CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 111Forgiveness and Related BehaviorsPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionPersonality Traits and Psychology

Gratitude and forgiveness: convergence and divergence on self-report and informant ratings.

Open access
Breen, William E., Kashdan, Todd B., Lenser, Monica L., Fincham, Frank D.·2010·Personality and Individual Differences
DOI 10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.033PMC PMC2943233
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Gratitude and forgiveness are theoretically linked character strengths that tend to be studied in isolation from other strengths. We examined gratitude and forgiveness in the same sample using self and confidant reports to better understand how strengths converge and diverge with personality factors, emotional vulnerabilities, and positive psychological processes. Data suggest that gratitude and forgiveness uniquely relate to personality factors, emotional vulnerabilities, and positive psychological processes with forgiveness evidencing stronger relations than gratitude. Forgiveness also appears to be more robust than gratitude due to the unique effects of forgiveness diminishing correlations between gratitude and other variables. Confidant data demonstrated that strengths were observable by others and related to observer perceptions of well-being. Results are discussed with an emphasis on the benefits of studying character strength profiles.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This study examined gratitude and forgiveness together using self- and confidant reports to see how these character strengths converge and diverge with personality, emotional vulnerabilities, and positive psychological processes. Forgiveness showed stronger and more robust relations with most outcomes, while both strengths were observable by others and linked to confidant-rated well-being.

Key findings

  • Character strengths were positively correlated with Agreeableness (rs = .32 to .58), Extraversion (rs = .17 to .22), and Conscientiousness (rs = .27 to .39), and negatively correlated with Neuroticism (rs = −.27 to −.59); Openness correlated only with Forgiveness of Self (r = .19).
  • Strengths were negatively correlated with anger (rs = −.29 to −.61), loneliness (rs = −.28 to −.51), and depressive symptoms (rs = −.31 to −.53), and positively correlated with acceptance (rs = .25 to .58), self-compassion (rs = .35 to .68), and perspective taking (rs = .25 to .44).
  • Forgiveness appeared more robust: controlling for forgiveness reduced gratitude–neuroticism from r = −.27, p < .001 to r = −.10, ns, and gratitude–anger from r = −.29, p < .001 to r = −.13, ns.
  • Participant–confidant convergence was found for gratitude and forgiveness (rs = .20 to .30) and well-being (r = .47, p < .01); participant strengths also correlated with confidant-rated well-being (rs = .24 to .40).

Methods

  • Participants were 140 undergraduate students (113 females, 27 males; mean age = 21.91 years, SD = 5.74) at a large public university.
  • Participants completed a 60-minute web-based survey, then gave a confidant paper-and-pencil questionnaires; 137 of 140 packets (97.9%) were returned.
  • Measures included the GQ-6, Heartland Forgiveness Scale, Big Five Inventory, BDI-II, Multidimensional Anger Inventory, UCLA-8, IRI, AAQ-2, SCS, and SWLS; confidants completed reworded GQ-6, HFS, BFI, and SWLS. Analyses used correlations, tests of dependent correlations, and partial correlations.

Limitations

  • Stated by the paper: data were cross-sectional, mostly self-report, and comprised of university students; the authors also could not verify every aspect of methodology pertaining to safeguarding confidant data.
  • Evident from the text: the correlational design cannot establish causal direction, and the sample was predominantly female and undergraduate, limiting generalizability.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.033

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 31 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Character strengths (gratitude and forgiveness) were observable by others.

    “Confidant data demonstrated that strengths were observable by others and related to observer perceptions of well-being.”
    • Also stated in: § Correlations between participant and informant ratings · plain
      “Data supported our expectations for ratings of gratitude and forgiveness (rs = .20 to .30) and well-being (r = .47, p < .01).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Gratitude and forgiveness uniquely relate to personality factors, emotional vulnerabilities, and positive psychological processes.

    “Data suggest that gratitude and forgiveness uniquely relate to personality factors, emotional vulnerabilities, and positive psychological processes with forgiveness evidencing stronger relations than gratitude.”
    • Also stated in: § Descriptive Statistics and Correlations Between Variables · hedged
      “The range of correlation magnitudes suggest that strengths relate uniquely to Big 5, emotional vulnerabilities, and positive psychological processes.”
    • Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
      “Gratitude and forgiveness are distinct character strengths that uniquely relate to personality factors, emotion vulnerabilities, positive psychological processes, and well-being.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Character strengths related to observer perceptions of well-being.

    “Confidant data demonstrated that strengths were observable by others and related to observer perceptions of well-being.”
    • Also stated in: § Correlations between participant and informant ratings · plain
      “Participant ratings of strengths also positively correlated with confidant ratings of participant well-being (rs = .24 to .40).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Forgiveness evidences stronger relations than gratitude with personality factors, emotional vulnerabilities, and positive psychological processes.

    “Data suggest that gratitude and forgiveness uniquely relate to personality factors, emotional vulnerabilities, and positive psychological processes with forgiveness evidencing stronger relations than gratitude.”
    • Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
      “Forgiveness evidenced stronger correlations with most outcomes compared to gratitude and these relations retained much of their magnitude after controlling for the effects of gratitude.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Character strengths were negatively correlated with depressive symptoms (rs = −.31 to −.53).

    “depressive symptoms (rs = −.31 to −.53)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 11
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 12

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Participant and confidant ratings showed moderate convergence for gratitude and forgiveness (rs = .20 to .30) and well-being (r = .47, p < .01).

    “Data supported our expectations for ratings of gratitude and forgiveness (rs = .20 to .30) and well-being (r = .47, p < .01).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Gratitude and forgiveness significantly differ in relation to Big Five, emotion vulnerabilities, and positive psychological processes.

    “Results suggest that character strengths significantly differ in relation to Big Five, emotion vulnerabilities, and positive psychological processes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Gratitude was significantly negatively correlated with neuroticism (r = −.27, p < .001), but after controlling for forgiveness, gratitude was unrelated to neuroticism (r = −.10, ns).

    “For example, the correlation between gratitude and neuroticism was significant, r = −.27, p < .001. However, after controlling for forgiveness, gratitude was unrelated to neuroticism, r = −.10, ns.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Gratitude was significantly negatively correlated with anger (r = −.29, p < .001), but after controlling for forgiveness, gratitude was unrelated to anger (r = −.13, ns).

    “Similarly, the correlation between gratitude and anger was significant, r = −.29, p < .001, until controlling for forgiveness, r = −.13, ns.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Forgiveness tends to be positively correlated with agreeableness and negatively correlated with neuroticism.

    “Forgiveness tends to be positively correlated with agreeableness and negatively correlated with neuroticism (Brose, Rye, Lutz-Zois, & Ross, 2005; McCullough & Hoyt, 2002).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Brose, Rye, Lutz-Zois, & Ross, 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites McCullough & Hoyt, 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Gratitude and forgiveness are interpersonal strengths that produce well-being through a combination of reflection, positive emotions, and adaptive social behaviors and relationships.

    “Gratitude and forgiveness are interpersonal strengths that produce well-being through a combination of reflection, positive emotions, and adaptive social behaviors and relationships that facilitate well-being (Frederickson, 2004; Watkins, 2004).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Frederickson, 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Watkins, 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Forgiveness is more robust than gratitude because the unique effects of forgiveness diminish correlations between gratitude and other variables.

    “Forgiveness also appears to be more robust than gratitude due to the unique effects of forgiveness diminishing correlations between gratitude and other variables.”
    • Also stated in: § Discussion · hedged
      “Forgiveness also appears uniquely related to variables whereas much of the strength of relations between gratitude and some variables seems due to the co-occurrence of forgiveness.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Gratitude and forgiveness require distinct attributions but share a common, fundamental component of empathy.

    “Gratitude and forgiveness require distinct attributions (Fincham, Paleari, & Regalia, 2002; McCullough, Emmons, & Tsang, 2002) but share a common, fundamental component of empathy (Farrow et al., 2001; Lazarus, 1991; Macaskill, Maltby, & Day, 2002; McCullough, Kilpatrick, Emmons, & Larson, 2001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Fincham, Paleari, & Regalia, 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Farrow et al., 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites McCullough, Kilpatrick, Emmons, & Larson, 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Gratitude and forgiveness are associated with pro-social behavior, positive psychological outcomes, physical health benefits, and well-being.

    “Empirical data suggests that gratitude and forgiveness are associated with pro-social behavior (Bartlett & DeSteno, 2006; McCullough, 2000), positive psychological outcomes such as optimistic appraisals of life, positive memory biases, and relationship satisfaction (Emmons & McCullough, 2003; Fincham, Paleari, & Regalia, 2002; Watkins, Grimm, & Kolts, 2004), physical health benefits (McCraty et al”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Bartlett & DeSteno, 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Emmons & McCullough, 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Toussaint & Friedman, 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Extraversion may be correlated with gratitude and forgiveness.

    “More recent work redefining extraversion suggests that it too, may be correlated with gratitude and forgiveness (Ashton, Lee, & Paunonen, 2002; Lucas et al., 2000).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Ashton, Lee, & Paunonen, 2002 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Lucas et al., 2000 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Empathic emotions tend to increase positive and decrease negative affect.

    “In general, empathic emotions tend to increase positive and decrease negative affect (Batson, 1990).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Batson, 1990 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Compliance was exceptional: 137 of 140 (97.9%) confidant packets were returned.

    “Compliance was exceptional: 137 of 140 (97.9%) packets were returned.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Methods and procedure were approved by the university institutional review board.

    “Methods and procedure were approved by the university institutional review board.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Forgiveness demonstrated strong associations with both emotional vulnerabilities (negative relations) and positive psychological processes (positive relations), suggesting it is a robust indicator of mental health outcomes.

    “Forgiveness, in particular, demonstrated strong associations with both emotional vulnerabilities (negative relations) and positive psychological processes (positive relations) suggesting that it is a robust indicator of mental health outcomes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Forgiveness appears uniquely related to variables whereas much of the strength of relations between gratitude and some variables seems due to the co-occurrence of forgiveness.

    “Forgiveness also appears uniquely related to variables whereas much of the strength of relations between gratitude and some variables seems due to the co-occurrence of forgiveness.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Trait vengefulness is associated with an increase in maladaptive, avoidance-based relationship behaviors.

    “Other studies suggest that trait vengefulness (or the tendency to be unforgiving) is associated with an increase in maladaptive, avoidance-based relationship behaviors (McCullough et al., 1998; McCullough, Worthington, & Rachal, 1997).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites McCullough et al., 1998 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites McCullough, Worthington, & Rachal, 1997

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Abandoning angry feelings is fundamental to forgiveness.

    “Abandoning angry feelings also appears to be fundamental to forgiveness (Berry et al., 2005; Enright, 2001; McCullough, 2000).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Berry et al., 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Enright, 2001

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites McCullough, 2000 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Low trait forgiveness is associated with a greater tendency to engage in avoidance-based coping strategies.

    “Prior work with college students provides initial support in that people reporting low levels of trait forgiveness reported a greater tendency to engage in avoidance based coping strategies (Maltby, Macaskill, & Gillett, 2007).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Maltby, Macaskill, & Gillett, 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The data were cross-sectional, mostly self-report, and comprised of university students.

    “Our data were cross-sectional, mostly self-report, and comprised of university students.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    The GQ-6 demonstrated excellent reliability (αs < .90) in prior studies.

    “The GQ-6 demonstrated excellent reliability (αs < .90) in prior studies (McCullough, Emmons, & Tsang, 2002).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites McCullough, Emmons, & Tsang, 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Gratitude positively correlates with cognitive and affective aspects of empathy.

    “Research with college students suggests that gratitude positively correlates with both cognitive (i.e., perspective taking) and affective (i.e., warm feelings) aspects of empathy (McCullough et al., 2002).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites McCullough et al., 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The authors were unable to verify every aspect of their methodology pertaining to safeguarding confidant data.

    “In addition, we were unable to verify every aspect of our methodology pertaining to safeguarding confidant data.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
22 of 22

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most research tends to examine character strengths in isolation from other strengths.

    “However, most research tends to examine strengths in isolation from other strengths.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No known study has examined self-compassion and gratitude.

    “No known study has examined self-compassion and gratitude.”
2 of 2

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?

  • Gratitude and forgiveness processes do not imply condoning abuse but reflect adaptive strategies for emotional healing.

    “Importantly, these processes do not imply condoning abuse but rather reflect adaptive strategies for emotional healing (Breen et al., 2010).”

    From From use to abuse: psychological, neurobiological, and spiritual pathways in relational harm and recovery (2026) · cites this paper as Breen et al., 2010

    The Discussion (page not provided) links gratitude and forgiveness with less anger, loneliness, and depressive symptoms, supporting the general idea of emotional benefits. The paper does not address abuse or say that these processes should not be understood as condoning it; its reported associations also do not establish emotional healing in that setting. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

  • African-American percentage does not match the count

    Minor

    Seven of 140 participants is 5.0%, not the reported 6.5%.

    Reported 6.5 · recomputed 5

  • Ethnicity counts do not account for all participants

    Minor

    The listed ethnicity counts sum to 137, although the sample contains 140 participants. The text does not account for the other three.

    Reported 140 · recomputed 137

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Breen, W. E., Kashdan, T. B., Lenser, M. L., & Fincham, F. D.
Affiliations
  • George Mason University (US)
  • Florida State University (US)
Corresponding author
Kashdan, Todd B.
ORCID
Venue
Personality and Individual Differences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-12
Volume
49
Issue
8
Pages
932-937
ISSN
0191-8869 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.033
PMC
PMC2943233
OpenAlex
W2107604038
Semantic Scholar
e8dc5bf0ddc67f983c51fe6f5d6925c75917ea47
Cited by
111
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Personality and Individual Differences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R21MH073937)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Forgiveness and Related Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
gratitude, forgiveness, character strengths, personality factors, emotional vulnerability

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

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