Cited by 34Forgiveness and Related BehaviorsMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Efficacy of Reach Forgiveness Across Cultures

Lin, Yin, Worthington, Everett L., Griffin, Brandon J., Greer, Chelsea L., Opare-Henaku, Annabella, Lavelock, Caroline R., Hook, Joshua N., Ho, Man Yee +1 more·2014·Journal of Clinical Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the efficacy of the 6-hour REACH Forgiveness intervention among culturally diverse undergraduates. METHOD: Female undergraduates (N = 102) and foreign extraction (46.2%) and domestic (43.8%) students in the United States were randomly assigned to immediate treatment or waitlist conditions. Treatment efficacy and the effect of culture on treatment response were assessed using measures of emotional and decisional forgiveness across 3 time periods. RESULTS: Students in the treatment condition reported greater improvement in emotional forgiveness, but not decisional forgiveness, relative to those in the waitlist condition. Gains were maintained at a 1-week follow-up. Although culture did not moderate the effect of treatment, a main effect of culture on emotional forgiveness and marginally significant interaction effect of culture on decisional forgiveness were found. CONCLUSION: The REACH Forgiveness intervention was efficacious for college students from different cultural backgrounds when conducted in the United States. However, some evidence may warrant development of culturally adapted forgiveness interventions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jclp.22073

Cites

47 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Hook, J. N., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Davis, D. E., Watkins, D., Hui, E., Luo, W., Fu, H., Shulruf, B., Morris, P., & Reyna, S. H. (in press). A China-New Zealand comparison of forgiveness. Asian Journal of Social Psychology .
  2. Kiefer, R. P., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Myers, B., Kliewer, W. L., Berry, J. W., Davis, D. E., Kilgour, J., Jr., Miller, A. J., Van Tongeren, D. R., & Hunter, J. L. (2010). Training parents in forgiveness and reconciliation. American Journal of Family Therapy, 38, 3249.
  3. Singelis, T. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent selfconstruals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580-591.
  4. Stratton, S. P., Dean, J. B., Nooneman, A. J., Bode, R. A., & Worthington, E. L., Jr. (2008). Forgiveness interventions as spiritual development strategies: Workshop training, expressive writing about forgiveness, and retested controls. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 27, 347-357.
  5. Wade, N. G., Hoyt, W. T., Worthington, E. L., Jr., & Kidwell, J. A. (in press). Meta-analysis of psychotherapeutic interventions to promote forgiveness. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , in press.
  6. Wade, N. G., Worthington, E. L., Jr., & Haake, S. (2009). Promoting forgiveness: Comparison of explicit forgiveness interventions with an alternative treatment. Journal of Counseling and Development, 87 (1), 143-151.
  7. Worthington, E. L., Jr. (2006). Forgiveness and reconciliation: Theory and practice . New York: Brunner-Routledge.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lin, Y., Worthington, E. L., Griffin, B. J., Greer, C. L., Opare-Henaku, A., Lavelock, C. R., Hook, J. N., Ho, M. Y., & Muller, H.
Affiliations
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
  • Virginia Commonwealth University
  • University of North Texas (US)
  • Education University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • Palo Alto University (US)
Corresponding author
Worthington, Everett L.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-02-03
Volume
70
Issue
9
Pages
781-793
ISSN
0021-9762 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2135782854
Cited by
34
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2014: 1
FWCI
5.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VCU Scholars Compass (Virginia Commonwealth University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Fetzer Institute
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Forgiveness and Related Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
forgiveness, emotional forgiveness, university students, international students, cultural background, culturally tailored interventions, waitlist control
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Culture, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Mid-Atlantic Region, Universities, Young Adult, Forgiveness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review