SPIRITUALITY STUDIESVolume 11 / Issue 2 FALL 2025
Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 Publisher: The Society for Spirituality Studies Published in partnership with the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue and the European Union of Yoga Available online: www.spirituality-studies.org Editor-in-Chief: Doc. Dr. Martin Dojčár PhD. Graphic Design: Martin Hynek Contact: editor@spirituality-studies.org ISSN 1339-9578 Donate Spirituality Studies’ mission is to deliver high-quality studies, articles, educational materials, and information related to spirituality in its various forms. At the same time, the journal provides a forum for sharing personal spiritual experiences. By combining academic and experiential approaches to spirituality, Spirituality Studies aims to provide a unique platform for dialogue between a variety of viewpoints, approaches, and methodologies in the study of spirituality. Spirituality Studies publishes all articles under the open access policy, allowing for unlimited public use. Please consider donating to support the continued publishing of Spirituality Studies as an open-access journal for free. ←← Portrait of Ashin Ottama © 2025 Martin Dojčár Content 1 Editorial Martin Dojčár 3 Mindfulness and Tourism Well-Being: The Mediating Role of Spirituality Vivien Iacob et al. 21 Learning to Be with Oneself: Reflections on Mindfulness and Self-Compassion among Future Educators Petra Kacafírková 39 Effects of Trimūrti Dhyāna on Heart Rate Variability and Three Gunas: A Pilot Study Based on Dhyānabindu Upanisad Chanchal Surywanshi et al. 55 Spirituality, Coping, and Loneliness in Adolescent Cybervictimization: Emotional Loneliness as a Unique Predictor Peter Žitný et al. 67 Svādhyāya Meets Technology: Can AI Assist Self-Study? Gábor Pék, Gejza M. Timčák 82 Yogalands: In Search of Practice on the Mat and in the World Rachel Brown
Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 1 EDITORIAL Editorial One way to describe the central spiritual process of self-transcendence is through the metaphor of a transition in awareness from objects to awareness itself. In this way, awareness is “uncovered” (Gr. alḗtheia) as the very Self – as bare Consciousness. Although awareness is always present in every human cognition or experience, it becomes obscured when distracted by objects. This distraction often results in the identification of awareness with objects, enigmatically expressed by the Latin term existentia – ex, “out of”, and sta, “to stand” – meaning “to stand out of oneself”. Suffering from self-alienation arises by “standing outside of oneself” and brings about anxiety, the first of various consequent emotions that emerge from this fundamental loss of completeness – the deprivation of oneness in division. Insofar as human existence is this “alienation of being”, as Martin Heidegger puts it, spirituality can be defined as an action that transcends the fundamental self-alienation by redirecting the flow of awareness away from objects and consequent immersion in them. This action is complex. It begins by turning awareness away from objects and ends by returning it to them because nothing can be excluded from the field of awareness. Ultimately, however, objects no longer appear as separate entities, but rather as phenomena that are not independent from their background – the infinite, spacious Consciousness. Self-transcendence is then like a bolt that makes all this possible. Initially, the attraction to objects is so powerful that turning awareness to itself is nearly impossible without prior preparation. One of the most prominent preparatory actions is mindfulness (Sa. smṛti, Pa. sati). The crucial spiritual process of awakening awareness through mindful actions is also the main topic of several studies in the current issue of Spirituality Studies. These studies may inspire us intellectually and practically as we strive to study spirituality and awaken as bare Consciousness. Dear readers, I invite you to explore this topic and others in the Fall 2025 edition of Spirituality Studies and be inspired by the featured authors’ insights. Cordially Martin Dojčár
2 Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025
Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 3 Vivien Iacob et al. Vivien Iacob is a research fellow (FCT) for a PhD in Psychology at the University of Algarve, Portugal, where she also serves as an invited Assistant Professor of Psychology. Her current research interests include the application of psychology to tourism, mindfulness, positive psychology, spirituality, and well-being. Vivien has authored and co-authored several book chapters, research studies, and articles in these areas. She can be contacted via email at viacob@ualg.pt. orcid.org Received July 24, 2025 Revised August 7, 2025 Accepted August 8, 2025 Key words Happiness, mindfulness, satisfaction, spirituality, well-being Vivien Iacob et al. Cláudia Carmo Soraia Garcês Saúl Neves de Jesus This study aims to examine the relationship between mindfulness, spirituality, and tourism well-being, considering affective and cognitive well-being. The research involved 236 travelers and used SEM analysis to validate the measurement model. Results showed that mindfulness positively impacts spirituality and tourism well-being, with spirituality partially mediating the relationship between mindfulness and well-being. To the author’s knowledge, this is the first study showing the potential of the positive relationship between mindfulness, spirituality, and tourism well-being considering the influence of mindfulness on happiness and satisfaction with life. These findings contribute to the growing literature on the positive effects of mindfulness on well-being. Mindfulness and Tourism Well-Being: The Mediating Role of Spirituality ←← Photography © 2025 Martin Dojčár
4 Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 1 Introduction In an era marked by constant distractions and ascending pressures, the pursuit of mental clarity and emotional equilibrium has garnered unprecedented attention. In our rapidly evolving world, where the dissonance of modern life often drowns out our inner voices, the concept of mindfulness has emerged as an inspiration to achieve higher levels of well-being along with self-awareness. Mindfulness, deeply rooted in ancient contemplative traditions, has captured the interest of researchers, practitioners, and the general public, including individuals seeking inner peace and well-being. Mindfulness can assist people in becoming aware of their surroundings and their body’s physical sensations as well as their thoughts, feelings, and emotions (Kabat-Zinn 2014). Further conceptualizations of mindfulness include a condition in which specific awareness characteristics exist, a dispositional or trait-like general propensity to pay attention in these ways, and a set of abilities that grow with practice and training (Baer 2019). Some authors suggest that consciousness is an essential attribute of mindfulness and strongly correlates with well-being (Brown and Ryan 2003). Thus, mindfulness has been seen as having the potential to cultivate a profound sense of awareness and psychological resilience (Lu et al. 2023). The applications of mindfulness have been extended to different contexts, and tourism researchers are showing a growing interest in exploring its benefits. The potential relationship between mindfulness and tourism well-being has been highlighted by some studies (Câmara et al. 2020; Iacob et al. 2023). A recent study suggests that mindfulness positively influences memorable tourism experiences (Tyagi et al. 2023). Similarly, Chen et al. (2017) indicated a positive relationship between mindfulness and tourism experiences. Also, Chan (2018) revealed that mindfulness could promote sustainable behaviors in a tourism context. The tourism literature presents studies linking travel and tourist experiences to positive psychological outcomes and well-being (Filep and Laing 2019). For instance, it has been reported that people are happier during their holiday than at home (Filep et al. 2017), and holidays are perceived as an escape from daily tasks at work (Pearce 2009). This study will consider the theoretical foundations of positive psychology, an area of research that emerged as an opposite perspective of human suffering, by shifting the focus to human flourishing and developing positive emotions and qualities (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi 2000). Although positive psychology covers different concepts, for this study’s purposes, well-being, happiness, and satisfaction with life will be considered and studied separately. When applied to tourism, mindfulness can profoundly impact tourists’ well-being in different ways. The existing literature findings show that tourist well-being is influenced by interaction with the environment, which is present in tourism experiences. For instance, experiences in wildlife tourism have been linked to well-being (Shang and Luo 2022). Some researchers have noted that well-being is a common factor that motivates people to pursue spiritual travel (Gill et al. 2019). A conceptual paper on meditation retreats highlights the significance of well-being as a key driver for spiritual travel (Norman and Pokorny 2017). The spiritual aspect of travel encompasses people, locations, connections, and feelings. It is impacted by cultural background, individual objectives, driving forces, expectations, prior knowledge of the destination, and locals (Tiberghien et al. 2020). Norman (2011) suggests that spiritual tourism involves a self-conscious project to improve one’s perception of well-being. Similarly, Moufakkir and Selmi (2018) suggest that people increasingly turn to spirituality to improve themselves. Spirituality could be a venue for people to get in contact with themselves and increase general well-being. Religious studies have widely discussed the relationship between spirituality and well-being (Fredrickson 2002; Koenig et al. 1988; Steger and Frazier 2005). However, in tourism, just a few studies analyzed the theoretical linkages between tourism and spirituality, focusing specifically on the niche of spiritual tourism (Buzinde 2020). This niche has been receiving an increasing demand, as it combines the biophysical, spiritual, and rational to enhance subjective well-being (Cheer et al. 2017). Nevertheless, none of the studies found in the literature analyzed the potential relationship between
Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 5 Vivien Iacob et al. mindfulness and tourism well-being, considering cognitive and affective well-being and the mediation effect of spirituality on this relationship. It is important to note that the study of variables such as mindfulness, spirituality, happiness, satisfaction, and well-being may represent a research challenge since there is no consensus on the definition of these concepts. In addition, some concepts, such as happiness, satisfaction, and well-being, are not well differentiated in the literature and have been used interchangeably (Filep and Laing 2019; Pearce 2009). For this reason, and since studies exploring the relationships between these concepts are scarce, this study aims to fill this gap and contribute to scientific progress in this field. This study investigates the direct and indirect relationships among mindfulness, spirituality, and tourism well-being, operationalized through Affective Well-Being (AWB) and Cognitive Well-Being (CWB), by testing a mediation model in which spirituality serves as a mediator between mindfulness and tourism well-being. The study aims to clarify these relationships and contribute to the scientific understanding of how mindfulness and spirituality jointly influence tourism well-being. The subsequent section presents the theoretical background of mindfulness, tourism well-being, and spirituality. The conceptual model is proposed based on the literature review presented. 2 Literature Review 2.1 Mindfulness Mindfulness has received greater attention in Western culture after the accomplishment and proven effectiveness of the Mindfulness Based-Stress Reduction (MBSR) program developed by Kabat-Zinn (1982). Although there is no consensus about the definition of mindfulness, for this study’s purposes, the definition promoted by Kabat-Zinn (2014) will be considered; mindfulness could be defined as an awareness that arises from paying attention on purpose, in a particular way to the present moment nonjudgmentally. Emotions play a central role in all aspects of human experience, including interaction with other individuals and contexts (Lazarus 2006). Mindfulness involves moment-to-moment awareness and observing emotions rather than controlling them. As emotions are part of everyday life, it’s essential to highlight the significance of awareness in the present moment, allowing individuals to recognize their emotions. Some mechanisms of mindfulness, including emotion regulation, lead to significant changes that facilitate positive emotions, self-compassion, and acceptance of growth (Gu et al. 2019). Emotion regulation involves managing emotions over time and responding appropriately to situational demands (Gross 2013). Thus, by developing mindfulness skills, individuals can bring a new perspective on their emotions, allowing for better emotion regulation. Mindfulness researchers report various long-term positive effects, including increased well-being, compassion (Baer et al. 2012), quality of life, and decreased depression, anxiety, and stress (Grossman et al. 2004). Whether psychologically healthy or not, every individual benefits from practicing mindfulness (Lazaridou et al. 2016). It seems that mindfulness has an essential role in numerous aspects of our lives, especially in well-being-related factors. As Klussman et al. (2020) argue, mindfulness could strongly and consistently predict well-being. Some researchers suggested a positive relationship between mindfulness and spiritual well-being (Bester et al.
6 Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 2016). For instance, Birnie et al. (2010) found that MBSR effectively increased participants’ mindfulness levels. Furthermore, the results showed an increase in self-compassion and spiritual well-being. These studies address the relationship between mindfulness and spiritual well-being as a single component, but none address these constructs separately. Phan et al. (2020) suggested that mindfulness is meaningful and purposive, reflecting an individual’s personality, temperament, and, more crucially, a state of mind, emphasizing two beliefs: (1) experiencing a present state, reflecting personal contentment, and clear focus may help to encourage an internal state of ease, clarity, and calmness; (2) in the true sense of experiencing mindfulness, different meaningful outcomes may be generated, such as improvement in personal functioning (e.g., performance in a subject matter), positive emotions (e.g., happiness), and weakening negative emotions (e.g., anxiety). Considering its complexity, the authors proposed a multifaceted model of mindfulness consisting of three components: (1) psychological (e.g., relaxation, self-awareness, non-judgment), (2) philosophical (e.g., rationality, ultimate reality), and (3) spiritual (e.g., present moment, harmony, self-actualization). Some evidence suggests that mindfulness could be effective for spiritual development. For instance, Lazaridou and Pentaris (2016) indicate that spirituality is an experience of mindfulness, while mindfulness is a practice of the spiritual. Following these authors, spirituality involves experiencing subjectively and individually; thus, the individual becomes mindful through their spiritual outlook. Both concepts, spirituality and mindfulness, concern the spirit, soul, mind, and consciousness, considering the interconnection and the support of history, as mindfulness has its roots in Buddhist traditions. Another study suggests that meditation acts as a catalyst for the spiritual growth of individuals (Boatsi and Dwarika 2024). The spiritual component could be regarded as an integral part of mindfulness, as it reflects the attitude of presence in the experience of the present moment. Consistent with the previous discussion, the following hypotheses are offered: H1. Mindfulness positively influences tourism well-being. H2. Mindfulness positively influences spirituality. 2.2 Spirituality Weaver et al. (2006) suggested that despite the arguments around the linkages between religion and spirituality, there is a common understanding that the two concepts are different but still interconnected. Koenig (1988) suggests religion as separate from spirituality; therefore, those two can be addressed separately. Mindfulness has shown somewhat promising results regarding its linkage with spirituality and well-being. A few studies approached spiritual well-being as a single component, defining it as a sense of satisfaction that comes from an individual’s inner self and is directly associated with their quality of life (Moaven 2020). For instance, a study revealed that the presence of spiritual facilities enhances the tourist’s satisfaction (Koburtay 2021). Although, there is a need to investigate the relationship between the two concepts separately. The relationship between spirituality and well-being has been studied in different contexts, but research on this topic in tourism literature is scarce. Tourism is a dynamic and systematic activity that allows tourists to evolve and renovate what they desire (Hamid et al. 2021). One of the goals that can motivate tourists is to travel to restore health and enhance well-being (Gan et al. 2023). According to Cloninger (2009), an individual’s perspective is transformed by creating an awareness of an inseparable involvement in a universal unity of being, which can lead to increased well-being. Considering this perspective, individuals need to grow an awareness of what is meaningful and pleasing in their lives to be satisfied with life. In this sense, mindfulness may assist in developing awareness abilities, which will develop spirituality levels, leading to increased well-being. Although much scholarly attention has been paid to the relationship between tourism and religion, particularly in the context of pilgrimage and religious tourism, it is argued that the broader spiritual dimension of tourism remains under-researched (Sharpley and Sundaram 2005). Consistent with this suggestion and the foregoing discussion, the following hypotheses are offered: H3. Spirituality positively influences tourism well-being. H4. Spirituality positively mediates the influence of mindfulness on tourism well-being.
Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 7 Vivien Iacob et al. 2.3 Tourism Well-Being The concept of well-being has been gaining popularity, and it is evident that travel agencies are already integrating deals to give tourists more profound experiences while allowing them to relax and enjoy themselves. Furthermore, western societies are showing an increased interest in eudaimonic tourism experiences, and new products are emerging to fill this gap in tourists’ desires and needs (Smith and Diekmann 2017). A multidisciplinary approach is crucial for understanding well-being, particularly in tourism. In this sense, Garcês et al. (2020) proposed the conceptual framework of Human Optimal Psychological Experience (HOPE), which encompasses a theoretical model where tourists’ creativity, optimism, and spirituality influence their well-being, and the activities developed in the destination also affect these variables. The definition of HOPE addresses a personal state of fulfillment during an experience in which the individual’s well-being influences their creativity, optimism, and spirituality. Moreover, their creativity, optimism, and spirituality can affect an individual’s activities during an experience and, therefore, their well-being. Policymakers, governments, and community groups worldwide are more interested in topics such as well-being (Martela et al. 2022). The search for well-being has been regarded as a fundamental goal in life since ancient times (Ryan and Deci 2001). Since then, the definition has been expanded to include the idea of subjective well-being (Huta and Ryan 2010). Subjective well-being consists of a cognitive and an affective component (Tov 2018). Affective Well-Being (AWB) is based on hedonic theories of happiness and relates to pleasant or unpleasant feelings (Sumner 1996). It is described as the harmony between people’s experiences of pleasure and pain. So, an individual with high AWB experiences pleasant over unpleasant feelings. This component could be assessed by asking people how often they have experienced specific emotions (e.g., happiness). Happiness can be defined as a person’s emotional state of desire more, having positive affect, and not having negative affect (Wu et al. 2017). Cognitive Well-Being (CWB) is based on evaluating how well one’s life is going. For instance, CWB could be assessed by measures of life satisfaction (Diener et al. 1985). A person’s level of satisfaction with life is determined by contrasting their perception of their current quality of life with their ideal life circumstances (Lucas et al. 1996; Pavot and Diener 2009). Accordingly, life satisfaction involves analyzing the aspects of the individuals’ lives considering a global assessment of overall satisfaction (Rothmann 2013; Cai et al. 2024). As satisfaction with life is a conceptually unique component of subjective well-being, it has been suggested that the separable elements of subjective well-being should be studied independently (Lucas et al. 1996). Because life satisfaction transcends and integrates mood states, influences behavior, and is considered a fundamental component of well-being, it is frequently studied as an outcome in and of itself (Huebner et al. 2008). Consistent with this suggestion and the foregoing discussion, the following hypotheses are offered: H5. Tourism well-being positively influences affective well-being (happiness). H6. Tourism well-being positively influences cognitive well-being (satisfaction with life).
8 Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 3 Research Model Based on the theoretical background, this study proposes a mediation model for mindfulness, spirituality, and tourism well-being (considering AWB and CWB). In this model, spirituality would function as a mediator between mindfulness and tourism well-being. Also, this model considers that mindfulness has a positive direct effect on tourism well-being and an indirect impact on tourism well-being via spirituality (Figure 1). The present study aims to (1) explore the direct relations among mindfulness, spirituality, 4 Methodology 4.1 Data Collection and Participants The main instrument for data collection was an online survey. An online inquiry was suitable for this study as it allowed researchers to obtain information that cannot be observed directly, such as attitudes and emotions (Creswell et al. 2007). It also provided extensive flexibility for the respondents to complete the questionnaire whenever and wherever they wanted. The survey was administered via an online panel provided by EUSurveys, a global market research firm. Online platforms are becoming increasingly common in tourism and marketing research, and such data has shown to be reliable with no bias in responses (Brandon et al. 2013). EUSurvey was selected for this study based on its research experience, reputation, and use in social sciences. The questionnaire was shared via email and social networks like LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. Participants were recruited through non-probability convenience sampling (Sedgwick 2013). The technique used was snowball sampling, in which participants were asked to Figure 1 Conceptual Model H2 H4 H1 Mindfulness Tourism Welll-Being Satisfaction CWB H6 H5 H3 Spirituality Hapinness AWB and tourism well-being considering AWB and CWB and (2) examine if spirituality operates as a mediator between mindfulness and tourism well-being. Specifically, it is hypothesized that mindfulness will be positively associated with tourism well-being and spirituality; furthermore, spirituality will mediate the relationship between mindfulness and tourism well-being; and finally, it proposes to analyze the relationship between tourism well-being with AWB and CWB separately. share the questionnaire with other respondents. It was ensured that the participants agreed to participate in the survey freely. The study’s objectives, anonymity, and voluntary participation (with the possibility of withdrawing from the questionnaire at any time) were explained at the beginning. Additionally, all questions had a forced response to ensure that all answers were completed without missing data. This study did not focus on any specific tourism context. The final sample included 236 participants aged 19 years or older who had taken a latest trip. The sample involved 76.3% female and 23.3% male; the mean age was 34.09, with a minimum of 19 years old and a maximum of 82 years old. Regarding professional status, 28.8% were students, 42.4% were employed, 23.7% were student-workers, 2.5% were unemployed, and 2.5% were retired. 4.2 Measurements A self-administered survey was conducted using instruments from the extant literature that have been empirically validated. The formal questionnaire used in the final study
Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 9 Vivien Iacob et al. consisted of two sections. The first section included the sociodemographic questionnaire. The second section included previously validated measurement items adapted from existing instruments. Mindfulness was measured by adapting 13 items from the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory short form (FMI; Walach et al. 2006). This scale evaluates essential aspects of mindfulness and is considered one-dimensional, and the Cronbach alpha value for this study was 0.89. Spirituality was assessed using five items from the Spirituality Scale (SS; Pinto and Pais-Ribeiro 2010). This scale aims to evaluate spirituality with items focused on the meaning of life/beliefs and positive life perspective and hope. The Cronbach alpha value for this study was 0.79. Tourism well-being was examined through eight items from the Tourism Well-being Scale (TWS; Garcês et al. 2020). This scale comprises the following theoretical factors of the HOPE model: Positive Emotions, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, Accomplishment, Creativity, Spirituality, and Optimism, and the Cronbach alpha value for this study was 0.85. Happiness was measured by using three items from the Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS; Lyubomirsky and Lepper 1999). This scale measures global subjective happiness through statements with which participants either self-rate themselves or compare themselves to others. The Cronbach alpha value for this study was 0.73. Satisfaction was assessed by adapting five items from the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Diener et al. 1985). It assesses the subjective judgment that each individual makes about the quality of their own life. In this study, Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.92. 4.3 Data Analysis This study employed SPSS 28.0 and AMOS 24. Descriptive analyses were performed to describe the sociodemographic information and study variables (mindfulness, tourism well-being, happiness, satisfaction, and spirituality). Then, common method bias (CMB) and normality tests were performed. Then, a two-step structural equation modeling (SEM) process was employed, as Anderson and Gerbing (1988) suggested. First, the measurement model was analyzed by assessing the reliability and validity of the variables. Second, the structural model was evaluated to investigate the relationship between constructs. Finally, bootstrapping approaches were used to examine the mediating effect of spirituality. 5 Results 5.1 Test of Common Method Bias In this study, common method bias was ensured before, during, and after administering the questionnaire. Before data collection, the choice of instruments was based on scales that had already been validated. Only voluntary participants filled out the survey during data collection and were previously informed that their responses would remain anonymous. After data collection, Harman’s single factor test was used to test for any common method bias (CMB) statistically. Harman’s one-factor test was employed to address CMB, and all the constructs were subjected to Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). The results reflected a 29% variance, less than the recommended threshold value of 50%. Therefore, CMB was not a significant issue in this study. 5.2 Measurement Model Assessment First, the assumption of multivariate normal distribution was tested. Curran et al. (1996) proposed that skewness values smaller or equal to two (|sk|≤2) and kurtosis equal to or smaller than seven (|ku|≤7) points to the respect of the normal distribution assumption. The results of this study fulfilled the normality assumption by presenting skewness values between −0.06 and 1.09 and kurtosis values between −0.01 and −1.51. Second, the model was examined to evaluate the quality of the variables in the theoretical model (Anderson and Gerbing 1988). In the first step, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess the psychometric properties of the constructs. Measures of goodness of fit were examined considering the following adjustment indexes: (a) χ2/df considering that an acceptable fit occurs for values equal to or less than five and a very good fit emerges for values equal to or less than two (Marôco 2021); (b) Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), with proper adjustment values ranging between 0.05 and 0.10 (Marôco 2021); (d) Standardised Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR), acceptable adjustment values ranging between 0.05 and 0.08 (Hu and Bentler 1999); (e) Comparative Fit Index (CFI) and Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), with excellent fit values between 0.90 and 0.95 (Marôco, 2021); and (f) Incremental Fit Index (IFI) considering the rec-
10 Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 ommended values above 0.90 (Hair et al. 2010). The overall model fit of the proposed model was found to be satisfactory with good fit indices for χ2/df = 1.84, RMSEA = 0.06, SRMR = 0.07, CFI = 0.91, IFI = 0.91 and TLI = 0. 90. Hence, the cut-off values defined in the literature were respected for the different adjustment indices considered. The results revealed that factor loadings of all the items in the model had values above the minimum acceptable value of 0.50 (Hair et al. 2010). Although factor loading over 0.70 is desirable, it is common to obtain weaker loadings (<0.70) in social science studies (Vinzi et al. 2009). Generally, items with loadings from 0.40 to 0.70 shall be considered for removal only if deletion results increase composite reliability (CR) or average variance extracted (AVE) over the recommended value (Hair et al. 2016). The effects of the item’s removal on CR and AVE were investigated rather than just eliminating items based on the factor loadings. In the current study, removing items with factor loadings below 0.70 didn’t significantly increase the CR and AVE values. Hence, no items were removed for further analysis. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, rho_a, and CR. The Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.75 to 0.93, whereas CR statistics ranged from 0.82 to 0.94, and rho_a ranged from 0.79 to 0.94 (Table 1). All the indicators have reliability statistics over the recommended threshold of 0.70 (Hair et al. 2010). Hence, construct validity is established. Additionally, following the recommendations of Bagozzi and Yi (1988), to assess the measurement model, the convergent validity and discriminant validity were evaluated. The Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values were used to examine convergent validity. When AVE values are greater than or equal to the recommended value of 0.50, items converge to measure the underlying construct, and hence, convergent validity is established (Fornell and Larcker 1981). As shown in Table 1, the AVE values for this study are acceptable. Although the AVE values for mindfulness and tourism well-being were slightly below the reference value, according to Fornell and Larcker (1981), the validity could be considered adequate if AVE is less than 0.5, but CR is higher than 0.7. Hence, the CR values for these constructs were greater than 0.7, indicating that convergent validity is not an issue. The criterion of Fornell-Larcker and the Heterotrait-Monotrait ratio values (HTMT) (Henseler et al. 2015) were used to test the model’s discriminant validity. In line with Fornell and Larcker (1981), discriminant validity is established when the square root of AVE for a construct is greater than its correlation with all other constructs. In this study, the square root of AVE for all the constructs was greater than its correlation with the other constructs (Table 2). Additionally, the HTMT was also tested. For instance, Kline (2011) suggests a threshold of 0.85 or less. The results of this study revealed no issues relating to discriminant validity; according to HTMT, all the values were well less than 0.85 (Table 2). Hence, this provides strong support for the establishment of discriminant validity. After the adequacy of the measures was confirmed, the structural model was examined.
Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 11 Vivien Iacob et al. Table 1 Measurement Model: Reliability, Validity, and Item Loadings Construct Items M SD F.L. α rho_A CR AVE Mindfulness 37.69 7.41 0.89 0.90 0.91 0.44 FMI_1 3.26 0.81 0.51 FMI_2 3.09 0.86 0.67 FMI_3 2.86 0.89 0.60 FMI_4 3.29 0.84 0.62 FMI_5 3.26 0.77 0.64 FMI_6 2.77 0.93 0.76 FMI_7 3.01 0.80 0.77 FMI_8 2.69 0.87 0.62 FMI_9 2.66 0.90 0.76 FMI_10 2.70 0.88 0.75 FMI_11 2.70 0.87 0.59 FMI_12 2.56 0.92 0.72 FMI_13 2.84 0.82 0.60 Tourism Well-Being 39.17 9.52 0.85 0.87 0.88 0.49 TWS_1 5.03 1.49 0.68 TWS_2 4.33 1.85 0.71 TWS_3 6.08 1.09 0.71 TWS_4 5.63 1.49 0.79 TWS_5 4.95 1.72 0.63 TWS_6 4.45 1.96 0.70 TWS_7 3.91 2.06 0.73 TWS_8 4.78 1.84 0.64 AWB Happiness 19.58 4.43 0.75 0.79 0.82 0.58 SHS_1 5.20 1.39 0.91 SHS_2 4.90 1.35 0.90 SHS_3 4.84 1.47 0.83 CWB Satisfaction 24.03 6.79 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.77 SWLS_1 4.79 1.44 0.90 SWLS_2 4.88 1.41 0.90 SWLS_3 4.98 1.51 0.93 SWLS_4 5.04 1.55 0.88 SWLS_5 4.34 1.85 0.78 Spirituality 14.94 3.46 0.79 0.79 0.85 0.54 SS_1 2.42 1.19 0.71 SS_2 2.59 1.18 0.74 SS_3 3.29 0.80 0.77 SS_4 0.75 SS_5 0.70 * M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; F.L. = Factor Loadings; CR = Composite Reliability; α = Cronbach’s Alpha; AVE = Average Variance Extracted.
12 Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 Table 2 Fornell-Larcker Criterion and HTMT 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. Mindfulness 0.67 0.67 0.47 0.59 0.32 2. Happiness 0.56 0.76 0.62 0.83 0.33 3. Spirituality 0.41 0.46 0.73 0.55 0.28 4. Satisfaction with Life 0.53 0.71 0.50 0.88 0.37 5. Tourism Well-Being 0.28 0.30 0.24 0.36 0.70 * Diagonal and italicized are the square roots of the AVE. Below the diagonal elements are the correlations between the construct’s values. Above the diagonal elements are the HTMT values. 5.3 Structural Model Evaluation A structural model was tested to investigate the empirical relation among variables (Anderson and Gerbing 1988). The SEM approach was used to test the proposed conceptual model. The present study evaluated the significance of the path coefficients by employing bootstrapping. This study, 5000 bootstrap subsamples were used to measure the significance of path coefficients. Coefficients in the standardized form are presented in Table 3 and Table 4. The results indicated that all proposed direct effects were supported. Mindfulness positively influenced tourism well-being (β = 0.22, t = 3.01, p <.001), thus supporting H1. Similarly, mindfulness positively influenced spirituality (β = 0.41, t = 7.84, p <.001), supporting H2. Furthermore, spirituality positively influenced tourism well-being (β = 0.15, t = 2.46, p <.001), indicating that H3 is supported. Additionally, tourism well-being had a positive influence on AWB (β = 0.30, t = 4.47, p <.001) and CWB (β = 0.36, t = 6.36, p <.001), supporting H5 and H6, respectively. Mediation analysis was performed to assess the mediating role of spirituality on the influence of mindfulness on tourism well-being. The results (Table 4) revealed a significant indirect effect of mindfulness on tourism well-being through spirituality (β = 0.06, t = 2.287, p <.05). The total effect of mindfulness on tourism well-being was significant (β = 0.29, t = 4,483, p <.001), with the inclusion of the mediator the effect of mindfulness on tourist well-being was still significant (β = 0.22, t = 3.01, p <.001). Thus, the results showed a complementary partial mediating role of spirituality in the relationship between mindfulness and tourist well-being.
Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 13 Vivien Iacob et al. Table 3 Standardized Direct Effect of Constructs Hypothesis Path Direct Effect SD t-value Result H1 FMI -> TWS 0.22 0.07 3.01 Supported H2 FMI -> SS 0.41 0.05 7.84 Supported H3 SS -> TWS 0.15 0.06 2.46 Supported H5 TWS -> SHS 0.30 0.07 4.47 Supported H6 TWS -> SWLS 0.36 0.06 6.36 Supported * SD = Standardized Deviation; FMI = Mindfulness; TWS = Tourism Well-Being: SS = Spirituality; SHS = Happiness; SWLS = Satisfaction with Life. Table 4 Mediation Analysis Results Total Effects (FMI -> TWS) Indirect Effects of FMI on TWS β t-value p-value β SE t-value p-value Percentile Bootstrap 95% Confidence Interval 5% 95% 0.29 4.483 0.001 0.06 0.028 2.287 0.011 0.024 0.115 * SE = Standard Error; FMI = Mindfulness; TWS = Tourism Well-Being.
14 Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 6 Discussion and Conclusions Previous findings with new approaches were considered to explore the associations between mindfulness, spirituality, and tourism well-being. Since a gap was identified in the literature regarding integrating these concepts into a conceptual theoretical model, this research aimed to present a model that could serve as a basis and inspiration for future studies to continue to focus on research in this area. The theoretical contributions of this study expand the academic understanding of how mindfulness affects tourism well-being. Mindfulness helps individuals restore mental and psychological well-being (Baer et al. 2012). In tourism, mindfulness has been proven to influence memorable tourism experiences positively (Tyaigi et al. 2023), contributing to enhancing well-being (Klussman et al. 2020). A limited number of tourism studies have examined the concept of spiritual well-being (Moaven 2020). However, the relationships and effects between these concepts have not yet been discussed separately in tourism. The present study enriches the understanding of the positive influence of mindfulness and spirituality on tourism well-being from a psychological perspective by addressing this research gap. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is one of the first studies examining the positive association between mindfulness and tourism well-being (considering AWB and CWB) and the mediating role of spirituality in this relationship. Mindfulness has been shown to influence tourism experiences positively (Chen et al. 2017). The results of the measurement model revealed satisfactory fit indices. Also, the reliability and construct validity were confirmed. The structural model findings further supported the vital role of mindfulness and spirituality in tourism well-being. The current research empirically demonstrated the positive relationship between mindfulness and tourism well-being, reflecting that individuals more likely to experience mindfulness states show increased tourism well-being. Further, the results align with previous literature that suggests a positive association between mindfulness and subjective well-being (Baer et al. 2012). In line with prior literature, the findings of this study showed that spirituality was positively related to well-being, as discussed by Fredrickson (2002), Koenig et al. (1988), and Steger and Frazier (2005). Also, the mediation analysis results supported the link between mindfulness and tourism well-being via spirituality as a mediator. Mindfulness directly affects tourism well-being and indirectly impacts tourism well-being via spirituality. Additionally, the findings of this study align with positive psychology literature and add empirical confirmation that subjective well-being, which comprises CWB and AWB, has also found its counterparts in the tourism context. Tov (2018) indicated a strong correlation between CWB and AWB. In a similar vein, the present research findings revealed a strong correlation between happiness and life satisfaction. Also, the results indicated a positive link between tourism well-being, happiness (AWB), and satisfaction with life (CWB). These results corroborate previous studies, which suggest that these concepts are somewhat related but should be examined separately (Lucas et al. 1996). Finally, the findings of this study have managerial implications. First, it gives professionals in the field a better understanding and appreciation of how tourism can enhance people’s overall quality of life and well-being in ways that go beyond straightforward hedonistic enjoyment. This knowledge may encourage travel service providers to increase customer engagement and interaction further. Second, promoting well-being benefits of a holiday experience can open doors for the traveler economy. For instance, as a resource for tourism products, well-being, and mindfulness can be adapted as marketing tactics to influence consumers’ vacation destination preferences. Adopting topics such as well-being for travel destinations may inspire more people to travel, which will boost the industry’s financial gains.
Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 15 Vivien Iacob et al. 7 Limitations and Future Directions This study employed self-report measures through an online survey. Thus, future research might consider data collection in different ways (e.g., observations, interviews) to minimize possible standard bias. Qualitative studies are also necessary because they can help researchers gain a more in-depth understanding of the tourism experience and how mindfulness and spirituality could lead to higher levels of well-being. Finally, it would be essential to conduct longitudinal studies to analyze the effects of mindfulness, spirituality, and well-being over time. More specifically, it would be interesting to investigate if mindfulness levels are stable over the trip, if they enhance after the travel, or if they tend to decrease. In this sense, it will be possible to better understand the evolution of these concepts over time. Hopefully, this study could inspire future researchers to continue exploring these concepts. Acknowledgements Funding This study was supported by the FCT: Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, I.P., Project UI/BD/152313/2021, doi.org; and Project UIDB/04020/2020, doi.org. Conflict of Interest The authors report there are no competing interests to declare. Data Availability Statement The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Compliance with Ethical Standards Ethics Approval All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study, including the ethical standards, was approved by the Scientific Commission of the Faculty of Human and Social Sciences, University of Algarve, Portugal, with the reference number CEUAlg Pn°106/2023. Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
16 Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 References Anderson, James C., and David W. Gerbing. 1988. “Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach.” Psychological Bulletin 103: 411–423. doi.org. Baer, Ruth A., Erin L. B. Lykins, and Jennifer R. Peters. 2012. “Mindfulness and Self-Compassion as Predictors of Psychological Well-Being in Long-Term Meditators and Matched Non-Meditators.” Journal of Positive Psychology 7: 230–238. Baer, Ruth A. 2019. “Assessment of Mindfulness by Self-Report.” Current Opinion in Psychology 28: 42–48. doi.org. Bagozzi, Richard P., and Youjae Yi. 1988. “On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 16: 74–94. doi.org. Bester, Edelweiss, Pravani Naidoo, and Anja Botha. 2016. “The Role of Mindfulness in the Relationship Between Life Satisfaction and Spiritual Well-Being Amongst the Elderly.” Social Work/ Maatskaplike Werk 52 (2). doi.org. Birnie, Kathryn, Michael Speca, and Linda E. Carlson. 2010. “Exploring Self-Compassion and Empathy in the Context of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR).” Stress and Health 26 (5): 359–371. doi.org. Boatsi, Thelma, and Vanessa Dwarika. 2024. “Spirituality and Transcendental Meditation Practitioners’ Experiences in South Africa and Ghana.” Journal of Spirituality in Mental Health 1–24. doi.org. Brandon, Duane M., James H. Long, Tina M. Loraas, Jennifer Mueller-Phillips, and Brian Vansant. 2013. “Online Instrument Delivery and Participant Recruitment Services: Emerging Opportunities for Behavioral Accounting Research.” Behavioral Research in Accounting 26 (1): 1–23. doi.org. Brown, Kirk W., and Richard M. Ryan. 2003. “The Benefits of Being Present: Mindfulness and Its Role in Psychological Well-Being.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84 (4): 822–848. doi.org. Buzinde, Christina N. 2020. “Theoretical Linkages Between Well-Being and Tourism: The Case of Self-Determination Theory and Spiritual Tourism.” Annals of Tourism Research 83: 102920. doi.org. Cai, Ruiyiang, Christina G. Q. Chi, and Giacomo Del Chiappa. 2024. “How Sense of Community and Social Environment Influence Residents’ Subjective Well-Being? Moderating Role of Trust.” International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration 1–26. doi.org. Câmara, Ester, Margarida Pocinho, Dora Agapito, and Saul Neves de Jesus. 2022. “Positive Psychology, Well-Being, and Mindfulness: A Successful Partnership Towards the Development of Meaningful Tourist Experiences.” Journal of Tourism, Sustainability and Well-Being 10 (1): 21–38. doi.org. Chan, Eugene Y. 2018. “Mindfulness Promotes Sustainable Tourism: The Case of Uluru.” Current Issues in Tourism 22 (13): 1526–1530. doi.org. Cheer, Joseph M., Yaniv Belhassen, and Joanna Kujawa. 2017. “The Search for Spirituality in Tourism: Toward a Conceptual Framework for Spiritual Tourism.” Tourism Management Perspectives 24: 252–256. doi.org. Chen, Li I. L., Noel Scott, and Pierre Benckendorff. 2017. “Mindful Tourist Experiences: A Buddhist Perspective.” Annals of Tourism Research 64: 1–12. doi.org. Cloninger, C. Robert, Anat Zohar, and Kevin M. Cloninger. 2010. “Promotion of Well-Being in Person-Centered Mental Health Care.” FOCUS 8 (2): 165–179. doi.org. Cohen, Jacob. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Second edition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Creswell, J. David, Baldwin M. Way, Naomi I. Eisenberger, and Matthew D. Lieberman. 2007. “Neural Correlates of Dispositional Mindfulness During Affect Labeling.” Psychosomatic Medicine 69 (6): 560–565. doi.org. Curran, Patrick J., Stephen G. West, and Jon F. Finch. 1996. “The Robustness of Test Statistics to Nonnormality and Specification Error in Confirmatory Factor Analysis.” Semantic Scholar 1 (1). doi.org. Diener, Ed, Robert A. Emmons, Randy J. Larsen, and Sharon Griffin. 1985. “The Satisfaction with Life Scale.” Journal of Personality Assessment 49 (1): 71–75. doi.org. Filep, Sebastian, and Jennifer Laing. 2019. “Trends and Directions in Tourism and Positive Psychology.” Journal of Travel Research 58 (3): 343–354. doi.org. Filep, Sebastian, Jennifer Laing, and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 2017. “What Is Positive Tourism? Why Do We Need It?” In Positive Tourism, edited by Sebastian Filep, Jennifer Laing, and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. New York, NY: Routledge.
Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 17 Vivien Iacob et al. Fornell, Claes, and David F. Larcker. 1981. “Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics.” Journal of Marketing Research 18: 382–388. doi.org. Fredrickson, Barbara L. 2002. “How Does Religion Benefit Health and Well-Being? Are Positive Emotions Active Ingredients?” Psychological Inquiry 13 (3): 209–213. Gan, Ting, Jiansong Zheng, Wei Li, Jiaxin Li, and Junxian Shen. 2023. “Health and Wellness Tourists’ Motivation and Behavior Intention: The Role of Perceived Value.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20 (5): 4339. doi.org. Garcês, Soraia, Margarida Pocinho, and Saul Neves de Jesus. 2020. “Psychometric Analysis of the Tourism Well-Being Scale (TWS): A Multidisciplinary Approach.” Anais Da Academia Brasileira de Ciências 92 (1). doi.org. Gill, Chelsea, Jan Packer, and Roy Ballantyne. 2019. “Spiritual Retreats as a Restorative Destination: Design Factors Facilitating Restorative Outcomes.” Annals of Tourism Research 79: 102761. doi.org. Gross, James J., ed. 2013. Handbook of Emotion Regulation. New York, NY: Guilford Publications. Grossman, Paul, Ludger Niemann, Stefan Schmidt, and Harald Walach. 2004. “Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction and Health Benefits: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Psychosomatic Research 57: 35–43. Gu, Simeng, Fushun Wang, Nitesh P. Patel, James A. Bourgeois, and Jason H. Huang. 2019. “A Model for Basic Emotions Using Observations of Behavior in Drosophila.” Frontiers in Psychology 10: 781. doi.org. Hair, Joseph F., William C. Black, Barry J. Babin, and Rolph E. Anderson. 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis. New York, NY: Pearson. Hamid, Rula A., Ali S. Albahri, Jwan K. Alwan, Zaid T. Al-qaysi, Omar S. Albahri, Ammar A. Zaidan, Alhamzah Alnoor, Abdul H. Alamoodi, and B. B. Zaidan. 2021. “How Smart Is E-Tourism? A Systematic Review of Smart Tourism Recommendation System Applying Data Management.” Computer Science Review 39. doi.org. Henseler, Jörg, Christian M. Ringle, and Marko Sarstedt. 2015. “A New Criterion for Assessing Discriminant Validity in Variance-Based Structural Equation Modeling.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 43 (1): 115–135. doi.org. Hu, Li-tze, and Peter M. Bentler. 1999. “Cut-Off Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives.” Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 6 (1): 1–55. doi.org. Huebner, E. Scott, and Christopher Diener. 2008. “Research on Life Satisfaction of Children and Youth: Implications for the Delivery of School-Related Services.” In The Science of Subjective Well-Being, edited by Michael Eid and Randy J. Larsen. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Huta, Veronika, and Richard M. Ryan. 2010. “Pursuing Pleasure or Virtue: The Differential and Overlapping Well-Being Benefits of Hedonic and Eudaimonic Motives.” Journal of Happiness Studies 11 (6): 735–762. doi.org. Iacob, Vivien, Saul Neves de Jesus, and Cláudia Carmo. 2023. “An Overview of Mindfulness Theories Applied to Tourism: Systematic Review Update and Bibliometric Analysis.” Quality & Quantity. doi.org. Kabat-Zinn, Jon. 1982. “An Outpatient Program in Behavioral Medicine for Chronic Pain Patients Based on the Practice of Mindfulness Meditation: Theoretical Considerations and Preliminary Results.” General Hospital Psychiatry 4 (1): 33–47. doi.org. Kabat-Zinn, Jon. 2014. “Meditation Is Everywhere.” Mindfulness 5 (4): 462–463. doi.org. Kline, Rex B. 2011. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Klussman, Kristine, Nicola Curtin, Julia Langer, and Austin L. Nichols. 2020. “Examining the Effect of Mindfulness on Well-Being: Self-Connection as a Mediator.” Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology 14. doi.org. Koburtay, Tamer. 2021. “Guests’ Happiness in Luxury Hotels in Jordan: The Role of Spirituality and Religiosity in an Islamic Context.” International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration 23 (5): 987–1005. doi.org. Koenig, Harold G., James N. Kvale, and Carolyn Ferrel. 1988. “Religion and Well-Being in Later Life.” The Gerontologist 28 (1): 18–28. doi.org. Lazaridou, Asmina, and Panagiotis Pentaris. 2016. “Mindfulness and Spir-
www.spirituality-studies.orgRkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUwMDU5Ng==