The Effects of Mindfulness and Reappraisal on Personal Growth Initiative and Self-Forgiveness: An Experimental Study Using Audio-Guided Reflection to Enhance Self-Forgiveness
Given the emerging association between mindfulness and eudaimonic growth, the potential of mindfulness-based reflective practice in fostering growth-promoting self-appraisals and commitment to value-congruent living in the context of self-forgiveness is worth investigation. The current study experimentally examined the effect of mindfulness, reappraisal, and the mediating role of personal growth initiative on self-forgiveness.
Methods
One hundred and eighty-one participants (59.6% female; mean age = 22.96, SD = 4.76) were randomized to three different audio-guided practices: mindful reappraisal condition (n = 62), reappraisal-only condition (n = 60), or control condition (n = 59).
Results
Repeated-measures ANOVA with pre-experimental data as the covariate showed that mindful reappraisal condition yielded significantly higher levels of personal growth initiative, relative to reappraisal-only and control conditions. None of the conditions significantly improved self-forgiveness throughout the experiment. Personal growth initiative was strongly correlated with state mindfulness, state reappraisal, and one of the facets of self-forgiveness. Path analysis confirmed the mediating role of personal growth initiative in the mindful reappraisal condition. However, the effects of mindful reappraisal on personal growth initiative and esteem restoration became negligible after controlling the effect of the reappraisal-only condition.
Conclusions
The investigation presented initial evidence supporting the linkage among state mindfulness, state reappraisal, growth intention, and esteem restoration. Personal growth initiative was found to mediate mindfulness, reappraisal, and self-forgiveness. Future empirical studies with various methodological designs are warranted to investigate the applicability of mindfulness as an additional eudaimonic pathway to self-forgiveness.
Preregistration
This study is not preregistered.
Opmerkingen
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Forgiveness is often emphasized as an important spiritual virtue that liberates people from malevolent spirits for revenge against transgressors, ends unresolved suffering, and brings peace and harmony to their lives. Nevertheless, what if the transgression is committed by oneself? How should one forgive and free oneself from self-loathing? Although self-forgiveness was once largely underrepresented in the forgiveness literature (Bauer et al., 1992), the consequences of not forgiving the self may be more detrimental than not forgiving another. One can avoid an unforgiven perpetrator, but one cannot escape an unforgiven self (Hall & Fincham, 2005). Furthermore, committing transgressions against one’s values and moralities might conflict severely with one’s perceptions of the self as a good person (Leary & Baumeister, 2000), trigger depression and anxiety (Thompson et al., 2005), as well as undermine one’s purpose and meaning in life (Cibich et al., 2016). Thus, the significance of self-forgiveness and reconciliation with the self should be noted as equally important in one’s well-being as interpersonal forgiveness.
To date, self-forgiveness is widely conceptualized as an intentional process of abandoning self-resentment in the context of perceived wrongdoing and constructively restoring a positive sense of self through a commitment to change or reaffirm values that one violated previously (Webb et al., 2017). Thus, self-forgiveness is characterized by two distinct processes: value reorientation and esteem restoration (Griffin et al., 2018). Value reorientation refers to a cognitive component that one is willing to accept responsibility and commit to align one’s behavior with one’s values in the future; esteem restoration represents an emotional component in that one replaces self-condemning emotions with self-affirming emotions over perceived wrongdoing. Each component is individually necessary and jointly sufficient for self-forgiveness to occur (Woodyatt et al., 2017a, b).
The current definition of self-forgiveness reflects a gradual shift from hedonic to a more eudaimonic conceptualization (McElroy-Heltzel et al., 2019). Instead of being an emotion-focused coping strategy, self-forgiveness is seen as a result of a eudaimonic growth process through learning from one’s mistakes and transforming to a better self based on past experiences. Such a process is driven by intrinsic psychological needs to repair the threatened sense of coherent self and relatedness in the face of perceived transgression (Woodyatt et al., 2017a, b). Moreover, substantial evidence has confirmed the association of self-forgiveness with enhanced psychological well-being, life satisfaction, and meaning (Davis et al., 2015; Peterson et al., 2017). The eudaimonic nature of self-forgiveness reflects personal growth towards the development of one’s virtue, character, and the “true self” (Bauer et al., 2015).
Among various therapeutic stage models for self-forgiveness, cognitive reappraisal of the self is identified as the shared therapeutic component for change (Enright, 1996; Jacinto & Edwards, 2011; Worthington, 2013). Reappraisal is a cognitive strategy through which stressful events are reconstrued as benign, meaningful, if not growth-promoting (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). In the context of self-forgiveness, fostering a growth-promoting self-appraisal through behavioral modification and commitment to value usually becomes a major aim in most clinical interventions (Worthington, 2013). Notably, the emphasis on personal growth and connections with values coincidentally corresponds to the core components of eudaimonic well-being, namely personal growth and purpose in life (Vitterso, 2016). Such a conscious pursuit of eudaimonic growth to cope with stressful life events is also conceptually related to personal growth initiative.
Personal growth initiative is defined as one’s active and intentional engagement in the personal growth process of different life demands (Robitschek et al., 2012). It consists of cognitive and behavioral components that operate synergistically to optimize personal growth, namely readiness for change, planfulness, utility of resources, and intentional behavior, all of which can be developed through an intentional process (Robitschek & Keyes, 2009). Substantial research has found positive correlations of personal growth initiative with an internal locus of control, intrinsic motivation, reflective coping, reduced psychological distress, a strong prediction of post-traumatic growth, and eudaimonic well-being (Mason, 2019; Robitschek & Keyes, 2009).
The conceptualization and empowering effects associated with personal growth initiative are consonant with the process of facilitating self-forgiveness. When facing self-initiated wrongdoings, one with high levels of personal growth initiative is more likely to view transgressions as opportunities for personal growth and purposefully commit to moves towards self-actualization following the subsequent restoration of positive self-regard (Woodyatt & Wenzel, 2013). Nonetheless, most research neither explicitly addresses the concept of personal growth initiative in the context of self-forgiveness nor experimentally tests their association despite their plausible relevance. A growing body of empirical research begins to link personal growth and reflective coping as eudaimonic pathways to foster interpersonal forgiveness (Heintzelman et al., 2014; Mansfield et al., 2015) yet such linkage has yet to be extended to self-forgiveness.
To rebuild value-congruent behaviors and a continuous sense of growth, one must be aware of what is occurring internally and externally under any circumstances (Vitterso, 2016). Accordingly, mindfulness practice is a potential candidate for improving interoceptive awareness and reflective skills (Brown & Ryan, 2003). Mindfulness practice originates from Buddhist contemplative practices to cultivate virtue (Shapiro et al., 2012), overcome suffering, and attain nibbana, the state of transcendent bliss and inner peace (Fronsdal, Thubten, & Chayat, 2006). In earlier scientific research, mindfulness was once regarded as a secular approach to attention regulation, with an aim to cultivate present-moment awareness of one’s physical sensations and mental activities with an open mind (Grossman et al., 2004; Kabat-Zinn, 2003). However, the complete isolation of mindfulness from Buddhist ethical teaching was criticized for its superficiality in addressing or transforming the content of intrusive thoughts (Greenberg & Mitra, 2015; Monteiro et al., 2015).
As a result, the increasing emphasis on exploring insights and cultivating ethical virtues through mindfulness practice (Greenberg & Mitra, 2015) is relevant to eudaimonic growth and well-being (Brown & Ryan, 2003). Previous research showed that mindfulness practitioners had significantly greater eudaimonic well-being than nonpractitioners (Hanley et al., 2015). One’s eudaimonic well-being is directly associated with one’s propensity to be mindful in everyday life (Josefsson et al., 2011). Given the correlational nature of existing evidence, how mindfulness practice might foster insight into one’s maladaptive patterns in self-appraisals remains unclear.
Among several mechanisms of change, the Buddhist Psychological Model (BPM) seems relevant in explaining how mindfulness practice may contribute to the cognitive process of change towards self-forgiveness (Grabovac et al., 2011). According to BPM, one’s habitual pattern of attachment and aversion to transient feeling tones on the object of awareness (i.e., sensory or mental events), rather than the object of awareness itself, triggers concomitant proliferation of mental events and eventually leads to psychological suffering (Grabovac et al., 2011). Therefore, being mindful might increase the clarity of awareness in one’s habitual attachment to self-blaming, leading to unforgiving of the self when one recalls a previous transgression. However, when one could become aware and suspend the subsequent cognitive processing arising from attachment or aversion, one might be more likely to be released from self-condemnation and forgive oneself. In addition, by freeing up the attentional capacity from unnecessary mental proliferation and being aware of the transitory nature of the self (Hölzel et al., 2011), one might be more likely to detach from identification with a static sense of the self and become conscious of potential eudaimonic growth from the guilt-provoking incident. Nevertheless, such an assertion of mindfulness to foster self-forgiveness awaits further empirical evidence.
Considering the theoretical linkage of self-forgiveness with mindfulness and reappraisal respectively, it is worth investigating whether the combined application of mindfulness and reappraisal can foster self-forgiveness. Although mindfulness and reappraisal might seem conceptually contradictory at first glance—with mindfulness emphasizing non-judgmental awareness and reappraisal involving cognitive reframing—scholars elaborated their relationship as mutually inclusive. “Mindfulness-to-meaning theory” provides a framework that links mindfulness and reappraisal, which argues that mindfulness could facilitate a metacognitive state of awareness. This state enables individuals to decenter from stress appraisals and broaden their attention to include previously unattended contextual data. Such broadened awareness allows individuals to identify and savor positive features of their life experience, which promotes personal transformation and growth (Garland et al., 2015). Such notion carries a profound implication that mindfulness is not ostensibly a non-evaluative process but does promote a salutary form of evaluative cognitive-affective processing, namely positive reappraisal, thereby engendering eudaimonic meaning and values-driven behavior (Garland et al., 2015).
The integration of mindfulness with reappraisal is expected to yield distinct outcomes compared to reappraisal-only practice for several reasons. First, previous research has indicated that reappraisal-only practice can be more effortful and cognitively taxing (Wenzel et al., 2023), particularly in high-intensity emotional situations, as it requires overriding established appraisals (Milyavsky et al., 2019; Sheppes et al., 2011). Mindfulness, on the other hand, is associated with tranquility, concentration (Chan et al., 2023), and replenished cognitive resources (Friese et al., 2012; Rosch, 2007) because it does not involve changing one’s impulses but rather accepting and observing them (Shallcross et al., 2013). Thus, mindfulness reduces the cognitive costs associated with reappraisal by fostering an open attitude towards emotional experiences, making it easier to engage in reappraisal even in high-intensity emotional situations (Troy et al., 2018). Second, mindful reappraisal enhances emotional regulation by promoting a balanced awareness of both positive and negative aspects of a situation, which can lead to more adaptive and enduring reappraisals (Chiesa et al., 2013). Thirdly, mindful reappraisal supports eudaimonic growth by aligning reappraisal efforts with values-driven behavior, as mindfulness encourages individuals to connect their actions to broader life meaning and values (Garland et al., 2015).
Given this theoretical delineation, empirical studies examining the role of mindfulness in the reappraisal of life events began to emerge (Tedeschi & Blevins, 2015; Wang et al., 2023). For example, researchers explicitly combined mindfulness and reappraisal practices as a daily diary intervention to promote well-being among university students in times of daily life stress, with preliminary evidence that mindful reappraisal helped produce more positive affect and buffer against negative affect in daily life stressors than reappraisal-only practice (Pogrebtsova et al., 2018). Nonetheless, mindful reappraisal was not empirically investigated compared to reappraisal alone to investigate its possible incremental benefits in the realm of self-forgiveness.
This paper responds to the growing call for the immediate effects of audio-guided practice despite a surge of singular emotion-focused mindfulness practices that incorporate self-forgiveness. Research on self-forgiveness has predominantly focused on its applications in psychotherapy. Beyond the clinical context, few studies have empirically investigated the effects of these brief self-help practices on facilitating self-forgiveness following a transgression experience. Therefore, the present study aimed to experimentally investigate (1) the relationship among mindfulness, reappraisal, personal growth initiative, and self-forgiveness and (2) whether the combined application of mindfulness and reappraisal facilitates self-forgiveness through personal growth initiative. We hypothesized that both mindful reappraisal practice and reappraisal-only practice would significantly increase one’s state self-forgiveness and personal growth initiative as compared to placebo control. Moreover, the increase in one’s state of self-forgiveness in the mindful reappraisal condition was hypothesized to be significantly greater than that in the reappraisal-only condition. Besides, personal growth initiative is hypothesized to mediate the relationship between state mindfulness, state reappraisal, and state self-forgiveness.
Method
Participants
In total, 181 Hong Kong Chinese adults (59.6% female; mean age = 22.96, SD = 4.76) were recruited through university mass emails and Facebook. The majority (86.4%) were non-meditators. 13.6% reported some mindfulness experience, with its length ranging from 2 weeks to 10 years. A power analysis conducted by G*Power 3.1 (Faul et al., 2009) identified that a sample of 159 would be required to achieve 80% power in detecting the small to medium effect sizes (f = 0.25) with an alpha of 0.05. Four incomplete responses were excluded. Ultimately, 177 participants (60.8% female; mean age = 22.91, SD = 4.76) were included in data analysis.
Procedure
All participants provided informed consent and completed baseline measures of their state mindfulness and personal growth initiative through Qualtrics. After that, the webpage directed them to listen to a standardized guilt-inducing audio recording that guided them to recall and write about an interpersonal transgression that induced feelings of guilt and self-resentment. To verify the effectiveness of the guilt induction, participants subsequently completed a single-item guilt intensity scale as a manipulation check as well as measures of state self-forgiveness and state reappraisal. Participants were then randomly assigned via a computerized block randomization algorithm (block size = 6, selected to enhance allocation concealment while maintaining group balance) into one of the three conditions: mindful reappraisal, reappraisal-only, and control condition. Allocation concealment was ensured to the experimenter, as the condition assignment was generated independently and revealed only to both the experimenter and the participant after the completion of the experiment. Each condition consisted of a 14-min audio recording, following an identical amount of writing instruction. All recordings were delivered by the same speaker, with standardized pacing, volume, and duration to control for nonspecific factors. Immediately after listening to the recording, all participants completed a post-experiment questionnaire on their state self-forgiveness, mindfulness, reappraisal, as well as personal growth initiative. Debriefing followed upon completion of each individual’s participation in the study. Participants assigned to the mindful reappraisal condition listened to an audio track that contained a guided mindfulness sitting meditation, with instructions of sustained attention on breathing and sounds. Then, they were guided to focus their attention on the thoughts and feelings derived from the transgression. The audio gently invites participants to forgive themselves or accept the present self. Finally, the audio ended with a reappraisal component guiding participants to think of the transgression as an opportunity for increased self-understanding, growth, and insights, and to record their thoughts in a reappraisal writing exercise. The meditation script was developed under repeated consultations and revisions by qualified mindfulness teachers, as referenced from Kornfield’s (2011) forgiveness meditation and Brach’s (2019) RAIN meditation.
Participants assigned to the reappraisal-only condition were explicitly guided to reinterpret the nature of that transgression and to think about the situation from another person’s perspective such as a friend. They were guided to record their thoughts in a reappraisal writing exercise. This condition differed notably from mindful reappraisal because participants were not given guided instructions related to mindfulness meditation (e.g., mindful breathing and self-forgiveness).
Participants assigned to the control condition listened to a recording that comprised an audio recording of an excerpt from Yu et al. (2021) related to the process of rock formation in nature. After that, participants were instructed to write down what they remembered about the rocks as a summary writing exercise. No instructions related to mindfulness meditation and reappraisal were involved in this condition.
Measures
All measures used in this study are in Chinese. All scales were back-translated into Chinese by three independent translators who are native Chinese-English bilinguals (Cha et al., 2007). To ensure conceptual equivalence, the translators resolved any discrepancies in translation.
State Self-Forgiveness Dual-Process Scale (Griffin et al., 2018)
A 10-item scale was completed to assess the dual process of one’s state self-forgiveness (i.e., value reorientation and esteem restoration) in response to a specific transgression. Each of the subscales consists of 5 items rated on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The two subscales demonstrated good internal consistencies in the present study (α = 0.69 for value reorientation, α = 0.87 for esteem restoration).
State Reappraisal Inventory (SRI; Ganor et al., 2018)
A 12-item scale was used to measure two dimensions of one’s state reappraisal—increased positive appraisal and decreased negative appraisal. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Both subscales showed acceptable internal consistencies in the current study (α = 0.73 for increased positive appraisal, α = 0.72 for decreased negative appraisal).
State Mindfulness Scale (SMS; Tanay & Bernstein, 2013)
The 21-item scale is composed of two subscales that assess one’s mindfulness state of mind and body respectively. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very well). The two subscales demonstrated satisfactory internal consistencies in the present study (α = 0.90 for state mindfulness of mind, α = 0.79 for state mindfulness of body).
Personal Growth Initiative Scale-II (PGIS-II; Robitschek et al., 2012)
It is a 16-item scale that measures four dimensions of an intentional process for personal growth, namely readiness for change, planfulness, using resources, and intentional behavior. Each item was rated on a 6-point Likert scale from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The four dimensions demonstrated excellent internal consistencies in the present study (α = 0.83 for readiness for change, α = 0.89 for planfulness, α = 0.81 for using resources, α = 0.87 for intentional behavior).
Manipulation Check on Guilt Induction
The real-time effects of guilt-inducing audio on one’s subjective experience of acute yet transient feelings state on guilt were assessed. Grounded on the evidence that using single-item mood ratings works comparably well with lengthier multiple-item scales (Verster et al., 2021), a single-item rating was developed by the first author to assess one’s intensity of guilt feeling, following the recall of transgression. The item was written as “how strong are your feelings of guilt at the moment after recalling and writing this incident?” A 10-point rating scale was applied to allow more differentiation in scoring, ranging from 1 (no guilt) to 10 (extremely severe guilt).
Data Analyses
Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics (version 28). Composite and subfactor scores were calculated respectively for state mindfulness, state reappraisal, growth initiative, and state self-forgiveness, according to their respective scoring methods. Repeated-measures ANOVAs were conducted to investigate the effects of state mindfulness and state reappraisal conditions on personal growth initiative and state self-forgiveness, compared to the control condition. SPSS PROCESS macro (Model 4) was used to test the hypothesized mediation effect of personal growth initiative in the relationship between mindfulness, reappraisal, and state self-forgiveness. Hayes and Preacher’s (2014) guidelines for calculating direct and indirect effects using a multicategorical predictor were followed. Specifically, condition variables were dummy coded with the control condition treated as the reference category and were treated as the independent variables. In total, two dummy coded variables were created. Post-experimental scores of personal growth initiative and state self-forgiveness were considered as the mediator and dependent variable (DV) respectively. The pre-experimental score of the mediator and DV was controlled as covariates in the model.
Results
One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated that the three conditions did not statistically differ in terms of participants’ mindfulness experience (F(2,176) = 0.102, p = 0.903) and age (F(2,176) = 0.276, p = 0.759). No baseline difference in guilt scores was detected (F(2,176) = 0.714, p = 0.491) among mindful reappraisal (mean = 5.44, SD = 1.89), reappraisal-only (mean = 4.98, SD = 1.97), and the control condition (mean = 5.28, SD = 2.48). Moreover, results of ANOVA showed no significant baseline group differences in state mindfulness (F(2,176) = 1.64, p = 0.196), state reappraisal (F(2,176) = 0.144, p = 0.866), growth initiative (F(2,176) = 0.254, p = 0.776), and state self-forgiveness (F(2,176) = 0.017, p = 0.983).
Manipulation Check on State Mindfulness
A repeated-measures ANOVA indicated significant group differences in the pre-post change of state mindfulness composite score (F(2,176) = 27.1, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.236). Levene’s test indicated that the assumption of homogeneity of variance had been violated for post-experiment scores in state mindfulness (p = 0.038). Post hoc comparison using the Games-Howell tests indicated that mindful reappraisal statistically scored higher than the control condition (mean difference = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.37 to 0.85, p < 0.001) but did not statistically differ from reappraisal-only conditions (mean difference = 0.038, 95% CI = − 0.16 to 0.23, p = 0.89).
Manipulation Check on State Reappraisal
A repeated-measures ANOVA indicated significant group differences in state reappraisal composite score (F(2,176) = 3.95, p = 0.021, η2 = 0.043). Pairwise comparisons using Bonferroni correction indicated that mindful reappraisal statistically scored higher than the control condition (mean difference = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.03 to 0.43, p = 0.02) but compared to reappraisal-only conditions, the difference was statistically not significant (mean difference = 0.064, 95% CI = − 0.14 to 0.26, p = 1.00).
Effects of Conditions on Changes in Outcome Variables
Two separate repeated-measures ANOVAs were conducted to evaluate the experimental effects on state self-forgiveness and personal growth initiative respectively among three conditions (Table 1). A significant time × condition interaction effect on the pre-post change in personal growth initiative composite score was found (F(2,176) = 3.41, p = 0.035, η2 = 0.037). Post hoc analyses using Bonferroni correction showed that the increase in personal growth initiative in the mindful reappraisal condition was significantly higher than in the control condition (mean difference = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.002 to 0.43, p = 0.048), but the reappraisal-only condition was not (mean difference = 0.18, 95% CI = − 0.03 to 0.40, p = 0.120). The mean difference between the mindful reappraisal and reappraisal-only condition was non-significant (mean difference = 0.044, 95% CI = − 0.15 to 0.24, p = 1.00). No significant group difference was detected on the pre-post change in state self-forgiveness (F(2,176) = 1.49, p = 0.228, η2 = 0.017). All conditions yielded a significant increase in state self-forgiveness over time (F(1,176) = 32.0, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.15). Specifically, analyses of ANOVA indicated that the facet of value reorientation showed a statistically significant drop among all conditions across time (F(1,176) = 10.1, p = 0.002, η2 = 0.06). All conditions yielded a significant increase in esteem restoration over time (F(1,176) = 131, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.43).
Table 1
Conditional effects in study variables
Conditions
Pre
Post
Time × condition
M(SD)
M(SD)
F (2,176)
p
η2
State mindfulness
Mindful reappraisal
3.82(0.58)
4.12(0.43)
27.1***
< 0.001
0.236
Reappraisal-only
3.84(0.53)
4.10(0.54)
Control
3.99(0.56)
3.69(0.65)
State reappraisal
Mindful reappraisal
3.26(0.59)
3.80(0.52)
3.95*
0.021
0.043
Reappraisal-only
3.32(0.54)
3.79(0.52)
Control
3.30(0.64)
3.61(0.51)
Personal growth initiative
Mindful reappraisal
3.39(0.68)
3.79(0.62)
3.41*
0.035
0.037
Reappraisal-only
3.29(0.78)
3.67(0.84)
Control
3.32(0.75)
3.50(0.67)
State self-forgiveness
Mindful reappraisal
5.22(0.74)
5.50(0.72)
1.49
0.228
0.017
Reappraisal-only
5.19(0.77)
5.35(0.84)
Control
5.20(0.68)
5.36(0.79)
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.0001
Mediation Analysis
Correlations among all studied variables at baseline are shown in Table 2. Only one dimension of self-forgiveness, namely esteem restoration, showed a strong association with state mindfulness (r = 0.42, p < 0.01), personal growth initiative (r = 0.39, p < 0.01), and state reappraisal (r = 0.40, p = 0.01). Given the result that value reorientation did not correlate with any variables, only esteem restoration, instead of overall state self-forgiveness, was included in the mediation analysis. Cross-sectional mediation analysis found significant indirect effects of state mindfulness (β = 0.26; 95% CI [0.10 to 0.45]) and state reappraisal (β = 0.13; 95% CI [0.03 to 0.25]) on esteem restoration through personal growth initiative respectively, as shown in Fig. 1.
Table 2
Bivariate correlations of study variables, including respective factors in each construct, at pre-experiment (n = 177)
Variable
M(SD)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1
Readiness for change
3.07(0.94)
1
2
Planfulness
3.09(0.89)
0.78**
1
3
Using resources
3.43(0.93)
0.45**
0.49**
1
4
Intentional behavior
3.72(0.80)
0.57**
0.58**
0.53**
1
5
Increased positive appraisal
3.33(0.75)
0.17*
0.13
0.19**
0.22**
1
6
Decreased negative appraisal
3.22(0.69)
0.06
0.10
0.13
0.15
0.23**
1
7
State of mind
3.87(0.58)
0.55**
0.48**
0.31**
0.41**
0.20**
0.02
1
8
State of body
3.91(0.60)
0.45**
0.41**
0.31**
0.35**
0.16*
0.18*
0.75**
1
9
Value reorientation
5.37(0.99)
0.06
0.01
0.06
0.04
− 0.04
− 0.06
− 0.01
0.02
1
10
Esteem restoration
5.03(1.08)
0.40**
0.38**
0.21**
0.29**
0.37**
0.24**
0.41**
0.36**
− 0.01
1
11
State mindfulness
3.88(0.56)
0.55**
0.49**
0.33**
0.41**
0.20**
0.07
0.98**
0.87**
− 0.00
0.42**
1
12
Personal growth initiative
3.31(0.75)
0.87**
0.90**
0.71**
0.80**
0.21**
0.13
0.54**
0.47**
0.04
0.39**
0.55**
1
13
State self-forgiveness
5.20(0.75)
0.33**
0.28**
0.19*
0.24**
0.25**
0.13
0.30**
0.28**
0.67**
0.73**
0.31**
0.32**
1
14
State reappraisal
3.28(0.58)
0.16*
0.15
0.21**
0.24**
0.87**
0.67**
0.16*
0.21**
− 0.06
0.40**
0.19*
0.22**
0.26**
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01
Fig. 1
Unstandardized regression coefficients for the proposed mediation. The unstandardized regression coefficients between esteem restoration, state mindfulness, and state reappraisal, controlling for personal growth initiative, are in parentheses. **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
Figure 2 shows the experimental mediation models by condition. Mindful reappraisal condition could significantly predict personal growth initiative (β = 0.26, 95% CI [0.10 to 0.43]) compared to the control condition. The indirect effect of mindful reappraisal condition on esteem restoration through personal growth initiative was significant (β = 0.145, 95% CI [0.05 to 0.26]). After controlling for the effect of the mediator, the direct effects of mindful reappraisal condition, compared to the control condition, on esteem restoration were not significant (β = 0.074, 95% CI [− 0.13 to 0.28]). By contrast, reappraisal-only condition could not significantly predict personal growth initiative (β = 0.17, 95% CI [− 0.005 to 0.34]) compared to the control condition. The indirect effect of reappraisal-only condition on esteem restoration through personal growth initiative was not significant (β = 0.09, 95% CI [− 0.015 to 0.20]). The direct effect of reappraisal-only condition on esteem restoration was also not significant (β = 0.058, 95% CI [− 0.015 to 0.26]).
Fig. 2
Unstandardized regression coefficients for the experimental mediation models by condition. The unstandardized regression coefficients between esteem restoration and two conditions, controlling for personal growth initiative, are in parentheses. Dotted lines represent non-significant paths, whereas dashed lines represent significant paths. **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
In addition, mediation analysis indicated that both mindful reappraisal (β = 0.50, 95% CI [0.33 to 0.67]) and the reappraisal-only condition, relative to the control condition (β = 0.46, 95% CI [0.29 to 0.64]), could significantly predict the post-experimental state mindfulness (Fig. 3). The post-experimental score of state mindfulness could significantly predict personal growth initiative (β = 0.34, 95% CI [0.19 to 0.49]). The indirect effects of both conditions on personal growth initiative through state mindfulness were significant (MR: β = 0.17; 95% CI [0.09 to 0.28]; R-only: β = 0.158; 95% CI [0.08 to 0.26]). After controlling for the effect of the mediator, the direct effect of both conditions on personal growth initiative was not significant (MR: β = 0.10; 95% CI [− 0.08 to 0.28]; R-only: β = 0.02; 95% CI [− 0.15 to 0.20]).
Fig. 3
Unstandardized regression coefficients for two meditation models. The unstandardized regression coefficients between personal growth initiative and two conditions, controlling for state mindfulness, are in parentheses. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
Discussion
The present research theorized about and experimentally investigated the relationship among state mindfulness, reappraisal, and the mediating role of personal growth initiative on self-forgiveness. The core research questions were whether genuine self-forgiveness can be facilitated through a simple experimental induction of mindful reappraisal and reappraisal-only practices, and how personal growth initiative fostered the process of self-forgiveness. Results showed a significantly medium-sized correlation between state mindfulness and state self-forgiveness. State mindfulness corresponds mainly to the facet of esteem restoration in state self-forgiveness, with an implication that being mindful enables people to restore self-directed negativity with elevated self-compassion through nonjudgmental acceptance (Kiken & Shook, 2011). However, state mindfulness has zero correlation with the facet of value reorientation in self-forgiveness. In addition to the finding that mindful reappraisal resulted in a non-significant change in value reorientation, the present results suggest that the induction of state mindfulness may not lead to instant recommitment to values, as its purpose is not specifically focused on planning or preparing for a particular outcome (Whitaker & Brannon, 2023). Such a notion also aligns with the evidence that there is no association between state mindfulness and trait mindfulness, which include value clarification and eudaimonic well-being (Hanley et al., 2015; Pavlov et al., 2015; Tanaka et al., 2014), and that the development of insight was strongly dependent on regular meditation practice (Bergomi et al., 2015).
The study provided initial evidence supporting the mediating role of personal growth initiative in the relationship among state mindfulness, reappraisal, and an aspect of self-forgiveness, namely esteem restoration. In accordance with the hypothesis, mindful reappraisal is the only condition that could significantly enhance personal growth initiative, which significantly links to changes in esteem restoration. The results correspond to previous studies wherein mindfulness-based training can enhance one’s sense of continued learning, changing, and growth as a person (Iani et al., 2017). Furthermore, consistent with the eudaimonic approach to self-forgiveness, the intention of personal growth towards purpose, virtue, and character development might facilitate one’s readiness to acknowledge wrongdoings and to reconstruct a positive sense of the self (Mansfield et al., 2015).
However, despite considerable research demonstrating the benefits of single-session mindfulness on stress physiology, mood, and cognitive performance (Fennell et al., 2016; Johnson et al., 2015; Quek et al., 2021), the experimental results presented in this study indicated that neither single-session mindful reappraisal nor reappraisal-only practices were sufficient to significantly increase one’s state self-forgiveness compared to the control condition. The lack of robust improvement in self-forgiveness across conditions, especially in value reorientation, suggests that explicit prompts encouraging the intention, planning, and execution of reparative behavior may be needed in self-forgiveness contemplative practices. Previous research on laboratory-based self-forgiveness exercises has shown that guided reflection emphasizing personal responsibility and reparative actions (e.g., accepting fault, making apologies, and amends) yields greater self-forgiveness shifts than self-forgiveness-only practices, which focus solely on attitudinal change related to the incident and releasing excessive guilt or self-punishment) (Exline et al., 2011). This underscores the role of reparative behavior as a possible predictor of self-forgiveness and implies that premature emphasis on self-acceptance and reducing self-condemnation may inadvertently weaken motivation for reparative actions and limit meaningful shifts in self-forgiveness.
In addition, the null results for state self-forgiveness in our experiment prompt us to consider various facilitators and barriers that may play a crucial role. For example, past research has shown that reparative actions, a robust predictor of self-forgiveness, are more likely when relationships are close, offenses are recent, and the process of apology or amends has already begun (Exline et al., 2011). Beyond these contextual factors, individual differences such as spirituality have been identified as facilitators of self-forgiveness in prior work (Davis et al., 2015). Spiritual practices often emphasize compassion, acceptance, and reconciliation with oneself, which may synergize with mindfulness and reappraisal in promoting self-forgiveness. On the other hand, affective states such as anger, anxiety, and shame are shown to be robust predictors of self-unforgiveness (Macaskill, 2012). In our experiment, these emotions may have acted as barriers to self-forgiveness, offsetting the effects of mindfulness and reappraisal.
Furthermore, the null result of self-forgiveness reaffirmed that a single-session experiment is not enough to shift individuals from a pre-contemplative stage to action in the process of self-forgiveness (Norcross et al., 2011). Such a brief self-forgiveness exercise inherently limits our ability to capture the dynamic and iterative process of self-forgiveness, which often requires sustained effort to disrupt intro-punitive tendencies (Mauger et al., 1992) and typically unfolds gradually over time through ongoing interactions between value reorientation and esteem restoration (Enright, 1996). To address this limitation, longitudinal studies with repeated experimental inductions and follow-up assessments could clarify how self-forgiveness develops over time, particularly when mindfulness and reappraisal are internalized and lead to reparative actions. A sequential experimental design is needed to understand the potential temporal sequencing of value reorientation and esteem restoration (i.e., whether value reorientation precedes esteem restoration, or vice versa) and how their interaction contributes to genuine self-forgiveness (Bem et al., 2021). Further research and testing will be required to refine and understand how experimental induction can be translated into scalable low-intensity interventions for practical application in real-world settings.
It is worth noting that while self-forgiveness is inherently a private and intrapersonal process, sociocultural factors may influence the way self-forgiveness is motivated and expressed in specific populations (Ho & Fung, 2011), such as the Hong Kong Chinese sample in our study. Prior cross-cultural research has found that both Chinese Americans and Hong Kong Chinese participants were less likely to share personal examples of self-forgiveness when asked, compared to European American and Brazilian counterparts (Cook et al., 2021). Such suppressed verbal expression of self-forgiveness may stem from efforts to “save face” and avoid social sanctions tied to past failures (Cheng et al., 2010; Oyserman et al., 2002). In the same study, Chinese Americans and Hong Kong Chinese participants were more likely to recognize the impact of forgiveness on others and quicker to emphasize that offenders should make amends before receiving forgiveness (Cook et al., 2021). These beliefs regarding the social consequences of transgressions and the importance of personal responsibility in rectifying harm may similarly shape the expression of self-forgiveness in collectivistic contexts. For instance, self-forgiveness in Hong Kong Chinese may manifest through action-oriented restitution rather than explicit verbal or emotional expression. Future studies need to examine this possible difference cross-culturally.
In collectivistic cultures, self-forgiveness is likely to be motivated by the need to restore communal trust rather than seeking personal emotional relief. This aligns with the findings that individuals from vertical-collectivistic cultures (e.g., Asian societies that tend to accept inequalities within the cultural system) prioritize concerns about how interpersonal violations affect their social standing, which may lead to efforts to “save face” for oneself or others (Hui & Bond, 2009). Therefore, the motivation of self-forgiveness in such contexts is to restore one’s standing within the social group and maintain communal trust. Such cultural norms help maintain social cohesion, preserve respect, and mitigate collective humiliation. Vertical collectivism may also tie self-forgiveness to Confucian values emphasizing moral accountability (Ho, 2019). As such, self-forgiveness might then be perceived as legitimate only if it aligns with communal expectations or judgments. For example, public failures (e.g., relational infidelity) may be internally forgiven only after external “face” is restored (e.g., through relationship repair). However, it is important to note that these studies focused on older samples, whereas our current sample consists mainly of university students. The increasing individualism of younger generations in Hong Kong (Jiang & Zhang, 2025) suggests evolving cultural dynamics. These generational and cultural dynamics challenge Western assumptions of self-forgiveness as a universal, intrapersonal process, underscoring the need for culturally grounded frameworks of self-forgiveness in future research. Moreover, the present study showed that all conditions enhanced esteem restoration after the experiment. The lack of between-group differences in the increase in esteem restoration raises the possibility of demand characteristics and expectancy effects influencing the results. During recruitment, the explicit mention of "self-forgiveness" as the study’s theme may have primed participants to expect improvement, leading them to unconsciously align their responses with perceived therapeutic goals (Geers et al., 2005). Additionally, participants who were more ready to self-forgive may have been more likely to join the study, whereas those who were not prepared for self-forgiveness might have avoided participation. This conditioning effect could explain the uniform enhancement of esteem restoration across conditions, as participants might have engaged in self-induced soothing affect or cognition to meet experimenter expectations.
Furthermore, it is worth noting that self-acceptance in the form of restored positive self-regard is contingent upon actual and ongoing behavior change reflecting (re)commitment and sustained efforts to live by one’s (transgressed) values/morals (Wenzel et al., 2012). Thus, the shared outcome of enhanced esteem restoration without significant value orientation change suggests that the one-off experimental induction is insufficient to induce the internal transformation process necessary for genuine self-forgiveness. Instead, the observed improvements in esteem restoration may reflect expectation-driven adjustments rather than meaningful psychological shifts. To mitigate demand characteristics and expectancy effects, future research should adopt blinded recruitment practices, such as avoiding mentions of “self-forgiveness” in recruitment materials. Additionally, supplementing self-report measures with behavioral indicators of value reorientation (e.g., tracking commitment to value-aligned actions or behavior change) might provide multi-faceted insights into the mechanisms of self-forgiveness, mitigating the limitations of subjective reporting. These strategies might enhance the validity of findings and offer deeper insights into the dynamic interplay between psychological processes and behavioral transformation involved in genuine self-forgiveness.
Contrary to expectations, mindful reappraisal and reappraisal-only practices were not significantly different from each other on increased state mindfulness. Interestingly, such a finding is consonant with the recent identification of decentering as a shared mechanism between mindfulness and cognitive reappraisal, including the evidence that cognitive reappraisal facilitates decentering (Kobayashi et al., 2020). Both mindfulness and cognitive reappraisal belong to emotional regulation techniques that encourage one to engage in decentering, or the process of seeing thoughts or feelings as objective events in the mind rather than personally identifying with them (Hayes-Skelton & Graham, 2013). More recent research argued that non-mindfulness exercises, such as re-perceiving trainings (Ausiàs Baer, 2019; Burzler & Tran, 2022; Cebolla et al., 2018), may also cultivate skills such as awareness of thoughts and feelings as well as the orientation to experience—both of which are theoretical and empirical factors of mindfulness (Tran et al., 2014).
As the State Mindfulness Scale (SMS) mainly taps into the momentary awareness of thoughts and bodily sensations (Tanay & Bernstein, 2013), it raises questions about whether this scale, with its focus on bare awareness, sufficiently captures the unique quality of mindfulness-based practices. Although both conditions showed similar effects in increasing state mindfulness, the quality of awareness may differ. Specifically, attention to the present moment can be either reactive and judgmental, or open, curious, and accepting (Greenberg & Mitra, 2015). Alternative scales such as the Curiosity scale and Decentering scale in the Toronto Mindfulness Scale (Lau et al., 2006) might also better capture the quality of awareness and different aspects of mindfulness. Moreover, unique outcomes of mindfulness cultivation—such as equanimity, a mental state of even-mindedness and hedonic independence (Chan et al., 2023)—was not explicitly measured in our study. Equanimity could be a relevant contributor to mental well-being (Chan et al., 2014) and by extension, self-forgiveness. Future studies could consider incorporating equanimity scales such as the Equanimity Scale-16 (Rogers et al., 2021) to explore how brief mindful practice may bring forth distinct facets of equanimity that may contribute to state self-forgiveness.
Regarding the measurement of self-forgiveness, we acknowledge that state measures may be more appropriate for assessing the immediate effects of a brief mindfulness practice. However, using both state and trait assessments of self-forgiveness could provide a clearer picture of both the cultivation process and the states of self-forgiveness itself. Self-forgiveness is theorized to involve phased nonlinear mechanisms, such as esteem restoration and value reorientation, which typically unfold over time. Our single-session design and reliance on state measures cannot extrapolate whether transient emotional relief can turn into lasting psychological change. To address this gap, trait-level measures, such as the Heartland Forgiveness Scale (HFS) Self-Forgiveness Subscale (Yamhure Thompson et al., 2002), could be incorporated in future studies to elucidate the transformative process of state self-forgiveness into self-forgiveness tendencies when a longitudinal experimental design with repeated-measures and practices is applied. The combined use of state and trait measures might more effectively measure self-forgiveness that is a theoretically complex construct at the moment of experimental induction as well as longer-term changes over time.
Limitation and Future Directions
First, the sample mainly consisted of young individuals recruited via convenience sampling. It is unknown whether findings generalize to other populations (e.g., non-college students and clinical populations). Moreover, there was heterogeneity within the sample regarding their level of mindfulness experience. Future work should purposively observe how the utility of mindfulness practices on self-forgiveness may differ between meditators and non-meditators. Second, to avoid recalling traumatic experiences, participants were guided not to recall severe transgression experiences as the subject of the experiment. A low severity of the transgression inevitably impacted one’s perceived need to seek self-forgiveness and their subsequent engagement in audio-guided reflection. As self-forgiveness is driven by the degree of threats to one’s psychological needs, future studies should assess one’s perceived need, significance, and severity of the recalled incident when accounting for the effect of a forgiveness resource. Another limitation could be using a single-item guilt measure in this study. Single-item measures are best used (a) for measuring unidimensional constructs (Wanous et al., 1997) and (b) when a holistic impression is informative (Youngblut & Casper, 1993). It is contended that this specification is highly appropriate for overall guilt feeling. Despite the advantages of single-item measures in their validity and reliability (Robins et al., 2001; Verster et al., 2021), future studies might attempt to replicate the study using a direct measure of guilt experienced during the experiment, especially when guilt is considered an aid, if not a pre-requisite (Bem et al., 2021; Wenzel et al., 2012) to self-forgiveness. Moreover, mindfulness was examined only in combination with reappraisal, precluding the evaluation of pure mindfulness on dependent variables. As a result, the discussion about the interaction effect of mindfulness and reappraisal remains inconclusive due to the inability to rule out mindfulness as the single cause to fully account for the effects of mindful reappraisal. In future research, the adoption of a full factorial design may further elucidate the unique and shared effects of mindfulness and reappraisal. Other important questions for future directions include the trajectory changes in attaining both cognitive and emotional components of genuine self-forgiveness and also, how long the state of personal growth initiative lasts, and whether it could lead to behavioral outcomes such as reduction in value-incongruent behaviors, given its immediate effect of enhanced personal growth initiative after practice in the study.
In summary, this paper provides initial evidence that self-forgiveness is related to state mindfulness, state reappraisal, growth intention, and esteem restoration. Personal growth initiative was found to mediate mindfulness, reappraisal, and self-forgiveness. A brief experimental induction of mindful reappraisal may not yield improved state self-forgiveness above and beyond those imparted by reappraisal-only practice. Given the established practice effect of mindfulness on one’s well-being, however, the potential of mindfulness to be a eudaimonic pathway towards self-forgiveness warrants further investigation. Future empirical studies with various methodological designs are warranted to investigate the applicability of mindfulness as an additional eudaimonic pathway to self-forgiveness.
Declarations
Ethics Approval
All study procedures received ethical approvals by the Survey and Behavioral Research Ethics Committee, The Chinese University of Hong Kong. The study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Use of Artificial Intelligence
ChatGPT was minimally used to improve the grammar of the manuscript.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
share
DELEN
Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)
Optie A:
Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
Met BSL Psychologie Totaal blijf je als professional steeds op de hoogte van de nieuwste ontwikkelingen binnen jouw vak. Met het online abonnement heb je toegang tot een groot aantal boeken, protocollen, vaktijdschriften en e-learnings op het gebied van psychologie en psychiatrie. Zo kun je op je gemak en wanneer het jou het beste uitkomt verdiepen in jouw vakgebied.
The Effects of Mindfulness and Reappraisal on Personal Growth Initiative and Self-Forgiveness: An Experimental Study Using Audio-Guided Reflection to Enhance Self-Forgiveness