Next Article in Journal
The Religious Component in Contemporary Russian Imperialism
Previous Article in Journal
The Church Amidst the War of Attrition: Ukrainian Evangelical Community in Search of a New Mission Paradigm
Previous Article in Special Issue
Pathways to Flourishing: The Roles of Self- and Divine Forgiveness in Mitigating the Adverse Effects of Stress and Substance Use among Adults in Trinidad and Tobago
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Religions
Volume 15
Issue 9
10.3390/rel15091137
religions-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Association between Religiosity and Forgiveness: Testing a Moderated Mediation Model of Self-Compassion and Adverse Childhood Experiences

by
Justyna Mróz
1,*,
Loren Toussaint
2 and
Kinga Kaleta
1
1
Department of Psychology, Jan Kochanowski University in Kielce, 25-429 Kielce, Poland
2
Department of Psychology, Luther College, Decorah, IA 52101, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Religions 2024, 15(9), 1137; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15091137
Submission received: 6 August 2024 / Revised: 1 September 2024 / Accepted: 11 September 2024 / Published: 21 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Intersections of Religiousness/Spirituality and Forgiveness and Implications for Mental Health and Well-Being)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
(1) Background: Forgiveness is one way to deal with negative experiences. The protective–protective model and the resource-caravan model assume that positive resources come together and support coping. In this study, we tested the association of religiosity, decisional and emotional forgiveness, and the indirect associations running through self-compassion. In addition, negative experiences in childhood were considered as a moderator of the indirect model of associations. (2) Methods: The sample consisted of 309 participants. The measures included the Religious Meaning System Questionnaire, the Decisional Forgiveness Scale, the Emotional Forgiveness Scale, the Self-Compassion Scale, and the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. SEM and PROCESS models were applied to test the moderated mediation model. (3) Results: The results partially supported our moderated mediation model. Self-warmth mediated the associations between religiosity and decisional forgiveness and between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions. Self-coldness mediated the relationship between religiosity and emotional forgiveness. The relationship between religiosity and forgiveness was fully mediated by self-compassion when ACEs were low. (4) Conclusions: Both religiosity and self-compassion are assets for forgiveness, and their influence is more pronounced in individuals with more negative childhood experiences.

1. Introduction

The harm experienced in childhood has the potential to traumatize individuals for the rest of their lives (e.g., Felitti and Anda 2010;). The consequences of adverse childhood experiences affect physical health (Bellis et al. 2014; Hughes et al. 2017), mental health (Rossegger et al. 2009), and relationships (Gąsior and Chodkiewicz 2020). In order to deal with injustice, victims can apply different strategies—seeking justice, avoiding the perpetrator, revenge, or forgiveness. The benefits of forgiveness can reduce the costs of harm (McCullough et al. 2013). Models such as Zimmerman’s protective–protective model (Zimmerman et al. 2013) or Hobfoll’s resource caravan model (Hobfoll 2012) point to the supportive effect of combined resources in order to cope with unfavorable circumstances. In the present study, a moderated mediation model was tested where the association between religiosity and forgiveness was predicted to be indirect through self-compassion. Levels of childhood trauma were expected to moderate this model.

1.1. Religiosity and Forgiveness

Religion plays a vital role in shaping individuals’ beliefs about themselves and the world and in providing understanding of both ordinary and remarkable events. Religion’s role is particularly essential in helping individuals navigate difficult times and ponder existential matters. Research shows that people often depend on their meaning systems to find direction and meaning in stressful situations (Park 2013).
In the present study, we concentrated on religiosity as a religious meaning system. Religion is one of the more comprehensive systems of meaning, relating as it does to other universal sources of meaning-making, such as ethical norms, values, family, and relationships (Silberman 2005; Krok 2014). Religion interprets and clarifies reality in terms of meaning and purpose (Krok 2014). A religious meaning system can support and uncover the hidden significance of events, even those that are complex and hard to accept, like ACEs. Understanding situations, especially difficult ones that hurt an individual, by engaging a religious system of meaning can lead to forgiveness (Haikola 2023). The individual coping with experienced injustice or violence gives different meaning to these events. A religious system of meaning can help both to decide to forgive and to transform negative emotions towards the perpetrator into positive ones.
Forgiveness is a widely researched concept that has the potential to alleviate distress caused by harm (Koutsos et al. 2008; McCullough and Witvliet 2002; Riek and Mania 2012). Forgiveness of others is an intraindividual process that leads to a change in emotions, behavior, and motivation towards the offender from negative to neutral and positive (Worthington 2019). In our study, we related to components of forgiveness proposed by Worthington et al. (2007)—decisional and emotional forgiveness. Decisional forgiveness is a behavioral statement of abandoning the expression of anger and the search for revenge against the wrongdoer, instead treating him or her as a valuable person (Worthington 2019). Emotional forgiveness involves changing negative emotions, such as anger, hatred, malice, and resentment, in a neutral or even positive direction. Researchers point to two dimensions of emotional forgiveness: reducing negative emotions and increasing the presence of positive emotions (Hook et al. 2012). Emerging positive emotions, such as compassion, pity, or love towards the perpetrator, can be the final stage of emotional forgiveness (Worthington 2019). The differences between reducing unforgiveness and developing positive attitudes towards the wrongdoer are also highlighted by other researchers (Fincham et al. 2004).
The links between religiosity and forgiveness have previously been tested in several studies (Alaedein-Zawawi 2015; Edara 2015; Schultz et al. 2014; Tsarenko and Tojib 2012; Toussaint et al. 2012). For example, Park et al. (2014) found positive relationships between religious identity, positive religious/spiritual coping, and forgiveness in advanced chronic heart failure patients. In other research among emerging Muslim adults in Jordan, religious commitment correlated with trait and state forgiveness (Alaedein-Zawawi 2015). Individuals with higher levels of religious commitment demonstrated less motivation toward revenge and avoidance of the wrongdoer and higher levels of disposition to forgive. Furthermore, forgiveness mediated associations of religious commitment with life satisfaction and depression. No study, however, has examined mediators between the religious meaning system and decisional and emotional forgiveness.

1.2. Self-Compassion as a Mediator

Self-compassion is a possible variable in understanding the link between religious meaning and forgiveness. Self-compassion, as defined by Neff (2023), involves showing oneself kindness instead of self-criticism, recognizing that one’s experiences are universal, and maintaining mindfulness of one’s painful thoughts and emotions without becoming overwhelmed by them. Self-compassion involves multiple elements working together to relieve suffering. Self-compassion spans two dimensions: self-warmth and self-coldness. Self-warmth includes self-kindness, common humanity, and mindfulness, whereas self-coldness involves self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification (Neff 2023). Self-warmth and self-coldness are distinct constructs, not simply two ends of the same spectrum, and they relate to outcomes differentially (Brenner et al. 2018).
Self-warmth is in line with positive psychology and promotes the protective nature of self-compassion. Gratitude, hope, and self-esteem are examples of positive variables that are associated with the self-warmth component of self-compassion. Conversely, self-coldness is associated with negative variables, such as anxiety disorders, depression, and other mental health problems (Brophy et al. 2020). Previous research indicates a link between self-compassion and coping with various difficult events, such as childhood abuse (Wu et al. 2019; Barlow et al. 2017), sexual assault (Hamrick and Owens 2019), natural disasters (Allen et al. 2024; Yuhan et al. 2021), and loss of a child (Khursheed and Shahnawaz 2020). Additionally, self-compassion is related to lower levels of procrastination (Yang et al. 2023) and lower levels of depression, anxiety and stress (Wollast et al. 2019), while it is positively associated with forgiveness (Miyagawa and Taniguchi 2022; Booker and Perlin 2021; Wu et al. 2019), resilience (Aydin Sünbül and Güneri 2019), and posttraumatic growth (Khursheed and Shahnawaz 2020).
Recently, scholars have focused increasingly on the mediating role of self-compassion in associations between religiousness, health, and positive psychological outcomes (Miyagawa and Kanemasa 2023). For example, Homan (2014) studied the mediating role of self-compassion between attachment to God and mental health (depression, anxiety, and life satisfaction) and found that insecure attachment to God was related to low self-compassion and enhanced depression and anxiety symptoms.
Given these findings, an examination of how self-compassion mediates the link between religious meaning and forgiveness will contribute to more complete explanations of how individuals cope with wrongdoing.

1.3. ACEs as a Moderator

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) include different forms of maltreatment (i.e., emotional and/or physical abuse, neglect) and household dysfunction (e.g., household substance abuse, mental illness, incarceration). ACEs can have a profound effect on individuals’ overall belief systems, including their religious or spiritual beliefs (Walker et al. 2009; McCormick et al. 2017). Research on religion and trauma reveals a complex relationship between traumatic experiences and religious beliefs. While religious beliefs can support trauma recovery (Schaefer et al. 2008), trauma can also significantly impact religious beliefs, either strengthening or weakening them (Leo et al. 2021). Trauma often prompts existential questions about life’s meaning, morality, and the nature of good and evil, challenging core belief systems and religious assumptions (Boehnlein 2007). Religious frameworks can provide a means for survivors to construct meaningful narratives of their traumatic experiences, potentially aiding in recovery (Sremac and Ganzevoort 2019). However, LeTendre and Reed (2017) found that adverse childhood experiences increase the risk of developing substance use disorders in adulthood, and religiosity does not moderate this relationship. A limited number of studies have previously examined ACEs in relation to forgiveness. However, a previous study found that negative interaction with parents inversely correlated with dispositional forgiveness of others and forgiveness of self in emerging adults (Garthe et al. 2018). Additionally, Rivera and Fincham (2015) found that interpersonal violence perpetrated by parents was negatively correlated with the capacity to forgive. Skolnick et al.’s (2023) study shows that forgiveness of others and self acts as a buffer in the transmission of relational trauma between generations. Parents with experience of ACEs who had higher levels of forgiveness of self and others passed on lower ACEs to their children. In summary, ACEs appear to be related to both religiousness and forgiveness, and the effects are not well understood. One possibility is that religious meaning may promote forgiveness through self-compassion, but only when ACEs are high and the demand for combined resources is necessary.

1.4. The Aim of the Study

Based on the above literature review, this study had two goals. First, we hypothesized that higher levels of religiosity would be associated with higher levels of forgiveness (decisional and emotional) through higher self-compassion (higher self-warmth and lower self-coldness). Second, we hypothesized that ACEs would moderate the indirect association between religiosity and forgiveness via self-compassion. We expected ACEs to moderate the connections between self-warmth/self-coldness and forgiveness as well as between religiosity and forgiveness. Following the theoretical predications of Zimmerman et al. (2013) and Hobfoll (2012), we expected that higher ACEs would stimulate a “resource caravan” and offer the opportunity for religious meaning to be positively and indirectly associated through self-compassion with both decisional and emotional forgiveness.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

We used a sample of 459 adult participants from Poland. However, for the final analyses, 309 individuals who indicated in the survey that they had experienced childhood abuse from a close family member were included. Female respondents accounted for 64% (n = 209) of the sample, male 36% (n = 96), and four participants indicated other genders. The subjects’ age ranged from 18 to 68 years, with a mean of 30.88 (SD = 11.87).
Regarding the level of education, 1% of the sample had completed primary education, 1% had completed vocational education, 41.4% had completed secondary education, 22.7% had a university degree, and 34.2% had graduated from college. The respondents were requested to participate in the study voluntarily—no remuneration was offered to them.

2.2. Measurements

Five measures were used that have all been validated for use in Poland.

2.2.1. Religiosity

The Religious Meaning System Questionnaire developed by Krok (2009, 2011) measures religiosity understood in terms of meaning and two main dimensions: (1) religious orientation and (2) religious meaning. The total score of the two dimensions was used in the study. The questionnaire contains 20 statements: for example, “When reflecting on my life, I refer to religious norms.” Participants responded on a 7-point Likert-type scale from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree). In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha for the RMSQ was 0.97.

2.2.2. Decision to Forgive Scale (DTFS)

(Davis et al. 2015; Mróz et al. 2022) was used to assess decisional forgiveness. The DTFS consists of 5 items (e.g., I made a commitment to forgive him or her) rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1—strongly disagree to 5—strongly agree). In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha for the DTFS was 0.93.

2.2.3. Emotional Forgiveness Scale (EFS)

(Hook et al. 2012; Mróz et al. 2022) was used to assess the intensity of emotional forgiveness and peace of mind in relation to a particular offence. The measure consists of 8 items (e.g., I feel sympathy toward him or her) rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1—strongly disagree to 5—strongly agree). Four items measure positive emotions toward the offender (EFS-PP), and four items measure reduced negative emotions toward the offender (EFS-RN). For the current sample, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the EFS was 0.81.

2.2.4. Self-Compassion Scale (SCS)

Self-compassion is typically assessed using the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS) (Neff 2003). The original SCS has 26 items measuring six components of self-compassion in two dimensions. The first dimension, self-warmth, includes self-kindness, common humanity, and mindfulness. The second dimension, self-coldness, includes self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification. Items are rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha for the SCS was 0.95.

2.2.5. Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ)

Adverse childhood experiences were assessed using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ) (Bernstein et al. 2003). The measure consists of 28 items and five subscales (emotional abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional neglect, and physical neglect), but we used only a total score. The items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1—never true to 5—very true. In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha for the CTQ was 0.93.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

We calculated Pearson’s zero-order correlations using IBM SPSS Statistics 26. We then utilized JASP to test a mediation model and Hayes’ PROCESS macro (Hayes 2013) to test the moderated mediation model (model 15), employing bootstrapping with 5000 subsamples and a 95% confidence interval. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05, and when the 95% confidence intervals for an indirect or moderated effect did not include zero, the effect was considered statistically significant (MacKinnon et al. 2004). Fit indices for acceptably-fitting latent models included χ2, RSMEA (<0.08), SRMR (<0.08), TLI (>0.90) and CFI (>0.90).

3. Results

3.1. Correlation

The results of the correlational estimates are shown in Table 1. Religiosity positively correlated with decisional forgiveness, emotional forgiveness, and self-warmth. Additionally, religiosity inversely related to self-coldness and adverse childhood experiences. Decisional and emotional forgiveness related positively to self-warmth but negatively to self-coldness and ACEs. Self-warmth negatively and self-coldness positively correlated with ACEs.

3.2. Mediation Model

We hypothesized that self-compassion would mediate the relationship between religiosity and forgiveness. Self-compassion was represented by self-warmth (self-kindness, common humanity, mindfulness) and self-coldness (self-judgment, isolation, over-identification). Religiosity combined two subscales—orientation and sense. The different types of forgiveness, in turn, were loaded by individual items.
First, we tested the model using decisional forgiveness as the outcome variable (see Figure 1). The structural equation model regarding the mediating role of self-compassion (self-warmth and self-coldness) in the relationship between religiosity and decisional forgiveness resulted in a good fit to the data: χ2 (N = 309) = 133.477, p < 0.001; RSMEA = 0.064; RMSEA CI: 0.050–0.078; SRMR = 0.047; TLI = 0.971; and CFI = 0.978.
Mediation analysis revealed a significant indirect effect (b = 0.072, 95% CI [0.002—0.014]) of religiosity on decisional forgiveness through self-warmth. The indirect effect through self-coldness was non-significant. Religiosity showed a significant total effect on decisional forgiveness (b = 0.357, 95% CI [0.019 0.038]). Higher levels of religiosity predicted reported higher decisional forgiveness directly, and also indirectly via higher levels of self-warmth.
Second, we tested a model with emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions as the outcome variable (see Figure 2). The structural equation model regarding the mediating role of self-compassion (self-warmth and self-coldness) in the relationship between religiosity and the presence of positive emotions resulted in a good fit to the data: χ2 (N = 309) = 113.936, p < 0.001; RSMEA = 0.067; RMSEA CI: [0.051–0.083]; SRMR = 0.039; TLI = 0.964; and CFI = 0.974.
Mediation analysis showed significant indirect effects of religiosity on emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions through self-warmth (b = 0.068, 95% CI [0.002—0.015]) and self-coldness (b = −0.056, 95% CI [−0.011—−0.001]). Religiosity showed a significant total effect on emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions (b = 0.154, 95% CI [0.001—0.025]).
Third, we tested a model with emotional forgiveness—reduction in negative emotions as the outcome variable (see Figure 3). The structural equation model regarding the mediating role of self-compassion (self-warmth and self-coldness) in the relationship between religiosity and reduced negative emotions presented a good fit to the data: χ2 (N = 309) = 104.625, p < 0.001; RSMEA = 0.062; RMSEA CI: 0.046–0.078; SRMR = 0.040; TLI = 0.965; and CFI = 0.974.
The indirect effect via self-coldness was significant (b = 0.04, 95% CI [0.000—0.007]). Religiosity showed a significant total effect on emotional forgiveness—reduction in negative emotions (b = 0.22, 95% CI [0.005—0.019]). Higher levels of religiosity predicted reported higher emotional forgiveness—reduction in negative emotions directly, and also indirectly via lower levels of self-coldness.

3.3. Moderated Mediation

We hypothesized that the indirect effect of religiosity on decisional and emotional forgiveness through self-warmth and self-coldness would be contingent on adverse childhood experiences. We assumed that ACEs would moderate the paths between self-warmth/self-coldness and forgiveness and between religiosity and forgiveness. The examination of these hypotheses used the PROCESS Model 15 macro specified by Hayes (2013), in which the association of religiosity with forgiveness via self-warmth and self-coldness was moderated by ACEs. Table 2 presents the conditional direct and indirect associations between religiosity, self-compassion, and forgiveness according to levels of ACEs.
The relationship between religiosity and decisional forgiveness was mediated by self-compassion (self-warmth and self-coldness), and this association was moderated by ACEs (ΔR2 = 0.23, F(300,7) = 12,743 p < 0.001). The relationship of religiosity to decisional forgiveness via self-warmth was moderated by ACEs (b = 0.036, 95% CI [0.000–0.077]). For individuals with low ACEs, self-warmth did not mediate the religiosity—decisional forgiveness path (b = 0.01, 95 % CI [−0.035–0.061]), but for individuals with average (b = 0.046, 95% CI [0.013–0.092]) and high (b = 0.083, 95% CI [0.027–0.155]) ACEs, self-warmth significantly mediated the relationship between religiosity and decisional forgiveness. The relationship of religiosity to decisional forgiveness via self-coldness was moderated by ACEs (b = −0.027, 95% CI [−0.058–−0.002]). The results showed that for individuals with low and average ACEs, self-coldness did not mediate the relationship between religiosity and decisional forgiveness (see Table 2), but for individuals with high ACEs, self-coldness did mediate the relationship between religiosity and decisional forgiveness (b = −0.047, 95% CI [−0.099–−0.007]). In sum, these results suggested that ACEs moderated the relationship between religiosity and decisional forgiveness via self-warmth and self-coldness. As ACEs increased, the indirect association of religiosity through self-warmth and self-coldness with decisional forgiveness increased in strength.
The indirect relationship between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions via self-compassion was moderated by ACEs (∆R2 = 0.15, F(300,7) = 7.394 p < 0.001).
The relationship of religiosity to emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions via self-warmth was moderated by ACEs (b = 0.036, 95% CI [0.001–0.074]) The results showed that for individuals with low ACEs, self-warmth did not mediate the link between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions (b = −0.001, 95% CI [−0.049–0.055]). For people with average (b = 0.035, 95% CI 0.001–0.085) and high (b = 0.071, 95% CI [0.017–0.137]) ACEs, self-warmth significantly mediated the relationship between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions.
The relationship of religiosity to emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions via self-coldness was moderated by ACEs (b = −0.031, 95% CI [−0.064–−0.004]). For individuals with low ACEs, self-coldness did not mediate the link between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions (b = −0.015, 95% CI [−0.062–0.020]). For people with average (b = −0.046, 95% CI [−0.094–−0.011]) and high (b = −0.077, 95% CI [−0.143–−0.021]) ACEs, self-coldness mediated the link between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions (see Table 2). In sum, these results suggested that at average and high levels of ACEs, self-compassion mediated the link between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions.
The relationship between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—reduction in negative emotions via self-compassion was moderated by ACEs (∆R2 = 0.21, F(300,7) = 11.531, p < 0.001).
The relationship of religiosity to emotional forgiveness—reduction in negative emotions via self-warmth was not moderated by ACEs (b = 0.021, 95% CI [−0.018–0.063]). The relationship of religiosity to emotional forgiveness—reduction in negative emotions via self-coldness was not moderated by ACEs (b = −0.011, 95% CI [−0.038–0.017]). In sum, these results suggested that ACEs did not moderate the indirect relationship between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—reduction in negative emotions via self-warmth and self-coldness.

4. Discussion

The purpose of this study was to assess a moderated mediation model of the relationships between religiosity, self-compassion, and forgiveness, especially taking into account levels of adverse childhood experiences as a potential moderator.
First, the outcomes of this study partially support the proposed mediation model, demonstrating the following: (1) the relationship between religiosity and decisional forgiveness was mediated by self-warmth; (2) the relationship between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions was mediated by self-warmth and self-coldness; and (3) the relationship between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—reduction in negative emotions was mediated by self-coldness. The results obtained are partly consistent with previous studies; Bodok-Mulderij et al. (2023) found a mediating role for self-compassion between religiosity and well-being and between religiosity and depression and anxiety. In the case of the former, self-compassion had a supportive character, and in the latter case, a protective character, in a Dutch-language population. However, it must be recognized that previous research has not addressed the mediating role of self-compassion between religiosity and forgiveness. Therefore, our results provide new insights into the relationships between these variables. Our findings suggest that both religiosity and self-compassion (as a mediator) are key partners in the pursuit of forgiveness. Strengthening these resources can lead to a decision to forgive, as well as leading to forgiveness on an emotional level. Strengthening self-warmth is important for both decisional forgiveness and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions. Diminishing self-coldness is important for emotional forgiveness—reduction in negative emotions.
Although previous research has supported self-coldness as a mediator (Brpohy et al. 2020; Lu et al. 2022), it is self-warmth that has been shown to play a mediating role between religiosity and forgiveness. This discrepancy may be explained by the fact that self-coldness mediates relationships between variables relating to negative aspects of functioning, e.g., attachment-related avoidance and depressive symptoms (Brophy et al. 2020). In contrast, self-warmth appears to be important for enhancing positive resources, such as religiosity and forgiveness. Positive resources cluster to support the emergence of new resources even more strongly. This is consistent with the resource caravan model proposed by Hobfoll (2012), that is, a combination of supporting variables fosters positive functioning.
Our second hypothesis referred to a moderated mediation model and predicted that ACEs would moderate the religiosity → self-compassion → forgiveness pathway. We assumed that ACEs would moderate the paths between self-compassion and forgiveness and between religiosity and forgiveness. The models show that average and high levels of ACEs significantly moderate the associations between religiosity and forgiveness (decisional forgiveness and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions) mediated by self-warmth and self-coldness. Under better conditions, the need for multiple resources to handle difficulties may not be necessary. The previous results on how religiosity relates to ACEs were nuanced and depended on the definition of religiousness/spirituality in the study (Kucharska 2020). For example, McCormick et al. (2017) and Janů et al. (2022) showed that, following childhood or adolescent trauma, individuals may face distress or conflict in different areas of religion/spirituality. Bierman (2005) discovered a negative association between paternal abuse and maternal abuse and religious involvement and religious self-perception. However, only paternal abuse showed a negative association with spiritual self-perception in participants of the Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) study. Earlier research indicates that self-compassion plays a protective role in mitigating ACEs. In line with previous studies (e.g., Hazzard et al. 2021), our findings reveal the potential of forgiveness through self-compassion to mitigate the impact of severe negative childhood experiences. Additionally, research conducted by Barlow et al. (2017) reveals that self-compassion can provide support in reducing PTSD symptoms among individuals who have undergone trauma. The analyses found no moderation of the religiosity–self-compassion–forgiveness relationship by ACEs in reducing negative emotions associated with forgiveness. This result confirms the validity of the division between positive forgiveness (an increase in positive references toward the wrongdoer) and negative forgiveness (a reduction in negative references toward the wrongdoer) (Fincham et al. 2004). It further illustrates that forgiveness is a complicated concept that demands a multidimensional evaluation.

5. Limitations

The present study provides a novel examination of religiosity, self-compassion, forgiveness, and ACEs, but it is not without limitations. First, the design was cross-sectional in nature, so determining a cause-and-effect relationship is not possible. Confirming this causality requires the implementation of longitudinal designs or experiments in future studies. Second, the sample was a middle-class sample of Polish adults, and these participants are unlikely to represent adults from other cultures. Last, these were healthy adult participants, not trauma patients. The moderating effect of trauma might look different in traumatized patient populations. The results obtained in this study are consistent with theories such as the protective–protective model proposed by Zimmerman et al. (2013) and Hobfoll’s resource caravan model (Hobfoll 2012), whose premise is the pooling of resources or assets to cope with unfavorable circumstances. In our case, religiosity and self-compassion can be treated as assets because of their intrinsic nature. Both religiosity and self-warmth are assets that lead to forgiveness, but when the individuals have higher levels of ACEs, their protective role is stronger than when there were fewer negative experiences in childhood. To be clear, the protective–protective and resource caravan models find support for the development of forgiveness as an outcome. That is, religiosity and self-compassion work together in a protective–protective or caravanning fashion to promote forgiveness (a third protective resource), and when combined, these might offer a network of protective assets to provide resilience against the negative outcomes of life stress, ACEs, or other difficult experiences (e.g., low support). It remains crucial that we continue to understand the development, collection, mechanisms, and use of resilience resources toward the end of promoting human flourishing.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.M., L.T. and K.K.; methodology, J.M.; validation, J.M.; formal analysis, J.M.; resources, J.M. and L.T.; data curation, J.M.; writing—original draft preparation, J.M., L.T. and K.K.; writing—review and editing, J.M. and L.T.; visualization, J.M.; project administration, J.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the Committee for Ethics in Scientific Research of the Department Pedagogy and Psychology, Jan Kochanowski University in Kielce (KEBN/WPiP/UJK/2/2022).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The dataset presented in this study is available on reasonable request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Alaedein-Zawawi, Jehad. 2015. Religious commitment and psychological well-being: Forgiveness as a mediator. European Scientific Journal 11: 117–41. [Google Scholar]
  2. Allen, Ashley B., Heather Littleton, Steve Bistricky, Kayla Benson, Tyler Cox, and Charles C. Benight. 2024. Self-compassion reduces posttraumatic stress symptom severity in hurricane survivors via perceived social support. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy. online ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Aydin Sünbül, Zeynep, and Oya Yerin Güneri. 2019. The relationship between mindfulness and resilience: The mediating role of self compassion and emotion regulation in a sample of underprivileged Turkish adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences 139: 337–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Barlow, M. Rose, Rachel E. G. Goldsmith Turow, and James Gerhart. 2017. Trauma appraisals, emotion regulation difficulties, and self-compassion predict posttraumatic stress symptoms following childhood abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect 65: 37–47. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bellis, Mark A., Karen Hughes, Nicola Leckenby, Lisa Jones, Adriana Baban, Margarita Kachaeva, Robertas Povilaitis, Iveta Pudule, Gentiana Qirjako, Betül Ulukol, and et al. 2014. Adverse childhood experiences and associations with health-harming behaviors in young adults: Surveys in eight eastern European countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 92: 641–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bernstein, David P., Judith A. Stein, Michael D. Newcomb, Edward Walker, David Pogge, Taruna Ahluvalia, John Stokes, Leonard Handelsman, Martha Medrano, David Desmond, and et al. 2003. Development and Validation of a Brief Screening Version of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. Child Abuse & Neglect 27: 169–90. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bierman, Alex. 2005. The effects of childhood maltreatment on adult religiosity and spirituality: Rejecting God the Father because of abusive fathers? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 44: 349–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Bodok-Mulderij, Ineke, Hanneke Schaap-Jonker, Anneleen Klaassen-Dekker, Jantine Boselie, and Nele Jacobs. 2023. The relation between religion/spirituality and mental health is mediated by self-compassion: Evidence from two longitudinal studies in the Dutch-speaking general population. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality 15: 407–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Boehnlein, James K. 2007. Religion and Spirituality After Trauma. In Understanding Trauma. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 259–74. [Google Scholar]
  10. Booker, Jordan A., and Joshua D. Perlin. 2021. Using multiple character strengths to inform young adults’ self-compassion: The potential of hope and forgiveness. The Journal of Positive Psychology 16: 379–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Brenner, Rachel, David Vogel, Dan Lannin, Kelsey Engel, Andrew Seidman, and Patrick Heath. 2018. Do self-compassion and self-coldness distinctly relate to distress and well-being? A theoretical model of self-relating. Journal of Counseling Psychology 65: 346–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Brophy, Kyla, Elmar Brähler, Andreas Hinz, Silke Schmidt, and Annett Körner. 2020. The role of self-compassion in the relationship between attachment, depression, and quality of life. Journal of Affective Disorders 260: 45–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Davis, Don E., Joshua N. Hook, Daryl R. Van Tongeren, Cirleen DeBlaere, Kenneth G. Rice, and Everett L. Worthington, Jr. 2015. Making a decision to forgive. Journal of Counseling Psychology 62: 280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Edara, Inna R. 2015. Mediating role of individualism-collectivism in spirituality’s relation to motivational forgiveness. Asia Pacific Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy 6: 28–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Felitti, Vincent J., and Robert F. Anda. 2010. The relationship of adverse childhood experiences to adult medical disease, psychiatric disorders and sexual behavior: Implications for healthcare. In The Impact of Early Life Trauma on Health and Disease: The Hidden Epidemic. Edited by Ruth A. Lanius, Eric Vermetten and Clare Pain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 77–87. [Google Scholar]
  16. Fincham, Frank D., Steven R. H. Beach, and Joanne Davila. 2004. Forgiveness and conflict resolution in marriage. Journal of Family Psychology 18: 72–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Garthe, Rachel C., Brandon J. Griffin, Everett L. Worthington, Jr., Elizabeth A. Goncy, Terri N. Sullivan, Jennifer A. Coleman, Don E. Davis, Charlotte O. Kwakye-Nuako, Thapelo Mokushane, Solomon Makola, and et al. 2018. Negative interpersonal interactions and dating abuse perpetration: The mediating role of dispositional forgivingness. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 33: 2311–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Gąsior, Krzysztof, and Jan Chodkiewicz. 2020. Adverse childhood experiences in women with externalisation and internalisation disorders. Current Issues in Personality Psychology 8: 119–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Haikola, Anne. 2023. Conversations with God: How are religion and spirituality used to make sense of forgiveness? Pastoral Psychol 72: 693–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Hamrick, Lauren A., and Gina P. Owens. 2019. Exploring the mediating role of self-blame and coping in the relationships between self-compassion and distress in females following the sexual assault. Journal of Clinical Psychology 75: 766–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Hayes, Andrew F. 2013. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  22. Hazzard, Vivienne M., Cynthia Yoon, Rebecca L. Emery, Susan M. Mason, Ross D. Crosby, Stephen A. Wonderlich, and Dianne Neumark-Sztainer. 2021. Adverse childhood experiences in relation to mood-, weight-, and eating-related outcomes in emerging adulthood: Does self-compassion play a buffering role? Child Abuse & Neglect 122: 105307. [Google Scholar]
  23. Hobfoll, Stevan E. 2012. Conservation of resources and disaster in cultural context: The caravans and passageways for resources. Psychiatry: Interpersonal & Biological Processes 75: 227–32. [Google Scholar]
  24. Homan, Kistin J. 2014. A mediation model linking attachment to God, self-compassion, and mental health. Mental Health, Religion & Culture 17: 977–89. [Google Scholar]
  25. Hook, Joshua N., Everett L. Worthington, Jr., Shawn O. Utsey, Don E. Davis, and Jeni L. Burnette. 2012. Collectivistic self-construal and forgiveness. Counseling and Values 57: 109–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hughes, Karen, Mark A. Bellis, Katherine A. Hardcastle, Dinesh Sethi, Alexander Butchart, Christopher Mikton, Lisa Jones, and Michael P. Dunne. 2017. The effect of multiple adverse childhood experiences on health: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Public Health 2: e356–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Janů, Anna, Klara Malinakova, Alice Kosarkova, and Peter Tavel. 2022. Associations of childhood trauma experiences with religious and spiritual struggles. Journal of Health Psychology 27: 292–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Khursheed, Masrat, and Mohammad G. Shahnawaz. 2020. Trauma and Post-traumatic Growth: Spirituality and Self-compassion as Mediators Among Parents Who Lost Their Young Children in a Protracted Conflict. Journal of Religion and Health 59: 2623–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Koutsos, Peggy, Eleanor H. Wertheim, and Jenny Kornblum. 2008. Paths to interpersonal forgiveness: The roles of personality, disposition to forgive and contextual factors in predicting forgiveness following a specific offence. Personality and Individual Differences 44: 337–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Krok, Dariusz. 2009. Religijność a jakość życia w perspektywie mediatorów psychospołecznych [Religiosity and Quality of Life in the Perspective of Psychosocial Mediators]. Opole: Redakcja Wydawnictwo WT UO. [Google Scholar]
  31. Krok, Dariusz. 2011. Skala Religijnego Systemu Znaczeń (SRSZ) [Religious Meaning System Scale]. In Psychologiczny pomiar religijności [Psychological Measurement of Religiosity]. Edited by Marek Jarosz. Lublin: Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL, pp. 153–68. [Google Scholar]
  32. Krok, Dariusz. 2014. Religious meaning system, religious coping, and eudaimonistic well-being-direct and indirect relations. Roczniki Psychologiczne 17: 665–82. [Google Scholar]
  33. Kucharska, Justyna. 2020. Religiosity and the psychological outcomes of trauma: A systematic review of quantitative studies. Journal of Clinical Psychology 76: 40–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Leo, Darius, Zahra Izadikhah, Erich C. Fein, and Sayedhabibollah Ahmadi Fo-rooshani. 2021. The Effect of Trauma on Religious Beliefs: A Structured Literature Re-view and Meta-Analysis. Trauma, Violence & Abuse 22: 161–75. [Google Scholar]
  35. LeTendre, Mckenzie Lynn, and Mark B. Reed. 2017. The Effect of Adverse Childhood Experience on Clinical Diagnosis of a Substance Use Disorder: Results of a Nationally Representative Study. Substance Use & Misuse 52: 689–97. [Google Scholar]
  36. Lu, Mengxin, Yaoyao Yang, Guangmei Wang, Hui Wang, and Danjun Feng. 2022. Effects of perceived stigma on depressive symptoms and demoralization in maintenance hemodialysis patients: Self-warmth and self-coldness as mediators. Mindfulness 13: 3058–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. MacKinnon, David P., Chondra M. Lockwood, and Jason Williams. 2004. Confidence Limits for the Indirect Effect: Distribution of the Product and Resampling Methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research 39: 99–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. McCormick, Wesley H., Timothy D. Carroll, Brook M. Sims, and Joseph Currier. 2017. Adverse childhood experiences, religious/spiritual struggles, and mental health symptoms: Examination of mediation models. Mental Health Religion & Culture 20: 1042–54. [Google Scholar]
  39. McCullough, Michael E., and Charlotte V. O. Witvliet. 2002. The psychology of forgiveness. In The Handbook of Positive Psychology. Edited by Charles. R. Snyder and Shane. J. Lopez. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 446–55. [Google Scholar]
  40. McCullough, Michael E., Robert Kurzban, and Benjamin A. Tabak. 2013. Cognitive systems for revenge and forgiveness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36: 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Miyagawa, Yuki, and Junichi Taniguchi. 2022. Self-compassion helps people forgive transgressors: Cognitive pathways of interpersonal transgressions. Self and Identity 21: 244–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Miyagawa, Yuki, and Yuji Kanemasa. 2023. Insecure attachment and psychological intimate partner violence perpetration: Low self-compassion and compassionate goals as mediators. Journal of Family Violence 38: 1443–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Mróz, Justyna, Kinga Kaleta, and Ewa Sołtys. 2022. Decision to forgive scale and emotional forgiveness scale in a polish sample. Current Psychology 41: 3443–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Neff, Kristin. 2003. The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and Identity 2: 223–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Neff, Kristin. 2023. Self-compassion: Theory and Measurement. In Handbook of Self-Compassion. Edited by Amy Finlay-Jones, Karen Bluth and Kristin Neff. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar]
  46. Park, Crystal L. 2013. Religion and Meaning. In Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality. Edited by Raymond F. Paloutzian and Crystal L. Park. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 357–79. [Google Scholar]
  47. Park, Crystal L., Haikel Lim, Max Newlon, D. P. Suresh, and Deborah E. Bliss. 2014. Dimensions of religiousness and spirituality as predictors of well-being in advanced chronic heart failure patients. Journal of Religion and Health 53: 579–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Riek, Blake M., and Eric W. Mania. 2012. The antecedents and consequences of interpersonal forgiveness: A meta-analytic review. Personal Relationships 19: 304–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Rivera, Peter M., and Frank Fincham. 2015. Forgiveness as a mediator of the intergenerational transmission of violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30: 895–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Rossegger, Astrid, Nicole Wetli, Frank Urbaniok, Thomas Elbert, Franca Cortoni, and Jérôme Endrass. 2009. Women convicted for violent offenses: Adverse childhood experiences, low level of education and poor mental health. BMC Psychiatry 9: 81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Schaefer, Frauke C., Dan G. Blazer, and Harold G. Koenig. 2008. Religious and Spiritual Factors and the Consequences of Trauma: A Review and Model of the Inter-relationship. International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine 38: 507–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Schultz, Jessica M., Elizabeth Altmaier, Saba Ali, and Benjamin Tallman. 2014. A study of posttraumatic spiritual transformation and forgiveness among victims of significant interpersonal offences. Mental Health Religion & Culture 17: 122–35. [Google Scholar]
  53. Silberman, Israela. 2005. Religion as a meaning system: Implications for the new millennium. Journal of Social Issues 61: 641–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Skolnick, Victoria G., Brian A. Lynch, Latasha Smith, Magdalena Romanowicz, Gretchen Blain, and Loren Toussaint. 2023. The association between parent and child ACEs is buffered by forgiveness of others and self-forgiveness. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma 16: 995–1003. [Google Scholar]
  55. Sremac, Srdan, and R. Ruard Ganzevoort. 2019. Trauma and Lived Religion: Embodiment and Emplotment. In Trauma and Lived Religion. Edited by R. Ruard Ganzevoort and Srdjan Sremac. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  56. Toussaint, Loren L., Justin C. Marschall, and David R. Williams. 2012. Prospective associations between religiousness/spirituality and depression and mediating effects of forgiveness in a nationally representative sample of United States adults. Depression Research and Treatment 28: 337–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Tsarenko, Yelena, and Dewi Tojib. 2012. The role of personality characteristics and service failure severity in consumer forgiveness and service outcomes. Journal of Marketing Management 28: 1217–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Walker, Donald F., Henri W. Reid, Tiffany O’Neill, and Lindsay Brown. 2009. Changes in personal religion/spirituality during and after childhood abuse: A review and synthesis. Psychological Trauma Theory Research Practice, and Policy 1: 130–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Wollast, Robin, Abigail R. Riemer, Philippe Bernard, Christophe Leys, Ilios Kotsou, and Olivier Klein. 2019. How self-compassion moderates the effect of body surveillance on subjective happiness and depression among women. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 60: 464–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Worthington, Everett L. 2019. Understanding forgiveness of other people: Definitions, theories, and processes. In Handbook of Forgiveness. Edited by Everett L. Worthington and Nathaniel G. Wade. London: Routledge, pp. 11–21. [Google Scholar]
  61. Worthington, Everett L., Charlotte V. O. Witvliet, Pietro Pietrini, and Andrea J. Miller. 2007. Forgiveness, health, and well-being: A review of evidence for emotional versus decisional forgiveness, dispositional forgivingness, and reduced unforgiveness. Journal of Behavioral Medicine 30: 291–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Wu, Qinglu, Peilian Chi, Xianglong Zeng, Xiuyun Lin, and Hongfei Du. 2019. Roles of anger and rumination in the relationship between self-compassion and forgiveness. Mindfulness 10: 272–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Yang, Xiaofan, Jingru Zhu, and Ping Hu. 2023. Perceived social support and procrastination in college students: A sequential mediation model of self-compassion and negative emotions. Current Psychology 42: 5521–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Yuhan, Joshua, David C. Wang, Andrea Canada, and Jonathan Schwartz. 2021. Growth after Trauma: The Role of Self-Compassion following Hurricane Harvey. Trauma Care 1: 119–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Zimmerman, Marc A., Sarah A. Stoddard, Andria B. Eisman, Cleopatra H. Caldwell, Sophie M. Aiyer, and Alison Miller. 2013. Adolescent resilience: Promotive factors that inform prevention. Child Development Perspectives 7: 215–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Religions 15 01137 g001
Figure 1. The mediating role of self-warmth and self-coldness in the relationship between religiosity and decisional forgiveness. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; dotted line—non-significant path.
Figure 1. The mediating role of self-warmth and self-coldness in the relationship between religiosity and decisional forgiveness. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; dotted line—non-significant path.
Religions 15 01137 g001
Religions 15 01137 g002
Figure 2. The mediating role of self-warmth and self-coldness in the relationship between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
Figure 2. The mediating role of self-warmth and self-coldness in the relationship between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—presence of positive emotions. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
Religions 15 01137 g002
Religions 15 01137 g003
Figure 3. The mediating role of self-warmth and self-coldness in the relationship between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—reduction in negative emotions. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; dotted line—non-significant path.
Figure 3. The mediating role of self-warmth and self-coldness in the relationship between religiosity and emotional forgiveness—reduction in negative emotions. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; dotted line—non-significant path.
Religions 15 01137 g003
Table 1. Correlations of study variables.
Table 1. Correlations of study variables.
Variables123456
1. Religious Meaning—
2. Decisional Forgiveness0.341 ***—
3. Emotional Forgiveness—PPE0.168 **0.636 ***—
4. Emotional Forgiveness—RNE0.204 ***0.558 ***0.362 ***—
5. Self-Warmth0.228 ***0.269 ***0.1100.320 ***—
6. Self-Coldness−0.169 **−0.148 **0.038−0.342 ***−0.662 ***—
7. ACEs−0.166 **−0.259 ***−0.225 ***−0.345 ***−0.329 ***0.363 ***
** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; PPE—presence of positive emotions; RNE—reduction in negative emotions; ACEs—adverse childhood experiences.
Table 2. Moderated mediation model: conditional direct and indirect effects of religiosity on forgiveness through self-compassion moderated by adverse childhood experiences.
Table 2. Moderated mediation model: conditional direct and indirect effects of religiosity on forgiveness through self-compassion moderated by adverse childhood experiences.
Decisional ForgivenessEmotional Forgiveness—Presence of Positive EmotionsEmotional Forgiveness—Reduction in Negative Emotions
Conditional direct effect analysis at ACEs = M ± SDbSE95% CIbSE95% CIbSE95% CI
Low0.1470.070.001 0.2920.0120.07−0.140 0.1650.0250.07−0.121 0.171
Average0.3060.050.201 0.4120.1610.050.049 0.2720.1270.050.021 0.235
High0.4660.090.287 0.6450.3080.090.120 0.4690.230.090.050 0.411
Conditional indirect effect analysis at ACEs = M ± SD by self-warmthbSE95% CIbSE95% CIbSE95% CI
Low0.0090.02−0.35 0.061−0.0010.02−0.049 0.0550.0010.00−0.045 0.055
Average0.0460.020.013 0.0920.0350.020.000 0.0850.0230.01−0.009 0.064
High0.0830.030.026 0.1520.0710.030.017 0.1370.0450.03−0.011 0.107
Index of moderated mediationIndex 0.036 SE = 0.02 95% CI [0.001 0.077]Index 0.036 SE = 0.01 95% CI [0.001 0.074]Index 0.021 SE = 0.02 95% CI [−0.018 0.063]
Conditional indirect effect analysis at ACEs = M ± SD by self-coldness bSE95% CIbSE95% CIbSE95% CI
Low0.0070.01−0.028 0.041−0.0150.02−0.062 0.0200.0380.020.002 0.085
Average−0.0190.01−0.052 0.002−0.0460.02−0.094 −0.0110.0280.010.002 0.064
High−0.0470.02−0.099 −0.007−0.0770.03−0.143 0.0210.0170.02−0.015 0.065
Index of moderated mediationIndex −0.027 SE = 0.01 95% CI −0.058 −0.002Index −0.031 SE = 0.01 95% CI −0.064 −0.003Index −0.011 SE = 0.013 95% CI −0.038 0.017
Bold font = statistically significant.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mróz, J.; Toussaint, L.; Kaleta, K. Association between Religiosity and Forgiveness: Testing a Moderated Mediation Model of Self-Compassion and Adverse Childhood Experiences. Religions 2024, 15, 1137. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15091137

AMA Style

Mróz J, Toussaint L, Kaleta K. Association between Religiosity and Forgiveness: Testing a Moderated Mediation Model of Self-Compassion and Adverse Childhood Experiences. Religions. 2024; 15(9):1137. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15091137

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mróz, Justyna, Loren Toussaint, and Kinga Kaleta. 2024. "Association between Religiosity and Forgiveness: Testing a Moderated Mediation Model of Self-Compassion and Adverse Childhood Experiences" Religions 15, no. 9: 1137. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15091137

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop