「感恩融入寬恕課程」對感恩、寬恕與幸福感影響之研究

Wan-Yun Chen; Yu-Ting Wang; Shu-Chien Hsiao; Sheng-Ling Chang; Hsiang-Yi Wu

doi:10.6251/BEP.202412_56(2).0006

山西大学，您好！

感谢采购，人社期刊库｜人社论文库，期间：2025/01/01~2025/12/31

感谢试用，科学期刊库｜科学论文库，期间：2025/04/01~2025/06/30

浏览高级检索

关闭
检索检索高级检索出版物检索
浏览期刊主题浏览核心期刊浏览期刊拼音浏览

关闭

查询符号(半角)	查询符号意义说明
空格	表示为「AND」两个查询词之交集
双引号 ( " " )	片语以双引号标示开始及结束，而且只寻找出现顺序相同的字词，例： " image process "
?	表示一个字母切截，输入两个?表两个字母，依此类推，例：输入「Appl?」，查得结果应为appl e , appl y … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
*	表示不限字母切截，由0~n. 例：输入「appl*」，查得结果应为appl e , appl es , appl y , appl ied , appl ication … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
AND、OR、NOT	布尔逻辑组合关键字，用来扩大或缩小查询范围的技巧。 (1) AND ：缩小查询范围 (2) OR ：扩大查询范围(3) NOT：排除不相关的范围

DOI 是数位物件识别码（ D igital O bject I dentifier ）的简称，
为物件在网路上的唯一识别码，可用于永久连结并引用目标物件。

使用DOI作为永久连结

每个DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」便成为永久网址。
如以DOI号为 10.5297/ser.1201.002 的文献为例，此文献的永久连结便是： http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5297/ser.1201.002 。
日后不论出版单位如何更动此文献位置，永久连结所指向的位置皆会即时更新，不再错失重要的研究。

引用含有DOI的文献

有DOI的文献在引用时皆应同时引用DOI。若使用APA、Chicago以外未规范DOI的引用格式，可引用DOI永久连结。

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考（）。

ACI:

数据来源：Academic Citation Index，简称ACI

台湾最大的引用文献资料库，目前收录台湾与港澳地区所出版的人文学、社会学领域学术期刊之书目资料与参考文献，总期刊量超过690种，每年定期公布收录期刊的影响指数(Impact Factor)等指标给大众，并提供专家学者与学术单位实用的计量与分析功能。

五年影响指数（5-Year Impact Factor）：某一期刊前五年所出版的文章在当年度的平均被引用次数。

公式：（前五年发表论文在统计年的被引用次数）÷（前五年论文产出论文总篇数）

例如：A期刊2017年之五年影响指数

(A期刊2012-2016年发表论文在2017年的被引总次数)/(A期刊2012-2016年发表的论文总数)

什么是预刊文章？

为提供读者最前线之学术资讯，于期刊文献获同意刊登后、纸本印制完成前，率先于网路线上发表之文章即为预刊文章。预刊文章尚未有卷期、页次及出版日期资讯，但可藉由DOI号识别。 DOI号是文献的数位身份证字号，不论预刊或正式出版皆不会改变，读者可点击DOI连结，或于DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」连结到文献目前最新版本。

如何引用预刊文章？

请使用预刊文章的线上发表日期及DOI号来引用该篇文献。

引用范例(视不同引文格式规范可能有所差异)：

作者姓名。文章篇名。期刊名称。 YYYY/MM/DD线上预先发表。

doi:DOI 号

来源数据

P357 - 382

社会科学 > 心理学
社会科学 > 教育学

DOI： 10.6251/BEP

书目管理工具

相关连结

问题回报

全文下载

「感恩融入宽恕课程」对感恩、宽恕与幸福感影响之研究

Effects of the "Integrating Gratitude into Forgiveness Program" on Gratitude, Forgiveness, and Well-Being

陈琬云(Wan-Yun Chen) ；王郁婷(Yu-Ting Wang) ；萧舒谦(Shu-Chien Hsiao) ；张圣翎(Sheng-Ling Chang) ；吴相仪(Hsiang-Yi Wu)

教育心理学报； 56 卷 2 期 (2024 / 12 / 01) ， P357 - 382

繁体中文;英文 DOI： 10.6251/BEP.202412_56(2).0006

宽恕课程；感恩；幸福感； forgiveness program ； gratitude ； well-being

0 个人觉得这篇文章赞

摘要 │ 参考文献 (89)

摘要〈TOP〉

并列摘要〈TOP〉

Most studies evaluating forgiveness interventions have focused on a single dimension, with limited attention paid to the multidimensional nature of forgiveness. The literature highlights a need for integrating gratitude into forgiveness interventions to enhance their efficacy (Bono & McCullough, 2006; Toussaint & Friedman, 2009). Therefore, we developed the "Gratitude-Integrated Forgiveness Program" and explored its effects on gratitude, forgiveness, and well-being. The aforementioned program was developed on the basis of the forgiveness framework proposed by Thompson et al. (2005), which comprises forgiveness of others, forgiveness of self, and forgiveness of situations. After obtaining consent from Wu et al. (2017), we condensed their college student gratitude course into two units (6 hours) and administered it before the forgiveness course. Thus, we combined forgiveness with gratitude, as recommended by Bono and McCullough (2006) in their study on interpersonal forgiveness and psychological well-being. The course order was determined on the basis of research indicating that gratitude can predict forgiveness and serves as its foundation. Thus, the course began with gratitude and then transitioned to forgiveness. The gratitude component focused on appreciating the present and being content with what one has. The five dimensions of gratitude incorporated in the program included "gratitude for adversity," which involves appreciating the challenges and growth that adversity brings. This dimension closely aligns with the forgiveness of situations dimension, which involves accepting uncontrollable events in life. Thus, the course transitioned from gratitude for adversity to situational forgiveness. After situational forgiveness, the course addressed "forgiveness of self" before addressing "forgiveness of others." This order was maintained considering that "forgiveness of self" is generally less challenging. It allowed the participants to first cultivate self-compassion by forgiving themselves for previous mistakes, which then served as a foundation for extending forgiveness toward others. This study included 60 college students from Kaohsiung. They were recruited through online advertising and divided into experimental group (n = 30) and control group (n = 30). After the exclusion of two participants who dropped out, the experimental group comprised 28 students. A quasi-experimental design was adopted for the present study. Before the intervention, pretests were conducted using the Gratitude Questionnaire-Six Item Form (GQ-6), Heartland Forgiveness Scale, and Mental Health Continuum-Short Form. All three scales demonstrated good internal consistency, which confirmed their reliability. Construct validity was supported by confirmatory factor analysis, with overall fit indices meeting the required standards, indicating that the overall model fit for each scale was ideal (McCullough et al., 2002; Thompson et al., 2005). Hsiao et al. (2023) developed a Chinese version of the Heartland Forgiveness Scale (Thompson et al., 2005). This questionnaire was also administered in the present study. It exhibited strong internal consistency (Cronbach's α: .78 to .87). The pretest scores were used as covariates to account for the effect of nonrandom assignment. During the intervention, the experimental group participated in an 18-h gratitude-integrated forgiveness course, which was conducted over 6 weeks, with 3 hours of instruction per week. By contrast, the control group received no intervention. After the experiment, posttests were conducted using the scales used for pretests. The pretest and posttest scores were statistically analyzed to compare gratitude, forgiveness, and well-being between the experimental and control groups. The results were as follows: (1) The course significantly enhanced gratitude. The effect of the intervention on the GQ-6 score, analyzed through covariance analysis, exhibited an F(1, 57) value of 4.36 (p < .05), indicating a significant posttest effect for the experimental group. This finding revealed an immediate effect of the intervention on the overall gratitude of the experimental group after adjustment for the pretest effect. (2) The course significantly enhanced forgiveness, particularly overall forgiveness and forgiveness of self. However, it exerted no significant effect on forgiveness of others or situations. The effect of the intervention on the forgiveness scale score, analyzed through covariance analysis, exhibited an F(1, 57) value of 6.24 (p < .05) for overall forgiveness and an F(1, 57) value of 5.33 (p < .05) for forgiveness of self, indicating significant posttest effects for the experimental group in these domains. However, the course exerted no significant effect on forgiveness of others, F(1, 57) = 2.53 (p > .05), or forgiveness of situations, F(1, 57) = 3.05 (p > .05). Therefore, after adjustment for the pretest effect, the intervention exerted immediate effects on overall forgiveness and forgiveness of self, but not on forgiveness of others or situations. (3) The course significantly enhanced overall well-being. The effect of the intervention on the well-being scale score, analyzed through covariance analysis, exhibited an F(1, 57) value of 16.87 (p < .001) for overall well-being and an F(1, 66) value of 4.30 (p > .05) for psychological well-being. This result revealed a significant posttest effect on the overall well-being of the experimental group, highlighting an immediate intervention effect on the overall well-being, but not psychological well-being, of the experimental group after adjustment for the pretest effect. Approximately 25% and 42% of the participants exhibited improvements in emotional and social well-being, respectively. The aforementioned findings indicated that the course significantly enhanced gratitude, forgiveness, and well-being. After the intervention, the students exhibited immediate increases in their gratitude levels, attributable to the course content, which aligns well with the indicators of the GQ-6. Furthermore, the strong association between forgiveness and gratitude, along with the integration of forgiveness concepts into the course, might have exerted a complementary effect. After the intervention, the students exhibited immediate improvements in overall forgiveness and self-forgiveness, likely attributable to the structured and progressive approach of the forgiveness of self dimension, which resonated deeply with the participants. Hall and Fincham (2005), building on Enright's (1996) model, described self-forgiveness as a process involving the stages of revelation, decision, work, and outcome. This stepwise approach encourages individuals to reflect on their mistakes, take corrective actions, adopt a forgiving attitude toward themselves, and ultimately release negative emotions. Our findings revealed no immediate improvements in the forgiveness of situations or forgiveness of others domain. The lack of improvement in the forgiveness of situations may be attributable to the short duration of the course and the absence of previous intervention studies specifically targeting this dimension, which was analyzed solely on the basis of the definition proposed by Thompson et al. (2005). This result underscores room for improvement in course design. Forgiving others is inherently challenging; improvement in this dimension may require more time than the course allowed and targeted interventions. Although we referenced process-based therapies from meta-analyses (Baskin & Enright, 2004; Recine, 2015), the course did not effectively enhance individuals' ability to forgive others. After the intervention, the students exhibited immediate improvements in emotional and social well-being. This finding is consistent with that of a study indicating a strong correlation between self-forgiveness and overall well-being (Davis et al., 2015). The course's emphasis on self-forgiveness likely mediated these improvements, fostering emotional healing and strengthening interpersonal relationships. Furthermore, the gratitude component, which was adapted from Wu et al.'s (2017) gratitude curriculum for college students, contributed to the observed increase in social well-being, reaffirming the findings of Wu et al. regarding the positive effect of gratitude on well-being. However, no significant improvement was noted in psychological well-being. This can be explained as follows: (1) The harmful events addressed during the course might not have been sufficiently severe to facilitate deep psychological healing. (2) The course did not limit the target of forgiveness to close individuals, forgiving whom would be relatively easy and would enhance psychological well-being (Karremans et al., 2003). Future studies should clearly differentiate the sources of the course's effects and expand its application to diverse populations and regions. In addition, the course can be administered in a "counseling group" format to investigate the relationship between forgiveness and other research variables. From a practical perspective, students' beliefs about forgiveness can be nurtured through multiple channels. Given the structured nature of the course, extending the time allocated to forgiveness of others and focusing on specific individuals for a long period may enhance the effectiveness of the intervention.

参考文献 ( 89 ) 〈TOP〉

Lin, W.-F.(2010).The treatment of substance abuse disorders by the psychological forgiveness.Bulletin of Educational Psychology,41(4),859-884.
连结：
吴相仪, H.-Y.,辛昱融, Y.-Z.,陈琬云, W.-Y.,简晋龙, C.-L.,锺昆原, K.-Y.(2017)。感恩课程对大学生感恩、幸福感与复原力影响之研究。教育心理学报，49，23-41。
连结：
林碧花, B.-H.,吴金铜, J.-T.(2008)。宽恕教育辅导方案对国小学童的宽恕态度影响之研究。教育心理学报，39，435-450。
连结：
林维芬, W.-F.(2011)。「修订 Enright 宽恕治疗历程模式」团体介入方案对国小儿童宽恕态度、情绪智力与幸福感之研究。教育心理学报，42，591-612。
连结：
梁进龙, J.-L.,杨锦登, C.-D.,崔新玲, X.-L.,吴和堂, H.-T.(2021)。海峡两岸大学生求意义的意志、心流与心理幸福感之关系：中介与多群组的分析。教育心理学报，53，335-358。
连结：

E-mail ：

文章公开取用时，将寄通知信至您填写的信箱地址