In four studies, the authors examined the correlates of the disposition toward gratitude. Study 1 revealed that self-ratings and observer ratings of the grateful disposition are associated with positive affect and well-being, prosocial behaviors and traits, and religiousness/spirituality. Study 2 replicated these findings in a large nonstudent sample. Study 3 yielded similar results to Studies 1 and 2 and provided evidence that gratitude is negatively associated with envy and materialistic attitudes. Study 4 yielded evidence that these associations persist after controlling for Extraversion/positive affectivity, Neuroticism/negative affectivity, and Agreeableness. The development of the Gratitude Questionnaire, a unidimensional measure with good psychometric properties, is also described.Gratitude, as it were, is the moral memory of mankind.

The effect of a grateful outlook on psychological and physical well-being was examined. In Studies 1 and 2, participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 experimental conditions (hassles, gratitude listing, and either neutral life events or social comparison); they then kept weekly (Study 1) or daily (Study 2) records of their moods, coping behaviors, health behaviors, physical symptoms, and overall life appraisals. In a 3rd study, persons with neuromuscular disease were randomly assigned to either the gratitude condition or to a control condition. The gratitude-outlook groups exhibited heightened well-being across several, though not all, of the outcome measures across the 3 studies, relative to the comparison groups. The effect on positive affect appeared to be the most robust finding. Results suggest that a conscious focus on blessings may have emotional and interpersonal benefits.Reflect on your present blessings, on which every man has many, not on your past misfortunes, of which all men have some.-Charles Dickens (M. Dickens, 1897, p. 45)The construct of gratitude has inspired considerable interest in the general public. The prevalence of books targeted to general audiences on the topic (

Interpersonal forgiving was conceptualized in the context of a 2-factor motivational system that governs people's responses to interpersonal offenses. Four studies were conducted to examine the extent to which forgiving could be predicted with relationship-level variables such as satisfaction, commitment, and closeness; offense-level variables such as apology and impact of the offense; and social-cognitive variables such as offunder-focused empathy and rumination about the offense. Also described is the development of the transgression-related interpersonal motivations inventory-a self-report measure designed to assess the 2-component motivational system (Avoidance and Revenge) posited to underlie forgiving. The measure demonstrated a variety of desirable psychometric properties, commending its use for future research. As predicted, empathy, apology, rumination, and several indexes of relationship closeness were associated with self-reported forgiving. The concept of forgiving, although not a traditional focus of personality and social psychology, has been of passing theoretical and empirical interest to the discipline for 40 years. In a chapter on benefit and harm in The Psychology oflnterpersonal Relations, Heider (1958) outlined a variety of attributional principles that underlie the quest for revenge after one has incurred an interpersonal transgression. In this context, Heider described forgiving as the forgoing of vengeful behavior, which he posited to be an implicit expression of the victim's self-worth. However,

Interpersonal forgiving was conceptualized in the context of a 2-factor motivational system that governs people's responses to interpersonal offenses. Four studies were conducted to examine the extent to which forgiving could be predicted with relationship-level variables such as satisfaction, commitment, and closeness; offense-level variables such as apology and impact of the offense; and social-cognitive variables such as offunder-focused empathy and rumination about the offense. Also described is the development of the transgression-related interpersonal motivations inventory--a self-report measure designed to assess the 2-component motivational system (Avoidance and Revenge) posited to underlie forgiving. The measure demonstrated a variety of desirable psychometric properties, commending its use for future research. As predicted, empathy, apology, rumination, and several indexes of relationship closeness were associated with self-reported forgiving.The concept of forgiving, although not a traditional focus of personality and social psychology, has been of passing theoretical and empirical interest to the discipline for 40 years. In a chapter on benefit and harm in The Psychology oflnterpersonal Relations, Heider (1958) outlined a variety of attributional principles that underlie the quest for revenge after one has incurred an interpersonal transgression. In this context, Heider described forgiving as the forgoing of vengeful behavior, which he posited to be an implicit expression of the victim's self-worth. However,

No abstract

Gratitude is conceptualized as a moral affect that is analogous to other moral emotions such as empathy and guilt. Gratitude has 3 functions that can be conceptualized as morally relevant: (a) a moral barometer function (i.e., it is a response to the perception that one has been the beneficiary of another person's moral actions); (b) a moral motive function (i.e., it motivates the grateful person to behave prosocially toward the benefactor and other people); and (c) a moral reinforcer function (i.e., when expressed, it encourages benefactors to behave morally in the future). The personality and social factors that are associated with gratitude are also consistent with a conceptualization of gratitude as an affect that is relevant to people's cognitions and behaviors in the moral domain.

Psychologists' emerging interest in spirituality and religion as well as the relevance of each phenomenon to issues of psychological importance requires an understanding of the fundamental characteristics of each construct. On the basis of both historical considerations and a limited but growing empirical literature, we caution against viewing spirituality and religiousness as incompatible and suggest that the common tendency to polarize the terms simply as individual vs. institutional or ′good′ vs. ′bad′ is not fruitful for future research. Also cautioning against the use of restrictive, narrow definitions or overly broad definitions that can rob either construct of its distinctive characteristics, we propose a set of criteria that recognizes the constructs' conceptual similarities and dissimilarities. Rather than trying to force new and likely unsuccessful definitions, we offer these criteria as benchmarks for judging the value of existing definitions.

The authors report the development of the Religious Commitment Inventory-10 (RCI-10), used in 6 studies. Sample sizes were 155, 132, and 150 college students; 240 Christian church-attending married adults; 468 undergraduates including (among others) Buddhists (n ϭ 52), Muslims (n ϭ 12), Hindus (n ϭ 10), and nonreligious (n ϭ 117); and 217 clients and 52 counselors in a secular or 1 of 6 religious counseling agencies. Scores on the RCI-10 had strong estimated internal consistency, 3-week and 5-month test-retest reliability, construct validity, and discriminant validity. Exploratory (Study 1) and confirmatory (Studies 4 and 6) factor analyses identified 2 highly correlated factors, suggesting a 1-factor structure as most parsimonious. Religious commitment predicted response to an imagined robbery (Study 2), marriage (Study 4), and counseling (Study 6).Interest in religion and spirituality has increased dramatically recently both within culture in general and within psychology. Substantial literatures now describe connections between religion and mental health (Miller