An interesting recent development in the psychology of religion is that it has broadened to include the study of spirituality, and considerable conceptual work has been done in this area (e.g., Oman, 2013). There have often been complaints (more from theologians than psychologists) that the concept of “spirituality” is hopelessly vague. The lack of precision indeed presents problems, though that is not to say that the concept cannot be clarified. The general cultural movement in many countries to interest in spirituality rather than in religion is one that cannot be ignored by the psychology of religion.

One obvious problem is that there is little agreement about what the term “spirituality” refers to. That is not just a matter of academics reaching agreement among themselves; a broader cultural problem concerns reaching agreement among the general population. Spirituality within a religious tradition means something rather different from spirituality outside religion. There are clearly common elements, but also differences. Even if a common definition is reached, such as “search for the sacred or the transcendent,” people may mean such different things by those terms that it only moves the problem on to another level.

Another question that can be raised about spirituality outside religion is whether it has enough institutional structure to constitute a sustainable tradition. Key questions, raised by Philip Sheldrake (2013), are whether there is a tradition that goes beyond the founding generation, whether it is gathering core texts and practices, and whether there can be transmission of a nonreligious tradition of spirituality from place to place. Some strands of nonreligious spirituality may meet those criteria, but most do not. When the New Age movement began, it tended to have clear structures, albeit in relatively small and isolated groups. With the passage of time, there are fewer such structures, and nonreligious spirituality seems to have been incorporated into the general culture in a way that is less organized and less identifiable (Heelas, 2003).

Another problem is that “spiritual” is not used as a term of self-identification as much as is “religious.” People generally know whether or not they regard themselves as religious. However, they do not, to the same extent, know whether or not to classify themselves as spiritual. Cross-cultural differences may also exist here.