Examining the Effects of a Psychoeducation Program Prepared Based on Optimism,Self-Compassion,Altruism,and Gratitude on Forgiveness in Emerging Adults

Abstract

The aim of this research is to investigate the effectiveness of a psychoeducation program designed based on the variables of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, which are demonstrated under the umbrella of positive psychology, on the forgiveness of emerging-adults towards themselves, others, and situations. An experimental research model was employed to test the effect of the psychoeducation program prepared by the researchers. In the initial stage, a demographic information form and the Heartland Forgiveness Scale were administered to 161 emerging-adults who volunteered to participate, in order to determine which participants would be assigned to the experimental and control groups. Subsequently, two participants of the same gender with very close forgiveness score averages were paired to create 14 pairs. Then, one participant from each pair was randomly assigned to the experimental group and the other to the control group, using the method of matching participants, resulting in the division of participants into experimental and control groups. Non-parametric Mann Whitney U-Test and Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test were utilized for data analysis. According to the research results, the experimental group that participated in the forgiveness-focused psychoeducation program, which supported the variables of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, showed a significant positive difference in total forgiveness scores as well as forgiveness towards themselves, others, and situations compared to the control group. This difference in forgiveness scores among emerging-adults in the experimental group was also found to be enduring in the follow-up measurement. In this context, it can be concluded that the variables of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude demonstrated under the umbrella of positive psychology can be utilized to enhance forgiveness skills among emerging adults.

Keywords

altruism emerging adulthood forgiveness gratitude optimism self-compassion

Introduction

Individuals are born within the nuclear family and continue to grow and develop within society. Changing life conditions and roles in the developmental process bring with them various challenges due to societal and global changes. In recent years, influenced by the emerging field of positive psychology, emphasis has been placed on research regarding how individuals can utilize their positive qualities effectively to cope with the challenges of life and developmental tasks (Aishvarya et al., 2021; Arslan, Özdemir-Bişkin & Uzun, 2024; Uzun, 2024). Qualities such as wisdom, authenticity, determination, courage, interpersonal skills, hope, tolerance, compassion capacity for love, and forgiveness are among the positive attributes that individuals are believed to possess and can use in facing life difficulties (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). In interpersonal relationships, individuals may sometimes hurt others or be hurt by them for various reasons. In such situations, forgiveness plays a crucial role both in individuals’ subjective well-being and the continuity of social relationships (Ergi et al., 2021). Research on forgiveness gained momentum in the 1980s and in the 2000s, forgiveness became one of the most extensively studied concepts in psychology (McCullough et al., 2005). The concept of forgiveness is defined as the process by which individuals let go of negative emotions such as revenge, hatred, disappointment, and anger that create negativity towards their surroundings and themselves and replace these negative emotions with positive feelings such as empathy, tolerance, compassion, and love to repair a damaged relationship (Enright & Fitzgibbons, 2000). In the literature, particularly after the 1990s, forgiveness has evolved beyond being a one-dimensional concept solely focused on forgiving others and started to be examined as a multidimensional construct, including forgiveness of self, others, and uncontrollable situations (Enright et al., 1996; Karataş & Uzun, 2021; Uzun & Karataş, 2023). In this study, in line with the literature, the concept of forgiveness (Thompson et al., 2005) is considered as a multidimensional construct that encompasses forgiving self, forgiving others, and forgiving any uncontrollable situations.

Self-forgiveness is defined as the reduction of negative emotions such as anger and resentment towards oneself, as well as a decrease in the desire for self-punishment, replaced by an increase in positive thoughts and emotions that can be self-supportive (Wohl et al., 2008). Self-forgiveness is a process that can occur in two different ways: first, individuals forgiving themselves for the harm they have caused to others outside of themselves, and second, individuals forgiving themselves for the harm they have inflicted upon themselves (Hall & Fincham, 2005). Self-forgiveness occurs as individuals accept their mistakes and take responsibility for their actions. Forgiveness of others, on the other hand, can be described as individuals willingly letting go of negative judgments and feelings they harbor towards others who have wronged them, through the promotion of positive emotions such as love, generosity, and compassion (Enright et al., 1998). Forgiveness of others contributes positively to individuals’ subjective well-being and the improvement of interpersonal relationships (Worthington, 1998). It can be stated, therefore, that when forgiving others, the fault or wrongful behavior is attributed to others, while when forgiving of self, the fault or wrongful behavior is attributed to the individual (Hall & Fincham, 2005). Sometimes, a situation arises that is beyond the control of either the individual or someone else (e.g., illness, earthquake, flood); nevertheless, such situations can trigger negative emotions and reactions in individuals. Letting go of the negative emotions experienced due to such situations, which individuals cannot intervene in, is defined as forgiving the situation (Thompson et al., 2005). Following the recognition of the positive impact of forgiveness on individuals’ psychological well-being (Singh & Sharma, 2018; Wulandari & Megawati, 2020), studies aimed at identifying variables that can be effective in the forgiveness process have gained rapid importance (Uzun & Arslan, 2024; Uzun & Karataş, 2023).

In order to support individuals’ forgiveness skills, it would be a prudent choice at this stage to select variables from the foundational concepts of positive psychology that have been proven effective in enhancing individuals’ psychological well-being, such as optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and the like. Positive psychology, beyond focusing on individuals’ problematic, deficient, and negative aspects, aims to harness and develop their strengths and positive qualities, thus utilizing its preventive function to mitigate individuals’ exposure to psychological problems (Hefferon & Boniwell, 2011). Furthermore, positive psychology can be defined as a field that examines the processes and conditions necessary for elements such as individuals, groups, and organizations to function and thrive most effectively and contributes to these aspects (Gable & Haidt, 2005). In this context, it can be assumed that positive psychology variables, just as they influence all other variables contributing to individuals’ psychological health, will also have a positive impact on individuals’ capacity for forgiveness. Indeed, positive psychology contributes to individuals’ levels of hope and optimism by enhancing their positive traits and character strengths, increasing their levels of psychological resilience, aiding them in becoming more forgiving, facilitating the discovery of purpose and meaning in life, and ultimately serving a preventive function by enhancing psychological and subjective well-being (Doğan & Eryılmaz, 2013).

When the literature is examined, it is understood that optimism is among the developmental positive psychology concepts (Ümmet & İme, 2020). In the process of forgiving situations, individuals can give up the negative emotions they experience due to situations that they cannot intervene in themselves, thanks to the cognitive development and transformation they experience in the process (Thompson et al., 2005). In this context, optimism can be considered to be an important part of cognitive change towards forgiving situations. Self-compassion is one of the self-focused concepts in positive psychology (Dinç, 2020). Considering that self-forgiveness is a personal process, it can be predicted that supporting self-compassion will make significant contributions to the process of self-forgiveness. Finally, altruism and gratitude are among the concepts focused on interpersonal approach in positive psychology (Keskinoğlu & Akbulut, 2020). Considering that forgiving others is an interpersonal process, altruism and gratitude are expected to facilitate forgiving others. As can be seen, these four variables, which are under the umbrella of positive psychology and carefully selected, are promising in supporting different forgiveness dimensions of individuals, but in total, they can be considered as important variables in contributing positively to individuals’ overall forgiveness.

In light of all the explanations, this research has theoretically addressed the variables of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, which are part of positive psychology, as evidence-based, teachable-learnable factors in supporting individuals’ forgiveness skills. Indeed, in a study conducted by Uzun and Karataş (2023) in a sample of emerging adults, it was found that optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude variables played a mediating role in the relationship between cognitive distortions and forgiveness. Furthermore, it was emphasized that these variables were positively related to forgiveness and were potential factors that could be utilized to enhance forgiveness in emerging adults. Based on promising evidence in the literature, it is believed that the psychoeducation program prepared based on these variables will positively contribute to the forgiveness of emerging adults. The main reason for conducting this study on Turkish emerging-adults is the unique cultural and religious/spiritual context of Türkiye. As a bridge between East and West, Türkiye stands out as a country that harbors diverse cultural and religious beliefs. This can profoundly affect the social and psychological dynamics of individuals. Turkish emerging-adults represent a group trying to strike a balance between both traditional values and modern ideas. Therefore, understanding how the variables addressed in this study (forgiveness, optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude) function in this unique context will make important contributions to the existing literature.

Optimism and Forgiveness

The first variable included in the psychoeducation program prepared to support emerging-adults in forgiveness is optimism. Optimism is defined as having a positive expectation that, despite obstacles and difficulties in life, things will generally turn out well (Scheier & Carver, 1992). The foundation of optimism lies in an individual’s belief in their ability to cope with life events (Arslan, 2023; Scheier & Carver, 1985). Optimism is considered among the concepts of developmental positive psychology (Ümmet & İme, 2020). When examining the literature, relational studies have shown a positive and significant correlation between optimism and forgiveness (Nembhard, 2017; Ramadhani et al., 2021). Furthermore, it is known that optimism also has positive relationships with the sub-dimensions of forgiveness, including self-forgiveness (Ramadhani et al., 2021), forgiving others (Nembhard, 2017), and forgiving situations (Sivri, 2019). Some personality traits, such as optimism, influence individuals’ ability to forgive, as they impact the way individuals relate to, think about, and feel about forgiveness (McCullough et al., 1998). In this context, it can be stated that the theoretical basis for the relationship between optimism and forgiveness is supported. Since optimism is a teachable and learnable concept (Karagöz, 2011), it can be considered beneficial to include it in the content of the psychoeducation program prepared to support the forgiveness of emerging adults.

Self-Compassion and Forgiveness

Another variable included in the psychoeducation program prepared to support the forgiveness of emerging-adults is self-compassion. Self-compassion can be defined as an individual’s ability to show kindness to themselves in the face of failures and inadequacies, to possess a compassionate perspective towards themselves rather than a critical attitude, and to accept their failures and inadequacies as a natural part of being human (Neff, 2003). Self-compassion is considered among the self-focused concepts in positive psychology (Dinç, 2020). It is a healthy attitude towards one’s self and is a variable that contributes positively to an individual’s ability to cope with pain by providing self-soothing (Arslan, Uzun, et al., 2024; Neff, 2003). Examination of the results of studies in the literature reveals a positive and significant relationship between self-compassion and forgiveness (Karataş & Uzun, 2021; Miyagawa & Taniguchi, 2022; Pandey et al., 2020). Furthermore, research results indicate that self-compassion also has positive relationships with the sub-dimensions of general forgiveness, including self-forgiveness (Wu et al., 2019), forgiving others (Booker & Perlin, 2021), and forgiving situations (Breen et al., 2010).

Positive emotions like self-compassion are known to broaden individuals’ attention and thinking, as well as to eliminate negative emotional triggers such as holding grudges and seeking revenge (Fredrickson, 2004). Drawing from Frederickson’ (2001) research, it is quite reasonable to infer that self-compassion is associated with forgiveness, which is considered another positive emotion. In addition, Jordan (1989, 1991) has provided a comprehensive explanation of self-empathy, a concept similar to self-compassion. According to Jordan, self-empathy is directly related to empathizing with others. Jordan (1989) argued that individuals who recognize their similarities with others are better able to empathize with the inevitable transgressions of being human, which facilitates forgiveness behavior. Furthermore, the person who hurts an individual can also be the individual themselves. In this context, it is necessary for the individual to let go of negative emotions and overcome resentments. Self-compassion is seen as related to forgiveness, as it is based on an individual’ ability to accept their negative experiences and show compassion to themselves (Kılıç & Tunç, 2020). In this context, it can be said that the theoretical basis for the relationship between self-compassion and forgiveness is supported. Considering that self-compassion is a teachable and learnable concept (Ekşi et al., 2020), it can be considered beneficial to include it in the content of the psychoeducation program prepared to support the forgiveness of emerging adults.

Altruism and Forgiveness

Another variable included in the psychoeducation program prepared to support the forgiveness of emerging-adults is altruism. Altruism is a moral perspective based on the principle of being selfless for the benefit of others, regardless of one’s own interests, and the belief that every individual’s primary duty is to dedicate oneself to the benefit of others and society (Krebs, 1970). Altruism encompasses numerous positive social behaviors such as giving, taking responsibility, and assisting others. In short, altruism can be expressed as an act of helping without expecting a reward, apart from the pleasant feeling that comes from doing something good for others (Ümmet et al., 2013). Therefore, acts of help done out of self-interest or coercion are not considered altruism. Altruism is considered among the interpersonal approach-focused concepts in positive psychology (Keskinoğlu & Akbulut, 2020).

In this context, when examining the literature, it is evident that there are positive and significant relationships between altruism and forgiveness (Ergi et al., 2021; Naeem & Akhtar, 2016; Shabizade et al., 2016). Furthermore, it is known that altruism also has positive relationships with the sub-dimensions of general forgiveness, including self-forgiveness (Oliner, 2005), forgiving others (Naeem & Akhtar, 2016), and forgiving situations (Sanlav, 2016). In these studies, individuals’ altruistic behaviors, which involve making sacrifices to help others, play an important role in explaining individuals’ forgiveness. Considering the mutual relationship between altruism and forgiveness, it is natural for an individuals’ sense of empathy that emerges when practicing forgiveness to make them more sensitive to the needs of those around them, leading to a more altruistic individual (Ergi et al., 2021).

The relatively limited use of altruism and forgiveness by therapists can be explained by the fact that these two therapeutic strategies are less philosophically compatible with the underlying self-theory of most popular psychotherapeutic approaches used today (Uzun & Karataş, 2023). As a result of the literature review, it is evident that the theoretical basis for the relationship between altruism and forgiveness has been established. In this context, it can be said that altruism, which is a teachable and learnable concept (Kaynak, 2020), may be beneficial to include in the content of the psychoeducation program prepared to support the forgiveness of emerging adults.

Gratitude and Forgiveness

The final variable included in the psychoeducation program prepared to support the forgiveness of emerging adults is gratitude. Gratitude is a positive emotion that individuals feel towards other people or a deity when they perceive a kindness they have received (Karataş & Uzun, 2020). Gratitude is generally associated with appreciation (Wood et al., 2008). Appreciation is defined as recognizing the meaning and value of something (an object, behavior, person, event, etc.) and feeling a positive emotional connection to it (Karataş & Uzun, 2020). The gratitude dimension of appreciation involves recognizing, accepting, and expressing thanks to another for benefits received from God or others, and for their actions, sacrifices, and efforts (Adler & Fagley, 2005). Gratitude is considered among the interpersonal approach-focused concepts in positive psychology (Keskinoğlu & Akbulut, 2020).

When examining the literature, studies reveal positive and significant relationships between gratitude and forgiveness (García-Vázquez et al., 2020; Hermaen & Bhutto, 2020; Satıcı et al., 2014). Additionally, it is known that gratitude has positive relationships with the sub-dimensions of general forgiveness, including self-forgiveness (Hermaen & Bhutto, 2020), forgiving others (Kane et al., 2021), and forgiving situations (Aishvarya et al., 2021). Gratitude has a pro-social nature, so its positive relationship with forgiveness can be naturally expected (McCullough et al., 2002). Gratitude and forgiveness conceptually support each other as prosocial and empathy-based character strengths. Furthermore, they contribute positively to individuals’ psychological and physical well-being (Breen et al., 2010). Studies in the literature indicate that both gratitude (McCullough et al., 2002) and forgiveness (Wade et al., 2005) can be enhanced through psychological interventions and that both have a positive impact on individuals’ well-being.

Considering all these studies in the literature, it can be said that the theoretical basis for the relationship between gratitude and forgiveness is established. In this context, it can be thought that gratitude, which is a teachable and learnable concept (Haskins, 2009), may be beneficial to include in the content of the psychoeducation program prepared to support the forgiveness of emerging-adults.

The Present Study

University students are in the midst of a complex transitional period known as emerging adulthood, during which they prepare for adult roles. It is acknowledged that university students in this phase, referred to as emerging adulthood, mature both psychologically and physically, and they are expected to address their challenges with more rational thinking and behavior, transcending emotional reactions (Kılıç, 2013). Indeed, forgiveness has recently garnered attention among some researchers who adopt cognitive and cognitive-behavioral approaches (Miceli & Castelfranchi, 2011). Many researchers have indicated that individuals undergo a cognitive transformation during the painful process of attempting to forgive themselves and others for a mistake (Enright et al., 1996). Especially during emerging adulthood, individuals tend to reinterpret their experiences differently, struggle in their quest for solutions, and consequently, may experience feelings of hopelessness regarding the future (Şahin, 2009). In this stage, characterized by a greater diversity of interpersonal interactions compared to the past, it is expected that individuals may encounter more conflicts and interpersonal problems as a result. Emerging-adults require more resources and support to cope with their problems (Aşçıoğlu-Önal, 2014). Therefore, the main problem of this research is to develop an original psychoeducational program based on theoretically proven sources that have positive effects on the forgiveness of emerging-adults and experimentally test this prepared psychoeducational program.

It is of great importance to experimentally test the variables that are expected to bring about the desired cognitive transformation regarding forgiveness and make them available for practitioners’ use. Therefore, in this research, a psychoeducational program was developed based on the concepts of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, which are related to forgiveness and considered as variables within the domain of positive psychology, and its effectiveness on the forgiveness of emerging-adults was experimentally examined. Although there have been experimental studies on forgiveness in the literature, it can be observed that a comprehensive experimental study encompassing a wide range of variables related to forgiveness has not yet been designed within the Turkish culture. Hence, it can be argued that there is still insufficient knowledge specific to Turkish culture that can explain the forgiveness process. Therefore, this study was planned with the aim of understanding the forgiveness process in Turkish culture and identifying and enhancing the variables that strengthen forgiveness. Türkiye’s unique cultural and religious/spiritual context can provide new and valuable insights into how these variables operate.

University students in the emerging adulthood period need to recognize and strengthen the supportive resources they possess to cope with their interpersonal problems. In this study, a forgiveness psychoeducational program was developed based on the theoretically proven variables of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude. In the literature review conducted, it can be seen that all of these variables, which constitute the content of the psychoeducational program, are considered together for the first time in this study. This research is original and contributes significantly to the existing knowledge on forgiveness in terms of identifying the variables to be considered in future studies (experimental, correlational, psychoeducational, etc.) aimed at enhancing forgiveness and establishing a comprehensive forgiveness model. The findings related to the support of forgiveness will also serve as a valuable data source for practitioners in the field of psychological counseling or psychotherapy. In this respect, the research is expected to fill the gap in the literature not only theoretically but also in the practical application domain.

Based on all these explanations, the aim of this research is to examine whether the forgiveness-based psychoeducational program developed based on the variables of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude has an impact on emerging-adults’ forgiveness scores for both themselves and others, as well as forgiveness scores related to specific situations. The participants in the experimental and control groups formed for this purpose were assumed to show a similar baseline and the following hypotheses were formulated.

H ₁ : There will be a significant increase in favor of the experimental group when comparing the post-test forgiveness scores of emerging-adults in the experimental and control groups.

H ₂ : There will be a significant increase in the post-test scores when comparing the pre-test and post-test forgiveness scores of emerging-adults in the experimental group.

H ₃ : There will be no significant differences when comparing the pre-test and post-test forgiveness scores of emerging-adults in the control group.

H ₄ : There will be no significant differences when comparing the post-test and follow-up test forgiveness scores of emerging-adults in the experimental group.

H ₅ : There will be no significant differences when comparing the post-test and follow-up test forgiveness scores of emerging-adults in the control group.

Method

Research Design

In this study, an experimental method was employed to investigate the effectiveness of a forgiveness-based psychoeducation program based on the variables of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, which fall under the umbrella of positive psychology, on the forgiveness of emerging-adults. Experimental research, in its simplest definition, can be described as studies aimed at testing the impact of a created difference by researchers on the dependent variable. The primary purpose of experimental research design is to test the causal relationship (cause-effect relationship) between variables (Büyüköztürk et al., 2016). In this study, a semi-experimental method was preferred, including experimental and control groups, and pre-test, post-test, and follow-up test measurements, with the aim of examining the effect of the psychoeducation program prepared based on variables known in the literature to be positively related to forgiveness on the forgiveness of emerging-adults. In true experimental designs, participants are randomly assigned to experimental and control groups from a large pool of participants. In semi-experimental designs, however, participants in the participant pool are matched based on certain variables (such as pre-test scores, gender, age, socioeconomic level, etc.) and then assigned to experimental and control groups. The process followed for the semi-experimental design used in this research is provided in Table 1.

Table 1.

Experimental Operation Process

	Group	Pre-test	Process	Post-test		Follow-up test
Matching of participants based on gender and pre-test scores (n = 161)	EG (14 individuals, including 10 females and 4 males)	O₁	X	O₁	45 days	O₁
	CG (14 individuals, including 10 females and 4 males)	O₁	No intervention has been applied.	O₁	45 days	O₁

Note. EG, experimental group; CG, control group; O₁, Heartland forgiveness scale; X, forgiveness-based psychoeducation program.

Participants

The study group used in the research was composed of university students who were enrolled in the guidance and psychological counseling undergraduate program of a state university in Türkiye during the spring semester of the 2021–2022 academic year and were in the emerging adulthood period. The main reason for this choice is that Türkiye is a country that harbors various cultural and religious/spiritual values. Turkish university students, as a group influenced by both traditional values and modern ideas, provide an ideal study group to examine the variables addressed in this study (forgiveness, optimism, self-compassion, altruism and gratitude). Initially, the Heartland Forgiveness Scale was administered to first, second, third, and fourth-year undergraduate students (n = 161) who were studying in the guidance and psychological counseling department and volunteered to participate in the research to determine which participants would be selected for the experimental and control groups. Then, in order for the emerging-adults who would be included in the experimental and control groups to have similar levels of forgiveness, a ranking process was performed based on the scores obtained from the forgiveness scale, and 28 emerging-adults with low levels of forgiveness were identified according to the group average. Afterward, two of these emerging-adults with similar gender and very close forgiveness score averages were randomly matched to create 14 pairs. Then, one of the emerging-adults in each pair was randomly assigned to the experimental group, while the other was assigned to the control group, using the matching method of participants. The matching method of participants is the pairing of participants with similar characteristics (pre-test score, gender, age, socioeconomic level, etc.) and assigning them to two different groups. Thus, it can be said that the differences between the groups are solely due to the experimental process (Büyüköztürk et al., 2016). As a result of all these procedures, there were 10 female and 4 male participants in both the experimental and control groups, with an average age of 20.84 (SD = 2.15) for the experimental group and 20.79 (SD = 2.02) for the control group. Participants in the experimental and control groups reported that their parents’ education level was at the middle or high school level and that their household income was at the middle level by Turkish standards. When participants were asked about their religious affiliation, it was found that there were no atheists or ultra-religious individuals among the participants. Before the implementation of the psychoeducation program, 1 female and 1 male participant who were found to have high forgiveness scores among the study group (n = 161) were added to the 14 emerging-adults in the experimental group. These participants were included in the process to enhance the interaction and experiential support of the group and to serve as role models for forgiveness skills. However, the scores of these 2 participants were not included in the analysis process for the experimental data.

Measures

In this study, data were collected using a demographic information form containing personal details of emerging-adults and the Heartland Forgiveness Scale. Permissions for the use of all data collection instruments in the research were obtained via email from the respective intellectual property rights holders.

Demographic Information Form

Within the study group, a demographic information form was created by the researchers to obtain personal information from emerging-adults, including inquiries about gender and age.

Heartland Forgiveness Scale (HFS)

HFS, developed by Thompson et al. (2005), is designed to measure individuals’ tendencies to forgive themselves, others, and situations. The adaptation process of the scale to Turkish culture was conducted by Bugay and Demir (2010). The scale consists of a total of 18 items and is rated on a 7-point Likert scale. HFS comprises three sub-dimensions titled self-forgiveness, forgiveness of others, and forgiveness of situations. A total forgiveness score can also be obtained from the scale. Higher scores on each sub-dimension reflect a higher level of forgiveness in that domain. The Cronbach Alpha internal consistency coefficients for HFS are as follows: .81 for the whole scale, .64 for the self-forgiveness sub-dimension, .79 for the forgiveness of others sub-dimension, and .76 for the forgiveness of situations sub-dimension (Bugay & Demir, 2010). Confirmatory Factor Analysis was conducted to test the construct validity, and Cronbach Alpha internal consistency coefficient analysis was performed to determine the reliability of HFS to confirm its usability in this study. The values obtained for HFS in these analyses were found to be consistent with the reference range for validity (χ²_{[n = 161]} = 512.478, df = 132, p = .000, χ²/df = 3.882, RMSEA = .068, SRMR = .061, CFI = .902) and reliability (overall scale .83, self-forgiveness sub-dimension .74, forgiveness of others sub-dimension .75, and forgiveness of situations sub-dimension .64) as indicated in the literature (Büyüköztürk, 2014; Kline, 2015), suggesting its applicability in this research. To provide a better understanding of the HFS, some example items from the scale are as follows: [Item-6] I cannot stop criticizing myself for the negative things I have felt, thought, said, or done. [Item-7] I continue to punish the person I think did wrong. [Item-15] If I become disappointed in life due to uncontrollable situations, I continue to think negatively about them.

Data Collection

While collecting data, researchers initially formed experimental (n = 14) and control (n = 14) groups using the method of matching participants based on their pre-test scores and genders within the study group of emerging-adults (n = 161). Informed consent forms were obtained with signatures from the participants assigned to the experimental and control groups. The interventions with the experimental group were conducted in a physically suitable room at the institution where the researchers worked, taking into account factors such as size, seating arrangement, lighting, temperature, etc. No interventions were applied to the control group throughout the process. During the initial meeting with the experimental group, participants were provided with information about the objectives and content of the psychoeducation program. The psychoeducation program, conducted by the researchers, was implemented in 10 sessions, once a week, lasting 90 min each. After the 10-week psychoeducation program, both the experimental and control groups underwent a post-test assessment at the same time. Forty-five days after the post-test assessment, a follow-up test was administered to both groups, marking the completion of the data collection process. The data for the study were collected during the spring semester of the 2021–2022 academic year.

Procedure and Intervention

The general aim of the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program is to contribute positively to the attitudes of individuals in emerging adulthood towards forgiving self, others, and situations. When developing the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program, emphasis was placed on supporting the variables of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, which have been relatively proven in the literature to contribute positively to forgiveness (Uzun & Karataş, 2023). First, a literature review was conducted on these four variables. Studies aimed at increasing individuals’ levels of optimism (Avcı, 2009), self-compassion (Sarıcaoğlu & Arslan, 2019), altruism (Nedim-Bal & Topuz, 2015), and gratitude (Kocatepe, 2020), both domestically and internationally, were examined. It was observed that psychoeducation programs or group counseling processes prepared and implemented based on these variables contributed positively to the development of the relevant characteristics of the participants. Subsequently, a draft program consisting of 10 sessions was prepared in light of the relevant literature. This draft program was sent to two academics who are faculty members in the department of guidance and psychological counseling for their feedback, resulting in revisions. The pilot application of the revised draft program was conducted in January and February 2022 with 6 university students in the emerging adulthood period. During the pilot application, it was determined that the activities included in the program could capture the interest of the target age group, were comprehensible, and could be completed in 90-min periods as planned. Based on feedback from the students participating in the pilot application, the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program was finalized. Of the total of 10 sessions in the program, the first session was allocated to getting to know each other and establishing the group process. Then, two sessions were planned for supporting each of the variables that form the basis of the program. For example, the second session was dedicated to introducing and teaching gratitude, while the third session focused on engaging in gratitude-related activities. Similarly, two sessions were prepared for the concepts of self-compassion, optimism, and altruism. At the end of each session, verbal feedback was received from the participants about their experiences in the process and thus progress in the learning process was monitored. The final session was designed for evaluation and closure. After the sessions, homework assignments were given so that the group members could reinforce the skills they had learned and relate these skills to daily life. The first session after the homework was given started by checking the homework of the participants, so that experiences and feedback on the homework were received verbally. The effect of participation in the process through homework assignments on individuals’ daily lives was checked. An overview of the program’s content is provided in Table 2.

Table 2.

Forgiveness-Based Psychoeducation Program

Number of sessions	Session names and contents
1.	Session name: Introduction and OrientationSession duration: 90 minSession content: The aim of this session was to facilitate group members getting to know each other and establish rapport. Information about the psychoeducation program, its process, and operation was provided. Rules to be followed within the group during the psychoeducation were established. A group contract was prepared and signed by the members. Group members identified their expectations and individual goals for psychoeducation. Information about the concept of forgiveness was provided.Activities implemented in the session: “Noun and adjective”, “talking to a stranger for 5 min” and “trust pool” were the activities that participants were directly involved in during this session.Homework: “Keep a positive diary” activity was given to the participants as homework.
2.	Session name: Gratitude – 1Session duration: 90 minSession content: The purpose of this session was to provide group members with information about the concept of gratitude. Efforts were made to help group members notice the positive things they have in their lives. The positive impact of expressing gratitude on individuals’ psychological well-being was emphasized.Activities implemented in the session: “Warm-up activity”, “balance your grievances” and “gratitude tree” were the activities that participants were directly involved in during this session.Homework: “Keep a gratitude journal” activity was given to the participants as homework.
3.	Session name: Gratitude – 2Session duration: 90 minSession content: This session aimed to help group members recognize positive behaviors directed towards themselves. Emphasis was placed on the unifying power of gratitude in social life. Exercises were conducted to enable group members to express their feelings of gratitude comfortably.Activities implemented in the session: “Warm-up activity”, “thank you” and “make gratitude visits” were the activities that participants were directly involved in during this session.Homework: “Write a thank you note” activity was given to the participants as homework.
4.	Session name: Self compassion – 1Session duration: 90 minSession content: This session aimed to educate group members about the concept of self-compassion. Various exercises were conducted to facilitate the development of self-compassion in group members. Different types of compassion were discussed to help group members understand the differences in the compassion they show to others and themselves.Activities implemented in the session: “Warm-up activity”, “my positive trait”, “critic, criticized and compassionate observer” and “treating self and others differently” were the activities that participants were directly involved in during this session.Homework: “Letter from an imaginary friend” activity was given to the participants as homework.
5.	Session name: Self compassion – 2Session duration: 90 minSession content: In this session, group members were taught how to let go of negative self-thoughts. Emphasis was placed on the importance of group members recognizing their self-worth.Activities implemented in the session: “Warm-up activity”, “return of the lost piece of self”, “write, read and burn”, “find your self-worth” were the activities that participants were directly involved in during this session.Homework: “Self-compassion diary” activity was given to the participants as homework.
6.	Session name: Optimism – 1Session duration: 90 minSession content: The aim of this session was to provide group members with knowledge about the concept of optimism. Emphasis was placed on the importance of optimism for a positive life. Awareness was raised about the idea that optimism can be learned.Activities implemented in the session: “Warm-up activity”, “make your future self thank you” and “learn to be optimistic” were the activities that participants were directly involved in during this session.Homework: “Kindness notebook” activity was given to the participants as homework.
7.	Session name: Optimism – 2Session duration: 90 minSession content: Various exercises were conducted to help group members develop an optimistic perspective. Awareness was created about the possibility of replacing a pessimistic outlook with an optimistic one.Activities implemented in the session: “Warm-up activity” and “look through the glasses of optimism” were the activities that participants were directly involved in during this session.Homework: “Write a letter from the future” activity was given to the participants as homework.
8.	Session name: Altruism – 1Session duration: 90 minSession content: The aim was to inform group members about the concept of altruism. Emphasis was placed on the contributions and benefits of altruism in individuals’ lives. Awareness exercises were conducted to help group members develop sensitivity towards the needs of others.Activities implemented in the session: “Warm-up activity”, “sanctuary”, “think less of yourself” and “I need” were the activities that participants were directly involved in during this session.Homework: “Engage in unexpected positive behavior” activity was given to the participants as homework.
9.	Session name: Altruism – 2Session duration: 90 minSession content: Group members were made aware of the positive power of giving compliments. Various activities were conducted to explore opportunities for volunteering for the benefit of the community.Activities implemented in the session: “Warm-up activity”, “accordion of praise”, “giving praise” and “establishing a charity” were the activities that participants were directly involved in during this session.Homework: “Keep account of your acts of kindness” activity was given to the participants as homework.
10.	Session name: Evaluation and conclusionSession duration: 90 minSession content: A comprehensive evaluation of the group process was conducted. Participants were encouraged to express their feelings and thoughts about their participation in the group process. The assessment of whether personal goals were achieved and sharing of other gains took place. Emphasis was placed on the application of the gains acquired during the group process in real life. The discussion also focused on how the knowledge and experiences gained within the psychoeducation program could be applied after the group process. The post-test was administered, and the group concluded with a farewell and positive emotions as participants parted ways.Activities implemented in the session: “Letter of intent” and “shake hands and say goodbye” were the activities that participants were directly involved in during this session.

Data Analysis

The pre-test, post-test, and follow-up test scores obtained from the Heartland Forgiveness Scale by the participants in the experimental and control groups, which were formed in line with the aim of the study, were transferred to the computer system in a manner that could answer the research questions. First, it was tested whether the data transferred to the computer system met the parametric assumptions necessary for the planned analyses. For this purpose, the kurtosis and skewness coefficients were examined to check whether the data satisfied the assumption of normal distribution. In the conducted analyses, it was observed that the kurtosis and skewness coefficients of each variable did not fall within the reference range of −1.00 to +1.00 (Çokluk et al., 2014), as seen in Table 3.

Table 3.

Descriptive Statistics of Pre-Test Scores for Forgiveness and its Subdimensions in the Experimental and Control Groups

Groups	Variables	n	Min.	Max.	$\bar{x}$	SD	Skewness	Kurtosis
Experimental group	Total forgiveness	14	35.00	62.00	52.50	7.89	−1.184	.230
	Forgiveness of self	14	12.00	27.00	19.35	4.76	−.035	−1.291
	Forgiveness of others	14	6.00	24.00	15.07	5.06	.130	−1.027
	Forgiveness of situation	14	7.00	28.00	18.07	5.39	−.378	1.176
Control group	Total forgiveness	14	38.00	63.00	53.85	7.14	−1.070	.146
	Forgiveness of self	14	14.00	26.00	19.42	4.08	.246	−1.213
	Forgiveness of others	14	7.00	20.00	15.14	4.40	−1.337	−1.498
	Forgiveness of situation	14	14.00	35.00	19.28	5.75	1.640	3.411

In fact, Büyüköztürk (2014) has argued in the context of experimental studies that seeking the assumption of normality is not realistic and that it is very challenging for data to follow a normal distribution in such studies conducted with small groups. In line with Büyüköztürk’ perspective, it was determined that the data collected for the experimental part of this research also did not exhibit normal distribution. Furthermore, the Shapiro-Wilk (W) normality test confirmed that the data did not follow a normal distribution (W = .931, p < .05). In this context, it was decided that non-parametric statistical techniques would be employed in the analysis of the data obtained using the experimental method.

First, a non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to determine if there was a significant difference in forgiveness pre-test scores between the identified adults assigned to the experimental and control groups through the matching method. The analysis revealed that there was no significant difference between the forgiveness pre-test scores of the identified adults in the experimental and control groups (U = 89.000, p > .05; See Table 4). It can be concluded from this that the matching process (matching the participants based on gender and pre-test scores) conducted during the selection of members for the experimental and control groups achieved its goal. Thus, it can be stated that the forgiveness scores of the identified adults assigned to the experimental (

\bar{x}

= 52.50) and control (

\bar{x}

= 53.85) groups were similar at the beginning of the process, and any differences observed between the groups at the end of the process were solely attributed to the experimental intervention.

Table 4.

Comparison of Group Means for Pre-Test, Post-Test, and Follow-Up Test Scores

Scales	Experimental group (n = 14)	Control group (n = 14)	U	p	r
Scales	M ± SE	M ± SE	U	p	r
Total forgiveness
Pre-test	52.500 ± 7.891	53.857 ± 7.145	89.000	.678	.078
Post-test	87.786 ± 10.154	54.357 ± 7.175	2.000	.000	.834
Follow-up test	87.786 ± 9.585	53.714 ± 7.630	1.000	.000	.842
z (Pre × Post test)	−3.306	−1.245
p	.001	.213
r	.883	.332
z (Post × Follow-up test)	−.767	−1.097
p	.443	.273
r	.205	.293
Forgiveness of self
Pre-test	19.357 ± 4.765	19.429 ± 4.089	97.000	.963	.008
Post-test	31.357 ± 5.241	19.929 ± 4.287	8.000	.000	.783
Follow-up test	30.714 ± 5.483	19.714 ± 7.630	9.500	.000	.770
z (Pre × Post test)	−3.306	−1.469
p	.001	.142
r	.883	.392
z (Post × Follow-up test)	−.528	−.749
p	.597	.454
r	.141	.200
Forgiveness of others
Pre-test	15.071 ± 5.060	15.143 ± 4.400	92.000	.782	.052
Post-test	26.714 ± 5.676	15.571 ± 4.552	7.000	.000	.791
Follow-up test	26.929 ± 6.019	15.643 ± 4.517	7.500	.000	.787
z (Pre × Post test)	−3.315	−1.281
p	.001	.200
r	.886	.342
z (Post × Follow-up test)	−.711	−.439
p	.477	.660
r	.190	.117
Forgiveness of situation
Pre-test	18.071 ± 5.398	19.286 ± 5.757	96.000	.926	.017
Post-test	29.714 ± 5.297	18.857 ± 5.655	19.500	.000	.684
Follow-up test	30.143 ± 4.801	18.357 ± 5.183	11.500	.000	.754
z (Pre × Post test)	−3.310	−1.418
p	.001	.156
r	.884	.379
z (Post × Follow-up test)	−1.732	−1.308
p	.082	.191
r	.462	.349

Note. U, Mann-Whitney U test; z, Wilcoxon signed-rank test; r, effect size.

After the completion of the 10-week psychoeducation program for the experimental group, the Mann-Whitney U test was employed to examine whether there was a significant difference in forgiveness post-test scores between the identified adults in the experimental and control groups. Subsequently, the non-parametric Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test was conducted to determine whether there was a significant difference in forgiveness post-test scores compared to pre-test scores for the identified adults in the experimental and control groups. Furthermore, 45 days after the administration of the post-test, a follow-up test was administered to the identified adults in both the experimental and control groups. The Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test technique was used to assess whether there was a significant difference in forgiveness post-test and follow-up test scores for the identified adults in the experimental and control groups.

Furthermore, in all of these non-parametric statistics, the effect size calculation formula recommended by Fritz et al. (2012) was utilized, which is expressed as r = z / √N (r = effect size; z = z-value; N = sample size). This formula is commonly employed for calculating effect sizes in non-parametric statistics such as the Mann-Whitney U test and Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test, especially when the sample size is relatively small. The obtained r value is interpreted as follows: if it is close to .10, it indicates a small effect; if it is close to .30, it suggests a moderate effect, and if it is close to .50, it signifies a large effect (Cohen, 1988). In all the statistical analyses conducted in the scope of this research, IBM SPSS Statistics version 22.0 was used, and a significance level of .05 was adopted.

Results

Based on the support obtained from the literature on forgiveness, the researchers have developed a forgiveness-based psychoeducation program that emphasizes optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude variables. The findings regarding the impact of this psychoeducation program on both the total forgiveness level and self-forgiveness, other-forgiveness, and situational-forgiveness levels of emerging-adults as a result of the experimental procedures are presented in Table 4.

When examining Table 4, it can be observed that after the 10-week experimental study, there is a significant difference between the emerging adult participants who attended the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program and those who did not, in terms of both their overall forgiveness (U = 2.000, p < .05) scores and the sub-dimensions of forgiveness, including self-forgiveness (U = 8.000, p < .05), forgiving others (U = 7.000, p < .05), and forgiving situations (U = 19.500, p < .05). Upon closer inspection of the means provided in Table 4, it becomes evident that emerging adult participants who took part in the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program achieved higher scores in both overall forgiveness and its sub-dimensions compared to those who did not participate in such a program. This finding indicates that the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program, which supports variables such as optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, is effective in enhancing the forgiveness skills of emerging-adults experiencing difficulties in forgiveness. Thus, H₁ hypothesis is supported. Furthermore, as seen in Table 4, it is apparent that the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program has a large effect (r > .50) on the average scores of overall forgiveness (r = .834), as well as self-forgiveness (r = .783), forgiving others (r = .791), and forgiving situations (r = .684) among the emerging adult participants (Cohen, 1988). This suggests that the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program applied to the experimental group has a significant and substantial impact on improving the forgiveness skills of emerging adult participants.

In Table 4, it is evident that there is a significant difference between the experimental group participants who attended the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program in terms of both their overall forgiveness (z = 3.306, p < .05) scores and the sub-dimensions of forgiveness, including self-forgiveness (z = 3.306, p < .05), forgiving others (z = 3.315, p < .05), and forgiving situations (z = 3.310, p < .05) before and after the experiment. When examining the mean differences, it is apparent that this difference is in favor of the post-test scores. Based on these results, it can be stated that the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program is effective in enhancing the forgiveness skills of emerging adult participants. Thus, H₂ hypothesis is supported. Furthermore, as seen in Table 4, it is evident that the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program has a large effect (r > .50) on the average scores of overall forgiveness (r = .883), as well as self-forgiveness (r = .883), forgiving others (r = .886), and forgiving situations (r = .884) among the emerging adult participants in the experimental group (Cohen, 1988). These results demonstrate that the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program has a significant and substantial impact on the experimental group.

When analyzing the results of the analysis regarding whether there is a significant difference in the forgiveness levels of the participants in the control group in Table 4 before and after the experiment, it is evident that there is no significant difference in both their overall forgiveness (z = 1.245, p > .05) scores and the sub-dimensions of forgiveness, including self-forgiveness (z = 1.469, p > .05), forgiving others (z = 1.281, p > .05), and forgiving situations (z = 1.418, p > .05) between the pre-test and post-test measurements among the emerging adult participants in the control group who did not participate in the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program. Based on these results, it can be concluded that emerging adult participants who did not participate in the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program did not exhibit any significant changes in their forgiveness skills at the end of the process. Therefore, H₃ hypothesis is supported.

On the other hand, when examining the analysis results regarding whether there is a significant difference in the forgiveness levels of the participants in the experimental group in Table 4 between the post-test and follow-up test measurements, it is evident that there is no significant difference in both their overall forgiveness (z = .767, p > .05) scores and the sub-dimensions of forgiveness, including self-forgiveness (z = .528, p > .05), forgiving others (z = .711, p > .05), and forgiving situations (z = 1.732, p > .05) between the post-test measurement conducted immediately after the intervention and the follow-up measurement conducted 45 days after the intervention among the emerging adult participants in the experimental group who participated in the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program. Based on these results, it can be concluded that emerging adult participants who participated in the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program maintained the sustainability of the positive development in their forgiveness skills even after the intervention. Therefore, H₄ hypothesis is supported.

Finally, when examining the analysis results regarding whether there is a significant difference in the forgiveness levels of the participants in the control group in Table 4 between the post-test and follow-up test measurements, it is evident that there is no significant difference in both their overall forgiveness (z = 1.097, p < .05) scores and the sub-dimensions of forgiveness, including self-forgiveness (z = .749, p < .05), forgiving others (z = .439, p < .05), and forgiving situations (z = 1.308, p < .05) between the post-test measurement conducted immediately after the experimental procedure and the follow-up measurement conducted 45 days after the experimental procedure among the emerging adult participants in the control group who did not participate in the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program. Based on these results, it can be concluded that emerging adult participants who did not participate in the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program did not experience any changes in their forgiveness skills 45 days after the experimental procedure. Therefore, H₅ hypothesis is supported.

Discussion

The most significant finding of this study is that the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program, developed based on the support of variables such as optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, increased the forgiveness scores of emerging-adults in both overall forgiveness and the sub-dimensions of self-forgiveness, forgiving others, and forgiving situations. On the other hand, the control group, where no intervention program was applied throughout the process, did not experience any significant change in their forgiveness scores. Furthermore, the positive effects of the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program on the emerging adult participants in the experimental group were sustained even 45 days after the intervention, as evidenced by the follow-up measurement. In this context, it can be stated that this study conducted with emerging adult participants, aimed at promoting forgiveness, was able to yield lasting positive results. On the other hand, it was observed that the forgiveness scores in the control group did not show a significant change in the follow-up measurement compared to the post-test scores. From this perspective, it can be suggested that forgiveness in emerging adult samples, without any intervention, may not naturally increase over time, independently of individual experiences or various factors.

Indeed, the review of the literature reveals that variables such as optimism (Karagöz, 2011), self-compassion (Ekşi et al., 2020), altruism (Kaynak, 2020), and gratitude (Haskins, 2009) are conceptualized as teachable and learnable concepts. Furthermore, it is well-established that separately prepared and implemented psychoeducation programs or group counseling processes for optimism (Avcı, 2009), self-compassion (Sarıcaoğlu & Arslan, 2019), altruism (Nedim-Bal & Topuz, 2015), and gratitude (Kocatepe, 2020) variables have positively contributed to the development of participants’ relevant characteristics. All these findings in the literature demonstrate that the positive attributes constituting the content of forgiveness-based psychoeducation programs are teachable and that teaching them can lead to positive effects on participants.

When examining experimental studies in the context of forgiveness in the literature, parallel to the findings of the current research, it can be observed that forgiveness-based psychoeducation programs (Ji et al., 2016; McCullough, 1995; Vural-Batık & Afyonkale-Talay, 2021) and group counseling processes (Bugay & Demir, 2012; Goldman & Wade, 2012; Parlak & Öksüz-Gül, 2021), although designed on different contents, have positively contributed to emerging-adults’ forgiveness skills. In this context, it can be stated that psychoeducation programs prepared for forgiveness can be used as functional and effective tools in enhancing emerging-adults’ abilities in both total forgiveness and the sub-dimensions of forgiveness, including self-forgiveness, forgiving others, and forgiving situations. However, when the literature is examined, it is understood that intervention programs prepared for forgiveness do not always yield effective results. For example, a self-compassion-based intervention program prepared by Hansmann (2018) did not influence changes in participants’ self-forgiveness situations. While some forgiveness-based intervention programs have not yielded the expected effective results, the general consensus in the literature suggests that forgiveness interventions, composed of different approaches and activities, have been effective in the sample of emerging-adults.

In this study, the utilization of positive psychology’ variables such as optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude to enhance emerging-adults’ self-forgiveness skills yielded highly favorable results. These mentioned variables strengthened emerging-adults’ tendencies toward self-forgiveness. This finding can be interpreted in light of Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi’ (2000) theoretical approach, which suggests that positive psychology assists individuals in developing their character strengths and positive qualities, thereby increasing their levels of psychological resilience and fostering greater self-forgiveness. Positive personality traits play a significant role in individuals’ ability to forgive, both in terms of the emotions and thoughts required for forgiveness (McCullough et al., 1998). Indeed, when examining the results of studies conducted in the literature, it is evident that the findings of this research align closely with prior research. When studies conducted within the context of these specific concepts are reviewed in the literature, it is observed that optimism (Ramadhani et al., 2021), self-compassion (Booker, 2019; Wu et al., 2019), altruism (Ergi et al., 2021; Oliner, 2005), and gratitude (Hermaen & Bhutto, 2020; Ramsey, 2019) serve as facilitating factors for individuals in forgiving themselves. In this context, supported by the literature, it can be asserted that the psychoeducation program, comprised of activities based on optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, has the potential to facilitate individuals’ self-forgiveness.

Within the scope of this study, the employment of positive psychology’ variables such as optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude to support the skill of forgiving others has yielded highly favorable outcomes. All these mentioned variables have positively contributed to emerging-adults’ abilities to forgive others. This finding can be interpreted in line with the theoretical approach of Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000), suggesting that positive psychology, by focusing on individuals’ positive and strong qualities rather than their negative, lacking, or problematic aspects, can prevent individuals from experiencing various psychological distresses, such as being unable to forgive others. Indeed, when examining the results of studies conducted in the literature, the findings of this research align closely with prior research. Upon reviewing studies in the literature, it becomes evident that optimism (Nembhard, 2017; Ramadhani et al., 2021), self-compassion (Booker & Perlin, 2021; Breen et al., 2010; Kılıç & Tunç, 2020; Oral & Arslan, 2017; Saeighi-Mameghani et al., 2020; Skoda, 2011), altruism (Naeem & Akhtar, 2016; Oliner, 2005, 2009), and gratitude (Kane et al., 2021; Naeem & Akhtar, 2016; Nembhard, 2017) are characteristics that, when supported, lead individuals to be more forgiving toward others. In this context, it can be asserted, supported by the literature, that the psychoeducation program, comprised of activities based on optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, facilitates individuals in forgiving others.

Finally, employing the variables of positive psychology, namely optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, to support the skill of forgiving situations has yielded positive results. All these variables have strengthened individuals’ abilities to forgive situations. This finding can be interpreted in accordance with the theoretical approach of Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000), suggesting that the variables within positive psychology have the potential to break individuals’ negative perceptions and contribute positively to individuals’ ability to forgive situations, just as they affect all other variables that contribute to individuals’ psychological well-being. Indeed, when examining the results of studies conducted in the literature, it becomes evident that the findings of this research align closely with prior research. From this perspective, upon reviewing studies in the literature focused on these specific concepts, it can be observed that optimism (Ramadhani et al., 2021), self-compassion (Breen et al., 2010; Kılıç & Tunç, 2020), altruism (Sanlav, 2016), and gratitude (Aishvarya et al., 2021; Lee & Kim, 2021; Satıcı et al., 2014), when supported, lead individuals to have a greater tendency to forgive situations. In this context, it can be asserted, supported by the literature, that the psychoeducation program, comprised of activities based on optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, facilitates individuals in forgiving situations.

Conclusion

The most comprehensive outcome of this research can be summarized as follows: In this study, first, with the theoretical support derived from the literature, variables believed to contribute the most to individuals’ abilities to forgive themselves, others, and situations were identified. Based on this, a psychoeducation program was designed, incorporating variables within positive psychology, namely optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, and tested through an experimental design on emerging-adults. The results have revealed that participation in the psychoeducation program, which supports optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, led to an enhancement in both overall forgiveness and the skills of self-forgiveness, forgiving others, and forgiving situations among the experimental group. Furthermore, it was determined that there was no significant change in forgiveness scores for the control group, where no intervention program was implemented throughout the process. The results obtained from the follow-up test demonstrated that the study conducted with emerging-adults to promote forgiveness was capable of yielding lasting positive outcomes. In this context, it can be concluded that the variables of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, which fall under the umbrella of positive psychology, can be utilized to enhance emerging-adults’ abilities to forgive themselves, others, and situations.

The fact that the participants were emerging-adults represents a critical period in which identity development and personal values are shaped in this age group (Arnett, 2000, 2007). In this period, forgiveness tendencies play an important role in the emotional and social development of individuals (Uzun & Arslan, 2024, 2025). On the other hand, cultural values and religious/spiritual commitments in Türkiye may play an important role in the effectiveness of such psychoeducation programs (Peker, 2013; Toprak, 2022). Indeed, in the cultural context, Türkiye’s social structure and religious/spiritual values are important factors affecting forgiveness behavior (Bozkaya, 2023). Forgiveness in Turkish society is often intertwined with religious and cultural teachings (Dilmaç et al., 2016), and the results of this study make sense when evaluated in this context. The collectivist culture in Türkiye emphasizes harmony and continuity of relationships within the community, while the teachings of Islam encourage forgiveness (Tura, 2019). Consistent with the results of this study, positive psychological traits such as optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude may contribute positively to emerging-adults’ forgiveness tendencies in Türkiye (Uzun & Karataş, 2023). In this context, the results of our study may reveal the effects of the Turkish cultural and religious context on these positive psychological traits and how they shape forgiveness tendencies. For example, there are many teachings in Islam that encourage forgiveness and tolerance (Aysu, 2019), and these values may be an important motivator in developing Turkish emerging-adults’ forgiveness skills. Thus, the results of this study, when compared to other studies in the existing literature, may provide important contributions highlighting the effects of Turkish cultural and religious values on forgiveness.

Limitations

It is assumed that the individuals participating in this research responded to the self-report scale used in the study honestly and sincerely. Furthermore, it is presumed that the participants in the experimental part of the study were exposed to similar factors throughout the process and did not experience significant influences that would create differences. On the other hand, the forgiveness-based psychoeducation program developed within the scope of the research is limited to the variables of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude concerning the subject. The sample of the research is confined to university students in the emerging adulthood period. Emerging-adults who are not enrolled in university education were not included in the research. In this context, the generalizability of the results of the research is limited to similar samples. In addition, the study included a limited number of participants, so the current study can be seen as a pilot or preliminary study. Although the psychoeducation program was structured around optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude, the study measured only forgiveness before and after the intervention. These four components were not independently assessed at pre- and post-intervention stages, which limits the ability to determine the specific contributions of each component to the observed changes in forgiveness. This lack of component-specific measurement is a noteworthy limitation. Finally, the fact that the Cronbach Alpha internal consistency value (.64) of the forgiveness of situations sub-dimension of the Heartland Forgiveness Scale is slightly below the reference value (.70) accepted in the literature can be shown as a limitation. Based on the limitations and findings of the current research, some recommendations have been developed for both new researchers planning to conduct studies on this topic and practitioners in the field.

Recommendations

Based on the results of this research, it can be suggested that the levels of self-forgiveness, forgiving others, and forgiving situations in emerging-adults should be enhanced by supporting the levels of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude within the framework of positive psychology. In this context, psychoeducation programs can be developed with new activities aimed at increasing optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude to indirectly promote forgiveness. In future implementations, it is recommended that researchers also measure optimism, self-compassion, and altruism independently, both before and after the intervention, to assess whether the psychoeducation program has a direct effect on these components as well. Furthermore, researchers can continue to conduct studies on identifying other potential variables (psychological mindedness, empathy, humility, etc.) that can enhance the forgiveness skills of emerging-adults. In addition to the variables used in this research, other character strengths of positive psychology (kindness, humility, humor, etc.) can also be considered as potential variables. This contribution can lead to the creation of more comprehensive psychoeducation programs focused on forgiveness.

Moreover, the impact of the psychoeducation program developed in the context of this research was examined exclusively on emerging-adults enrolled in a state university in Türkiye. In future studies, it is recommended that this program be implemented with broader and more heterogeneous samples, including individuals not enrolled in higher education as well as those from different age groups (e.g., adolescents, middle-aged adults, elderly individuals). To enhance the generalizability and cultural adaptability of the findings, researchers are also encouraged to test the program in culturally diverse educational and clinical settings by including participants from various ethnic, religious, and cultural backgrounds. Given the emphasis placed on cultural and spiritual factors in the present study, it is further suggested that future research incorporate validated measures of cultural values, religious commitment, or spirituality to empirically explore how these dimensions influence forgiveness and moderate the effectiveness of the intervention. Such efforts would contribute to a more nuanced and contextually grounded understanding of the forgiveness process across different populations.

Psychological counselors and other mental health professionals working in the field can address the skills of optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude in their individual counseling processes with clients who seek help with forgiveness issues. They can provide clients with tasks and assignments related to these areas to support and enhance their positive qualities. Additionally, for clients who may be reluctant to discuss forgiveness but are struggling with it, an alternative approach can involve working on these concepts to prepare them for the forgiveness process. Furthermore, psychoeducation programs focused on forgiveness that support optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude can be implemented in groups of 12 to 14 participants over 8 to 10 sessions for emerging-adults. This format allows emerging-adults who share a similar cultural background to develop their forgiveness skills while benefiting from group interaction and experiential support. For larger groups, seminars on optimism, self-compassion, altruism, and gratitude can be organized to provide brief informational sessions and raise awareness about variables that support forgiveness in a short period of time.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Examining the Effects of a Psychoeducation Program Prepared Based on Optimism, Self-Compassion, Altruism, and Gratitude on Forgiveness in Emerging Adults

Supplemental Material for Examining the Effects of a Psychoeducation Program Prepared Based on Optimism, Self-Compassion, Altruism, and Gratitude on Forgiveness in Emerging Adults by Kıvanç Uzun and Zeynep Karataş in Emerging Adulthood

Footnotes

Author Note

This study was produced from the doctoral thesis prepared by the first author under the supervision of the second author.

ORCID iDs

Kıvanç Uzun

Zeynep Karataş

Ethical Considerations

All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee, as well as with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Committee Approval Information: This research was examined by the Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee with the decision number GO 2021/304 at the meeting numbered 2021/09/09 held on 01/09/2021, in terms of its rationale, purpose, approach and method, and was found to be in accordance with ethical principles and human rights in terms of scope and application. Data Collection and Implementation Permission: The data collection and implementation permission for this research was obtained with the official letter numbered E-52793143-044-104597 dated 13/01/2022 from the Office of the Dean of the Faculty of Education, Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Scientific Research Projects Commission. Project Number: 0768-DR-21.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

Materials and analysis code for the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.*

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Author Biographies

Kıvanç Uzun: He received his bachelor’s degree in 2014, his Master’s degree in 2016 and his doctorate degree in 2023 from the Guidance and Psychological Counseling program of Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University. Between 2014 and 2020, he worked as a school psychological counselor in various schools affiliated to the Ministry of National Education. Between 2020 and 2024, he worked as a lecturer at Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University. Since 2024, he has been working as a faculty member at Uşak University, Department of Guidance and Psychological Counseling. His main field of study is preventive services to support the psychological health of adolescents and emerging adults. He has published national and international scientific studies on this subject.

Zeynep Karataş: She received her bachelor’s degree from Çukurova University Education Faculty Guidance and Psychological Counseling Department in 1998. In 2002, she received her Master’s degree from Çukurova University, Social Sciences Institute, Department of Educational Sciences, Guidance and Psychological Counseling Program. In 2008, she received her doctorate from Mersin University Social Sciences Institute, Department of Educational Sciences, Guidance and Psychological Counseling Program. Between 1998 and 2009, she worked as a school psychological counselor in various schools affiliated to the Ministry of National Education. She has been working as a faculty member in the Guidance and Psychological Counseling Department of Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University since 2009. She received the titles of associate professor in 2013 and professor in 2018 from Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University. Her main field of study is aggression, anger, self-compassion and cognitive behavioral therapy applications. She has published many national and international articles and presented conference papers in his fields of study. In addition, since 2009, she has been training undergraduate, graduate and doctoral students and giving courses related to her field.

References

Adler

M. G.

Fagley

N. S.

(2005). Appreciation: Individual differences in finding value and meaning as a unique predictor of subjective well-being. Journal of Personality, 73(1), 79–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00305.x

Aishvarya

A. R.

Devishrree

Naachimuthu

K. P.

(2021). Gratitude, forgiveness, & humility as predictors of thriving among college students. Psychology and Education Journal, 58(3), 3841–3850. https://doi.org/10.17762/pae.v58i3.4591

Arnett

J. J.

(2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469

Arnett

J. J.

(2007). Emerging adulthood: What is it, and what is it good for? Child Development Perspectives, 1(2), 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2007.00016.x

Arslan

(2023). Childhood psychological maltreatment, optimism, aversion to happiness, and psychological adjustment among college students. Current Psychology, 42, 25142–25150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03538-5

Arslan

Özdemir-Bişkin

Uzun

(2024). Self-transcendence explains how stress reduces mental well-being in emerging adults: A conditional approach of coping flexibility. Emerging Adulthood. https://doi.org/10.1177/21676968241286924

Arslan

Uzun

Güven

A. Z.

Gürsu

(2024). Psychological flexibility, self-compassion, subjective well-being, and substance misuse in college students: A serial mediation model. Journal of Ethnicity in Substance Abuse. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332640.2024.2366981

Aşçıoğlu-Önal

(2014). An investigation of the predictive role of cognitive distortions, empathy, and rumination level on forgiveness [Unpublished master’s thesis, Ankara University, Graduate School of Educational Sciences].

Avcı

(2009). The effect of the learned optimism training program on the optimism level of the students at 9th and 10th class [Unpublished master’s thesis, Gazi University, Graduate School of Educational Sciences].

10.

Aysu

(2019). The capacity to forgive: An object relations perspective [Unpublished master’s thesis, Dokuz Eylül University, Graduate School of Social Sciences].

11.

Booker

J. A.

(2019). Patterns in autobiographical reminiscing among early adults: Implications for forgiveness and self‐compassion. Social Development, 28(4), 802–819. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12354

12.

Booker

J. A.

Perlin

J. D.

(2021). Using multiple character strengths to inform young adults’ self-compassion: The potential of hope and forgiveness. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 16(3), 379–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2020.1716048

13.

Bozkaya

(2023). The virtue of forgiveness in terms of the use of positive psychology in spiritual counseling. Journal of Eskişehir Osmangazi University Faculty of Theology, 10(2), 768–796. https://doi.org/10.51702/esoguifd.1298088

14.

Breen

W. E.

Kashdan

T. B.

Lenser

M. L.

Fincham

F. D.

(2010). Gratitude and forgiveness: Convergence and divergence on self-report and informant ratings. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(8), 932–937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.033

15.

Bugay

Demir

(2010). A Turkish version of heartland forgiveness scale. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 1927–1931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.390

16.

Bugay

Demir

(2012). Can be forgiveness increased? Forgiveness enrichment group. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal, 4(37), 96–106.

17.

Büyüköztürk

Ş.

(2014). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [data analysis handbook for social sciences] (19th ed.). Pegem Academy.

18.

Büyüköztürk

Ş.

Kılıç-Çakmak

Akgün

Ö. E.

Karadeniz

Ş.

Demirel

(2016). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods] (21th ed.). Pegem Academy.

19.

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis fort he behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.

20.

Çokluk

Ö.

Şekercioğlu

Büyüköztürk

Ş.

(2014). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları [Multivariate statistics SPSS and LISREL applications for social sciences] (3th ed.). Pegem Academy.

21.

Dilmaç

Ekşi

Şimşir

(2016). Psikolojik danışma deneyimi yaşayanların dini başa çıkma, psikolojik iyi olma ve affetme düzeyleri arasındaki yordayıcı ilişkiler: Bir model önerisi [Predictive relationships among religious coping, psychological well-being, and forgiveness levels of individuals experiencing psychological counseling: A proposed model]. In Ayten

Koç

Tınaz

(Eds.), Manevi Danışmanlık ve Rehberlik [Spiritual Counseling and Guidance] (pp. 169–186). Dem Publishing.

22.

Dinç

(2020). Pozitif psikolojide kendilik odaklı kavramlar [Self-focused concepts in positive psychology]. In Ümmet

(Ed.), Tüm kavram ve yaklaşımlarıyla pozitif psikoloji [Positive psychology with all its concepts and approaches] (1th ed., pp. 97–114). Pegem Academy.

23.

Doğan

Eryılmaz

(2013). An examination of the relationships between two-dimensional self-esteem and subjective well-being. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 33(33), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.9779/PUJE434

24.

Ekşi

İkiz

Başman

(2020). The mediating rrole of self-compassion in the relationship between university students’ fear of happiness and expressing their emotions. Kastamonu Education Journal, 28(2), 820–829. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.702904

25.

Enright

R. D.

The Human Development Study Group . (1996). Counseling within the forgiveness triad: On forgiving, receiving forgiveness, and self‐forgiveness. Counseling and Values, 40(2), 107–126. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-007X.1996.tb00844.x

26.

Enright

R. D.

Fitzgibbons

R. P.

(2000). Helping clients forgive: An empirical guide for resolving anger and restoring hope. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10381-000

27.

Enright

R. D.

North

Tutu

A. D.

(1998). Exploring forgiveness (1th ed.). The University of Wisconsin Press.

28.

Ergi

Ö.

Düşünceli

Demir

(2021). Examining the effects of forgiveness flexibility of university students on altruism with structural equation model. Journal of Interdisciplinary Education: Theory and Practice, 3(1), 32–47. https://doi.org/10.47157/jietp.864777

29.

Fredrickson

B. L.

(2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-andbuild theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218

30.

Fredrickson

B. L.

(2004). The broaden–and–build theory of positive emotions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 359(1449), 1367–1377. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2004.1512

31.

Fritz

C. O.

Morris

P. E.

Richler

J. J.

(2012). Effect size estimates: Current use, calculations, and interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(1), 2–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024338

32.

Gable

S. L.

Haidt

(2005). What (and why) is positive psychology? Review of General Psychology, 9(2), 103–110. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.9.2.103

33.

García-Vázquez

F. I.

Valdés-Cuervo

A. A.

Martínez-Ferrer

Parra-Pérez

L. G.

(2020). Forgiveness, gratitude, happiness, and prosocial bystander behavior in bullying. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2827. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02827

34.

Goldman

D. B.

Wade

N. G.

(2012). Comparison of forgiveness and anger-reduction group treatments: A randomized controlled trial. Psychotherapy Research, 22(5), 604–620. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2012.692954

35.

Hall

J. H.

Fincham

F. D.

(2005). Self–forgiveness: The stepchild of forgiveness research. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24(5), 621–637. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2005.24.5.621

36.

Hansmann

S. E. M. T.

(2018). Evaluating the effectiveness of a self-compassion intervention to decrease state anxiety and increase state self-forgiveness and the role of trait self-compassion in this process [Unpublished master’s thesis, Utrecht University].

37.

Haskins

(2009). Teaching gratitude: Tools for inner peace and happiness. Montessori Life: A Publication of the American Montessori Society, 21(4), 26–32.

38.

Hefferon

Boniwell

(2011). Positive psychology: Theory, research and applications. Open University.

39.

Hermaen

Bhutto

Z. H.

(2020). Gratitude and forgiveness as predictors of subjective well-being among young adults in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 35(4), 725–738. https://doi.org/10.33824/PJPR.2020.35.4.39

40.

Tao

Zhu

(2016). Piloting forgiveness education: A comparison of the impact of two brief forgiveness education programmes among Chinese college students. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(3), 483–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-016-0273-6

41.

Jordan

J. V.

(1989). Relational development: Therapeutic implications of empathy and shame. In: Work in progress, no. 39. Stone Center Working Paper Series.

42.

Jordan

J. V.

(1991). Empathy and self-boundaries. In Jordan

J. V.

Kaplan

A. G.

Miller

J. B.

Stiver

I. P.

Surrey

J. L.

(Eds.), Women’s growth in connection: Writings from the stone center (pp. 67–80). Guilford.

43.

Kane

D. K.

Allen

G. K.

Ming

Smith

T. B.

Jackson

A. P.

Griner

Cutrer-Párraga

Richards

P. S.

(2021). Forgiveness and gratitude as mediators between religious commitment and well-Being among latter-day Saint Polynesian Americans. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 24(2), 195–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2021.1875205

44.

Karagöz

(2011). The effect of positive thinking training program on the adolescents? Level of optimism for the future, depression and cognitive distortion [Unpublished master’s thesis, Dokuz Eylül University, Graduate School of Educational Sciences].

45.

Karataş

Uzun

(2020). Do we feel gratitude or are we thankful? Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, (56), 411–440. https://doi.org/10.21764/maeuefd.769436

46.

Karataş

Uzun

(2021). The effect of perfectionism, loneliness and self-compassion in the prediction of adolescents’ tendency to forgive themselves, others and situations. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, (58), 248–289. https://doi.org/10.21764/maeuefd.877884

47.

Kaynak

(2020). Özgecilik [Altruism]. In Işık

Ş.

(Ed.), Okulda pozitif psikoloji uygulamaları [positive psychology applications in school] (5th ed., pp. 410–435). Pegem Academy.

48.

Keskinoğlu

M. Ş.

Akbulut

(2020). Pozitif psikolojide kişiler arası yaklaşım odaklı kavramları [Altruism]. In Ümmet

(Ed.), Tüm kavram ve yaklaşımlarıyla pozitif psikoloji [Positive psychology with all its concepts and approaches] (pp. 59–96). Pegem Academy.

49.

Kılıç

Tunç

(2020). The mediator role of forgiveness in the relationship between irrational beliefs and self-compassion among young adults. OPUS–International Journal of Society Researches, 16(Education and Society Special Issue), 6244–6270. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.735586

50.

Kılıç

(2013). Gerçek yaşam tadında: Gelişim dönemleri 3 - yetişkinlik ve yaşlılık [In real life taste: Developmental stages 3 - adulthood and old age] (1th ed.). Pegem Academy.

51.

Kline

R. B.

(2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Publications.

52.

Kocatepe

(2020). The effects of ‘thank you’ gratitude education program (TYGEP) on gratitude levels of school counselors [Unpublished master’s thesis, Uludağ University, Graduate School of Educational Sciences].

53.

Krebs

D. L.

(1970). Altruism: An examination of the concept and a review of the literature. Psychological Bulletin, 73(4), 258–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0028987

54.

Lee

J. Y.

Kim

(2021). Korean christian young adults’ religiosity affects post-traumatic growth: The mediation effects of forgiveness and gratitude. Journal of Religion and Health, 60, 3967–3977. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-021-01213-w

55.

McCullough

M. E.

(1995). Forgiveness as altruism: A social-psychological theory of interpersonal forgiveness and tests of its validity [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Commonwealth University].

56.

McCullough

M. E.

Bono

Root

L. M.

(2005). Religion and forgiveness. In Paloutzian

R. F.

Park

C. L.

(Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality (pp. 394–411). Guilford Press.

57.

McCullough

M. E.

Emmons

R. A.

Tsang

(2002). The grateful disposition: A conceptual and empirical topography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 112–127. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.112

58.

McCullough

M. E.

Rachal

K. C.

Sandage

S. J.

Worthington

Jr., E. L.

Brown

S. W.

Hight

T. L.

(1998). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships: II. Theoretical elaboration and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(6), 1586–1603. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.6.1586

59.

Miceli

Castelfranchi

(2011). Forgiveness: A cognitive‐motivational anatomy. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 41(3), 260–290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.2011.00465.x

60.

Miyagawa

Taniguchi

(2022). Self-compassion helps people forgive transgressors: Cognitive pathways of interpersonal transgressions. Self and Identity, 21(2), 244–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2020.1862904

61.

Naeem

Akhtar

(2016). Gratitude, altruism and forgiveness among young and middle aged working women. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 2(1), 87–97.

62.

Nedim-Bal

Topuz

(2015). The effect of psycho-training program on altruism levels of university students. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 4(4), 206–216.

63.

Neff

K. D.

(2003). Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a healthy attitude toward oneself. Self and Identity, 2(2), 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860309032

64.

Nembhard

(2017). The relationship between forgiveness, optimism, gratitude, and life satisfaction [Unpublished master’s thesis: Long Island University].

65.

Oliner

S. P.

(2005). Altruism, forgiveness, empathy, and intergroup apology. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 29(2), 8–39.

66.

Oliner

S. P.

(2009). Altruism, apology, forgiveness, and reconciliation as public sociology. In Jeffries

(Ed.), Handbook of public sociology (pp. 375–390). Rowman & Littlefield.

67.

Oral

Arslan

(2017). The investigation of university students’ forgiveness levels in terms of self-compassion, rumination and personality traits. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(9), 1447–1456. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050902

68.

Pandey

Tiwari

G. K.

Pandey

Mandal

S. P.

Mudgal

Parihar

Shukla

(2020). The relationship between self-esteem and self-forgiveness: Understanding the mediating role of positive and negative self-compassion. [Preprint]. https://doi.org/10.22541/au.158981530.01103201

69.

Parlak

Öksüz-Gül

(2021). Psychodrama oriented group therapy for forgiveness in university students. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 73, 101761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2021.101761

70.

Peker

(2013). Investigation of effect of human values-oriented psycho-training programme on problematic internet use and cyber bullying [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Sakarya University, Graduate School of Educational Sciences].

71.

Ramadhani

Sanjaya

Febriyanti

D. A.

Kustanti

E. R.

(2021). Predicting self-regulated learning among scholarship recipient students working on a thesis through forgiveness and its dimensions: The mediating role of optimism. In ICISPE 2020, Semarang, Indonesia, 9–10 October 2020. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.9-10-2020.2304752

72.

Ramsey

J. C.

(2019). Gratitude and forgiveness as moderators of depression, cognitive distortions, and perceived peer relationships in late adolescence [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Trevecca Nazarene University].

73.

Saeighi-Mameghani

Taşan

Saylan

(2020). Examination of university students’ levels of selfcompassion, philanthropy and forgiveness. Journal of Social and Human Sciences, 12(2), 220–244.

74.

Şahin

(2009). Hopelessness levels of students studying at faculty of education. Selçuk University Journal of Ahmet Keleşoğlu Education Faculty, 27, 271–286.

75.

Sanlav

(2016). Forgiveness and religious attitudes as the predictor of altruism [Unpublished master’s thesis, Gaziosmanpaşa University, Graduate School of Educational Sciences].

76.

Sarıcaoğlu

Arslan

(2019). Effects of the mindful self-compassion program on the university student’s self-compassion. MANAS Journal of Social Studies, 8(3), 2381–2399. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.522935

77.

Satıcı

S. A.

Uysal

Akın

(2014). Forgiveness and vengeance: The mediating role of gratitude. Psychological Reports, 114(1), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.2466/07.09.PR0.114k11w9

78.

Scheier

M. F.

Carver

C. S.

(1985). Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 4(3), 219–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.4.3.219

79.

Scheier

M. F.

Carver

C. S.

(1992). Effects of optimism on psychological and physical well-being: Theoretical overview and empirical update. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 16(2), 201–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01173489

80.

Seligman

M. E. P.

Csikszentmihalyi

(2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.5

81.

Shabizade

Sadeghi

Bonab

B. G.

Motamedi

(2016). Quality of romantic attachment, forgiveness, and altruism in parents of children with special needs and parents of regular school children. Journal of Educational, Health and Community Psychology, 5(3), 15–34. https://doi.org/10.12928/jehcp.v5i3.6161

82.

Singh

Sharma

(2018). Effect of forgiveness on psychological well‐being. Indian Journal of Positive Psychology, 9(2), 258–262. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/effect-forgiveness-on-psychological-well-being/docview/2158128415/se-2?accountid=37146

83.

Sivri

F. Z.

(2019). The investigation of relationships between forgiveness, optimism and subjective vitality in adults [Unpublished master’s thesis, Necmettin Erbakan University, Graduate School of Educational Sciences].

84.

Skoda

A. M.

(2011). The relation between self-compassion, depression, and forgiveness of others [Unpublished master’s thesis: University of Dayton].

85.

Thompson

L. Y.

Snyder

C. R.

Hoffman

Michael

S. T.

Rasmussen

H. N.

Billings

L. S.

Heinze

Neufeld

J. E.

Shorey

H. S.

Roberts

J. C.

Roberts

D. E.

(2005). Dispositional forgiveness of self, others, and situations. Journal of Personality, 73(2), 313–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00311.x

86.

Toprak

T. B.

(2022). Effectiveness of religious psycho-education integrated cognitive behavioral group therapy in the treatment of the patients with religious obsessions and compulsions [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Hasan Kalyoncu University, Graduate School of Education].

87.

Tura

(2019). The relationship between religiosity forgiveness psychological well-being [Unpublished master’s thesis, Marmara University, Graduate School of Social Sciences].

88.

Ümmet

Ekşi

Otrar

(2013). The study of development of altruism scale. Journal of Values Education, 11(26), 301–321.

89.

Ümmet

İme

(2020). Gelişimsel pozitif psikoloji kavramları [Developmental positive psychology concepts]. In Ümmet

(Ed.), Tüm kavram ve yaklaşımlarıyla pozitif psikoloji [Positive psychology with all its concepts and approaches] (1th ed., pp. 115–142). Pegem Academy.

90.

Uzun

(2024). Hope and uncertainty among Turkish adults: Pathways to subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness and Health, 4(2), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.47602/johah.v4i2.86

91.

Uzun

Arslan

(2024). Rumination and forgiveness in emerging adults: Mediating role of mindfulness and humility. Psychological Reports. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941241256641

92.

Uzun

Arslan

(2025). Adverse childhood experiences, forgiveness, rumination, intolerance of uncertainty, and social anxiety in emerging adults: A multi-mediation analysis. Psychological Reports. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941251363472

93.

Uzun

Karataş

(2023). The examination of the mediator role of optimism, self-compassion, altruism and gratitude in the relationship between cognitive distortions and forgiveness of emerging adults. Emerging Adulthood, 11(4), 845–868. https://doi.org/10.1177/21676968231171200

94.

Vural-Batık

Afyonkale-Talay

(2021). The effect of a group psychoeducation program for improving forgiveness on the forgiveness levels of psychological counselor candidates. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 51, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.9779/pauefd.686232

95.

Wade

N. G.

Bailey

D. C.

Shaffer

(2005). Helping clients heal: Does forgiveness make a difference? Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 36(6), 634–641. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.36.6.634

96.

Wohl

M. J.

DeShea

Wahkinney

R. L.

(2008). Looking within: Measuring state self-forgiveness and its relationship to psychological well-being. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 40(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1037/0008-400x.40.1.1.1

97.

Wood

A. M.

Maltby

Stewart

Joseph

(2008). Conceptualizing gratitude and appreciation as a unitary personality trait. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(3), 621–632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.09.028

98.

Worthington

E. L.

Jr. (1998). Empirical research in forgiveness: Looking backward, looking forward. In Worthington

E. L.

Jr. (Ed.), Dimensions of forgiveness: Psychological research and theological perspectives (pp. 321–339). Templeton Foundation Press.

99.

Chi

Zeng

Lin

(2019). Roles of anger and rumination in the relationship between self-compassion and forgiveness. Mindfulness, 10(2), 272–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-018-0971-7

100.

Wulandari

Megawati

F. E.

(2020, January). The role of forgiveness on psychological well-being in adolescents: A review. In 5th ASEAN conference on psychology, counselling, and humanities (ACPCH 2019) (pp. 99–103). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200120.022

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.11 MB