Forgiveness

From GoodWiki

Contents 1 Definitions and Overview 1.1 Related GoodWiki Pages 2 Often-Cited or New Studies with Accompanying Summaries 3 Related Sites and Writings 4 References

[edit] Definitions and Overview

Based originally on a GG review by Adam Cohen

Despite its importance to social interactions, relationships, and even individual health, forgiveness has not received much attention from psychologists up until a few years ago. Since then, however, there has been an enormous increase rise in the amount of attention given to forgiveness. This research is beginning to address what forgiveness is, how we can measure it effectively, whether it is healthy, and whether different cultures and religious groups have the same views about it.

Although we all feel we intuitively know what forgiveness is, it has proven to be a theoretical challenge to define it: is it a change in emotions, a behavior? Does it mean forgetting or pardoning offenses? New research and new analytic tools, some of which are discussed below, are contributing significantly to this area of study.

[edit] Related GoodWiki Pages

• Resolving differences
• Compassion in relationships

[edit] Often-Cited or New Studies with Accompanying Summaries

Cehajic, S., Brown, R., & Castano, E. (2008). Forgive and forget? Antecedents and Consequences of Intergroup Forgiveness in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Political Psychology, 29(3), 351-367. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00634.x

Abstract: "The present study examines the effects of contact and common-ingroup identification on intergroup forgiveness and outgroup behavioral tendencies. A sample of Bosnian Muslims (N=180) were asked to report their readiness to forgive the misdeeds committed by Bosnian Serbs during the 1992-95 war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. A path analysis of the presumed antecedents and consequences of forgiveness revealed that frequent and good quality contact with members from the perpetrator group predicted forgiveness (positively) and desire for social distance (negatively). Moreover, the positive relationship between contact and forgiveness was mediated by empathy and trust towards the outgroup and by perceived outgroup heterogeneity. Common-ingroup identification was also found to be positively associated with forgiveness and negatively with social distance towards the outgroup. Finally, intergroup forgiveness also predicted social distance from the outgroup. The theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved) (journal abstract)"

Philpot, C. R., & Hornsey, M. J. (2008). What happens when groups say sorry: The effect of intergroup apologies on their recipients. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(4), 474-487. doi:10.1177/0146167207311283

Abstract: "Despite the increased incidence of intergroup apology in public life, very little empirical attention has been paid to the questions of whether intergroup apologies work and if so, why. In a series of experiments, Australians read scenarios in which Australian interests had been harmed by an outgroup. Participants were then told that the outgroup had either apologized or had not apologized for the offense. Although the presence of an apology helped promote perceptions that the outgroup was remorseful, and although participants were more satisfied with an apology than with no apology, the presence of the apology failed to promote forgiveness for the offending group. This was the case regardless of whether the effectiveness of apology was measured cross-sectionally (Experiment 1) or longitudinally (Experiment 2). It was also the case when the apology was accompanied by victims advocating forgiveness (Experiment 3) and was independent of the emotionality of the apology (Experiment 4). In contrast, individuals who apologized for intergroup atrocities were personally forgiven more than those who did not apologize (Experiment 4). Theoretical and applied implications are discussed."

Knutson, J., Enright, R., & Garbers, B. (2008). Validating the developmental pathway of forgiveness. Journal of Counseling & Development, 86(2), 193-199. Retrieved from http://aca.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,8,11;journal,1,34;homemainpublications,2,2;

Abstract: "The validity of the Process Model of Forgiveness (R. D. Enright, 2001) was examined by asking 82 adults to reflect and report on how they went about forgiving someone who had hurt them unfairly and deeply. Respondents' sequential ordering of the forgiveness process was compared with the theoretical ordering. Results showed moderate correlations between the participant derived and theoretically derived sequences. Although shown to be statistically valid, the model could benefit from revisions based on the participants' report of their own forgiveness experiences."

Orathinkal, J., Vansteenwegen, A., & Burggraeve, R. (2008). Forgiveness: A perception and motivation study among married adults. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49(2), 155-160. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2007.00605.x Abstract: "This cross-sectional study investigated the perception and motivation of forgiveness among 785 heterosexually married adults from the Flanders region in Belgium. A descriptive analysis showed that, in general, the respondents have a rather positive perception of forgiveness. In the second phase of the study, a t-test showed evidence of a significant difference between the positive perception of forgiveness of the first-married and remarried adults. But on a gender level, there was no difference either in the positive or in the negative scales. This study has shown that the general forgiveness has significant (p < 0.001) positive correlation with the perception of forgiveness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved) (journal abstract)"

Orth, U., Berking, M., Walker, N., Meier, L. L., & Znoj, H. (2008). Forgiveness and psychological adjustment following interpersonal transgressions: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(2), 365-385. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2007.07.003 Abstract: "Forgiveness is often assumed to be adaptive for psychological adjustment following interpersonal transgressions. Three hundred and forty seven individuals who had experienced a recent interpersonal transgression were surveyed on four occasions over the course of six weeks. Forgiveness was assessed with scales measuring interpersonal avoidance and revenge motivation and psychological adjustment was assessed with scales measuring depression and rumination. Latent growth curve analyses showed that intraindividual changes in forgiveness were positively correlated with changes in adjustment. Latent difference score analyses indicated that adjustment predicted subsequent change in forgiveness, but that forgiveness did not predict subsequent change in adjustment. The results suggest that adjustment facilitates forgiveness, but not that forgiveness facilitates adjustment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved) (journal abstract)"

Berger, E. (2008). Caring and character: How close parental bonds foster character development in children. New York, NY, US: Springer Science + Business Media. Retrieved from www.csa.com

Abstract: "(Created by APA) Portions of this chapter have been excerpted and modified from my book, Raising Kids with Character: Developing Trust and Personal Integrity in Children (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006; see record 2006-05473-000). The book was originally published under the title Raising Children with Character: Parents, Trust, and the Development of Personal Integrity (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1999; see record 2000-07098-000). An upright character is our fundamental American value. Its image is everywhere--the men and women most admired in our nation's history are the very embodiment of strong character qualities: courage, ingenuity, loyalty, responsibility, and altruism. This chapter examines family character, parental love, forgiveness, tolerance, values, parent communication, schools, teacher-child relationships, citizenship, school-age children, troubled teens, access to good health care, and national goals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved)"

Green, J. D., Burnette, J. L., & Davis, J. L. (2008). Third-party forgiveness: (not) forgiving your close other's betrayer. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(3), 407-418. doi:10.1177/0146167207311534

Abstract: "Building on attribution and interdependence theories, two experiments tested the hypothesis that close friends of victims (third parties) are less forgiving than the victims themselves (first parties). In Experiment 1, individuals imagined a scenario in which either their romantic partner or the romantic partner of a close friend committed the identical relationship offense. Third parties were less forgiving than first parties, a phenomenon we termed the third-party forgiveness effect. This effect was mediated by attributions about the perpetrator's intentions and responsibility for the offense. In Experiment 2, first and third parties reported an actual offense and their subsequent unforgiving motivations. The third-party forgiveness effect was replicated and was mediated by commitment to the perpetrator. Perpetrator apology or amends to the victim increased third-party forgiveness. Future third-party research can expand interpersonal forgiveness research beyond the victim-perpetrator dyad."

Bono, G., Mccullough, M. E., & Root, L. M. (2008). Forgiveness, feeling connected to others, and well-being: Two longitudinal studies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(2), 182-195. Retrieved February 25, 2008, from Psychology: A SAGE Full-Text Collection database.

Abstract: "In two studies, the authors investigated the associations between interpersonal forgiveness and psychological well-being. Cross-sectional and prospective multilevel analyses demonstrated that increases in forgiveness (measured as fluctuations in individuals' avoidance, revenge, and benevolence motivations toward their transgressors) were related to within-persons increases in psychological well-being (measured as more satisfaction with life, more positive mood, less negative mood, and fewer physical symptoms). Moreover, forgiveness was more strongly linked to well-being for people who reported being closer and more committed to their partners before the transgression and for people who reported that their partners apologized and made amends for the transgression. Evidence for the reverse causal model, that increases in well-being were related to increases in forgiveness, was also found. However, changes in feelings of closeness toward the partner appeared to account for the associations of forgiveness with well-being, but not vice versa."

Maio, G. R., Thomas, G., Fincham, F. D., & Carnelley, K. B. (2008). Unraveling the role of forgiveness in family relationships. Journal of personality and social psychology, 94(2), 307-319. Retrieved February 25, 2008, from PsycARTICLES database.

Abstract: "Testing the idea that the process of forgiveness is intrinsically different across diverse relationships, this study examined the role of forgiveness in different family relationships. In 2 laboratory sessions 1 year apart, 114 families (each including 2 parents and 1 child) completed a new measure of family forgiveness and many individual-level, relationship-level, and family-level variables that have been previously linked with forgiveness. After validating the measure of family forgiveness in cross-sectional analyses, investigators performed longitudinal analyses to examine the role of forgiveness in each family relationship over the 1-year interval. Results indicated many important positive consequences of forgiveness on individual traits, aspects of each family relationship, and general family environment. However, there were also important asymmetries in associates of forgiveness across parent-child and parent-parent relationships, demonstrating the relationship-bound nature of forgiveness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved) (journal abstract)"

McNulty, J. K. (2008). Forgiveness in marriage: Putting the benefits into context. Journal of Family Psychology, 22(1), 171-175. Retrieved February 25, 2008, from PsycARTICLES database.

Abstract: "The current longitudinal study examined the consequences of spouses' tendencies to forgive their partners over the first 2 years of 72 new marriages. Though positive main effects between forgiveness and marital outcomes emerged cross-sectionally, spouses' tendencies to forgive their partners interacted with the frequency of those partners' negative verbal behaviors to predict changes in marital outcomes longitudinally. Specifically, whereas spouses married to partners who rarely behaved negatively tended to remain more satisfied over time to the extent that they were more forgiving, spouses married to partners who frequently behaved negatively tended to experience steeper declines in satisfaction to the extent that they were more forgiving. Similar patterns emerged for changes in the severity of husbands' problems, such that husbands married to wives who frequently behaved negatively reported sharper increases in problem severity to the extent that they were more forgiving but reported more stable problem severity to the extent that they were less forgiving. These findings question whether all spouses should benefit from forgiveness interventions and thus highlight the need for further research on the most appropriate targets for such interventions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved) (journal abstract)"

Orathinkal, J., Vansteenwegen, A., & Burggraeve, R. (2008). Are demographics important for forgiveness? The Family Journal, 16(1), 20-27. Retrieved January 30, 2008, from Psychology: A SAGE Full-Text Collection database.

Abstract: "The current study primarily investigates the effect of age, gender, education, employment status, number of children, and number of years in marriage on forgiveness of first-married and remarried adults. When corrected for marital status (p < .005) and gender (p < .002), there is a significant main effect of number of children on forgiveness. There are also significant main effects of gender on forgiveness when corrected for education (p < .04), number of children (p < .003), and length of marriage (p < .01). Women's forgiveness is found to be significantly higher than men (p < .005, one-tailed, d = .20). Number of children (r = .092, p < .05) and educational attainment of women (r = .098, p < .05) also indicated a significant positive association with forgiveness."

Koutsos, P., Wertheim, E. H., & Kornblum, J. (2008). Paths to interpersonal forgiveness: The roles of personality, disposition to forgive and contextual factors in predicting forgiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(2), 337-348. Retrieved January 30, 2008, from PsycINFO database.

Abstract: "This study examined a multi-factorial model of forgiveness in which personality of the offended party, disposition to forgive, and context-specific factors were examined as predictors of forgiveness in a specific situation. A community sample of adults (N = 128) was recruited from Australia and New Zealand. Regression analyses indicated that individuals scoring higher on agreeableness and spirituality, and lower on neuroticism, reported a greater disposition to forgive. Disposition to forgive mediated the relationship between individuals' agreeableness and their reported forgiveness in a specific situation. Factors that predicted unique variance in forgiveness of a specific offence were the offended party's disposition to forgive, the value they placed on the relationship with the transgressor, positive offender actions (e.g., listening, apologising, providing compensation), and expecting the transgressor to repeat the offence. The findings support the idea that interpersonal forgiveness involves the interplay of factors that are both intrinsic and extrinsic to individuals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved) (journal abstract)"

Orathinkal, J., Vansteenwegen, A., & Burggraeve, R. (2008). Are demographics important for forgiveness? The Family Journal, 16(1), 20-27. Retrieved December 27, 2007, from Psychology: A SAGE Full-Text Collection database.

Abstract: "The current study primarily investigates the effect of age, gender, education, employment status, number of children, and number of years in marriage on forgiveness of first-married and remarried adults. When corrected for marital status (p < .005) and gender (p < .002), there is a significant main effect of number of children on forgiveness. There are also significant main effects of gender on forgiveness when corrected for education (p < .04), number of children (p < .003), and length of marriage (p < .01). Women's forgiveness is found to be significantly higher than men (p < .005, one-tailed, d = .20). Number of children (r = .092, p < .05) and educational attainment of women (r = .098, p < .05) also indicated a significant positive association with forgiveness."

Holeman, V. T. (. (2008). The role of forgiveness in religious life and within marriage and family relationships. New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. Retrieved December 27, 2007, from PsycINFO database.

Abstract: "Particular religious beliefs and practices that are associated with forgiveness merit specific attention. Richards and Bergin (1997) observe that "from a religious perspective, forgiveness is viewed as an act that has important spiritual consequences". It is also an act with the potential to heal fractured family relationships. This chapter outlines the shape of forgiveness in the five major world religihons (Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism) and then it explores how these conceptualizations of forgiveness may affect family relationships (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)"

Neto, F. (2007). Forgiveness, personality and gratitude. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(8), 2313-2323. Retrieved November 17, 2007, from PsycINFO database.

Abstract: "Recent evidence indicates that personality plays a role in the study of forgiveness, but the literature has been limited. This study sought to determine whether gratitude accounted for a significant portion of the variance beyond that of personality in the study of dispositional forgiveness (enduring resentment, sensitivity to circumstances, and overall propensity to forgive). One hundred and fifty-two Portuguese college students (51% females and 49% males, mean = 21.10 years) participated in the study. The results confirmed that personality, particularly agreeableness and neuroticism correlate with enduring resentment and overall tendency to forgive. Additionally, results using multiple regression models indicated that gratitude explained a significant amount of variance of overall propensity to forgive."

Karremans, J. C., & Aarts, H. (2007). The role of automaticity in determining the inclination to forgive close others. Journal of experimental social psychology, 43(6), 902-917. Retrieved November 17, 2007, from PsycINFO database.

Abstract: "Hitherto, the literature on forgiveness has almost exclusively focused on the role of deliberative processes (e.g., attribution processes) in determining forgiveness. However, in the present article, we argue that in the context of close relationships, the inclination to forgive can be relatively automatically evoked in response to an offense. Four studies provide evidence relevant to this general hypothesis. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrate that the subliminal presentation of close others (versus non-close others or a control word) induces a relatively strong inclination to forgive various offenses. Study 3 provides insight into the cognitive processes that underlie the closeness-forgiveness link, demonstrating that thinking of (a transgression of) a close other (compared to a non-close other) leads to enhanced accessibility of the construct of forgiveness. Finally, Study 4 demonstrates that forgiving responses toward a close offender are less dependent on cognitive resources than are forgiving responses toward a non-close offender, suggesting that, in close relationships, the inclination to forgive arises in a relatively effortless, habitual manner. Implications for theorizing on how people forgive are being discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved."

Brown, R. P., Barnes, C. D., & Campbell, N. J. (2007). Fundamentalism and forgiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(6), 1437-1447. Retrieved November 17, 2007, from PsycINFO database.

Abstract: "Two studies investigated the associations between religious fundamentalism (RF) and aspects of dispositional forgiveness: pro-forgiveness attitudes and the tendency to forgive others. In Study 1, a direct self-report measure of RF was significantly associated with pro-forgiveness attitudes, but not with the tendency to forgive. In Study 2, we conceptually replicated these results by combining a measure of religiosity and a measure of need for structure, a cognitive style variable related to rigid, categorical thinking. A significant interaction between religiosity and need for structure revealed that the positive association between religiosity and pro-forgiveness attitudes was higher among respondents who were also high in need for structure. As expected, this pattern did not occur with the tendency to forgive, which was positively related to religiosity but negatively related to need for structure. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved) (journal abstract)"

Finkel, E. J., Burnette, J. L., & Scissors, L. E. (2007). Vengefully ever after: Destiny beliefs, state attachment anxiety, and forgiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3), 871-886. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.871

Abstract: "Two studies examined how destiny beliefs (that potential relationships are or are not “meant to be”) interact with state attachment anxiety to predict forgiveness tendencies. In Study 1, participants experienced an experimental manipulation of attachment anxiety (vs. security) before indicating the degree to which they would forgive a series of hypothetical partner offenses. In Study 2, participants reported every 2 weeks for 6 months (14 waves in total) on offenses enacted by their partner and indicated the degree to which they forgave the partner, both concurrently and 2 weeks later. Consistent with predictions, results revealed Destiny Beliefs × State Attachment Anxiety interaction effects: Strong (relative to weak) destiny beliefs predicted reduced forgiveness tendencies for individuals experiencing state attachment anxiety, but such beliefs were not associated with forgiveness for individuals experiencing state attachment security. Results from Study 2 suggest that this interaction effect was significantly mediated through trust in the partner."

McCullough, M. E., Bono, G., & Root, L. M. (2007). Rumination, emotion, and forgiveness: Three longitudinal studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3), 490-505. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.3.490

Abstract: "In 3 studies, the authors investigated whether within-persons increases in rumination about an interpersonal transgression were associated with within-persons reductions in forgiveness. Results supported this hypothesis. The association of transient increases in rumination with transient reductions in forgiveness appeared to be mediated by anger, but not fear, toward the transgressor. The association of rumination and forgiveness was not confounded by daily fluctuations in positive affect and negative affect, and it was not moderated by trait levels of positive affectivity, negative affectivity, or perceived hurtfulness of the transgression. Cross-lagged associations of rumination and forgiveness in Study 3 more consistently supported the proposition that increased rumination precedes reductions in forgiveness than the proposition that increased forgiveness precedes reductions in rumination."

Risen, J. L., & Gilovich, T. (2007). Target and observer differences in the acceptance of questionable apologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3), 418-433. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.3.418.

Abstract: "Do people distinguish between sincere and insincere apologies? Because targets and observers face different constraints, we hypothesized that observers would differentiate between spontaneous and coerced apologies but that targets would not. In Studies 1 and 2 participants either received or observed a spontaneous apology, a coerced apology, or no apology, following a staged offense, and the predicted target–observer difference emerged. Studies 3–5 provided evidence in support of 3 mechanisms that contribute to this target–observer difference. Studies 3 and 4 indicate that this difference is due, in part, to a motivation to be seen positively by others and a motivation to feel good about oneself. Study 5 suggests that social scripts constrain the responses of targets more than those of observers."

Wohl, M. J. A., & Mcgrath, A. L. (2007). The perception of time heals all wounds: Temporal distance affects willingness to forgive following an interpersonal transgression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(7), 1023-1035. doi:10.1177/0146167207301021

Abstract:"Prior research has assessed the temporal unfolding of forgiveness and found that forgiveness becomes more likely as time distances the victim from the transgression. These findings lend credence to the axiom “time heals all wounds.” This research examines the effect of time perception on forgiveness of others by experimentally manipulating temporal distance. In Experiment 1, respondents reported greater willingness to forgive the transgressor when more time had elapsed since the transgression. Experiments 2 and 3 determined the influence of subjective temporal distance on willingness to forgive. Participants who perceived a hypothetical (Experiment 2) or real (Experimental 3) transgression to be farther away in time were more willing to forgive the target than were participants who perceived the event to be temporally closer. Results suggest that temporal appraisals of an event are central to the forgiveness process."

Berry, J. W., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Parrot, I., L., O'Connor, L. E., & Wade, N. G. (2001). Dispositional forgiveness: Development and construct validity of the Transgression Narrative Test of Forgiveness (TNTF). Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1277-1290.

This piece describes the Transgression Narrative Test of Forgiveness (TNTF), a well-validated measure of forgiveness that was developed by John Berry, Everett Worthington, and their colleagues. The questionnaire asks you to imagine yourself in five different situations where someone harms you, and to rate in each case how likely you would be to forgive the person. (Compare to the TRIM scale described in McCullough et al 1998.)

One's pattern of forgiveness across the five situations probably gives some important clues about your general willingness to forgive other people, or your dispositional forgiveness. Berry and his collaborators presented some good evidence that their scale measures people’s general tendencies to forgive. Across the various studies that they did to develop and validate this scale, the evidence suggested that people who were disinclined to forgive were more likely to be prone to anger, anxiety, and other negative emotions. Furthermore, there seemed to be a small, positive relationship between willingness to forgive in these situations and the personality trait of agreeableness. Agreeable people are more good-natured, so this may suggest that forgiving people are also likely to be high in empathy, compassion, and trust.

Exline, J.J. & Baumeister, R. (2000). Expressing forgiveness and repentance: Benefits and barriers. In M.E. McCullough, K.I. Pargament & C.E. Thoresen (Eds), Forgiveness: Theory, research and practice (p. 133 – 155). New York: Guilford.

Researchers Julie Juola Exline and Roy Baumeister have proposed that forgiveness has both internal (emotional) and external (behavioral) elements. Sometimes, we might choose to tell people we forgive them, even if we are still angry inside. Or, we might not be angry anymore, but we might not want to tell the offending person this so they don't think they have a license to walk all over us. Which of these is forgiveness? Exline and Baumeister do not seem to prefer the private aspects over the public aspects, but merely point out that forgiveness can involve one or both. However, little research has been done on this interesting and important distinction between private and public forgiveness.

McCullough, M.E., Rachal, K., Sandage, S.J., Worthington, E.L., Brown, S.W., & Hight, T.L. (1998). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships: II. Theoretical elaboration and measurement. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 75, 1586-1603.

This piece describes initial work on the Transgression Related Interpersonal Motivations Inventory (TRIM), another well-validated measure of forgiveness. This scale, like the TNTF (above), focuses on forgiveness in relationships between people. However, the TRIM asks participants to remember a specific offense in which someone harmed them. And, unlike the TNTF, which simply asks people's likelihood of forgiving, the TRIM asks people several questions about their motives for revenge and for avoiding the perpetrator. The authors explained, “When an offended relationship partner reports that he or she has not forgiven a close relationship partner for a hurtful action, the offended partner's perception of the offense is stimulating relationship-destructive levels of the two motivational states; that is, (a) high motivation to avoid contact with the offending partner and (b) high motivation to seek revenge or see harm come to the offending partner.”

The following five items comprise the measure's Revenge scale: (1) I'll make him/her pay; (2) I wish that something bad would happen to him/her; (3) I want him/her to get what he/she deserves; (4) I'm going to get even; and (5) I want to see him/her hurt and miserable.

The following seven items make up the Avoidance scale: (1) I keep as much distance between us as possible; (2) I live as if he/she doesn't exist, isn't around; (3) I don't trust him/her; (4) I find it difficult to act warmly toward him/her; (5) 1 avoid him/her; (6) I cut off the relationship with him/her; and (7) I withdraw from him/her.

One of the ways the investigators validated the TRIM scale was to examine how the scale predicts qualities of people's relationships. It is likely that tendencies to forgive have important implications for personal relationships, and their study supported this. People's revenge and avoidance motivations (TRIM scores) were predictive of their relationship satisfaction. People who tended to forgive reported greater relationship quality, and also greater commitment to relationships. The authors summarized that “these findings gave some encouraging support for our conceptualization of forgiving as a motivational transformation that occurs more readily in satisfactory, committed relationships.”

McCullough, M.E., Worthington, E.L., Jr., & Rachal, K.C. (1997). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 321-336.

McCullough, Worthington, and Kenneth Rachal--some of the best known forgiveness researchers today--define forgiveness primarily in terms of changes in motivation: “We define interpersonal forgiving as the set of motivational changes whereby one becomes (a) decreasingly motivated to retaliate against an offending relationship partner, (b) decreasingly motivated to maintain estrangement from the offender, and (c) increasingly motivated by conciliation and goodwill for the offender, despite the offender's hurtful actions.” They carefully distinguish forgiveness from pardoning an offense, or forgetting about it, or opening oneself up to further abuse.

Staub, E., & Pearlman, L. A. (2001). Healing, reconciliation, and forgiving after genocide and other collective violence. In R. G. Helmick & R. L. Petersen (Eds.), Forgiveness and reconciliation: Religion, public policy, and conflict transformation (pp. 205-227). Philadelphia: Templeton.

Is forgiveness also possible or healthy in extreme cases, such as with respect to genocide? Some researchers, such as Ervin Staub and Laurie Anne Pearlman, say yes. “Forgiving is difficult,” they write. “The very idea of it can be offensive after horrible events like the Holocaust, the genocide in Rwanda, or the genocidal violence in Tibet. Even to people outside the victim group, the idea that survivors should forgive following genocide is an affront, an anathema. . . . Nevertheless, forgiving is necessary and desirable.” They take this position because they believe forgiveness paves the way for reconciliation and healing, promotes psychological well-being, and lifts psychological and spiritual burdens.

Witvliet, C.V.O., Ludwig, T. E., & Vander Laan, K. L. (2001). Granting forgiveness of harboring grudges: Implications for emotion, physiology, and health. Psychological Science, 12, 117-123.

Charlotte vanOyen Witvliet and her colleagues at Hope College (MI) have shown that a lack of forgiveness–-a tendency to maintain anger and resentment, to ruminate-–can have damaging effects on physical health. In a study on the physiological effects of forgiveness versus holding a grudge, Witvliet et al theorized that forgiveness “may free the wounded person from a prison of hurt and vengeful emotion, yielding both emotional and physical benefits, including reduced stress, less negative emotion, fewer cardiovascular problems, and improved immune system performance. . . . Unforgiving memories and mental imagery might produce negative facial expressions and increased cardiovascular and sympathetic reactivity, much as other negative and arousing emotions (e.g., fear, anger) do.”

To test this important hypothesis, these researchers had 70 Hope College undergraduates remember a time in which they were hurt or mistreated by someone else. Over the course of the study, the participant rehearsed either forgiving that person or being unforgiving. Participants were told that being forgiving consisted of empathizing with the offender, and being forgiving involved letting go of negative emotions toward the offender and cultivating conciliatory ones. Being unforgiving consisted of rehearsing the hurt and holding a grudge.

Participants were encouraged to focus on the thoughts, feelings, and physical responses that would accompany each response. During the study, the participants remembered offenses that included rejections, lies, and insults from their friends, romantic partners, and family members. During the two-hour study, participants' psychophysiological responses, emotional responses, and facial expressions were recorded. The results powerfully showed that forgiveness was associated with a healthier profile of emotional and physiological reactions, compared to unforgiveness. During the unforgiveness periods, participants reported feeling more negative, aroused, angry and sad, and less in control. In contrast, when asked to try to be forgiving, participants reported feeling more empathy and did report feeling more forgiveness.

Physiological measurements showed that during unforgiveness, participants showed greater corrugator EMG activity, which is a measure of tension in the brow area of the face - perhaps indicative of negative emotions. Skin conductance levels were lower in the forgiveness periods, indicating less sympathetic nervous system arousal. Arterial blood pressure was also higher during the unforgiveness periods. Many of theses changes persisted into the recovery period of the study.

In all, the emotional and physiological data suggest that a sustained pattern of unforgiveness over time could result in poorer health because of the negative psychophysiological states that accompany unforgiveness. Witvliet and colleagues believe that “although it is unlikely that the brief unforgiving trials in this study would have a clinically significant effect on health, we believe that the effects obtained in this study provide a conservative measure of effects that naturally occur during unforgiving responses to real-life offenders.”

[edit] Related Sites and Writings

• "Forgiveness, Peace & Well-Being" (GG literature review by Cohen)

• "Making Peace Through Apology" (GG article by Lazare, 2004, in which the author "explains why some apologies encourage forgiveness and reconciliation—and others only make things worse.")

• "The Choice to Forgive" (GG article by Luskin, 2004, which reviews Luskin's "research-tested method for helping people give up their grudges.")

• "Truth + Reconciliation" (GG article by Desmond Tutu, 2004, in which Tutu "explains how forgiveness allowed South Africans to imagine a new beginning for their country.")

• "The New Science of Forgiveness" (GG article by Worthington, 2004, which provides "a discussion of recent scientific inquiry into forgiveness.")

[edit] References

Bulk of list recommended by Cohen (UCB) in his literature review, cited above."

• Berry, J. W., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Parrot, I., L., O'Connor, L. E., & Wade, N. G. (2001). Dispositional forgiveness: Development and construct validity of the Transgression Narrative Test of Forgiveness (TNTF). Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1277-1290.

• Cohen, A.B., Malka, A., Rozin, P. & Cherfas, L. (2004). Religion and unforgivable offenses. Manuscript submitted for publication.

• Exline, J.J. & Baumeister, R. (2000). Expressing forgiveness and repentance: Benefits and barriers. In M.E. McCullough, K.I. Pargament & C.E. Thoresen (Eds), Forgiveness: Theory, research and practice (p. 133 – 155). New York: Guilford.

• McCullough, M.E., Rachal, K., Sandage, S.J., Worthington, E.L., Brown, S.W., & Hight, T.L. (1998). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships: II. Theoretical elaboration and measurement. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 75, 1586-1603.

• McCullough, M.E., Worthington, E.L., Jr., & Rachal, K.C. (1997). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 321-336.

• Rye, M. S., Pargament, K. I., Ali, M. A., Beck, G. L., Dorff, E. N., Hallisey, C., et al. (2000). Religious perspectives on forgiveness. In M. E. McCullough, K. I. Pargament & C. E. Thoresen (Eds.), Forgiveness: Theory, research and practice (pp. 17-40). New York: Guilford.

• Staub, E., & Pearlman, L. A. (2001). Healing, reconciliation, and forgiving after genocide and other collective violence. In R. G. Helmick & R. L. Petersen (Eds.), Forgiveness and reconciliation: Religion, public policy, and conflict transformation (pp. 205-227). Philadelphia: Templeton.

• Witvliet, C.V.O., Ludwig, T. E., & Vander Laan, K. L. (2001). Granting forgiveness of harboring grudges: Implications for emotion, physiology, and health. Psychological Science, 12, 117-123.