Introduction

Persons of various religious belief systems believe that petitions (prayers) to a deity or deities

can lead to a deity or deities intervening in human affairs. While beliefs about what prayers can

accomplish and the mechanism for which prayers function differ, some religious persons believe that

intercessory prayer, prayer from one person directed toward a person at a distance, can help improve

the health of persons. While some believe that intercessory prayer is outside of the domain of scientific

investigation for various reasons, there is widespread disagreement regarding this matter and,

nevertheless, an array of studies have taken place investigating whether intercessory prayer has any

effect on health outcomes of humans.

Aviles et al. (2001) wanted to determine whether intercessory prayer would have a positive

effect on subjects with cardiovascular disease who were discharged from hospitals. In a randomized

trial, 799 coronary care patients would be placed into a group receiving intercessory prayer or a group

not receiving intercessory prayer. Those who had received intercessory prayer were prayed for at least

once a week for 26 weeks. Subjects were further divided into high-risk and low-risk groups based on

presence of diabetes, prior myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular disease, and other factors.

Researchers declared certain 'end points' in their study including death, cardiac arrest,

rehospitalization, or an emergency department visit for cardiovascular disease. At the end of 26 weeks,

25.6% of subjects in the intercessory prayer group reached an end point and 29.3% of people in the

control group reached an end point. In the high-risk group, 31% in the prayer group and 33.3% in the

control group reached end points while 17% in the prayer group and 24.1% in the control group

reached end points. Researchers concluded that intercessory prayer had no statistically significant effect

on medical outcomes for subjects.

Benson et al. (2005) recruited patients who were going to have coronary artery bypass graft

(CABG) surgery. 1802 subjects out of 3295 eligible patients for the study decided to participate and

were placed into three random groups. The demographics of each randomized group were very similar;

the mean age of each group was very similar, most were males, most were Caucasian, most were not

current smokers, about half ever smoked, about half had a high school education or less, most patients

said they had a religious affiliation, the type of denomination was also similar throughout groups, and

most strongly agreed with the statement “I believe in spiritual healing.”

Group one received prayer from outside persons without knowing, but was told that the

religious groups contacted by the researchers may or may not be praying for them. Group two did not

receive prayer from outside persons, but was also uncertain about whether or not they were being

prayed for. Group three received prayer from outside persons and was informed that they would be

receiving prayer. Patients were prayed for for fourteen days by people who prayed anywhere from

thirty seconds a day to several hours from one to four times a day. Researchers recorded complications

and deaths that had taken place amongst the patients during and after the study.

Complications and death were similar across the three groups. Amongst patients in the group

who were uncertain about whether or not they were receiving prayer and did receive prayer, 52%

experienced complications. Amongst the patients who were uncertain about whether or not they were

receiving prayer and did not receive prayer, 51% experienced complications. 59% of the people who

were certain that they were receiving prayer and did receive prayer experienced complications.

Researchers concluded that prayer had no statistically significant effect on people being prayed

for, however patients who were certain that they were being prayed for had a higher rate of

complications than patients who were uncertain.

Boelens et al. (2009) wanted to investigate the effect of direct contact person-to-person prayer

on depression, anxiety, positive emotions, and salivary cortisol levels. Subjects in the study, all 18 years

of age or older, met the criterion proposed by the DSM-IV-TR for depressive disorder and were

recruited from medical physician offices. Subjects' symptoms were measured using various

measurement tools. 63 clients were split into two groups – one being a control group and one being an

intervention group. After serving as controls, 21 of the control subjects crossed-over into the

intervention group. After six prayer sessions for the intervention and crossed-over control group, no

prayer intervention would follow. Clients were then evaluated using the measurement tools

administered before the prayer intervention. Prayers were administered by a non-denominational

Christian minister who would, joined by subjects, pray various form prayers, prayers releasing hurts,

and prayers of blessings. The first prayer session lasted 90 minutes. Following sessions lasted 60

minutes are were tailored to subjects' needs.

Researchers concluded that findings of the study led to the conclusion that prayers significantly

lowered the levels of depression and anxiety while elevating the levels of optimism and spirituality in

subjects. Prayers, though, the researchers noted, had no effect on patients' cortisol levels.

Contrada et al., (2004) found 142 patients scheduled for heart surgery at a hospital in New

Jersey. Patients ranged from ages 32-88. 81% of subjects were male and 19% of subjects were female.

83.8% of the participants were Caucasian, 7.7% were African-American, 4.9% were Asian, 2.8% were

Hispanic, and 0.7% were other races. 76.8% of subjects were married, 0.7% were separated, 6.3% were

divorced, 12% were widowed, and 4.2% were never married. The mean years of education amongst

subjects was 13.5 (three completed undergraduate semesters in college). 52.8% of subjects were

Roman Catholic, 28.2% were Protestant, 2.8% were Eastern Orthodox, 8.5% were Jewish, 2.8% were

Hindu, and 4.9% were of no religion.

Researchers' questionnaires contained statements such as “How often do you attend religious

services?” , “How often do you privately pray or meditate?” ,and “I believe in a divine being who

watches over me and to whom I am accountable.” Each subject also completed a Beck Depression

Inventory (BDI), Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, and a Revised Life Orientation

Test.

Although the frequency of prayer had no effect on recovery, researchers found that subjects

with stronger religious beliefs had fewer surgical complications and shorter hospital stays, but more

frequent religious attendance was associated with longer hospital stays. Effects of religious beliefs and

attendance on length of hospital stay were found to be stronger among women.

Masters (2005) argues that prayer studies lack theological or rational theoretical foundations

and produce findings that are not inrerpretable. The experimental methods of science, Masters notes,

renders science ill-equipped to study divine intervention. Intercessory prayer studies, Masters says, are

a distraction from other work that should be performed in the areas of health and religion. He further

writes that the scientific method is an inappropriate ill-equipped tool to investigate whether a deity

intervenes in human affairs explaining that science assumes the world is predictable and mechanistic

while it is a basic premise that God is not a physical entity; Masters writes that natural processes are the

proper domain of science and supernatural processes are the proper domain of theology. Masters

further notes that, according to the Bible, God's ways are not known to humans, should not be

questioned, and should not be tested. The Bible also, he notes, warns people to not tempt, test, or

question God.

Mathai and Bourne (2004) selected children attending mental health services with a mean age of

nine (with a range from 4-14) and randomly assigned half of the children to a control group and

randomly assigned the other half of the children to an intervention prayer group without the knowledge

of the subjects. A group of six people prayed for the children in the prayer group and were blind to the

identity and condition of the children who were indicated by a numerical code. The subjects and their

families were unaware of the prayer so that positive effects related to positive expectations could not

confound the study. Subjects were given questionnaires to ensure that they were still being treated, a

Strength and Difficulty Questionnaire (SDQ), and a Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Children

and Adolescents (HoNOSCA) questionnaire as follow-ups after three months (time one) and six

months (time two).

Researchers from the study report that there was no difference in the SDQ scores from time one

to time two, but there was a reduction in HoNOSCA scores from time one to time two (there was no

statistically significant difference between the groups, though). The prayer and control groups were

compared at time one to ensure that there was no bias regarding group assignment. Prayer and control

groups did not significantly differ at time one on the mean SDQ Total difficulty scores, which indicates

that the group selection was evenly dispersed and that subjects' scores did not confound the results. The

HoNOSCA and SDQ results from the follow-ups were not statistically significant, thus the study did

not show that prayer produced additional benefits for patients who were in the prayer group when

compared to those in the control group.

Researchers in the Palmer, Katerndahl, and Morgan-Kidd (2004) study recruited subjects from

18-88 years of age and placed them into a group receiving prayer and a group not receiving prayer.

Seven Presbyterian churches interested in scientific studies were contacted by the researchers, and six

agreed to participate. Interested parishioners completed a twenty minute questionnaire and a five-

minute one month follow-up questionnaire. To diversify the sample size, researchers also recruited non-

church members who used the church facilities. Most subjects were Caucasian, married, and well-

educated. Group members had no significant demographic differences. Those who prayed for the

subjects were selected from a Christian retirement home and a local church prayer group. People who

prayed kept a prayer log and prayed for three minutes about two times a day.

Participants were told that the researchers were interested in studying the association between

health and religious behaviors and were not informed about the prayer component of the study during

the pre-questionnaire briefing. Subjects completed a 23-item Likert-type response questionnaire

composed of the Medical Outcomes Study SF-20 and religious and spirituality scales. After these

questionnaires, subjects were asked to answer an open-ended question about a current difficult life

situation. Subjects rated their degree of concern about the life situation from 1 (none) to 5

(overwhelming) and then rated the degree to which they believed the situation could be resolved. In a

follow-up survey after one month, subjects were asked to rate the degree to which the original problem

had been solved. Of the 120 surveyed participants, 34 were not randomized to a group because no life

problem was revealed or the problem was not rated as being of great concern. Using a random number

generator of odd and even numbers, subjects were randomized into two groups and a coin was flipped

to determine which group received prayer and which did not.

After the prayer had concluded and subjects answered questions on follow-up questionnaires,

researchers found no statistically significant difference in problem resolution between the group that

was prayed for and the control group. Among secondary results, researchers discovered that a lower

belief in prayer yielded positive outcomes in the mental health domain and significantly worse

outcomes in the physical domain, although a higher belief yielded positive results for physical function.

Better mental health scores were also found in members of the control group who had low belief in the

efficacy of prayer. Researchers note that the “power of prayer” does not necessarily have anything to do

with supernatural forces and that individual belief factors are a critical component of prayer efficacy.

Schjoedt et al. (2011) utilized 36 subjects, half of whom were devoted Christians and half of

whom were secular participants with no experience of practicing prayer and no belief in the healing

power of prayer, to measure the power of charisma speakers had on subjects. Subjects were told that

they were going to be participating in a study investigating the neural substrates of intercessory prayer

and received no mention of our particular interest in the effects of speakers' religious status. Subjects

were told -- before hearing prayers from speakers -- whether the speakers were non-Christian,

Christian, or Christians known for their healing powers although speakers were actually run-of-the-mill

Christians whose prayers were randomly distributed into the three categories. Subjects then received

fMRI scans.

Researachers concluded, after interpreting the fMRI scans, that the Christian subjects displayed

a significant increase in brain activity based on their assumptions about the praying speakers.

Differences in activity were found when comparing the low brain activity response elicited by the

speakers Christian subjects believed were non-Christian to the high brain activity response elicited by

the speakers Christian subjects believed were known for their healing abilities.

Walach et al. (2008) recuited 409 subjects with chronic fatigue syndrome to investigate the

effectiveness of distant healing. Subjects were assigned to an immediate treatment group or a deferred

treatment group. Of the two groups assigned to immediate treatment, one was informed that they were

being healed and the other was not. Two further groups were assigned to deferred treatment. Of the two

further groups, one was informed that they would have to wait six months for treatment and the other

was not. Healers were from many different healing traditions utilizing prayer or imagining the

transmission of 'healing energy,' 'light,' or 'healing power.' Researchers concluded that distant healing

had no significant effect on mental or physical health. Post-hoc analysis, the researchers note, suggests

that the most important clinical effects of distant healing may be related to patients' beliefs about

whether they received treatment.

A large amount of Americans are religious and believe that a god who can and does intervene in

human affairs via intercessory prayer exists. Intercessory prayer, though, has been largely shown, when

implemented in studies, to not improve the health of humans. Researchers in these studies recommend

that further research in this area be performed considering that a large body of research does not exist

in this area. The present research is designed to examine the effectiveness of intercessory prayer.

Method

Subjects

Subjects will be recruited from populations of cancer patients in cancer treatment centers across

the East coast of the United States. Fliers will be placed throughout treatment centers notifying patients

of a new intervention in which they can voluntarily participate. Due to the nature of cancer treatment

centers, the population will be specific (limited to hospitalized persons, persons with varying grades of

cancer, and a higher median age when compared with the general population).

Materials

Subjects will be evaluated according to the Spirituality Scale (SS) designed by Delaney in 2003.

The SS is a 23-item instrument measuring the human spiritual dimension including beliefs, intuitions,

lifestyle choices, practices, and rituals. Delaney views spirituality as a tri-dimensional phenomenon

which includes self-discovery (the search for meaning), the experience of relationships, and eco-

awareness (a connection to the environment and cosmos). The SS is designed to assess spirituality in a

manner that may be used to guide spiritual interventions.

Subjects will also be evaluated according to the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3) questionnaire

which is designed to assess the quality of life of cancer patients. This questionnaire will ask subjects

questions such as “Do you need to stay in bed or a chair during the day?” and “Do you have any

trouble taking a long walk?” and allow patients to respond from a scale of 1 (not at all) to 4 (very

much). Also included in this questionnaire are two questions – “how would you rate your overall health

during the past week?” and “How would you rate your overall quality of life during the past week?” –

in which subjects can respond from a scale of 1 (very poor) to 7 (excellent).

Procedure

Subjects will be told and led to believe that they will be randomized into two different groups

receiving intercessory prayer. Subjects will then be randomized into two groups, unbeknownst to them,

one which will receive intercessory prayer and one which will not be receiving intercessory prayer.

Subjects will, after randomization, before any intercessory prayer starts, be evaluated according to the

Spirituality Scale and the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3) questionnaire. Intercessory prayer will

commence at a rate of one day a week, at an interval of ten minutes per session, for twelve weeks. At

each three week point following the first questionnaire evaluations, subjects will again be evaluated

according to the Spirituality Scale and the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire.

Ten intercessors will be recruited from church congregations in California (in order to avoid

accidental contact between the intercessors and cancer center treatment patients) via announcements in

church bulletins and will, after recruitment, be instructed to pray and keep prayer journals. Intercessors

will be given the first name and last initial of the cancer patients.

Results

Subjects evaluated according to the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire – when comparing the

group receiving intercessory prayer and the group not receiving intercessory prayer – demonstrated no

statistically significant differences despite the implementation of intercessory prayer in this study; a

comparison of scores on the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire for those who received intercessory

prayer to those who did not receive intercessory prayer did not yield statistically significant results.

Additionally, subjects in both groups who scored high on the Spirituality Scale – when

compared to subjects of both groups who scored low on the Spirituality Scale – had similar results on

the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire.

Discussion

Similar to results in previous studies examining the implementation of intercessory prayer in

medical settings, this research coheres with the conclusion researchers often draw which is that

intercessory prayer has no statistically significant effect on subjects when considering improvement

after surgery, impact on surgery, quality of recovery, etc. In this study, though, belief in the power of

prayer, a deity or force which intervenes in human affairs, etc. – as gauged by the Spirituality Scale –

was not associated with improvement in quality of life. Previous research shows that expectation may

have something to do with recovery regardless of whether the mechanism (intercessory prayer, for

instance) is efficacious or not.

This study has several limitations in which future researchers can consider in order to improve

their studies. Three groups do not exist in this study. For instance, previous studies involving

intercessory prayer have groups which are not informed of intercessory prayer and do not receive

intercessory prayer. The population of this study was not very diverse and was largely geographically

limited (although some subjects was not from the East Coast). Persons in different continents,

especially those with beliefs associated non-monotheistic religions, would allow for a better diversity in

regards to religious belief and many other factors.

Researchers and readers of studies involving intercessory prayer, as some researchers and

commentators warn, should be wary of formulating theological conclusions based on the outcomes of

these studies. A lack of improvement in the quality of life of medical patients during and after surgery

for example, should not lead one to the wide conclusion that no deities exist or that intercessory prayer

has no efficacy on a global scale. Likewise, people who receive intercessory prayer and happen to show

statistically significant results when compared to those who did not may improve because of several

factors apart from intercessory prayer such as expectation that intercessory prayer will heal them, stress

reduction, etc. A meta-analysis showing that intercessory prayer largely has no effect in studies should

lead researchers to conclude just that.