Critical incident study on forgiveness in the organizational context

Forgiveness has been subject of interest, mainly in the psychology fields of study. Relatively to the organizational context, this topic has been somehow put aside and settled as something that is purely an intra-individual phenomenon which organizations cannot force, or even stimulate. As conflicts are common within organizations and being often difficult to overcome, eyes have turned into the role forgiveness might take in this scenario. Despite forgiveness being accepted as an intrapersonal decision and a result of predisposition as it is a result of education and culture. This study, as some already done, refuses to accept forgiveness as an unchangeable behavior that cannot be manipulated or induced by managers or by organizational context. Therefore, offering a set of incidents as well as their classification, that have been identified by individuals performing different types organizational roles in different organization which is believed as being a genuine way of delivering to the reader a set of actions and behaviors that if taken, may incentivize or inhibit forgiveness.

Explorations and comparisons of actual, ideal, and ought forgiveness definitions : a Q-methodological study /

Numerous definitions of forgiveness have been proposed in the literature (e.g.. North, 1987; Enright, Freedman & Rique, 1998), most ofwhich are based on religious or philosophical notions, rather than on empirical evidence. Definitions employed by researchers have typically set very high standards for forgiveness. This research was designed to investigate the possibility that these definitions describe an ideal of forgiveness and may not reflect laypersons' beliefe and experiences. Using Higgins' Self-Discrepancy Theory as a fiamework, three types of forgiveness beliefs were investigated: actual, ideal, and ought Q-methodology (which permits intensive study ofphenomena in small samples) was employed to examine and compare participants' beliefs about forgiveness across these domains. Thirty participants (20 women), 25 to 78 years of age, were recruited firom the community. They were asked to sort a set of66 statements about forgiveness according to their level of agreement with each statement This process was repeated three times, with the goal of modelling participants' actual experiences, their ideals, and how they believed forgiveness ought to be. Three perspectives on forgiveness emerged across the domains: forgiveness as motivated by religious beliefs, reconciliation-focussed forgiveness, and conflicted forgiveness. These perspectives indicated that, for many participants, the definitions presented in the literature may coincide with their beliefs about how forgiveness would ideally be and should be, as well as with their experiences of forgiveness; however, a large number of participants' experiences of, and beliefs about, forgiveness do not conform to the standards set out in the literature, and to exclude these participants' experiences and beliefs would mean overlooking what forgiveness means to a large portion of people. Results of this study indicate that researchers need to keep an open mind about what forgiveness may mean to their participants.

Stress, social support, and health risk behaviours as mediators of the forgiveness-health relation /

The mediating roles of stress, social support, and health risk behaviours in the relationships between dispositional forgiveness and mental and physical health were examined. Participants were 748 undergraduate students (554 women, 194 men) entering their first year of studies at Brock University. Participants, ranging in age from 17 to 25 years, completed the Brock University First Year Health Study and were provided monetary compensation. Dispositional forgiveness, stress, social support, health risk behaviours, mental health, and physical health were measured using self-report methods. The data were analyzed separately for women and men because there were significant mean differences on many of the study'S variables. Analyses revealed that the mediated relationships between dispositional forgiveness and health were generally stronger for women than men. Stress was the most robust mediator of the forgiveness-health relation for both women and men. The only health risk behaviour that mediated the forgivenesshealth relation was physical fitness and this result was found for women only. Social support mediated several of the relationships between forgiveness and health but not others. Results were discussed with reference to the literature on forgiveness and health. Several directions for future research were offered, such as conducting longitudinal research designs to assess the direction of causality better, investigating moderator variables of the forgiveness-health relation, and building models, which incorporate multiple mediators using structural equation modelling techniques.

The role of personality and situational factors in forgiveness /

This study deals with personality and situational variables that influence forgiveness. The relations between empathy and forgiveness were studied, followed by the examination of the relation of these two variables to the Big Five personality traits, as well as honesty, absorption, the propensity to mystical experiences, and dissociation. Empathy was then tested as a mediating variable between the personality variables and forgiveness. Empathy and forgiveness were then studied in relation to childhood maltreatment. Finally, the effects of six different motivations to forgive were examined in relation to the personality variables. Participants were 142 undergraduate students recruited from the ftrst year psychology class at Brock University; 75% were either 18 or 19 years of age, and 84% were female. All of the variables were measured using self-report questionnaires. The relation between empathy and forgiveness was only partially replicated. In terms of personality, forgiveness was found to be related to honesty, emotionality, and agreeableness. Empathy at least partially mediated the relations between forgiveness and agreeableness, honesty and emotionality. Childhood maltreatment was negatively related to forgiveness, and positively related to openness to experience, absorption, and dissociation from reality, but not to the propensity for mystical experiences. Six different motivations for forgiveness emerged from an exploratory factor analysis. Out of these, Forgiveness to Promote Reconciliation was related to emotionality and dispositional empathy. Religious Forgiveness was related to honesty, emotionality, and mystical experiences. Forgiveness to Feel Better was related to honesty, emotionality, agreeableness, conscientiousness, absorption, mystical experiences, and empathy. Forgiveness to Assert Moral Superiority over the Injurer was negatively related to honesty, empathy, and positively related to extraversion. Forgiveness out of Fear was related to agreeableness. Finally, Altruistic Forgiveness was related to honesty, emotionality, and agreeableness, absorption and the propensity to mystical experiences. Altruistic Forgiveness correlated most highly with all the measures of forgiveness, followed by Forgiveness to Feel better. Altruistic forgiveness was also the motivation for forgiveness that correlated the highest with absorption.

Dispositional Forgiveness and Health in Romantic Relationships: An Exploration of Sex Differences, Actor Effects, and Partner Effects

The individual and dyadic associations between dispositional forgiveness of self, others, and situations and mental and physical health in individuals involved in romantic relationships were examined. Sex differences in the relationship between dispositional forgiveness and health were examined. Sex differences in the dyadic relationship between forgiveness and health were also examined. The dispositional forgiveness scores of 297 partners involved in a romantic relationship were used to predict their own as well as their partners' physical and mental health. Both members of the relationship separately completed an Internet-based questionnaire assessing personality traits, relationship variables, and physical and mental health. The couple was provided with monetary compensation. Analyses revealed that women's dispositional forgiveness of self, others, and situations were positively associated with their own physical and mental health. Similarly, men's dispositional forgiveness of self, others, and situations were positively associated with their own mental and physical health. At the individual level, there were no sex differences in the relationship between dispositional forgiveness and health, nor were there sex differences in men and women's reports of dispositional forgiveness. Analyses revealed that men's forgiveness of others and situations were positively associated with their female partners' mental health. There were no partner effects for women or for physical health. The implications of these results for research in the forgiveness-health literature and research on forgiveness in romantic relationships were discussed as were directions for future research.

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.

Psychotherapeutical effects of stimulate positive connotation in the increase of forgiveness

This work presents different aspects that have been related to the aptitude to forgive, emphasizing its importance for the psychotherapeutic practice in order to promote an increase of such capacity. Existing empirical evidence tends to relate forgiveness to emotional, physical and psychological well-being of the persons, and shows that the way of providing sense to the experiences influences the process of forgiveness. An alternative to increase the aptitude to forgive is proposed and results of an experimental study with 60 patients demonstrate the psychotherapeutic effects of stimulating positive connotation in the increase of forgiveness. The independent variable was the type of psychotherapeutic approach applied and the dependant variables were measured with the Aptitude to Forgive Scale (CAPER) that evaluates the general predisposition of a subject to forgive, across four independent constructs: a) Self, b) Others, c) Situation, and d) Beliefs.

Must We Forgive?: Exploring the Limits and Possibilities of Forgiveness and Resentment

Conflict has marked civilization from Biblical times to the present day. Each of us, with our different and competing interests, and our desires to pursue those interests, have over time wronged another person. Not surprisingly then, forgiveness is a concern of individuals and groups¿communities, countries, religious groups, races¿yet it is a complex idea that philosophers, theologians, political scientists, and psychologists have grappled with. Some have argued that forgiveness is a therapeutic means for overcoming guilt, pain, and anger. Forgiveness is often portrayed as a coping mechanism¿how often we hear the phrase, ¿forgive and forget,¿ as an arrangement to help two parties surmount the complications of disagreement. But forgiveness is not simply a modus vivendi; the ability to forgive and conversely to ask for forgiveness, is counted as an admirable trait and virtue. This essay will explore the nature of forgiveness, which in Christian dogma is often posited as an unqualified virtue. The secular world has appropriated the Christian notion of forgiveness as such a virtue¿but are there instances wherein offering forgiveness is morally inappropriate or dangerous? I will consider the situations in which forgiveness, understood in this essay as the overcoming of resentment, may not be a virtue¿when perhaps maintaining resentment is as virtuous, if not more virtuous, than forgiving. I will explain the various ethical frameworks involved in understanding forgiveness as a virtue, and the relationship between them. I will argue that within Divine Command Theory forgiveness is a virtue¿and thus morally right¿because God commands it. This ethical system has established forgiveness as unconditional, an idea which has been adopted into popular culture. With virtue ethics in mind, which holds virtues to be those traits which benefit the person who possesses them, contributing to the good life, I will argue unqualified forgiveness is not always a virtue, as it will not always benefit the victim. Because there is no way to avoid wrongdoing, humans are confronted with the question of forgiveness with every indiscretion. Its limits, its possibilities, its relationship to one¿s character¿forgiveness is a concern of all people at some time if for no other reason than the plain fact that the past cannot be undone. I will be evaluating the idea of forgiveness as a virtue, in contrast to its counterpart, resentment. How can forgiveness be a response to evil, a way to renounce resentment, and a means of creating a positive self-narrative? And what happens when a sense of moral responsibility is impossible to reconcile with the Christian (and now, secularized imperative of) forgiveness? Is it ever not virtuous to forgive? In an attempt to answer that question I will argue that there are indeed times when forgiveness is not a virtue, specifically: when forgiveness compromises one¿s own self-respect; when it is not compatible with respect for the moral community; and when the offender is unapologetic. The kind of offense I have in mind is a dehumanizing one, one that intends to diminish another person¿s worth or humanity. These are moral injuries, to which I will argue resentment is a better response than forgiveness when the three qualifications cannot be met.

Forgiveness and psychological adjustment following interpersonal transgressions: A longitudinal analysis

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.

The Relationship Among Resilience, Forgiveness, and Anger Expression in Adolescents

This study was designed to investigate and describe the relationship among resilience, forgiveness and anger expression in adolescents. The purpose of the study was to explore whether certain adolescent resiliencies significantly related to positive or negative affective, behavioral, or cognitive levels of forgiveness and certain types of anger expression in adolescents. This study also investigated whether there were certain adolescent resiliencies and types of forgiveness that can predict lower levels of negative anger expression in adolescents. This research was built on two conceptual models: Wolin and Wolin's (1993) Challenge Model and the Forgiveness Process Model (Enright & Human Development Study Group, 1991). It was based on a quantitative, single-subject correlational research design. A multiple regression analysis was also used to explore possible effects of resilience and forgiveness on anger expression in adolescents. In addition, two demographic variables, Age and Gender, were examined for possible effects on anger expression. Data were gathered from a convenience sample sample of 70 students in three Maine public high schools using three separate assessment instruments: the Adolescent Resiliency Attitudes Scale (ARAS), the Adolescent Version of the Enright Forgiveness Inventory (EFI), and the Adolescent Anger Rating Scale (AARS). Correlational analyses were done on the scales and subscales of these surveys. Significant relationships were found between several adolescent resiliencies and forms of forgiveness as well as between some adolescent resiliencies and types of anger expression. The data indicated that Total Resiliency significantly correlated with Total Forgiveness as well as Total Anger. The findings also identified particular adolescent resiliencies that significantly predicted types of anger expression, while forgiveness did not predict types of anger expression. The data revealed that Age and Gender had no significant affect on anger expression. These findings suggest that the constructs of adolescent resilience and forgiveness have commonalities that can influence how adolescents express anger, and further suggest that intervention and prevention programs expand their focus to incorporate forgiveness skills. The findings from this study can provide critical information to counselors, therapists, and other helping professionals working with adolescents, on approaches to designing and implementing therapy modalities or developmental school guidance programs for adolescents.

The angel of forgiveness,

Mode of access: Internet.