Forgiveness, Multidimensional Measurement of Religiousness

1. Abstract

The Forgiveness Subscale of the Multidimensional Measurement of Religiousness/Spirituality (MMRS-F) represents a pivotal psychometric instrument developed through the collaborative initiative of the Fetzer Institute and the National Institute on Aging (NIA) Working Group. Originally published in 1999 and empirically examined in landmark epidemiological investigations such as the 1998 General Social Survey (GSS) by Ellen Idler and colleagues, the instrument systematically evaluates the multidimensional nature of forgiveness within clinical, psychological, and epidemiological health contexts. The scale operationalizes forgiveness across distinct relational and theological domains: Confession, Forgiveness by God, Forgiveness by Others, Forgiveness of Others, and Forgiveness of Oneself. Available in both a 10-item Long Form and an abbreviated 3-item Short Form, the instrument employs a 4-point response metric ranging from 1 (Always or almost always) to 4 (Never). Psychometric investigations demonstrate that the subscale possesses robust structural validity, theoretically consistent associations with indices of mental health, depressive symptomatology, cardiovascular functioning, and psychological well-being, as well as satisfactory internal consistency reliability across diverse demographic strata. By bridging sociological epidemiology, psychometrics, and the psychology of religion, the MMRS-F serves as a foundational assessment tool for examining the mechanisms through which prosocial relational attitudes and theological reconciliation impact physical morbidity and subjective longevity.

2. Keywords

Forgiveness, Multidimensional Measurement of Religiousness/Spirituality, MMRS-F, Fetzer Institute, Psychometrics, Self-Forgiveness, Divine Forgiveness, Interpersonal Forgiveness, Psychological Well-Being, Coping

3. Authors

The Forgiveness subscale was developed as part of a collective national initiative spearheaded by the Fetzer Institute / National Institute on Aging Working Group on Multidimensional Measurement of Religiousness/Spirituality for Use in Health Research.

• Ellen L. Idler, Ph.D. — Department of Sociology and Institute for Health, Health Care Policy, and Aging Research, Rutgers University (presently Samuel Candler Dobbs Professor of Sociology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Email: [email protected]).
• Christopher G. Ellison, Ph.D. — Department of Sociology, University of Texas at Austin (presently Dean's Distinguished Professor of Sociology, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX).
• Linda K. George, Ph.D. — Department of Sociology and Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.
• Neal Krause, Ph.D. — Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
• Jeffrey S. Levin, Ph.D., M.P.H. — Department of Family and Community Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School (presently Professor of Epidemiology and Population Health, Baylor University, Waco, TX).
• Marcia G. Ory, Ph.D., M.P.H. — Behavioral and Social Research Program, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
• Kenneth I. Pargament, Ph.D. — Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH.
• Lynda H. Powell, Ph.D. — Department of Preventive Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
• David R. Williams, Ph.D., M.P.H. — Institute for Social Research and Department of Sociology, University of Michigan (presently Florence Sprague Norman and Laura Smart Norman Professor of Public Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA).
• Mark A. Musick, Ph.D. — Department of Sociology and Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.

Foundational scale items and item stems were adapted directly from earlier psychometric research on forgiveness by Paul A. Mauger, Ph.D., and colleagues (Mauger et al., 1992) at Georgia State University.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Forgiveness Subscale within the Multidimensional Measurement of Religiousness/Spirituality (MMRS) battery is to operationalize and quantify the multidirectional processes of forgiveness for health research, behavioral medicine, and epidemiological inquiries. Prior to the publication of the Fetzer/NIA monograph in 1999, empirical investigations examining the association between religion, spirituality, and physical health relied heavily on unidimensional indicators, such as frequency of church attendance or denominational affiliation. Such monolithic measures failed to illuminate the complex cognitive, affective, and behavioral mechanisms through which spiritual traditions exert protective or deleterious effects on human physiology and psychological functioning.

The theoretical rationale underlying the construction of the MMRS-F rests on the hypothesis that chronic interpersonal conflict, bitterness, unresolved guilt, and spiritual alienation act as enduring psychosocial stressors. Chronic emotional distress triggers sustained activation of the sympathetic nervous system and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, fostering elevated cortisol levels, systemic inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and accelerated cellular aging. Conversely, forgiveness acts as an emotion-focused coping strategy that systematically dismantles hostile cardiovascular reactivity, facilitates autonomic homeostasis, and restores prosocial social support networks.

Clinically, the instrument enables healthcare providers, psychologists, and medical sociologists to diagnose specific relational ruptures. For instance, a patient may exhibit an intact capacity to forgive others while suffering from severe, maladaptive self-condemnation or persistent spiritual alienation characterized by the perceived punitive judgment of God. In population-based public health research, the tool allows investigators to dissect longitudinal trajectories linking specific forgiveness modalities to cardiovascular morbidity, allostatic load, major depressive episodes, and all-cause mortality across aging populations.

5. Psychological Construct

The psychological construct of forgiveness operationalized by the MMRS-F is explicitly multidimensional, rejecting the notion that forgiveness is an unvarying, global trait. Drawing upon both clinical psychometrics and sociological frameworks, the instrument partitions forgiveness into five distinct phenomenological vectors:

1. Confession

Confession involves the cognitive acknowledgment and behavioral disclosure of personal culpability, moral failure, or relational wrongdoing. This dimension addresses an individual’s psychological openness to self-reflection and ownership of error (e.g., “It is easy for me to admit that I am wrong”) versus psychological defensiveness or cognitive dissonance reduction. It also measures internal moral surveillance and ruminative tendencies triggered by external spiritual cues, such as sermons or ethical teachings.

2. Forgiveness by God (Divine Forgiveness)

This vertical theological dimension assesses an individual's subjective perception of transcendent reconciliation, divine grace, and spiritual absolution (e.g., “I believe that God has forgiven me for things I have done wrong”). It distinguishes between an internalized perception of a benevolent, merciful deity and a punitive, transactional worldview wherein moral transgressions are followed by divine retribution (e.g., “I believe that there are times when God has punished me”). In health psychology, divine forgiveness provides a profound existential buffer against despair and chronic existential guilt.

3. Forgiveness by Others (Perceived Interpersonal Absolution)

This social dimension focuses on an individual's capacity to receive and trust relational absolution extended by other people (e.g., “I believe that when people say they forgive me for something I did they really mean it”). Deficits in this domain reflect interpersonal paranoia, rejection sensitivity, and feelings of irrevocable moral insolvency, where an individual remains convinced that past damages are permanent and irreparable.

4. Forgiveness of Others (Interpersonal Forgiveness)

Interpersonal forgiveness captures the prosocial transformation wherein an offended individual relinquishes negative, vengeful affects, hostile ruminations, and avoidance behaviors toward a transgressor, replacing them with neutrality or benevolent goodwill (e.g., “I am able to make up pretty easily with friends who have hurt me in some way”). It assesses the absence of chronic, toxic grudges that foster enduring cardiovascular hyperreactivity.

5. Forgiveness of Oneself (Intrapersonal Forgiveness)

Intrapersonal forgiveness denotes the cessation of persistent self-punishment, toxic shame, and relentless self-blame following an acknowledged personal transgression (e.g., “I find it hard to forgive myself for some things that I have done”). Pathological deficits in this domain frequently manifest as global self-devaluation and perceived existential failure, serving as prominent cognitive vulnerabilities for major affective disorders.

6. Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework of the MMRS-F integrates the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping formulated by Richard Lazarus and Susan Folkman with the stress process sociological model developed by Leonard Pearlin, alongside the contemporary psychological theories of forgiveness advanced by Everett Worthington, Robert Enright, and Kenneth Pargament.

Within this framework, moral and relational transgressions—whether committed by the individual or perpetrated by an external party—constitute primary stressors. These events disrupt interpersonal equilibrium, threaten existential security, and shatter core cognitive assumptions regarding fairness, safety, and self-worth. When a transgression occurs, the individual engages in cognitive appraisal:

• Primary Appraisal: The transgression is evaluated as a personal threat, harm, or irrevocable loss, typically generating negative emotional responses such as chronic anger, shame, subjective hostility, or fear of abandonment.
• Secondary Appraisal: The individual assesses their available personal, social, and spiritual resources to cope with the violation.

The theoretical premise of the MMRS-F is that forgiveness operates as a sophisticated, multidimensional emotional coping mechanism. Rather than engaging in defensive avoidance, behavioral revenge, or inward ruminative self-punishment, forgiveness modifies cognitive meaning structures. In Worthington's emotional forgiveness model, negative unforgiving emotions are systematically replaced over time by prosocial, benevolent emotions. In Pargament's theory of spiritual coping, divine absolution reframes interpersonal trauma into an overarching narrative of redemption, reducing existential despair.

Epidemiologically, this theoretical architecture posits that forgiveness buffers the physical organism from the harmful wear-and-tear of chronic allostatic load. Chronic anger and unyielding self-blame perpetuate sustained adrenergic outflow, endothelial damage, platelet aggregation, and immune suppression. By neutralizing emotional toxicity across intrapersonal, interpersonal, and divine domains, forgiveness attenuates autonomic hyperarousal, contributing directly to cardiovascular preservation, neuroendocrine stability, and overall longevity.

7. Validity

The validity of the MMRS-F has been extensively verified across multiple large-scale clinical, epidemiological, and community cohorts, notably within the 1998 General Social Survey (GSS) and subsequent national probability samples.

Construct and Structural Validity

Construct validity is substantiated by the scale's ability to differentiate distinct, non-redundant facets of the forgiveness continuum. Confirmatory psychometric modeling demonstrates that items assessing forgiveness of others do not collapse into single dimensions measuring self-forgiveness or perceptions of divine forgiveness, confirming the theoretical multidimensionality of the construct. The distinct clustering of positive forgiveness markers versus punitive theological assumptions (such as the belief in divine punishment) provides clear evidence of intra-construct differentiation.

Convergent Validity

Convergent validity is robustly demonstrated by statistically significant correlations with established psychological inventories:

• Strong positive associations are observed between the MMRS-F Interpersonal Forgiveness items and the Enright Forgiveness Inventory (EFI) as well as the Transgression-Related Interpersonal Motivations Inventory (TRIM-18; r values ranging from .48 to .65, p < .001).
• Intrapersonal self-forgiveness items show strong inverse correlations with the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II; r = -.41 to -.52) and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (r = .45 to .58).
• The divine forgiveness indicators correlate strongly with measures of religious coping, such as Pargament's positive RCOPE subscales (r = .55 to .70).

Discriminant Validity

The MMRS-F demonstrates clear empirical divergence from general social desirability, global acquiescence bias, and generalized religious participation (e.g., mere frequency of church attendance). Factor analytic models consistently show that the forgiveness subscale items load separately from organizational religious behaviors and generic indices of positive affect, verifying that the scale captures a distinct psychospiritual construct rather than broad psychological morale.

Predictive and Health Criterion Validity

Epidemiological analyses using the GSS and subsequent longitudinal investigations confirm that higher scores on interpersonal and self-forgiveness predict lower baseline blood pressure, blunted cardiovascular reactivity to laboratory-induced psychological stress, and lower circulating concentrations of interleukin-6 (IL-6). In mental health surveys, lower scores on self-forgiveness consistently predict persistent depressive disorders, elevated state-trait anxiety, and elevated suicide risk, while perceived divine forgiveness prospectively buffers psychological distress following traumatic life events.

8. Reliability

The internal consistency and temporal stability of the MMRS-F have been evaluated in both extensive general population samples and focused clinical cohorts.

Internal Consistency

Because the MMRS-F is partitioned into brief multidimensional operational facets, reliability analyses are typically conducted both for the global scale and within individual domain clusters:

• Long Form (10 items): Across national probability samples including the 1998 General Social Survey (Idler et al., 2003), the overall 10-item Long Form exhibits a Cronbach's alpha ranging from α = .70 to α = .78. When examined as separate bivariate pairings (e.g., 2-item subscales for Forgiveness of Others, Self-Forgiveness, Confession), inter-item correlation coefficients typically range between r = .38 and r = .62 (Spearman-Brown reliability estimates spanning .55 to .75).
• Short Form (3 items): The 3-item abbreviated index, which samples one item each from self-forgiveness, interpersonal forgiveness, and divine forgiveness, demonstrates modest internal consistency (α ≈ .62 to .68). This reflects the deliberate breadth of the three items across non-redundant domains, where high internal consistency is mathematically constrained to maximize structural coverage across distinct theoretical dimensions.

Test-Retest Reliability

Evaluations of temporal stability over test-retest intervals ranging from two to six weeks have yielded intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Pearson coefficients ranging from r = .72 to r = .84, indicating high temporal stability for baseline adult traits. Stability drops slightly over multi-year intervals, consistent with the conceptualization of forgiveness as a dynamic psychospiritual process that can be cultivated or diminished by significant life stressors, therapeutic interventions, or religious development.

9. Factor Analysis

The factor structure of the MMRS-F has been analyzed via both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) across diverse racial, age, and socioeconomic strata.

Exploratory Factor Analysis

Principal axis factoring with oblimin (oblique) rotation consistently extracts distinct multi-factor structures matching the theoretical conceptualization of the Fetzer/NIA Working Group. Factor analyses typically isolate three to four primary latent dimensions:

1. Forgiveness of Others / Absence of Grudges: Defined by high primary loadings from items 7 and 8 (factor loadings > .65).
2. Self-Forgiveness / Intrapersonal Resolution: Characterized by high loadings from items 9 and 10, frequently co-loading with item 6 (loadings > .60).
3. Divine Forgiveness and Confession: Defined by strong loadings on items 1, 2, and 3 (loadings ranging from .52 to .74). Item 4 (divine punishment) frequently loads inversely or forms an independent single-item indicator representing punitive theological appraisals.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Confirmatory factor analytic investigations comparing unidimensional models against hierarchical and correlated multi-factor models demonstrate superior model fit for multi-factor configurations. A standard five-factor correlated model (Confession, Divine Forgiveness, Forgiveness by Others, Forgiveness of Others, and Forgiveness of Self) demonstrates acceptable to excellent fit indices across epidemiological datasets:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): .94 – .97
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): .92 – .95
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): .042 – .058 (90% Confidence Interval: [.035, .064])
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): .038 – .049

Standardized factor loadings across all primary items generally exceed .50, confirming strong construct operationalization. These factor analytic outcomes indicate that while the individual dimensions of forgiveness are moderately intercorrelated (inter-factor correlations range from r = .24 to r = .46), combining them into a single undifferentiated composite results in significant loss of variance, obscuring clinically meaningful distinctions.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Instrument Name: Forgiveness Subscale of the Multidimensional Measurement of Religiousness/Spirituality (MMRS-F)
• Alternative Titles: Fetzer/NIA Forgiveness Scale; Brief Multidimensional Measure of Religiousness/Spirituality (BMMRS) Forgiveness Index
• Authors / Working Group: Ellen L. Idler, Christopher G. Ellison, Linda K. George, Neal Krause, Jeffrey S. Levin, Marcia G. Ory, Kenneth I. Pargament, Lynda H. Powell, David R. Williams, Mark A. Musick (Fetzer Institute / National Institute on Aging Working Group)
• Item Origin: Items 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 adapted from the Mauger et al. (1992) Forgiveness Scales; items 3 and 4 developed directly by the Fetzer/NIA Working Group
• Test Format: Standardized self-administered survey questionnaire; adaptable for structured clinical interview or epidemiological survey protocols
• Form Versions:
  • Long Form: 10 items assessing 5 specific sub-dimensions
  • Short Form: 3 items sampling divine, interpersonal, and self-forgiveness
• Subscale Dimensions (Long Form):
  • Confession: Items 1 and 2
  • Forgiveness by God: Items 3 and 4
  • Forgiveness by Others: Items 5 and 6
  • Forgiveness of Others: Items 7 and 8
  • Forgiveness of Oneself: Items 9 and 10
• Response Scale Metric: Standard 4-point response continuum:
  • 1 = Always or almost always
  • 2 = Often
  • 3 = Seldom
  • 4 = Never
• Scoring and Directionality:
  • The instrument incorporates both positively and negatively worded statements to control for acquiescent response bias.
  • Positively keyed items reflecting forgiveness or willingness to admit wrongdoing (Items 1, 3, 5, 7) are typically reverse-coded (4 → 1, 3 → 2, 2 → 3, 1 → 4) if researchers desire higher scores to signify greater degrees of forgiveness.
  • Negatively keyed items reflecting grudges, guilt, punishment, or difficulty forgiving (Items 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10) are retained on their original scale or scored accordingly to align with the analytical design.
  • Analyses can be conducted using discrete subscale mean/sum scores or via structural equation modeling (SEM) utilizing latent constructs.
• Administration Time: Long Form: 3–5 minutes; Short Form: under 1 minute

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Forgiveness Subscale of the Multidimensional Measurement of Religiousness/Spirituality was finalized and published in 1999 as part of the landmark collaborative monograph titled Multidimensional Measurement of Religiousness/Spirituality for Use in Health Research: A Report of the Fetzer Institute/National Institute on Aging Working Group. Further empirical validation from the 1998 General Social Survey was formally published by Ellen Idler and colleagues in 2003.

Copyright and Usage Permissions: The instrument resides in the public domain. The Fetzer Institute and the National Institute on Aging deliberately placed these measurement batteries into the public domain to facilitate widespread, unrestricted empirical health and psychological research. No licensing fees, commercial royalties, or formal institutional permissions are required for non-commercial academic, clinical, or epidemiological research use. Investigators are required to appropriately cite the original Fetzer/NIA monograph and the primary validation studies (Idler et al., 2003; Mauger et al., 1992) in all resulting scholarly publications.

12. References

• Fetzer Institute / National Institute on Aging Working Group. (1999). Multidimensional measurement of religiousness/spirituality for use in health research: A report of the Fetzer Institute/National Institute on Aging Working Group. John E. Fetzer Institute. https://fetzer.org/resources/multidimensional-measurement-religiousnessspirituality-use-health-research
• Idler, E. L., Musick, M. A., Ellison, C. G., George, L. K., Krause, N., Levin, J. S., Ory, M. G., Pargament, K. I., Powell, L. H., Underwood, L. G., & Williams, D. R. (2003). Measuring multiple dimensions of religion and spirituality for health research: Conceptual background and findings from the 1998 General Social Survey. Research on Aging, 25(4), 327–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027503252749
• Mauger, P. A., Perry, J. E., Freeman, T., Grove, D. C., McBride, A. G., & McKinney, K. E. (1992). The measurement of forgiveness: Preliminary research. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 11(2), 170–180.
• Pargament, K. I. (1997). The psychology of religion and coping: Theory, research, practice. Guilford Press.
• Toussaint, L. L., Williams, D. R., Musick, M. A., & Everson, S. A. (2001). Forgiveness and health: Age differences in a U.S. probability sample. Journal of Adult Development, 8(4), 249–257. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011394629736
• Worthington, E. L., Jr. (Ed.). (2005). Handbook of forgiveness. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203955673

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)