advantage, endorsement of a
new age philosophy may serve as a mechanism for passively accepting, and thus denying the reality
or seriousness of, certain negative life events. As noted earlier, endorsement of a new age philoso-
phy implies an acceptance of amongst other things, the validity of precognitive and astrological
prediction (Lange et al., 2000). Thus, it is possible that individuals with highly avoidant coping
but good emotional utilisation are especially prone to seeking out fortune tellers, psychics and
mediums as a source of guidance and emotional support during stressful or uncertain times (Irwin,
2000; Wooffitt, 2005). Again, more research is needed to explore this possibility further.
 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105 1103

5. Summary and conclusions

The present study is the first to examine the relationship between belief in the paranormal, cop-
ing strategies and (subscales of) emotional intelligence using a general population sample and as
such, our findings are arguably more generalisable than those of previous studies (e.g. Dudley,
2002). Whilst belief in the paranormal was not associated with any particular coping strategy
or EI subscale, there was evidence to suggest low EI had a moderating effect on at least some types
of coping. It seems that having a weakened capacity for recognising and understanding emotional
states impacts on ones’ tendency to take action during times of distress which in turn leads to a
heightened propensity for endorsing the existence of paranormal phenomena. One limitation is
that the comparatively small effect sizes (R2 coefficients) reported here suggest many other factors
influence the onset and maintenance of belief in the paranormal (cf. Irwin, 2004). Nevertheless,
the overall significance of the above models suggests low EI, when combined with certain types
of coping strategy, are important factors in the endorsement of paranormal beliefs. More research
is needed to explore these relationships further.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr. Steve Brown, Dr. Liz Connors and two anonymous
reviewers for their comments and recommendations.

References

Bar-On, R. (1997). The emotional quotient inventory (EQ-i): Technical manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems
Inc.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychology research:
Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
Beloff, J., & Henry, J. (2005). Extrasensory perception. In J. Henry (Ed.), Parapsychology: Research on exceptional
experiences. London: Routledge.
Callaghan, A., & Irwin, H. J. (2003). Paranormal belief as a psychological coping mechanism. Journal of the Society for
Psychical Research, 67(872), 200–207.
Ciarrochi, J., Chan, A., Caputi, P., & Roberts, R. (2001). Measuring emotional intelligence. In J. Ciarrochi, J. P.
Forgas, & J. D. Mayer (Eds.), Emotional intelligence in everyday life: A Scientific Inquiry. New York: Psychology
Press.
Ciarrochi, J., Deane, F. P., & Anderson, S. (2002). Emotional intelligence moderates the relationship between stress and
mental health. Personality & Individual Differences, 32, 197–209.
Dudley, R. T. (2002). Order effects in research on paranormal belief. Psychological Reports, 90, 665–666.
Emmons, C. F., & Sobal, J. (1981). Paranormal beliefs: Testing the marginality hypothesis. Sociological Focus, 14,
49–56.
Endler, N. S., & Parker, J. D. A. (1994). Assessment of multidimensional coping: Task emotion and avoidance
strategies. Psychological Assessment, 6, 50–60.
Endler, N. S., & Parker, J. D. A. (1999). Coping inventory for stressful situations: Manual. North Tonawanda, NY:
Multi-Health Systems.
Engleberg, E., & Sjoberg, L. (2003). Emotional intelligence, affect intensity and social adjustment. Personality &
Individual Differences, 37, 533–542.
1104 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105

Farha, B., & Steward, G. Jr., (2006). Paranormal beliefs: An analysis of college students. Skeptical Inquirer, 30(1),
37–40.
Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1988). Manual for the ‘Ways of Coping’ Questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychology Press.
Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effects in counselling psychology.
Journal of Counselling Psychology, 51(1), 115–134.
French, C. C., & Kerman, M. K. (1996). Childhood trauma, fantasy proneness and belief in the paranormal. Paper
presented to the 1996 London Conference of the British Psychological Society, Institute of Education, University of
London, 17–18 December, 1996.
Furnham, A., Petrides, K. V., & Spencer-Bowdage, P. (2002). The effects of different types of social desirability on the
identification of repressors. Personality & Individual Differences, 33(1), 119–130.
Hartman, S. E. (1999). Another view of the paranormal belief scale. Journal of Parapsychology, 63(2), 131–141.
Holahan, C. J., & Moos, R. H. (1987). Personal and contextual determinants of coping strategies. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 52(5), 946–955.
Holden, K., & French, C. C. (2000). Discussion paper for a meeting on ‘the Measurement of Paranormal belief’.
Unpublished manuscript, Goldsmith’s College, University of London; 2 February, 2000.
Holland, J. C., Passik, S., Kash, K. M., Russak, S. M., Gronert, M. K., et al. (1999). The role of religious and spiritual
beliefs in coping with malignant melanoma. Psycho-Oncology, 8(1), 14–26.
Holmbeck, G. N. (1997). Toward terminological, conceptual and statistical clarity in the study of mediators and
moderators: Examples from the child-clinical and pediatric psychology literature. Journal of Consulting & Clinical
Psychology, 65(4), 599–610.
Hunt, N., & Evans, D. (2004). Predicting traumatic stress using emotional intelligence. Behaviour Research & Therapy,
42, 791–798.
Irwin, H. J. (1992). Origins and functions of paranormal belief: The role of childhood trauma and interpersonal control.
Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 86(3), 199–208.
Irwin, H. J. (1993). Belief in the paranormal: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of the American Society for
Psychical Research, 87(1), 1–39.
Irwin, H. (1994). Childhood trauma and the origins of paranormal belief: A constructive replication. Psychological
Reports, 74, 107–111.
Irwin, H. (2000). Belief in the paranormal and a sense of control over life. European Journal of Parapsychology, 15,
68–78.
Irwin, H. J. (2004). An introduction to parapsychology (4th ed.). Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
Krohne, H. W. (1996). Individual differences in coping. In M. Zeidner & N. S. Endler (Eds.), Handbook of coping:
Theory, research, application. New York: Wiley.
Lange, R., Irwin, H. J., & Houran, J. (2000). Top-down purification of Tobacyk’s Revised Paranormal Belief Scale.
Personality & Individual Differences, 29, 131–156.
Lawrence, T., & De Cicco, P. (1997). The factor structure of the paranormal belief scale: More evidence in support of
the oblique five. Journal of Parapsychology, 61, 243–251.
Lawrence, T., Edwards, C., Barraclough, N., Church, S., & Hetherington, F. (1995). Modelling childhood causes of
paranormal belief and experience: Childhood trauma and childhood fantasy. Personality & Individual Differences,
19(2), 209–215.
Lawrence, T., Roe, C., & Williams, C. (1997). Confirming the factor structure of the paranormal belief scale: Big
orthogonal seven or oblique five?. Journal of Parapsychology 61, 13–31.
Lopes, P. N., Brackett, M. A., Nezlek, J. B., Schütz, A., Sellin, I., & Salovey, P. (2004). Emotional intelligence and
social interaction. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(8), 1018–1034.
Matthews, G., Zeidner, M., & Roberts, R. D. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Science and myth. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Mayer, J. D. (2003). A field guide to emotional intelligence. In J. Ciarrochi, J. P. Forgas, & J. D. Mayer (Eds.),
Emotional intelligence in everyday life: A scientific inquiry. Hove: Psychology Press.
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D., & Salovey, P. (2000). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for an intelligence.
Intelligence, 27, 267–298.
 P. Rogers et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 1089–1105 1105

Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey & D. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional
development and emotional intelligence: educational implications. NY: Basic Books.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D., & Sitarenios, G. (2003). Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT
V2.0. Emotion, 3(1), 97–105.
Perkins, S. L. (2000). Paranormal beliefs: Developmental antecedents, perceived control and defensive coping:
Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Conolly College, Long Island University.
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham (2000). On the dimensional structure of emotional intelligence. Personality & Individual
Differences, 29, 313–320.
Rogers, P., Qualter P. & Phelps, G. (unpublished manuscript). Loneliness, attachment style and belief in the
paranormal: Re-Examining the social marginality and psychodynamic functions hypotheses of paranormal belief.
Department of Psychology, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.
Ross, C. A., & Joshi, S. (1992). Paranormal experiences in the general population. Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease,
180(6), 357–361.
Saklofske, D. H., Austin, E. J., & Minski, P. S. (2003). Factor structure and validity of a trait emotional intelligence
measure. Personality & Individual Differences, 34, 707–721.
Salovey, P., Stroud, L. R., Woolery, A., & Epel, E. S. (2002). Perceived emotional intelligence, stress reactivity, and
symptom reports: Further explorations using the trait meta-mood scale. Psychology & Health, 17(5), 611–627.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., et al. (1998). Development and
validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality & Individual Differences, 25, 167–177.
Schwarzer, R., & Schwarzer, C. (1996). A critical survey of coping instruments. In M. Zeidner & N. S. Endler (Eds.),
Handbook of coping: Theory, research, application. New York: Wiley.
Tabachnik, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Taylor, G. J. (2001). Low emotional intelligence and mental illness. In J. Ciarrochi, J. P. Forgas, & J. D. Mayer (Eds.),
Emotional intelligence in everyday life: A scientific inquiry. Hove: Psychology Press.
Tobacyk, J. J. (1988). A revised paranormal belief scale. Unpublished manuscript, Louisiana Technical University,
Ruston, LA.
Tobacyk, J. J., & Milford, G. (1983). Belief in Paranormal Phenomena: Assessment instrument development and
implications for personality functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(5), 1029–1037.
Wooffitt, R. (2005). Therapeutic aspects of psychic–sitter interactions: Some preliminary observations. Paper presented
at the 29th International Conference of the Society for Psychical Research, 2–4 September 2005, University of Bath,
UK.
Wuthnow, R. (1976). Astrology and marginality. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 15, 157–168.