Reparative Behaviors and Self-forgiveness: Effects of a Laboratory-based Exercise

Abstract

Abstract Two studies evaluated a laboratory-based exercise designed to facilitate reparative behaviors (e.g., apology, amends) and self-forgiveness. In Study 1, all participants (undergraduates; 50 men, 37 women) did the exercise. Participants reported self-forgiveness increases that were partly maintained over two weeks. In Study 2, undergraduates (75 men, 92 women) were randomly assigned to conditions: responsibility/repair (yes/no) × self-forgiveness (yes/no). The responsibility/repair-alone condition (without self-forgiveness) increased the odds that women would offer reparative behaviors. The self-forgiveness component predicted greater self-forgiveness increases at follow-up, but only among those who actively tried to forgive themselves during the two weeks. In both studies, reparative behaviors predicted self-forgiveness increases and were more likely when offenses were recent, relationships were close, and relational repair had already begun. Keywords: ApologyRemorseRepentanceResponsibilitySelf-forgiveness Notes 1. We did not include a condition that controlled for elapsed time for several reasons. First, we were primarily interested in effects of the exercise over a two-week period, rather than on immediate effects during the laboratory session of Part 1. Second, it would have been difficult to equate the length of time for the full-intervention condition with the other two non-control conditions (self-forgiveness-only and responsibility-only). Thus, the design we used was similar to a wait-list control and a dismantling intervention: Some people did not receive the exercise at all; others received part; and others received the whole exercise. 2. We decided against assigning a fifth group of participants to do the responsibility exercise after the self-forgiveness exercise, both because we wanted to retain the order used in Study 1 and also because the alternate order seemed to break the natural sequence: We are not aware of any prior literature suggesting that participants should forgive themselves first, then accept responsibility later. 3. One difference between Study 1 and Study 2 was that in Study 1, participants completed the apology-related questions in Section 2, which focused on relational repair. In Study 2, we needed to ensure that all participants answered questions about apology. Thus, questions related to apology were included in the background questionnaire. 4. We also conducted a parallel analysis using the quantity of reparative behaviors rather than their presence or absence. This analysis yielded virtually identical results.