We frequently consider the ability to forgive and pursue forgiveness as one of the key elements influencing the longevity of relationships.
In this piece, we examine the concept of forgiveness in the contexts of marriage, relationships, and the family unit overall.
Continue reading to discover the significance of forgiveness in our most intimate and vital relationships.
Before you proceed, you might find it useful to download our three complimentary Positive Relationships Exercises. These comprehensive, evidence-based exercises are designed to assist you or your clients in developing healthy, enriching relationships.
Forgiveness and Reconciliation
Forgiveness can arise in response to a perceived injustice and may involve reconciliation. It encompasses both an internal and external process for resolving conflicts.
According to McCullough and Witvliet, reconciliation refers to “the restoration of a fractured relationship,” whereas Richard Moore characterizes it as a component of the forgiveness process. He particularly highlights self-reconciliation, which in forgiveness discussions, is often associated with self-forgiveness.
Forgiveness exists within a social framework in which reconciliation is focused on rebuilding trust. Addressing the wrongdoing serves as both a pathway to reconciliation and a social context where individuals articulate and often feel forgiveness.
Reconciliation is not mandatory. Therefore, it entails a choice and the collaboration of the other party. Individuals determine whether, how, and when to reconcile. In contrast to forgiveness, reconciliation necessitates the involvement of both individuals.
The advantage of reconciliation is that it generally helps to lessen the victim’s feeling of injustice. The offender often engages in vulnerable actions, like offering an apology, which can assist the victim by restoring a sense of justice in the situation. This often enhances the chances of forgiveness and can also spur reconciliation.
Richard Moore posits that while forgiveness can occur without reconciliation, true reconciliation cannot happen without forgiveness. Effective reconciliation must be preceded by forgiveness.
Moore argues that forgiveness does not rely on justice, and that justice is not a prerequisite for forgiveness, as societal and legal systems are responsible for administering justice.
Forgiveness pertains to the individual who is forgiving. Internal forgiveness facilitates self-reconciliation, which in turn allows for forgiveness of others and may lead to reconciliation.
Moore observed that for him, reconciliation became an automatic response because forgiveness had occurred first. He believes that this pathway to forgiveness and reconciliation can be practiced and nurtured.
Worthington and Drinkard identified two main forms of reconciliation: implicit and explicit reconciliation (2000). Implicit reconciliation typically happens in healthy relationships where forgiveness almost takes place naturally.
Explicit reconciliation, which is often enhanced through therapy, occurs when partners come together to reconcile by deliberately discussing the issues. For explicit reconciliation to take place, any hostilities must first be resolved. This is why nations declare cease-fires and truces. Only when an agreement to stop hostilities is made can the process of reconciliation advance.
At that point, the parties can unite. Simply halting hostile actions without any interaction will not foster trust. If a cease-fire is broken, the parties will quickly revert to conflict. Therefore, a degree of peaceful interactions is crucial.
This may necessitate involving a neutral party as a mediator. When the parties meet, both need to behave positively toward one another. There must be some form of positive engagement to continue building trust; otherwise, the parties will not consider themselves trustworthy, and reconciliation will fail to occur (Worthington & Drinkard, 2000).
Forgiveness in Marriage and Relationships
Interpersonal offenses can significantly damage close relationships.
Conflicts and social harm can adversely affect our psychological and physical well-being, and many assert that our happiness largely hinges on how we respond to and recover from these challenging and distressing situations.
The process of forgiveness varies when we forgive a stranger compared to a loved one and is influenced by the nature of the relationship. Numerous researchers and clinicians assert that forgiveness is foundational to a successful marriage (e.g., Worthington, 1994).
This conviction underlies the creation of various marital interventions focused on forgiveness, particularly regarding marital infidelity (Gordon, Baucom & Snyder, 2005). Research supports this notion, as forgiveness has been linked to several important aspects in the marital sphere, such as conflict resolution, relationship-enhancing attributions, and increased commitment.
The most substantial finding in this developing field of study shows a positive correlation between forgiveness and the quality of marriage.
The ability to forgive and to seek forgiveness plays a crucial role in marital happiness and is frequently identified as one of the key factors influencing the longevity of relationships.
In marriages, forgiveness has been associated with the overall quality of the relationship, as well as the attributions made and levels of empathy. Fincham and his colleagues discovered a connection between high marital quality and more benign attributions concerning wrongdoings, which, in turn, promoted forgiveness.
These attributions, which frame the wrongdoing as less intentional or preventable, fostered more positive reactions and greater expressions of empathy toward the person who transgressed since partners perceived these actions as an intention to forgive (Fincham, Paleari, & Regalia, 2002).
This discovery was particularly notable because it directly linked marital satisfaction with forgiveness, indicating that individuals in supportive and close relationships tend to be more empathetic and experience fewer negative emotions, with empathy consistently recognized in studies as a crucial factor in one’s capacity to forgive (McCullough, Worthington, & Rachal, 1997).
Forgiveness is thought to correlate with several important relationship skills. Individuals who are more inclined to forgive may possess:
- a wider range of coping strategies to deal with the stress caused by negative emotions,
stronger emotion-regulation tactics (Gross, 1998), - a reduced likelihood of offending their partners, which may result in lower feelings of guilt and shame (Enright and the Human Development Study Group, 1996),
- a diminished capacity to commit to a relationship (Finkel et al., 2002), and
- a lesser willingness to make sacrifices for the relationship (Van Lange et al., 1997).
- Interestingly, the relationship between forgiveness and relationship skills also indicates that individuals who are more forgiving may tend to sacrifice less for their relationships (Van Lange et al., 1997) and may be less able to commit to a relationship (Finkel et al., 2002).
Gender differences are also relevant to forgiveness, with multiple studies suggesting that women tend to be more forgiving than men (e.g., Exline, Baumeister, Bushman, Campbell, & Finkel, 2004; Karremans et al., 2003).
Transgressions, particularly those significant enough to disturb a relationship, provoke strong negative emotions. We are also naturally inclined toward revenge. When this instinct surfaces in close relationships, it exhibits intriguing variations, especially as retaliatory impulses can be just as strong as the desire for connection (Tullisjan, 2013).
Research indicates that transgressions can alter relationship goals, as noted by Frank Fincham and Julie Hall from the University of Buffalo, along with Steven Beach from the University of Georgia, who reviewed 17 empirical studies regarding forgiveness in relationships.
Participants in these studies indicated that partners committed to cooperation may become competitive after an act of betrayal, leading to a tendency to keep score during arguments instead of seeking compromise and enjoying each other’s company (Hall & Fincham, 2005). Relationship researcher John Gottman similarly found that blame and defensiveness contribute to the gradual decline of relationships over time (Gottman & Silver, 2015).
A longitudinal study conducted by Tsang, McCullough, and Finchum tracked disputes and instances of forgiveness among couples on a weekly basis for nine weeks. This study revealed that while conflict is a natural part of close relationships, couples who reported forgiving each other after conflicts were happier nine weeks later than those who did not forgive (Tsang, McCullough, & Finchum, 2006).
Although humans have a natural predisposition towards empathy and compassion, taking the perspective of others and attuning to their feelings often requires intentional effort. In close relationships, solely practicing decisional, and thus superficial, forgiveness over extended periods may lead to resentment and act as a barrier to effective communication (Worthington & Scherer, 2004).
Research also suggests that relationship satisfaction and the personalities of the individuals involved affect the forgiveness process. Higher levels of relationship satisfaction were positively correlated with forgiveness, whereas lower satisfaction levels were negatively correlated (Allemand, Amberg, Zimprich & Fincham, 2007).
Forgiveness has been shown to enhance relationship satisfaction and longevity, and when examining commitment levels, it was found that cognitive interpretations of the transgression impacted the forgiveness process in committed relationships (Finkel, Rusbult, Kumashiro, & Hannon, 2002).
One way to define interpersonal forgiveness, as articulated by McCullough, Worthington, and Rachal (1997), is as a process of substituting destructive responses within a relationship with constructive behaviors.
In one research study, forgiveness in marital relationships was associated with conflict resolution skills and revealed gender differences in conflict approaches. Specifically, women were more inclined to address issues while husbands often displayed avoidant behaviors characterized by demands.
The significance of perspective-taking was highlighted, as self-serving recollections of harm tend to result in escalating negative interactions (Fincham, Beach, & Davila, 2006).
While not primarily focused on forgiveness within families or close relationships, it is also crucial to consider the motivations behind forgiveness-seeking behaviors from the perpetrator’s viewpoint.
In particular, one study emphasized the distinction between interpersonal and intrapersonal forgiveness; the former aims at reconciliation, whereas the latter is solely focused on personal relief.
The study indicated a correlation between forgiveness-seeking behavior and the personality traits of the perpetrator, whether extroverted or introverted, as well as the severity of the wrongdoing. When the incident was serious, self-forgiveness took precedence regardless of personality, but if the wrongdoing was minor, extroverts tended to seek relationship repair.
The severity of the transgression and the timing influenced the types of forgiveness-seeking behaviors exhibited by perpetrators, with some opting for approach behaviors and others showing avoidance, denial, or groveling (Rourke, 2006).
The manner in which forgiveness is expressed significantly affects the effectiveness of the forgiveness and subsequent reconciliation process. Conditional forms of communication were linked to relationship deterioration following forgiveness, while more authentic and explicit methods, including nonverbal expressions of forgiveness, contributed to strengthening relationships (Waldron & Kelley, 2005).
In Families
Some of the most compelling and frequently discussed examples of forgiveness are those involving trauma, where forgiveness is nearly a heroic feat. However, what about the subtle, yet ongoing, and committed acts of forgiveness that occur within close relationships and families?
In close relationships and families, instances of forgiveness happen much more frequently and can be significantly more complex in context. The nature of forgiveness differs between close and distant relationships, as family dynamics can play a crucial role in the forgiveness process.
Although research indicates that forgiveness has substantially positive effects on various aspects of family relationships and the overall family environment, it also reveals “asymmetries in associates of forgiveness across parent-child and parent-parent relationships,” highlighting the relationship-specific nature of forgiveness (Maio, Thomas, Fincham & Carnelley, 2008).
Maio and colleagues offered a more in-depth exploration of how forgiveness is specific to relationships in their 2008 study, linking it to a range of individual and relationship-level factors.
The differences in attachment styles accounted for the relationship-specific nature of forgiveness between children and their fathers compared to children and their mothers. The evolutionary pressures on children to forgive were also examined.
A tendency toward forgiveness and perceptions of other family members were utilized to evaluate the validity of the measures (Maio, Thomas, Fincham, & Carnelley, 2008).
The importance of some findings in this research cannot be overstated. Parental expressions of forgiveness were positively associated with greater expressiveness within the family, reduced conflict, and increased family cohesion.
It also predicted lower anxiety levels and reduced attachment dependency within the family unit, as well as improved feelings regarding the quality and closeness of marriages.
Some of the most significant conclusions stated that children acquire forgiveness behaviors at home as they are modeled by their parents. This becomes an essential part of value transmission from parents to children, impacting their lives as they grow and replicate forgiveness in their own relationships.
Although this study suggests that personality traits are vital in determining the capacity for forgiveness, it conversely found that forgiveness could predict emotional stability, agreeableness, and higher conscientiousness (Maio, Thomas, Fincham & Carnelley, 2008).
The research conducted by Hoyt and colleagues in 2005 confirms that interpersonal conflict within families has extensive consequences for the well-being of individual family members, affecting both physical and mental health, as well as family outcomes such as poor parenting, problematic attachment, and high conflict.
It investigates the complexity of “transgression-related interpersonal motivations” (TRIM) through three distinct factors: trait forgiveness, situational forgiveness, and the ability to obtain forgiveness, along with their relationship effects. The findings underscored the importance of the family context and called for more nuanced studies of forgiveness in a psycho-social framework.
Dispositional tendencies were found to be more important for fathers and children, while relationship-specific effects were more commonly reported for mothers (Hoyt, Fincham, McCullough, Maio, & Davila, 2005).
The closest relationship, as defined by attachment theory, influences how we view the world and others (Bowlby, 1960). The notion that we become like the five individuals we spend the most time with may have some basis in science. The deeper the connection, the greater the impact.
The studies mentioned earlier indicate that the link between forgiveness and wellbeing is stronger in intimate relationships, and the long-term effects of how forgiveness is demonstrated within families as children grow are noteworthy (Luskin, 2004).
Examining Forgiveness Following Infidelity and Betrayal
Avoidance of Social Gatherings in close relationships involves forgiveness occurring through ongoing interactions where both partners can sometimes play the role of offender or victim.
Consequently, reciprocity becomes crucial and can affect how partners respond to future offenses. Both past and ongoing behaviors contribute to the expectations and attributions that influence partners’ interactions.
Furthermore, an individual’s capacity to apologize and show empathy has been identified as a strong predictor of personal forgiveness. Relationship-level forgiveness is positively correlated with commitment, closeness, and fewer tendencies to showcase negative emotional responses to life’s stressors.
Individual trust perceptions and effective conflict management also impact the readiness to forgive, as highlighted by Rusbult in her concept of “accommodate rather than retaliate response” (1991). Over time, reactions to infractions form patterns where both actual and perceived responses shape expectations regarding future conflict resolution (Hoyt, Fincham, McCullough, Maio & Davila, 2005).
The readiness to forgive was linked to the level of commitment and trust within the relationship, according to research by Caryl Rusbult and colleagues, who posited that those in stronger and closer relationships would perceive a greater stake. The correlation between forgiveness and wellbeing was greater in marriages compared to other types of relationships (Rusbult, Davis, Finkel, Hannon, & Olsen, 2004).
Finkel has also explored how commitment serves as a motivation for forgiveness, positioning it against impulses to harbor grudges or seek revenge.
Notably, the connection between forgiveness and commitment pertains to the intention to continue the relationship rather than psychological attachment or long-term commitment. Specifically concerning betrayals, the cognitive interpretation of the wrongdoing plays a crucial role.
Finkel and his team further explored why forgiveness occurs in close relationships, relying on interdependence theory, and found that “the commitment-forgiveness association was mediated by cognitive interpretations of betrayal incidents” (Finkel, Rusbult, Kumashiro, & Hannon, 2002, p. 13).
The initial step in mending a relationship post-betrayal involves deciding whether to address the wrongdoing. One forgiveness exercise suggests creating a cost-benefit balance sheet.
To evaluate rational reasons for either discussing or avoiding the issue, a balance sheet can be created listing the costs of engaging in the discussion on one side and the benefits on the other. Once the balance sheet is completed, we would mark the most significant reasons, pro and con, with an asterisk (Worthington, 2004).
Reconciliation signifies a process of mending a fractured relationship. While reconciliation can take place without mutual forgiveness, forgiving each other tends to make the reconciliation process smoother and more enduring.
Therapists should focus on helping partners let go of past wounds by guiding them to choose reconciliation, and then assist them in discussing their respective transgressions. After forgiveness occurs, partners can work to remove lingering negativity from their relationship, and ultimately incorporate positive expressions of love and commitment.
Reconciliation is an essential step in repairing relationships after betrayals. To reconcile, trust must be restored through the establishment of new trustworthy behaviors. It is necessary to detoxify previous untrustworthy behaviors. However, building trust extends beyond simply erasing the negative; it requires an emphasis on fostering positive commitment if the relationship is to be completely reconciled.
Reviving devotion in a strained relationship entails a continuous willingness to appreciate the partner while being mindful to avoid undermining them.
This process encompasses not only individual actions within the relationship, which are very important, but also how the emotional bond between partners is influenced by those actions. When partners care for each other and aspire to restore their relationship, open communication becomes particularly beneficial.