Although the St. Ignatian inspired Jesuit Examen is a 500-year-old prayerful and meditative technique popular within diverse religious and spiritual circles, it has not been subject to empirical research. We believe that the Examen follows principles of cognitive behavioral therapy and could be used in both a religiously based as well as secular approach to improve psychological health and well-being. The present research proposes a secularized version of the Examen so that it can be used with a broad population who might not be religiously engaged or are from spiritually diverse backgrounds. More specifically, this pilot study explores the effectiveness and potential psychological health and well-being benefits of the Ignatian Examen in a university workplace setting (Case et al., 2019; Curlee et al., 2022; McMillin, 2021). It is important to address the well-being of employees in the workplace because they confront a variety of challenging and often stressful issues on a daily basis, including the impact on overall well-being in their professional and personal lives due to heavy workloads and possible burnout. The often ever-increasing demands by employers affect the psychological, physical, and social health of employees in the workplace and have potentially negative effects on job satisfaction and physical and mental well-being (Christopher & Maris, 2010; Koncz et al., 2016; Richmond, 2000; Salvagioni et al., 2017).

In a university setting, staff members often experience high levels of stress that may lead to burnout, a form of stress that results from excess work and high expectations. Alves et al. (2019) found that burnout affects faculty members’ quality of life and well-being (Grant et al., 2007; Roizen & Roach, 2010). In academia, the focus is primarily on the students, but the well-being of faculty and staff is also important (Gewirtz & Cribb, 2020). Hence, employers should continually explore methods for improving employees’ well-being in the workplace, and we propose that the Examen may promote relaxation and stress management and improve employee wellness.

Religious practices play an important role in promoting the psychological health and well-being of many engaged in their faith traditions (Plante, 2009). These practices may include special diets, sacred clothing, prayer, contemplative practices, feasts, festivals, chants, music, and dance. Many techniques borrowed from Christian and other religious practices have specifically targeted stress and worry (e.g., Knabb, 2021; Knabb et al., 2017, Knabb & Vazquez, 2018), including providence focused therapy (Knabb et al., 2017). Additionally, some religious practices and techniques have been secularized to appeal to a broader audience in our increasingly secular society. Some of the most common secularized practices in Western society include mindful meditation, a Buddhist-rooted discipline, and yoga, a Hindu-rooted tradition, both of which often promote connection to oneself, compassion, relaxation, and wellness. Secular interventions or practices include many elements of traditional elements of religion and spirituality without the cultural or religious aspects (Plante, 2020). This trend represents a divergence from the traditional elements of spirituality and a break from the ties to faith traditions (Barker, 2014).

The secularization of religious practices has increased in recent years, but ethical concerns have been expressed about their use (Plante, 2021; Young & Brunk, 2009). When utilizing secularized religion-based practices, the practice is often used without acknowledgment of the religious history or perspective of the practice. There is also a debate as to whether secularized religious practices are truly neutral (Palitsky & Kaplan, 2019). Additionally, an issue arises regarding the secularization of religious practices due to increased risks of inappropriate usage and potential cultural appropriation. Modernized versions of religious practices have potentially weakened the effectiveness of the traditional practice, and the removal of the religious aspect of religious practices can be viewed as cultural misappropriation (Plante, 2020).

Mindfulness is an excellent example of a very popular religious and spiritual practice that has been secularized to appeal to a wide audience. The practice is derived from the Buddhist tradition and reflects assumptions and values from this tradition (Dark-Freudeman, 2021). Yoga, a practice derived from the Hindu tradition, is also very popular, and yoga has been increasingly secularized, which allows those who have no connection to Hinduism the ability to engage in and experience the benefits of the practice (Hofmann, 2013). Secular mindfulness-based interventions include many of the elements of traditional mindfulness without the cultural or religious aspects (Zhang et al., 2021). John Kabat-Zinn (1982) is considered the most influential figure in the acceptance of mindfulness as a secular practice. Mindfulness has been integrated into various forms of psychotherapy, including cognitive behavior therapy (MBCT) and dialectical behavior therapy (DBT; Hick, 2009).

In the workplace setting, organizations have incorporated mindfulness practices to improve the well-being of their employees with positive effects. Workplace mindfulness training (WMT) within the field of secular psychotherapy incorporates practices derived from spiritual and religious practices (Kersemaekers et al., 2018). Studies support the use of WMT in organized settings to reduce stress and enhance the well-being of employees, suggesting that WMT is linked to better workplace performance (Chaskalson, 2011). Empirical studies of WMT have found that it promotes well-being and performance-related outcomes in the workplace (Hülsheger et al., 2013; Ostafin & Kassman, 2012), showing that secularized practices can be beneficial for reducing stress and improving the workplace experience. Numerous benefits can be derived from secularized religious traditions such as mindfulness and yoga, and several lesser-known secularized techniques are practiced widely today. One of these potentially beneficial secularized practices is the Ignatian daily Examen practice, a popular prayerful reflection exercise within the Jesuit community that is often used as a tool for discernment or decision-making.

St. Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus, commonly known as the Jesuits, developed the daily Examen in the 16th century (Kolvenbach, 2008). The Examen is an introspective, end-of-day prayer that provides parishioners the ability to reflect on their day, with an emphasis on gratitude. The process takes approximately 15 min, or 3 min per step, and the individual can be led by another individual or can be self-guided through the five steps. These steps are summarized as (1) presence, (2) gratitude, (3) review, (4) reflect, and (5) respond. The individual is encouraged to reflect on the present moment, note what they are grateful for, review and reflect on their day, and then set intentions for themselves going forward (Traub, 2008). Although the Examen was created in a religious context and typically centers around one’s relationship with God or the Divine, the religious details can be easily omitted to secularize this reflective practice. See Appendix for an example of a secularized Examen process.

There are no known empirical studies that use a secularized version of the Examen or have tested the Examen’s effectiveness. The present study focuses on the well-being and psychological benefits of practicing a secularized version of the Ignatian Examen in a university workplace. Built upon an ongoing research study of the benefits of the Examen by the authors and their colleagues, this pilot study was narrowly focused on the effects of a secularized version of the Examen on university staff. It was our hope to determine whether a secularized version of the Examen could be used to increase well-being and provide psychological health benefits. Given that meditation and reflective practices have been found to provide positive benefits, this pilot study might provide direction for future research.

Methods

Participants

The participants were staff employed at Santa Clara University (SCU) during the fall quarter of 2022. These individuals were invited to participate voluntarily and with no incentive. A total of ten SCU staff members fully participated in the current study; they fully completed three questionnaires and attended weekly Examen sessions.

This study was submitted to and approved by Santa Clara University’s Institutional Review Board. The study lasted nine weeks, and SCU’s Ignatian Center for Jesuit Education held weekly 15-min Examen sessions on Thursdays at 12:45 p.m. via Zoom (see Appendix for an example of a typical Examen session). Participants were asked to attend as many of the Examen sessions as possible (up to nine sessions) and to fill out three questionnaires. Adherence to the sessions was assessed by keeping track of attendance during the Examen Zoom sessions (i.e., who was logged in with or without their camera on). The first questionnaire was administered before the intervention started (week 1), the second questionnaire was administered halfway through the intervention (week 5), and the third and final questionnaire was administered after the intervention was completed (week 9). This data was collected via the survey software Qualtrics.

Only the first questionnaire collected demographic information. Aside from the demographics, the same information was collected in all three questionnaires. Each questionnaire consisted of several psychological and behavioral health measures: the Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ; Steger et al., 2006), the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS; Brown & Ryan, 2003), the Santa Clara Compassion Scale (SCBCS; Hwang et al., 2008), the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Diener et al., 1985), the State Hope Scale (SHS; Snyder et al., 1991), and the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995). Only the data from participants who completed all three questionnaires were imported into Jeffrey’s Amazing Statistics Program (JASP) for statistical analysis.

Measures

The Meaning in Life Questionnaire (Steger et al., 2006) measures two dimensions, including the subjective sense that one’s life is meaningful and one’s drive is toward finding meaning. The questionnaire consists of 10 statements that are designed to measure the meaning in life in these two dimensions. Using a 7-point Likert-type scale, participants answer each item in rank order from one to seven. One is absolutely true and seven is absolutely untrue. The MLQ has good internal consistency, with coefficient alphas ranging from the low to high .80 s for the Presence scale and the mid .80 s to low .90 s for the Search subscale. A sample statement is “I understand my life’s meaning.”

The Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (Brown & Ryan, 2003) is a 15-item scale that assesses the awareness of what is happening in the moment. The scale is a strong measure of trait mindfulness, or attention to life experiences, and has adequate reliability (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha = .84) and validity (Lawlor et al., 2014; Osman et al., 2016). There is also a six-item short scale that is less burdensome for the participant to complete. Both forms of the scale show adequate reliability and validity and have the ability to predict the self-regulation and well-being of the participant. The response options range from 1 (almost never) to 6 (almost always). A sample item is “I find it difficult to stay focused on what’s happening in the present.”

The Santa Clara Brief Compassion Scale (Hwang et al., 2008) is a five-item scale designed to assess compassion among the staff in a university setting. Participants score how true or false each statement is on a 7-point Likert scale. The scale is an easy, reliable, and valid instrument for measuring compassion, with Cronbach’s alpha and other reliability measures in the mid- to high .80 s (Caycho-Rodríguez et al., 2020; Plante & Mejia, 2016). A sample statement is “I feel compassion for people, even though I do not know them.”

The Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener et al., 1985) is a five-item questionnaire and evaluates the subject’s well-being or global life satisfaction. The scores correlate with measures of mental health and can predict future behaviors such as suicide attempts. The measurement scales are reliable and valid and show adequate internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .87, and excellent test–retest reliability, with a correlation of 0.82 across a two-month period. A sample statement is “I am satisfied with my life.”

The State Hope Scale (Snyder et al., 1991) was designed as a self-report measure of hope and is a brief six-item measure that takes less than two minutes to complete. Responses are rated on an 8-point Likert scale that ranges from 1 (definitely true) to 8 (definitely false); higher scores indicate a greater state of hopelessness. The scale offers a brief internally consistent and valid self-report measure of ongoing goal-directed thinking (Redlich‐Amirav et al., 2018; Snyder et al., 1996). The SHS is internally consistent and demonstrates concurrent and discriminant validity. The scale has a high internal consistency, with researchers reporting a Cronbach’s alpha of .93 (Snyder et al., 1991, 1996). A sample statement is “Right now, I see myself as being pretty successful.”

The Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995) is a 21-item measure consisting of three self-report scales used to measure an individual’s emotional state of depression, anxiety, and stress. The three scales consist of seven items each, built upon a dimensional conception of psychological disorder. Responses are rated on a point scale ranging from 0 (Does not apply to me at all) to 3 (Applies to me very much or most of the time). Within the three scales, the individual is categorized based on severity that ranges from normal to extremely severe. The scale offers a short internally reliable and valid self-report measure. An example statement is “I find it hard to wind down,” and the total scale evidences high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = .93) (Henry & Crawford, 2005).

Results

Once the three data sets were collected, they were input into JASP. We conducted paired sample t-tests on each outcome measure by comparing pre-intervention scores to post-intervention scores. After conducting paired sample t-tests examining the pre-intervention scores and post-intervention scores, the results from the dependent outcome variables, the Meaning in Life Questionnaire, the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale, the Santa Clara Brief Compassion Scale, the Satisfaction with Life Scale, and the State Hope Scale indicated no statistically significant findings (p > .05).

Although the DASS indicated no statistically significant findings for the depression and anxiety scores, the stress score did indicate a statistically significant finding. The mean stress score before the Examen intervention was 15.2 (SD = 4.1), while the mean stress score following the intervention was 10.0 (SD = 5.6). A paired sample t-test examining the pre-intervention stress scores relative to the post-intervention stress scores indicated a significant improvement (t = 4.33, p < .01), resulting in a large effect size (d = 1.07); self-reported stress was reduced over time relative to the baseline measure of stress.

Discussion

The current pilot study examined the feasibility and effects of using a secularized version of the Jesuit Examen in a university workplace. The goal was to determine whether the Examen could help to increase the well-being of staff members on a college campus while reducing their stress. This pilot study is unique in that it is the only one known that used a secular version of the Examen. It is our understanding that this is the first pilot study to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of the implementation of a secularized version of the Examen to determine whether the intervention can be used to increase psychological and well-being health benefits in the workplace. Pilot studies are an important step in the process of research to determine the feasibility and acceptability of an intervention, and pilot research can help to find practical solutions that lead to more rigorous and large-scale testing.

The present study contributes to the limited body of literature on the intervention by presenting results from an uncontrolled nine-week pilot study on the use of the Examen. This study suggests that a secular version of the Examen can be implemented and have positive effects on staff on a university campus. The statistical results of this study indicate that the use of the Examen resulted in the reduction of stress among a university workforce. Twenty-five staff members signed up to participate in the study, and 10 staff members completed the entire study. Feedback was not obtained to ask why 15 participants dropped out before completion. We can assume because there was no incentive to participate, individuals opted to not complete the remaining two questionnaires. A short survey would be helpful to obtain feedback regarding the participants’ experiences.

The results from the depression and anxiety scores in the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Hope scale did not indicate statistically significant findings. However, the statistical significance of the stress variable indicates that participants’ stress was significantly reduced from the start of the Examen program to the end of the nine-week session. This occurred while participants were simultaneously practicing the Jesuit Examen for the duration of this nine-week study. These findings obtained from the small sample suggest that the use of the intervention holds promise for use in promoting positive change for different groups and in different settings.

The current pilot study has several limitations. First, the study was not randomized, so there was no control for group differences. Without a control group, results may have been influenced by a placebo effect. For future research, a randomized controlled trial that includes an active control group is recommended. Future studies should use a randomized control design to enhance their internal validity. The lack of a control group did not allow us to test whether the observed changes were specific to the Examen intervention or were due to unobserved confounding variables that led to the improvement of the participants. Future research should use a randomized control trial that has an active control group and a larger sample size. Our findings suggest that the intervention can be useful with diverse populations. We hope to design a future study to examine whether the Examen intervention has the same benefits in larger populations.

Another limitation of the study is its reliance on self-report measures. Self-reporting data often result in inherent bias, so it would be useful to gather data using objective measures in future studies. The outcome could be strengthened with larger sample groups. Small group sizes can lead to statistical bias and a lack of detection of small group differences, so a well-designed study with a larger sample size is needed to further examine the effects of the Examen on university staff.

The lack of long-term follow-up is another limitation. The study was designed to assess the short-term effects of the intervention (nine weeks). This relatively short follow-up period does not allow for knowing whether the changes were maintained over a longer period of time. A study that assesses the sustained effects over a longer period would be beneficial. Homogeneity of the participants is also a limitation as all participants were staff who worked on the same college campus.

Using the Examen to reduce stress and promote well-being was feasible and effective. The results suggest that the use of the secularized Examen as an intervention provides benefits, including significantly reduced stress levels. Further studies should include randomized control groups, objective measurements, large group sizes, long-term follow-up, and diverse populations.