Forgiveness in Two Minds: Understanding Forgiveness Through Dual-Process Theory

In this thesis, I examined the relevance of dual-process theory to understanding forgiveness. Specifically, I argued that the internal conflict experienced by laypersons when forgiving (or finding themselves unable to forgive) and the discrepancies between existing definitions of forgiveness can currently be best understood through the lens of dual-process theory. Dual-process theory holds that individuals engage in two broad forms of mental processing corresponding to two systems, here referred to as System 1 and System 2. System 1 processing is automatic, unconscious, and operates through learned associations and heuristics. System 2 processing is effortful, conscious, and operates through rule-based and hypothetical thinking. Different definitions of forgiveness amongst both lay persons and scholars may reflect different processes within each system. Further, lay experiences with internal conflict concerning forgiveness may frequently result from processes within each system leading to different cognitive, affective, and behavioural responses. The study conducted for this thesis tested the hypotheses that processing within System 1 can directly affect one's likelihood to forgive, and that this effect is moderated by System 2 processing. I used subliminal conditioning to manipulate System 1 processing by creating positive or negative conditioned attitudes towards a hypothetical transgressor. I used working memory load (WML) to inhibit System 2 processing amongst half of the participants. The conditioning phase of the study failed and so no conclusions could be drawn regarding the roles of System 1 and System 2 in forgiveness. The implications of dual-process theory for forgiveness research and clinical practice, and directions for future research are discussed.

A Mixed-Method Study of Educator Knowledge and Practice Related to Student Socio-moral Development

The purpose of this study was to explore elementary educators’ knowledge of moral development, how this knowledge relates to their beliefs and sense of efficacy pertaining to character education practices and the socio-moral reasoning of their students. It was hypothesized that educators’ beliefs and practices related to character education would reflect their pedagogy rather than knowledge of moral development theory. It was further hypothesized that there would be differences in student socio-moral reasoning specifically the beliefs and desires that guide actions would differ based on grade and gender. This mixed-method study employing self-report questionnaires, open response vignettes, and semi-structured educator interviews yielded quantitative and qualitative data. Findings indicated socio-moral reasoning of students differed according to grade (age) and gender. Knowledge of moral development theory was found to vary among participants however some practices employed by educators did align with a social cognitive approach to moral development. Significant variables identified consistently among educator and student participants included, autonomy, social competence, sense of school community, and supportiveness. These variables, in conjunction with a sense of fairness, have been identified elsewhere as foundational to moral development (Nucci, 2009), and intrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000) and are relevant to educators working to develop student socio-moral reasoning as an aspect of character.