Are Believers Happier than Atheists? Well-being Measures in a Sample of Atheists and Believers in Puerto Rico ¿Realmente son los creyentes más felices que los ateos? Medidas de Bienestar en una Muestra de Ateos y Creyentes en Puerto Rico

González-Rivera, J. A., Rosario-Rodríguez, A., Rodríguez-Ramos, E., Hernández-Gato, I., & Torres-Báez, L. M. (2019). Are Believers Happier than Atheists? Well-being Measures in a Sample of Atheists and Believers in Puerto Rico. Interacciones, 5(1), 51-59. doi: 10.24016/2019.v5n1.160 3 Universidad de Puerto Rico, Recinto de Bayamón, Puerto Rico 1 * 2 3 Juan Aníbal González-Rivera , Adam Rosario-Rodríguez , Eduardo L. Rodríguez-Ramos , 2 4 Idania Hernández-Gato y Lourdes M. Torres-Báez

Existe poca literatura en Puerto Rico y América La na que trate empíricamente asuntos relacionados al bienestar psicológico de la comunidad ateísta. El presente estudio tuvo como propósito analizar si existen diferencias estadís camente significa vas en los niveles de sa sfacción con la vida y florecimiento psicológico entre creyentes en Dios y ateos iden ficados. Con este fin, se reclutó una muestra de 821 par cipantes (415 creyentes y 406 ateos) entre las edades de 19 y 85 años. Los resultados evidenciaron una ligera diferencia significa va en las medias de sa sfacción con la vida y florecimiento psicológico entre los grupos, pero no lo suficientemente distante como para afirmar categóricamente que los creyentes o los ateos enen una mejor calidad. Tanto creyentes como ateos, presentaron niveles robustos de sa sfacción con la vida y florecimiento psicológico. El estudio aporta evidencia empírica a la desmi ficación de ciertos postulados tradicionales sobre la supremacía de las creencias religiosas sobre las convicciones seculares o vice versa. Esperamos que estos hallazgos despierten la atención social y sirvan de base para futuras inves gaciones con la población de no-creyentes. The associa on of religiosity and spirituality with subjec ve and psychological well-being has been an emerging subject ma er. There has been a con nuous debate over whether religiosity has a direct effect on the well-being of individuals. The inves ga ons available on this subject ma er are characterized by a certain degree of discordance and empirical inconsistency. On one hand, there is scien fic literature which substan ates that religious people are o en more pleased with life than non-believers (Park & Sla ery, 2013;Rule, 2006) or that there is a posi ve correla on between religiosity, life sa sfac on, and wellbeing (Achour, Grine, Nor, & Yusoff, 2014;Harari, Glenwick, & Cecero, 2014). On the other hand, there are other studies which suggest that this connec on is confusing or nonexistent (Eichhorn, 2011;González-Rivera, Veray-Alicea, & Rosario-Rodríguez, 2017;Leondari & Gialamas, 2009). For example, even though Leondari and Gialamas (2009) indicate that religious beliefs and a ending church could be associated to life sa sfac on, they found that a belief in God is not related to any psychological well-being measure used in this study.
Throughout history, the study of human well-being has been one of the most compelling and scru nized subjects for a significant number of philosophers, theologians, and intellects. Nevertheless, it was not un l four decades ago that this subject reached the thresholds of behavioral sciences and became an empirical and academic research topic in posi ve psychology (González-Rivera, Quintero, Veray-Alicea, & Rosario-Rodríguez, 2016). The main intent of this trend was to understand the factors and psychological processes that underlie the search for happiness and the development of a be er quality of life. Wide empirical evidence consistently indicates that people, communi es, and even countries with subjec ve well-being and happiness usually feel more sa sfied with their lives, tend to live longer, and have a robust quality of life (Mar nez-Taboas & Orellana, 2017).
Within this context, in-depth, serious academic research should be conducted to determine how atheists describe their well-being and life sa sfac on compared to the level of well-being of believers. This type of research would be helpful in clarifying certain assump ons, as of yet lacking empirical evidence, about the supremacy of religious beliefs, which permeates in common thinking as well as in behavioral disciplines. In fact, Mar nez-Taboas, Varas-Díaz, López-Garay and Hernández-Pereira (2011) conducted a review of the literature in which they demonstrated that many behavioral professionals have historically characterized atheists as empty, lacking purpose in their lives, and being neuro c, an social, ego s cal, and immoral. There is also a widespread belief at the grass-root level that atheists are insensible, satanic, cynical, and lus ul people (González-Rivera, Pabellón-Lebrón, & Rosario-Rodríguez, 2017). Unfortunately, these types of stereotyped stances are simple personal opinions, are common in theis c socie es and are lacking scien fic validity. For that ma er, Mar nez-Taboas and Orellana (2017) explain that, prior to the year 2010, there was no empirical literature concerning the well-being of atheists.
The lack of scien fic literature in rela on to the atheist community demonstrates the absence of interest that has prevailed throughout decades in the field of psychology. It is important to establish that an atheist does not adhere to the core principles of theism and does not believe in God or gods (Cliteur, 2009). In fact, as explained by Mar nez-Taboas et al. (2011), not only do atheists not believe in God, they also assess God's inexistence with absolute certainty. Furthermore, atheists have been classified into two categories by the scien fic literature: (a) theological atheists: referring to people whom do not believe in God or gods; and (b) self-iden fied atheists: people whom iden fy themselves as atheists compared to other non-religious categories such as agnos cs (Doane & Ellio , 2015).

Secular s gma and atheist iden fica on
Numerous na onal surveys suggest that approximately 5% of the American popula on does not believe in God or gods (Zuckerman, 2009). Providing that these countries are mainly Chris an, there is plenty of literature available which iden fies atheists as one of the most marginalized groups in It has also been proven that culture and society have a powerful influence on the level of religiosity, spirituality, and subjec ve well-being (Diener, Tay, & Myers, 2011;Eichhorn, 2011). Since many individuals live in highly religious locali es, they would like to obtain a certain degree of acceptance within their cultural framework, resul ng in greater involvement in this type of ac vity. This associa on will, therefore, posi vely influence the level of subjec ve well-being (Eichhorn, 2011). On the other hand, in a study in Puerto Rico, Mar nez-Taboas and Orellana (2017) performed a preliminary study with the par cipa on of 190 individuals (55 = non-believers; 135 = believers) with the purpose of assessing the psychological well-being, life sa sfac on, and psychological flourishing of religious believers and non-believers. The results indicated that the average differences reported in the three scales, between both groups, were not sta s cally significant.
Similarly, Edling, Rydgren and Bohman (2014) performed a study in Sweden to examine the rela onship between religion and happiness in a sample of 2,942 youngsters. The results of the inves ga on indicated that having religious beliefs did not have a significant impact on happiness. In fact, the effect on happiness was due to variables related to the sense of belonging to a group or organiza on, regardless of religious affilia ons. Moreover, Lim and Putnam (2010) suggest that the connec on between religion and life sa sfac on could be a result of the social support networks that emerge within church groups. The authors' argument is that support networks based on religious faith are o en more important in life sa sfac on than other social links. The reason for this could be that people tend to find more meaning in things when the social exchange comes from someone with whom they share overall basic values and beliefs.

Religion, atheism and well-being
It is important to highlight the most outstanding results found in the limited research sources available dealing with the well-being and life sa sfac on of both atheists and believers. Several research studies associate religiosity and spirituality with an increase in psychological well-being (Dierendonck, 2005;González-Rivera, Quintero, Veray-Alicea, & Rosario-Rodríguez, 2017;Piedmont & Friedman, 2012). The results may vary when the elements of wellbeing are limited to ins tu onalized religion and exclude spiritual aspects or the search for the sacred or transcendental. Similarly, there has been a well-established reasser on in research that religious people report a higher level of well-being and life sa sfac on (Abdel-Khalek, 2011;. The ques on that arises is whether those high scores are sta s cally distant from the ones obtained from atheists and non-religious people. In this regard, Rule (2006) found that people with a favorable a tude towards religion show a remarkably higher level of sa sfac on towards life than non-prac oners. Furthermore, a study carried out in India found that religiosity is posi vely associated with happiness, life sa sfac on, self-esteem, and op mism (Abdel-Khalek & Singh, 2014).
Given the inconsistency of the compara ve measures between atheists and believers in terms of their well-being and life sa sfac on, Zuckerman, Galen and Pasquale (2016) decided to revise, analyze, and challenge these findings. The authors found that in prominently secular countries, atheists usually report strong levels of subjec ve well-being and life sa sfac on, whereas in countries that are dominantly theists or Chris ans, believers usually a ain slightly higher scores than those of atheists in life sa sfac on and well-being measures. This outcome is not surprising given that, in strongly religious cultures, theist faith could lead to discrimina on, hos lity, intolerance, and violence towards atheists (Silberman, 2005), resul ng in a disrup on in the development of a good quality of life.
tof the American popula on does not believe in God or gods (Zuckerman, 2009). Providing that these countries are mainly Chris an, there is plenty of literature available which iden fies atheists as one of the most marginalized groups in the United States (Cragun, Kosmin, Keysar, Hammer, & Nielsen, 2012;Gervais & Norenzayan, 2013;Doane & Ellio , 2015). Also, it has been shown that there are approximately 32 countries in which the rights of those who openly iden fy themselves as atheists have been seriously violated (Sánchez, 2015). A study carried out in Puerto Rico with a sample of 348 atheists reported that 82% of the par cipants have perceived significant levels of discrimina on (González-Rivera et al., 2017a). These results are not surprising, providing that distrust towards atheists is directly linked and significantly correlated with the belief in God (Gervais, 2008).
Historically, Chris anity has exercised a influence on Puerto There are very few inves ga ons that elucidate topics on the well-being and quality of life of the atheist community; nevertheless, there are some studies worth highligh ng and reviewing. For example, Moore and Leach (2016) administered various well-being and mental health measures to a substan al sample of subjects (n = 4,667) from diverse religious beliefs. They found that there are no significant differences between atheists and believers in these variables. The authors, therefore, concluded that their results do not empirically affirm the existence of mental health dispari es between religious and secular individuals. Likewise, another study with a sample composed of atheists, Chris ans, and Buddhists by Caldwell-Harris, Wilson, LoTempio and Beit-Hallahmi (2011) did not find any significant difference among these groups in terms of psychological well-being measures and empathy.
On the other side, in a study conducted by Baker, Stroope and Walker (2018), atheists demonstrated a be er physical health and fewer psychiatric symptoms (e.g., anxiety, paranoia, obsession, and compulsion) compared to other secular people and believers in God.  (3) being self-iden fied as a believer in a personal God (theist) or as an atheist (self-iden fied atheist). In this sample, agnos cs, non-religious people, and deists (believers in one universal God who does not interact with humans) were excluded.

METHODS
Psychological Flourishing. We used the flourishing scale developed by Diener et al. (2010), which consists of eight items, to assess the psychological well-being from an eudaemonic perspec ve (e.g. I lead a purposeful and meaningful life; I am op mis c about my future). Each item has a scale of response of seven points which fluctuate from "fully disagree" to "fully agree". The possible range is from 8 to 56 points. A high score characterizes a person with resilience and psychological resourcefulness. In the present study, the scale obtained an internal consistency index of .92 in Cronbach's alpha.

General Procedures
Thus, providing the scarcity of research in both Puerto Rico and La n America concerning how the atheist community perceives their subjec ve and psychological well-being, the main objec ve of the present study is to analyze if there are any sta s cally significant differences in the level of life sa sfac on (H1) and psychological flourishing (H2) between believers in God and self-iden fied atheists. This study aims to extend the scope of the preliminary findings reported by Mar nez-Taboas and Orellana (2017) and to encourage the La n American scien fic community to explore these variables in future research using believer and non-believer samples Rico. It has also been a significant cultural aspect in most La n American countries. For the year 2010, 96.7% of the Puerto Rican popula on iden fied themselves as Chris ans (Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life, 2012). Since colonial mes, the Chris an religion with most influence over Puerto Rican society has been Catholicism (69.7%), followed by Protestan sm (25.1%). The rest of the Chris an religions account for 1.9%, meaning the por on of Puerto Ricans who belong to either non-Chris an or non-Protestants churches or sects. Given that Chris ans make up the majority groups in both La n America and Puerto Rico, it can be said that they tend to feel more support among the popula on and that the focus has been towards them.

Measurement
General Data Ques onnaire. To define the study sample, a sociodemographic ques onnaire was elaborated to obtain age, sex, academic background, and annual income informa on, among other variables. It also contained dichotomous ques ons concerning the religious beliefs of the par cipants for theological iden fica on: theist or atheist.

Data Analysis
Before making the analysis to iden fy if there are significant differences in the levels of life sa sfac on and flourishing between believers in God and atheists, an evalua on was performed regarding whether there was a normal data distribu on of the variables men oned. For this analysis, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov sta s c with Lilliefors significance correc on was used. The obtained results indicate that the data did not meet the normality distribu on for life sa sfac on between believers in God (KS(415) = .128, p < .001) and atheists (KS(406) = .143, p < .001), nor for flourishing in believers (KS(415) = .213, p < .001) and atheists (KS(406) = .201, p < .001). Since it did not meet the normality data distribu on, a non-parametric analysis was used to test the hypothesis of this research.
Once the par cipants were able to access the online survey, they had to read the informed consent statement, which comprised the following clauses: (a) the purpose of the study, (b) the voluntary nature of the study, (c) possible risks and benefits, (d) the right to end the par cipa on at any moment, (e) the name of the ins tu on, and (f) the iden fica on data and contact informa on of the researchers. It also indicated the par cipa on dura on me, as well as the right to obtain the results of the study once completed. To guarantee the privacy and confiden ality of the par cipants, the ques onnaires were answered anonymously. Par cipants also had the choice to print the informed consent sheet.
The ini al hypothesis sought to analyze if there are significant sta s cal differences between the level of life sa sfac on between believers in God and atheists. For this, a group differences analysis using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test was carried out. When analyzing if there are significant differences of life sa sfac on between believers in God (Mrange= 429.87) and atheists (Mrange= 391.71), significant differences were observed, U = 76,412.50, Z = -2.311, p = .02, r = .08. These results imply that life sa sfac on is higher among believers than in atheists, but this result has a small effect size. However, both groups are within the range of what is considered a high level of life sa sfac on (Diener, 2006).
The Spearman correla on coefficient analysis was then performed for the life sa sfac on and flourishing for the overall sample of the study. The results indicate that there is a moderate rela on between life sa sfac on and flourishing (rs = .63, p < .001). In addi on, the descrip ve data of both measures were calculated (see Table 2).

Life Sa sfac on
Having obtained the results and observing that both groups are within a high level of life sa sfac on, an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed to determine if the results found in the Mann-Whitney U test were not biased by any other variable such as sex, age, income and academic background. Subsequently, a post hoc ANCOVA was conducted, introducing the par cipants' sex, age, income Albizu University (San Juan, Puerto Rico) approved the procedures for this study, the par cipant recruitment stage started. The data compila on was carried out through an online ques onnaire using the PsychData pla orm for psychology research, which was ac ve throughout the year 2017. During that period, a paid adver sement was circulated amongst popular social networks (such as Facebook, Twi er, Google+, WhatsApp, Instagram, among others) containing general informa on about the study and a link to access the online survey. Par cipants were authorized to share the advert, which resulted in a snowball effect throughout the social networks, speeding up the recruitment phase. Also, thanks to the collabora on of Atheists of Puerto Rico, an atheist ac vism organiza on who shared the advert in all their social networks, the par cipa on of the non-believer community increased significantly.
The current study is based on a descrip ve nonexperimental cross-sec onal exploratory design. The computer so ware IBM SPSS Sta s cs (version 23) was used for the data analysis. Sample descrip ve measures were obtained as part as the result analysis, the distribu on of data normality and the reliability of the scales were analyzed, and group comparison and correla on analyses were carried out.

ISSN 2411-5940 (impreso) / e-ISSN 2413-4465 (digital)
Interacciones, 2019, Vol. 5, N° 1, Enero-Abril, 51-59 Tabla 2. Since both groups have a high level of psychological flourishing, a post hoc ANCOVA was conducted, introducing the par cipants' sex, age, income and academic background as covariants. In the Levene test, it was found that there is equality in the variance erors of the variables used (p < .05).

Means and standard devia on of believers and non-believers
The results indicate that, by controlling the sex, age, income and academic background, there are sta s cally significant differences between the level of psychological flourishing between believers in God and atheists [F(1, 815) = 10.01, p < .01, = .04]. These results indicate that sex, age, income and academic background were variables that did not interfere in levels of psychological flourishing between believers in God and atheists. Although, the effect size is small and both groups are posi oned at a high level of psychological flourishing, sta s cally significant differences are evidenced in favor of atheists, with slightly higher scores.

Psychological Flourishing
This leads us to ques on which common factors (if any) atheists and believers have that makes them feel sa sfied with their lives. Authors such as Gallego, García and Pérez (2007) suggest that the freedom of people to be able to choose their beliefs, whether religious or non-religious, plays a transcendental role in their lives value and wellbeing. These authors found that the sense of freedom and meaning of life affirmed the religious self-defini on of the par cipants as being either exceedingly firm believers or totally atheists. In this sense, the self-determina on to be able to choose a religious or non-religious stance and the convic on in that belief makes people feel more secure, posi ve and sa sfied with their life. In fact, there is evidence that convic on in religious or non-religious beliefs correlates with psychological health and with a posi ve worldview of life (Baker & Cruickshank, 2009;Wilkinson & Coleman, 2010). It has also been found that people who exhibit insecurity in their religious beliefs are those who report having a poorer quality of life (Brinkerhoff & Mackie, 1993). Since our study's sample is composed of theists and self-iden fied atheists, this therefore strengthens and contributes evidence for those statements.
conducted, introducing the par cipants' sex, age, income and academic background as covariants. In the Levene test, it was found that there is equality in the variance errors of the variables used (p > .05). The analysis showed that all covariates did not interfere in the sta s cally significant differences between believers in God and atheists. This confirms that there are sta s cally significant differences in the level of life sa sfac on between believers in God and atheists [F (1, 815) = 8.27, p < .01, = .05]. Although the effect size for this analysis is small, and both groups are posi oned at a high level of life sa sfac on, sta s cally significant differences are evidenced in favor of believers in God, with slightly higher scores.
The second hypothesis sought to discover if there are sta s cally significant differences between the level of psychological flourishing between believers in God and atheists. Once more, the Mann-Whitney U test was used, given the lack of a normal data distribu on for these variables. The results obtained indicate that there are sta s cally significant differences in the level of psychological flourishing between believers in God and atheists U = 97,776.00, Z = 4.017, p < .001, r = .14. Unlike the data obtained in the life sa sfac on analysis, in this case, atheists (Mrange = 444.33) have a level of psychological flourishing which is sta s cally greater than that of believers in God (Mrange = 378.40). Nevertheless, the effect size is small and both groups are within a high level of psychological flourishing.
The objec ve of our research was to examine whether there are sta s cally significant differences in the levels of life sa sfac on and psychological flourishing between believers in God and self-iden fied atheists. This is a par cularly important issue due to the limited research within the Puerto Rican socio-cultural context on the subjec ve and psychological well-being of the country's atheist community. Studies such as this one serve to demys fy the popular mispercep on regarding the emo onal well-being of atheists, which has permeated in behavioral sciences, as well as academic se ngs. We emphasize that we do not intend to disparage the importance of faith in God nor understate the posi ve effects of religiosity that has been evidenced in many inves ga ons. We rather intend to provide enlightenment on topics related to the well-being of atheists and believers and how they differ.
On the other hand, sta s cally significant mean differences We have found sta s cally significant differences in the means of life sa sfac on between atheists and believers, nevertheless, that differences has a small effect size. This result is in harmony with those reported by Park and Sla ery (2013) and Rule (2006), who affirm that believers tend to be more sa sfied with life than non-religious people. Nevertheless, this finding must be analyzed carefully so as not to reach previous conclusions. According to the categories developed by Diener (2006) for SWLS interpreta on, scores between 25 and 29 reflect a high level of life sa sfac on. According to these categories, in our study, the averages of atheists (M = 27.06) and believers (M = 28.13) yielded a high life sa sfac on, since they only differ by one point. This means that the differences are sta s cally significant, yet not sufficiently pronounced as to categorically affirm that believers have a be er quality and life sa sfac on than atheists, that has confirmed by the small effect size. For Diener (2006), similar scores to the ones obtained in both of our groups (atheists and believers) represent a posi ve assessment of the main aspects of life: work, family, friends, leisure, and personal development. The author augments that people with this level of sa sfac on can seek mo va on and direc on to address the areas of dissa sfac on in their life. Our study demonstrates that both groups possess this quality.
It is worth men oning that the present study is the first in La n America and the Caribbean that compares the levels of well-being of atheists and believers with such a strong sample size (n = 821). However, some limita ons have been iden fied that readers and future researchers should take into considera on. First, the sample was collected by availability and not randomly. This type of sampling limits the generaliza on of the findings, which means that these results are only relevant to the par cipants in the study. Second, although it has been demonstrated that the collec on of data over the internet is reliable, valid, reasonably representa ve, profitable, and efficient (Mayerson and Tryon 2003), this can affect the means of the study and increase the standard error. Lastly, since the study were observed in psychological flourishing between atheists and believers with a small effect size. Our results are not aligned with the findings of Mar nez-Taboas and Orellana (2017), Moore andLeach (2016), andCaldwell-Harris et al. (2011), who did not find differences in well-being and mental health measures between these groups either. We therefore infer that there must be other psychological variables that mediate the rela onship of religious wellbeing and atheist well-being. Diener, Tay and Myers (2011) propose that having a defined purpose in life serves as a media ng factor between the variables of religiosity and happiness. Religious beliefs might sa sfy the need for meaning and mo va on of life; however, it should be stressed that they are one of the many op onal paths to achieve a life with meaning. In this sense, atheists give meaning to their life by other means such as living in the present, sharing me with important people, loving their loved ones, or by direc ng their efforts towards a valuable goal without any divine or transcendental interven ons.
At the theore cal level, our study makes a significant contribu on to the insufficient literature available in Puerto Rico and La n America on the subjec ve and psychological well-being of the atheis c community. Contrary to the dominant stereotypes in eminently Chris an cultures, our results confirm that atheists exhibit robust levels of life sa sfac on and psychological flourishing, therefore refu ng popular beliefs of the apparent lack of meaning and purpose of atheists. Mar nez-Taboas et al. (2011) reported that the interna onal literature suggests that atheists tend to be inquisi ve, liberal, undogma c, non-authoritarian, and open to diversity. These a ributes are important to qualify their lives as valuable, meaningful, and thriving at a psychological level. Our results demonstrate that, despite the constant marginaliza on atheists undergo in Puerto Rico (González-Rivera et al., 2017a), they have surprising psychological strength to face discrimina on, while simultaneously maintaining high levels of well-being and happiness.
Another aspect that must be taken into considera on is the sense of belonging and security that is obtained by sharing me with people who have similar beliefs. Various research has already proven that beyond religiosity itself-or the absence of it-there are variables linked to the sense of belonging to an organiza on or group, whether religious or not, which directly and posi vely impact the subjec ve assessment of happiness (Edling et al., 2014;Gervais, Shariff, & Norenzayan, 2011;Ten Kate, de Koster, & van der Waal, 2017). In other words, it is not the belief in God or atheism per se that makes people happy, but rather the social environment and sharing with people with the same convic ons. Thus, it can be presumed that posi ve emo ons, the increase of general well-being, and the feeling of belonging are a ained through the social interac on among individuals of similar beliefs (Powell, Shahabi, & Thoresen, 2003). Even though atheists are one of the most marginalized groups in the world, they are emerging from anonymity and are unifying into groups and organiza ons to openly defend and share their beliefs. In fact, there has been a significant increase of secular, atheist, and poli cally ac ve organiza ons, both locally and interna onally, that iden fy themselves with the atheis c community (González-Rivera et al., 2017a).
Regarding the prac cal implica ons, our study empirically strengthens certain postulates that are worth reviewing. First, it suggests that, in terms of psychological and subjec ve well-being, religiosity is useful, but it is not an essen al factor in the pursuit of happiness. This outcome should promote respect and equanimity between people who profess different beliefs or seek different ways of a aining happiness. According to Zuckerman (2007), an atheist can make sense of life just by the pleasure of living it or because it is meaningful for his/her loved ones. In fact, he found that atheists find happiness and meaning in their lives through family rela onships, in affinity with their community, highligh ng unique and pleasurable moments of their lives, without wai ng for any eschatological reward or eternal punishment a er death. In this sense, our study provides empirical evidence against the preconceived biases that presume that atheists are miserable people, lacking meaning, and are devoid of hope and purpose. Such affirma ons perpetuate discrimina on against atheists and promote the supremacy of faith over non-tradi onal or nonreligious beliefs. Another important prac cal implica on highlighted in our study is the need for behavioral professionals to include topics related to atheists, agnos cs, non-believers, and secular life in their academic discussions. This step would contribute to the construc on of a more mul cultural and pluralis c society, where respect for diversity, different thinking, and non-tradi onal beliefs stands out. As Mar nez-Taboas and Orellana (2017) explain, "social scien sts must take the lead in this ma er to break old schemes and replace them with credible and reliable informa on; moreover, we need theore cal models that fully explain the mind and lifestyles of non-believers" (p. 275). Given the lack of research dealing with issues related to atheists and non-believers, we recommend further studies with this popula on from different perspec ves and psychosocial approaches that may reveal a more complete profile of the atheist community. It is also necessary to carry out research and surveys and to collect sta s cal data that help us to establish a be er profile and to learn the specific needs of the atheist community in Puerto Rico. A viable alterna ve is to encourage psychology graduate students to consider this topic for their disserta on work.

Are Believers Happier than Atheists? Well-being Measures in a Sample of Atheists and Believers in Puerto Rico
and increase the standard error. Lastly, since the study has a transversal design, readers should be careful with causal inferences, since it is unknown whether the results will be sustained over me.

FUNDING
The present study was self-financed. Abdel-Khalek, A. (2013). The rela onships between subjec ve well-being, health, and religiosity among young adults from Qatar. Mental Health, R e l i g In summary, our results exposed that there are differences in the psychological and subjec ve well-being of the atheists and theists who were interviewed for the present study. The analysis revealed that believers show higher scores in life sa sfac on, while atheists demonstrate higher scores in psychological flourishing. However, both believers and atheists presented robust levels of life sa sfac on and psychological flourishing. This study breaks tradi onal assump ons, lacking empirical evidence, on the supremacy of religious beliefs that permeates within the popular imaginary and behavioral disciplines. We hope that these findings will awaken social a en on and serve as a basis for future research with the non-believer popula on.