Forgiveness in the Trenches: Empathy, Perspective Taking, and Anger

In response to a call for more in vivo research on forgiveness, domestic couples (N - 126 adults; 03 pairs of disputants), who were in the process of terminating their relationships and who were referred by city or family court to a mediation center to work out the terms of their separation, were studied. At the completion of the mediation hearing, individuals completed measures of empathy, cognitive perspective taking, and anger. They also completed three measures of forgiveness, each with a unique focus. Results indicated that empathy was a significant predictor of forgiveness in all three measures, but that perspective taking and anger predicted forgiveness with some measures but not with others. The use of multiple measures of forgiveness may help to triangulate constructs and relationships in future forgiveness research. There are many different conceptualizations and definitions of forgiveness, not because forgiveness researchers are incapable of arriving at a consensus, but because the topic itself is so complex (see Worthington, 2005). Some researchers stress emotional and motivational aspects (e.g., McCullough, Worthington, & Rachal, 1997; Wade & Worthington, 2003) while others emphasize the cognitive component (e.g., Gordon, Baucom, & Snyder, 2005; Thompson & Snyder, 2003). Some (e.g., Gordon et al., 2005) stress just the reduction of negative emotions in forgiveness while others (Wade & Worthington, 2003; Worthington, 2001) maintain that such reduction is but, part of the process; that is, negative emotions must be replaced by positive emotions such as compassion or empathy for forgiveness to occur. As Worthington and Wade (1999; see also Wade & Worthington, 2003) point out, forgiveness is but one of many ways to react to an offense; other reactions (e.g., denial, acceptance, pity, moving on, etc.) may lead to less unforgiveness with accompanying less negative emotions or motivations, but not necessarily more forgiveness. Nevertheless, under some conditions simply reducing negative emotions associated with unforgiveness is all that can be expected and may functionally serve the needs of both the perpetrator and the victim. Of particular interest here is that such different definitions might depend on other factors, such as whether forgiveness is studied in the context of continuing or noncontinuing (or, in the case of the study reported here, discontinuing) relationships. Worthington (2005) points out that most, researchers who define forgiveness as a reduction in negative emotions, motivations, or behavior study relationships between people who are strangers or others who do not expect their relationship to continue. In contrast, in the case of ongoing relationships (such as romantic partners, family members, close co-workers, fellow members of a church, or close friends), simply reducing negative emotions, motivations, or behavior is less likely to produce forgiveness (Fincham, Beach, & Davila, 2004). An ongoing commitment to a relationship, in itself, often facilitates forgiveness (Finkel, Rusbult, Kumashiro, & Hannon, 2002), yet forgiveness is not restricted to relationships characterized by such commitment. Given the arguments that forgiveness does not imply reconciliation (Exline, Worthington, Hill, & McCullough, 2003; Rusbult, Hannon, Stocker, & Finkel, 2005), commitment should not be seen as a prerequisite for forgiveness. Indeed, disintegrating marriage and family relationships no longer have that commitment, and reconciliation is no longer pursued as a goal, and yet forgiveness can potentially produce positive consequences. The study of broken couples would seem to be a useful sample in which to investigate real-time, real-world forgiveness to facilitate our understanding of forgiveness in the absence of ongoing commitment or reconciliation. Predictory of Forgiveness Empathy. Empathy is the practice of taking the emotional perspective of another individual. …