| The primary aims of this study were to examine two variables that have already been shows to be influential in forgiveness research: relationship type and apology. However, this study deviated from the traditional way that these variables have been conceptualized. Instead of simply categorizing relationships according to the traditional positive/negative paradigm, it compared positive verses ambivalent relationships. Ambivalent relationships contain both positive and negative characteristics. In addition, this study examined how different apology types influenced forgiveness. Not all apologies are equal in intent or effect. Therefore, this study constructed apologies that differed according to intent and effect by utilizing Schonbach's (1980, 1990) taxonomy of accounts. To test this, 283 individuals completed the Social Relationship Index (Uchino, Holt-Lunstad, Uno, & Flinders, 2001) that categorized friends as either positive or ambivalent. They then read a script of an interpersonal transgression that supposedly occurred between either a positive or ambivalent friend and them. Participants then completed an adjusted Transgression-Related Interpersonal Motivations Inventory measure of forgiveness (McCuliough, Rachal, Sandage, Worthington, Brown, & Hight, 1998). Results showed that participants were more willing to forgive positive friendships than ambivalent ones. In addition, apologies resulted in higher forgiveness rates as they followed the mitigating-aggravating account continuum of concession, excuse, justification and refusal. This study is able to better develop relational and apologetic factors that have already been cited as being influential in promoting forgiveness. |
