2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.05.026
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Does forgiveness require interpersonal interactions? Individual differences in conceptualization of forgiveness

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
18
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
1
18
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…They suggested that when people in collectivistic cultures forgive, they would more often be concerned with decisions to forgive (i.e., the intent to behave in ways that do not express negative emotions or motivations and treat the other person as a person of value) than with emotional forgiveness (i.e., restoring inner harmony within an individual). The results of the present study seem to suggest that, in conjunction with recent research in support of their theorizing (Hook et al., ), forgiveness and forgiveness interventions may serve different functions in different cultures. In the present study, there is little support for Hook et al's proposition regarding decisional forgiveness, given that the REACH Forgiveness intervention allots less than 1 of 6 hours to promoting decisional forgiveness.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…They suggested that when people in collectivistic cultures forgive, they would more often be concerned with decisions to forgive (i.e., the intent to behave in ways that do not express negative emotions or motivations and treat the other person as a person of value) than with emotional forgiveness (i.e., restoring inner harmony within an individual). The results of the present study seem to suggest that, in conjunction with recent research in support of their theorizing (Hook et al., ), forgiveness and forgiveness interventions may serve different functions in different cultures. In the present study, there is little support for Hook et al's proposition regarding decisional forgiveness, given that the REACH Forgiveness intervention allots less than 1 of 6 hours to promoting decisional forgiveness.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…Of particular relevance to the present research are studies that demonstrate that when collective identity is salient among victims, they exhibit greater prosocial responses to mistreatment, and lower antisocial responses (e.g., Bobocel, 2013;Bobocel & Zdaniuk, 2010;Fu, Watkins, & Hui, 2004;Hook, Worthington, Utsey, Davis, & Burnette, 2012a, Hook et al, 2012bHui & Bond, 2009;Karremans, Van Lange, & Holland, 2005;Neto & Mullet, 2004;Watkins et al, 2011). For example, Bobocel and Zdaniuk (2010) found that the stronger victim's collective identity, whether situationally primed or measured, the more prosocial their responses toward an offender (e.g., forgiveness, greater helping).…”
Section: Background Theory and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…For some clients, there may be no distinction between the concepts of faith and religion, whereas other clients may identify significant distinctions between them (Cook, Dixon, & McGuire, ). Researchers in recent years have defined and differentiated these terms, allowing counselors to more carefully explore the importance of these variables in the client's life and worldview (Cook et al, ; Hook et al, ). The concept of faith can be a salient feature of how a client self‐defines and needs to be explored further.…”
Section: Faith As a Cultural Variablementioning
confidence: 99%