The Role of Forgiveness in Strategic Conflict
Forgiveness is central to managing future conflict. Without forgiveness, people build up resentment toward others who have hurt them, and that resentment may very well serve as fuel for the next conflict.
Also, resentment and decreased good will toward a partner may cause people to believe that they are justified in using destructive behaviors during a future conflict (Fincham et al., 2004). Forgiveness, on the other hand, allows people to at minimum let go of the negative emotions and at best to reconcile. Forgiveness may break a recurring and reciprocal pattern of behavior and help people establish a new pattern of more productive conflict (Kim & Smith, 1993).Worse, people who do not forgive may seek revenge, an attempt to harm the person who harmed them. They may set in motion a reciprocal pattern because after they hurt someone, that person may then want to hurt them again because this person now sees himself/herself as the victim. The two take turns as victim and perpetrator and have very different perceptions of the degree of harm they inflict on the other. Eventually, the degree of anger and the consequences of both people’s behavior will be completely out of proportion to the original event (Kim & Smith, 1993).
To diminish the likelihood that desire for revenge may influence future conflict interaction and to ease the path to forgiveness, Kim and Smith (1993) suggested that during conflict people should try not to make comments that disparage the other’s integrity. Comments should focus on content or instrumental goals and not on identity goals (Chapter 9). If the other person is offended, people should apologize immediately and appropriately (see Chapter 14). Finally, they also suggest that people be alert for the existence of the desire for revenge. Because revenge is no longer viewed as socially acceptable, people may hide their feelings and dwell on them until they explode during a future conflict.
BOX 15.2 CAN LEARNING ABOUT FORGIVENESS HELP?
Rye and Pargament (2002) compared Christian and secular female college students regarding the role of intervention in forgiveness. (A control group with no intervention was also included.) Female doctoral students were trained to conduct both religious and secular workshops. The sessions corresponded to Worthington's five stage process: recall the hurt, develop empathy toward the offender, altruistic gift, commitment to forgive, and hold on to the forgiveness. Participants in the religious workshops were actively encouraged to call on their religious beliefs, whereas religion and spirituality were not mentioned in the secular groups.
Results indicated that participants in both the secular and religious intervention situations improved significantly more than those who experienced no intervention in terms of their level of forgiveness for the specific offender and their knowledge of forgiveness. However, no significant difference was found for their likelihood to forgive across a variety of situations. Participants also indicated improvements in both existential well-being and their personal well-being, and these improvements increased between the pre-test and the six week post-test. But no treatment effects were found for hope, depression, religious well-being, and hostility. Contrary to expectations, no differences were found between the two types of intervention. Also, participants in both conditions viewed the intervention workshops favorably.