The adolescent as forgiver

Abstract

A social cognitive developmental model of forgiveness is described and tested in two studies, the second being a replication of the first. In study 1, 59 subjects in grades 4, 7, 10, college and in adulthood were given a forgiveness interview that assessed six stages of forgiveness development, Rest's DIT measure of justice development, and a religiosity scale. As predicted, there were strong age trends for forgiveness and justice. Both forgiveness and justice were related but distinct constructs. The more one practiced one's faith, the higher one was in forgiveness stage. Study 2, with 60 subjects, replicated the above findings. The studies give strong evidence that people's understanding of forgiveness develops with age. Implications for adolescent development are drawn.

Forgiveness as a Mediator for the Relationship between Spirituality and Posttraumatic Growth in Aceh Conflict Victims, Indonesia

“…Tsang et al suggested that religion might be used to either encourage forgiveness or justify holding grudges, depending on the nature of one's religion [16]. Several study found that religious individuals are more likely to value forgiveness than those who are not religious [17]- [20], [31]- [32]. Our findings also support this argument in Aceh conflict fictims sample.…”

Evidence for a distinct forgiveness prototype: Convergent and discriminant validity

“…Accordingly, the present research does not provide any information about the consistency or stability of the lay representation of forgiveness across the life-span. Previous research (Enright, Santos, & Al-Mabuk, 1989) has documented unique differences across ages in how participants' reason about granting forgiveness, similar to Kohlberg's (1969) findings on moral reasoning. These findings have been replicated in a non-western sample (Park & Enright, 1997); however, all of this research was again based on participants' procedural knowledge of granting forgiveness and did not specifically examine if participants at different ages had unique conceptualizations or definitions of forgiveness.…”

Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships.

“…; A1-Mabuk, Enright, & Cardis, 1995;Coyle & Enright, 1997;Enright, Gassin, & Wu, 1992;Enright & Human Development Study Group, 1996;Enright et al, 1989;Freedman & Enright, 1996;Hebl & Enright, 1993; see also MeCullough & Worthington, 1995), scientific progress in the socialpsychological study of interpersonal forgiving has been slow (Baumeister, Exline, & Sommer, 1998;McCullough, Exline, & Baumeister, 1998;McCullough, Rachal, Sandage, & Worthington, 1997;McCullough & Worthington, I994a, 1994b). We believe that along with the slow development of theory, the slow development of psychometric instruments to measure forgiving has also been a major barrier to scientific progress in social and personality psychology .…”

“…For instance, preliminary research suggests that the disposition to forgive others loads on the Agreeableness factor of the Big Five (Manger, Saxon, Hamill, & Pannell, 1996). Other such variables might include the sophistication of one's reasoning about forgiveness (e.g., Enright, Santos, & AI-Mabuk, 1989), dissipation-rumination (Caprara, 1986;Caprara, BarbaraneUi, & Comrey, 1992), attitudes toward revenge (Emmons, 1992;Stuckless & Goranson, 1992), and general styles of responding to anger (e.g., Tangney, Wagner, Hill-Barlow, Marschall, & Gramzow, 1996). These personality processes might influence forgiving by facilitating certain relational styles (Asendorpf & Wilpers, 1998) or by disposing people to experience some cognitions (e.g., attributions) or affects (e.g., empathy) regarding an interpersonal offense or offender (while restraining them from experiencing others).…”