Forgiveness (psychology)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Forgiveness is the renunciation of the blame of guilt by a person who feels like a victim. This primarily inner-soul process can be carried out independently of the perpetrator's insight and remorse . Forgiveness is a coping strategy with which a victim can cope with the stressful consequences of an external or internal injury. Forgiveness is understood as a psychological process that can be explored psychologically .

Forgiveness plays an important role in most religions.

Forgiveness in human life

People depend on relationships, shared activities, and social support. Without relationships, a person is incapable of survival. At the same time, it is inevitable that in a relationship a person will occasionally be disappointed, hurt or harmed. Injuries can be perceived as serious by the “ victim ” and a. lead to anger , anger and hatred , to brooding , to physical or psychological complaints and to aggressive behavior .

An essential role in the forgiveness play grief work and empathy for the person in position perpetrators. Reinhard Tausch showed empirically in 1993 that forgiveness has positive emotional effects on both the injured person and the “perpetrator”.

Examples of forgiveness: A husband forgives his wife who recently had an affair. A mother forgives her daughter who moved out of home when she was almost 18 years old and who had completely broken off contact for 3 years. A 51 year old woman forgives her father who sexually abused her as a toddler for years.

Definitions of forgiveness

By forgiving a person “renounces the charge of guilt and their right to redress for the injustice suffered , without relativizing or apologizing for the injury suffered. Forgiveness is a predominantly inner process that can be carried out independently of the perpetrator's insight and repentance ”. The injured person frees himself from the victim role through forgiveness . She is no longer resentful. The act cannot be undone; but the injured person can cope better with the consequences. Whoever forgives acts like a creditor who remits the debt of an insolvent debtor. The act is not forgiven, but the perpetrator is forgiven.

A broad definition of forgiveness also implies that the victim changes his relationship with the perpetrator in the direction of benevolence and compassion - also in personal contact. “The ultimate goal of the forgiveness process is that the forgiver has positive feelings and thoughts for the perpetrator.” Forgiveness means that the person in the victim position includes the “perpetrator” in the forgiveness process and both of them share the hurtful act. Forgiveness and forgiveness are also used interchangeably.

A scientific definition comes from Schwennen:

“Forgiveness is an inter- and intrapersonal process that manifests itself in a prosocial change in affect , cognition and behavior towards a person who causes harm. Forgiveness is intentional, unconditional, not necessary and only happens in the awareness that the perpetrator is responsible. "

Forgiving is a long process. Metaphors are the path or journey of forgiveness.

Forgiving can also refer to one's own misconduct (a person forgives himself / herself / themselves culpable behavior or a wrong decision) or to third parties (e.g. society, government, situation or fate). - The word “ apologize ” has three meanings that must be distinguished: (a) asking for forgiveness; (b) deny guilt for an act; (c) forgive debt.

What forgiveness is not

Forgiveness cannot be asked of anyone. It takes place exclusively at the discretion of the person in the victim position. A perpetrator's request for forgiveness is usually helpful. Forgiveness does not mean:

  • Forgotten - The injury is no longer remembered.
  • Forbearance - The perpetrator's responsibility is relativized.
  • Acceptance - The violation or its consequences are accepted.
  • Approval - The victim expresses approval or consent.
  • Pardon - A planned / intended punishment is waived for the perpetrator.
  • Denial - inability or unwillingness to perceive an injury as such.
  • Justification - The offending act is justified with hindsight through arguments.

Forgiving and forgiving are not the same as reconciliation. In addition to forgiveness, reconciliation means that both sides want to continue the pre-existing relationship unencumbered by the injury. After forgiveness, a relationship can also end; d. H. there is no reconciliation, but nothing is added. Reconciliation only makes sense if the perpetrator shows repentance and makes amends. “Reconciliation demands that the parties renew their trust in one another.” In the event of rape or physical or emotional violence (e.g. in a partnership), the victim can choose to forgive. "If the perpetrator [however] shows no remorse and does not change, reconciliation is impossible."

Forgiveness for different forms of injury

Injury situations can differ enormously in severity:

  • Everyday situations (e.g. unfriendly criticism; husband forgets wedding day)
  • Life events (e.g. loss of job; separation, divorce)
  • Traumatizations (e.g. serious traffic accident through no fault of your own, suffering from an act of violence, abuse or sexual abuse in childhood).

In the event of injury or damage, the victim expects to get justice by asking the perpetrator to apologize, make amends and / and be punished. According to Erving Goffman, there are various social rules and norms for such “corrective actions”. The person in the perpetrator position often makes a corrective “declaration” that may change the victim's point of view and assessment.

A special situation arises with injuries in which the "corrective exchange" between perpetrator and victim does not take place. Then anger, fear, anger, brooding or shame can be attempts to cope with the injury or its consequences. These attempts can derail because the anger increases disproportionately or lasts for a very long time. After a serious, critical life event, a " post- traumatic bitterness disorder " can arise ( Michael Linden ), among other things. a. with the symptoms of intrusions and avoidance behavior. Bitterness is labeled as a "destructive emotion". In a clinical sample, 91% of the patients stated that they had experienced the critical life event as unjust and unfair, and 91% also saw no possibility of bringing the cause to justice.

The person in the victim's position can develop a long-lasting, negative bond with the perceived perpetrator, from which they cannot break away. The injury has led to physical, mental, ideal or material losses. These losses are to be mourned. In this respect, grief work is part of the forgiveness process. As Enright describes, "unforgiveness, bitterness, resentment and anger are like the four walls of a prison cell," in which a victim is locked. "Forgiveness is the key that [she] can use to open the prison door."

Forgiveness is an option for injuries in which the corrective exchange has not been made and where strong, persistent anger has developed. After the stress model of Lazarus is in forgiveness to so-called. Emotion-oriented coping.

A process model of forgiveness

According to Schwennen, the following social-cognitive processes are involved in forgiveness:

  • (a) Perception of Misconduct - Conduct or omission of another person will be perceived as harming or causing harm. This behavior "is experienced by the person concerned as aversive and contradicts their norms".
  • (b) Causal attribution (authorship) - Through whom or what did the harmful behavior or event occur?
  • (c) Attribution of responsibility ( attribution of blame ) - "The culprit is assigned the responsibility if he caused the misconduct, could have acted differently, could have foreseen the consequences and nevertheless accepted them or even intended them".
  • (d) empathy towards "the perpetrator of the misconduct".
  • (e) Processing one's own negative affective reactions.
  • (f) attaining forgiveness.

At the end of the path, the forgiver achieves peace of mind, an end to anger, hatred, brooding, and a reduction in discomfort.

Interventions

Enright sets up a similar model to the one above. He speaks of 20 "guides" to forgiveness, which are divided into four groups:

  • (a) uncover one's anger;
  • (b) choose to forgive;
  • (c) work on the award process;
  • (d) Recognize and break free from the prison of one's emotions.

Group (a), the confrontation with one's own anger, takes up the largest extent with 8 signposts. Empathy with the perpetrator is developed using the group (c) signs.

On the basis of the above Signpost model and similar concepts, individual and group measures ("interventions") were carried out in which people with serious emotional injuries are instructed to forgive the respective perpetrator. The duration ranged from 6 to over 50 sessions. In such intervention studies z. B. Part: People who were sexually abused as a child by a family member; Individuals who “had a painful interpersonal experience from which they still felt emotional consequences”. At the beginning and at the end of the intervention, the participants completed questionnaires and a. to forgive the perpetrator (specific forgiveness). In the meta-analysis by Lundahl et al. a. After the forgiveness intervention, the participants showed significant changes in the following variables compared to the participants in the control group ( effect sizes between 0.54 and 0.82, i.e. medium to strong effect):

  • a higher degree of forgiveness
  • less negative affect (i.e. less depressive symptoms , less anxiety , less anger, less perceived stress, less grief)
  • the increase in positive affect (i.e. more hope, more optimism, more positive emotions)
  • higher self-esteem
  • tends to change the relationship with the perpetrator positively

The most effective were individual interventions, as well as those based on the Enright model.

Linden u. a. developed a comprehensive cognitive behavioral therapy for patients with bitterness disorder under the name Wisdom Therapy . Stauss presents a model of “spiritual-therapeutic forgiveness and reconciliation work”. For him, forgiveness is a “spiritual construct. This means that the spiritual dimension should be taken into account when forgiving. ”An unconditional prerequisite for the work of forgiveness and reconciliation is the client's ability to function at a high or moderate“ structural level ”. This may have to be worked out beforehand in appropriate psychotherapy.

Forgiveness in partnership

Jellouschek assumes that insults and injuries are “inevitable” in a partnership. If these are not processed and forgiven, they can still burden the relationship even after decades. He formulated five steps for forgiveness and forgiveness in couples: (a) speaking, (b) understanding, (c) acknowledging, (d) forgiving, (e) making amends. All steps involve the conversation between “perpetrator” and “victim”. Individual steps may have to be processed several times. The role of victim gives power in the partnership, in that the injured part can repeatedly accuse the hurting part of the injury. The injured part gives up this power with forgiveness. If the “perpetrator” cooperates, asks for forgiveness and makes amends, this promotes trust in the partner in the victim position and reduces the fear of a repetition of the injury.

How is forgiveness promoted?

In addition to the intervention studies, correlation studies are carried out in which the connection between forgiveness with numerous characteristics (questionnaires) of the persons involved and the injury is examined. A distinction is made between the forgiveness of a specific violation (state forgiveness) and the tendency to forgiveness (as a characteristic of personality , trait forgiveness ).

In meta-analyzes , the following traits show a correlation with forgiveness with a strong or moderate effect (i.e. r ≥ 0.3): A person is more likely to forgive a specific injury

  • Empathy for the perpetrator,
  • little intention attributed to the perpetrator,
  • less anger related to the perpetrator,
  • Apologies from the perpetrator
  • less responsibility ascribed to the perpetrator,
  • otherwise satisfactory relationship with the perpetrator,
  • low level of brooding.

Forgiveness of a specific violation (state forgiveness) and the tendency to forgiveness (trait forgiveness) correlate around r = 0.30, i.e. H. not very high. The specific forgiveness therefore depends heavily on the circumstances of the particular injury.

Does Forgiveness Improve Health and Wellbeing?

Participation in a forgiveness intervention (see above) reduces “negative affect” and promotes “positive affect” and self-esteem. In the meta-analysis of the correlation studies, specific forgiveness (state forgiveness) is associated with significantly reduced negative affect (e.g. anger, bitterness, r = −0.47) and increased positive affect (e.g. compassion, benevolence, r = 0.32). Furthermore, forgiveness is associated with less depression, less anxiety, less stress, and more life satisfaction; however, these correlations are below 0.3 in terms of amount. - The most important social effect of forgiveness is that it enables reconciliation with the person in the perpetrator position and thus the continuation of the relationship.

In people who had experienced a specific, deep and unresolved psychological injury, a forgiveness intervention brought on the one hand an increase in specific forgiveness and a decrease in anger, and on the other hand an improvement in the myocardial blood flow measured under stress. - Students were interviewed about two injuries sustained in the past 6 months while taking blood pressure and heart rate measurements at the same time. Blood pressure variables correlated negatively with forgiveness between −0.45 and −0.31; d. H. the higher the forgiveness, the lower the blood pressure readings. Heart rate negatively correlated with specific forgiveness; d. H. the higher the forgiveness, the lower the heart rate.

McCullough formulates two hypotheses on the connection between forgiveness and health:

  1. People who have forgiven the hurtful often re-establish a positive relationship with them; this gives them more functioning relationships and more social support.
  2. Forgiving usually means that there is no hostility after injuries and thus the negative health consequences of persistent hostility are avoided.

See also

literature

  • Robert D. Enright: Forgiveness as an Opportunity. Finding new courage for life . Huber, Bern 2006.
  • Verena Kast : If we make up . Cross, Stuttgart 2005.
  • Adelheid Müller-Lissner: Being able to forgive - yourself and others . Ch.links, Berlin 2011.
  • Christian Schwennen: Forgive. In: Ann Elisabeth Auhagen (Ed.): Positive Psychology. Instructions for a "better" life. 2nd Edition. Beltz, Weinheim 2008, pp. 150–165.
  • Konrad Stauss: The healing power of forgiveness. The seven phases of spiritual-therapeutic forgiveness and reconciliation work. Kösel, Munich 2010, ISBN 978-3-466-36892-1 .

proof

  1. ↑ Reinhard Tausch: Forgive. Double the benefit. In: Psychology Today. 20 (4), 1993, pp. 20-26.
  2. ↑ a b A. Müller-Lissner: Being able to forgive - yourself and others. Ch.links, Berlin 2011.
  3. ^ A b S. R. Freedman, RD Enright: Forgiveness as an intervention goal with incest survivors. In: J Consulting Clinical Psychology. 64, 1996, pp. 983-992.
  4. ↑ a b c K. Stauss: The healing power of reconciliation. 2010, p. 114 f.
  5. ↑ RD Enright: Forgiveness as an Opportunity. 2006, p. 34.
  6. ↑ a b c C. Schwennen: Forgive. 2008, pp. 150-165.
  7. ^ V. Kast: When we are reconciled . Kreuz, Stuttgart 2005, p. 59 ff.
  8. ↑ RD Enright: Forgiveness as an Opportunity. Finding new courage for life. 2006, p. 37 f.
  9. ↑ Erving Goffman: The individual in public exchange. Public policy micro-studies . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1974, p. 138 ff.
  10. ↑ J. Maltby et al. a .: The cognitive nature of forgiveness: Using cognitive strategies of primary appraisal and coping to describe the process of forgiving. In: Journal of Clinical Psychology. 63, 2007, pp. 555-566.
  11. ↑ Michael Linden, B. Schippan u. a .: Post-traumatic bitterness disorder (PTED). Delimitation of a specific form of adjustment disorders. In: Neurologist. 75, 2004, pp. 51-57.
  12. ↑ RD Enright: Forgiveness as an Opportunity. Finding new courage for life. 2006, p. 52; K. Stauss: The healing power of reconciliation. 2010, p. 80 ff.
  13. ↑ RD Enright: Forgiveness as an Opportunity. Finding new courage for life. 2006, pp. 28, 74.
  14. ^ RS Lazarus: Stress and emotion. A new synthesis . Free Association Books, London 1999.
  15. ↑ RD Enright: Forgiveness as an Opportunity. Finding new courage for life. 2006, p. 73 ff.
  16. ^ AHS Harris et al .: Effects of a group forgiveness intervention on forgiveness, perceived stress, and trait-anger. In: J Clinical Psychology. 62, 2006, pp. 715-733.
  17. ^ BW Lundahl et al .: Process-based forgiveness interventions: A meta-analytic review. In: Research on Social Work Practice. 18, 2008, pp. 465-478.
  18. ↑ B. Schippan, K. Baumann, M. Linden: Wisdom therapy - cognitive therapy of post-traumatic bitterness. In: behavior therapy. 14, 2004, pp. 284-293.
  19. ↑ K. Stauss: The healing power of forgiveness. 2010, pp. 92, 261.
  20. ^ H. Jellouschek: Love in the long run. The art of staying a couple . Kreuz, Stuttgart 2004, pp. 69-88.
  21. ^ R. Fehr, MJ Gelfand, M. Nag: The road to forgiveness: A meta-analytic synthesis of its situational and dispositional correlates. In: Psychological Bulletin. 136, 2010, pp. 894-914.
  22. ↑ a b B. M. Riek, EW Mania: The antecedents and consequences of interpersonal forgiveness: A meta-analytic review. In: Personal Relationships. 19, 2011, pp. 304-325.
  23. ^ MA Waltman, RD Enright et al: The effects of a forgiveness intervention on patients with coronary artery disease. In: Psychology and Health. 24, 2009, pp. 11-27.
  24. ^ KA Lawler et al.: A change of heart: Cardiovascular correlates of forgiveness in response to interpersonal conflict. In: J Behavioral Medicine. 26, 2003, pp. 373-393.
  25. ^ ME McCullough: Forgiveness as human strength: Theory, measurement and links to well-being. In: J Social Clinical Psychology. 19, 2000, pp. 43-55.