ACTivate Self-Forgiveness: Can Psychological Flexibility Explain and Facilitate Genuine Intrapersonal Forgiveness?
Date
2024
Authors
Bem, Jemima Rohini
Editors
Advisors
Strelan, Peter
Proeve, Michael
Auton, Jaime
Proeve, Michael
Auton, Jaime
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Type:
Thesis
Citation
Statement of Responsibility
Conference Name
Abstract
Current conceptualisations about self-forgiveness do not clearly articulate or are ambiguous about how the process may unfold, including how barriers posed by shame, and in some instances guilt, may be overcome. Furthermore, hardly any attention has been devoted to the relevance and application of self-forgiveness to covert offending (i.e., rigidly believing negative stories about oneself as literal truth) or non-moral shame contexts—where individuals generally feel guilty or ashamed, but it is unclear whether they have committed any overt offense. This thesis asks and answers a theoretical and practical question: “Is there a way from shame and high levels of moral guilt to genuine self-forgiveness?” In doing so, it aims to uncover underlying mechanisms that may be responsible in transforming (overt or covert) offense-related shame and guilt into self-forgiveness. Specifically, it challenges conventional views that overt offending is required to trigger the process and examines whether the Psychological Flexibility Model—a mechanisms-of-change model underpinned by Relational Frame Theory—can explain the self-forgiveness process. To address the lack of research investigating psychological flexibility and selfforgiveness and support hypothesised relations, a series of four studies (Studies 2 – 5) investigated relations between shame, guilt, psychological flexibility processes, and selfforgiveness. Studies 2 (N = 258) and 3 (N = 300) employed a cross-sectional correlational design to investigate the role of the Acceptance, Action (Study 2) and Awareness (Study 3) aspects of psychological flexibility in the relation between guilt/shame and selfforgiveness. Study 2 also investigated the path from shame to hope as occurring through values and self-forgiveness. As predicted, findings generally supported the utility of psychological flexibility in explicating the path from shame and more entrenched guilt to achieve genuine selfforgiveness. In addition, results confirmed the path from shame to hope occurred through values enactment and self-forgiveness. Study 4 (N = 300) employed a three-condition experimental design to manipulate hypothesised mediators but found no significant differences between groups. Given challenges in manipulating mediators (Study 4), Study 5 (N = 250) employed a mixed methods design with a dominant quantitative and secondary qualitative strand to investigate hypothesised relations, including personal experiences of barriers to self-forgiveness, on the backdrop of real-world offenses. Results supported the importance of values enactment and a transcendent self-perspective in overcoming offense-specific and more generalised shame and guilt to achieve genuine self-forgiveness. Thesis outcomes were applied to develop a self-forgiveness workbook intervention to specifically target covert offending and non-moral shame. Primary limitations relate to reliance on cross-sectional mediation models. Nevertheless, thesis findings make an important contribution to understanding the self-forgiveness process, especially with respect to covert offending and non-moral shame and provide a basis for further experimental investigation. Significance of thesis findings, including contributions to knowledge as well as strengths and limitations, theoretical and practical implications, and future directions are discussed.
School/Discipline
School of Psychology
Dissertation Note
Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Adelaide, School of Psychology, 2025
Provenance
This electronic version is made publicly available by the University of Adelaide in accordance with its open access policy for student theses. Copyright in this thesis remains with the author. This thesis may incorporate third party material which has been used by the author pursuant to Fair Dealing exceptions. If you are the owner of any included third party copyright material you wish to be removed from this electronic version, please complete the take down form located at: http://www.adelaide.edu.au/legals