Birds of a Feather Flock Together: The Interpersonal Process of Objectification within Intimate Heterosexual Relationships

On the basis that objectification is a self-perpetuating phenomenon, we tested two new hypotheses about the role of objectification within ongoing, intimate heterosexual relationships. First, individuals who self-objectify and objectify others tend to have partners who also self-objectify and objectify others. Second, objectification within relationships is associated with reduced relationship quality. Furthermore, rather than relying on the perspective of only one dyad member, we applied the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM: Kenny et al. 2006) as a framework for hypothesis testing. That is, we collected data from both partners within the relationship on the same variables (n = 59 heterosexual couples). We found support for both hypotheses, but negligible evidence of gender differences in relations between self-objectification, objectification, and relationship quality. Finally, we applied the APIM to replicate previous research on relations among self-objectification, objectification of partner, and body- and self-esteem. Self-objectification and objectification of partner was unrelated to body esteem for both men and women. Self-objectification was associated with reduced self-esteem, irrespective of gender, but objectification of partner was not associated with partner’s self-esteem.     

When just-world beliefs promote and when they inhibit forgiveness

The present study provides further evidence that justice and forgiveness are not necessarily competitive responses. Among 157 undergraduates instructed to recall either serious or benign transgressions, just-world beliefs for the self (BJW-self) was associated with forgiveness as inhibition of negative responding but not forgiveness as positive responding. Each of these relations was significantly moderated by transgression severity: the more benign the transgression, the stronger the relationship. Just-world beliefs for others (BJW-others) was negatively associated with inhibition of negative responding and unrelated to positive responding. These relations held over and above well-established predictors of transgression-specific forgiveness (relationship closeness and post-transgression offender effort), and an individual difference variable, justice sensitivity. In practical terms, BJW-self may enable people to better deal with minor stressors. An important theoretical implication is that modelling the relationship between just-world beliefs and forgiveness requires a bidimensional conception of both constructs.     

Retribution and forgiveness: The healing effects of punishing for just deserts

Although punishment and forgiveness frequently are considered to be opposites, in the present paper we propose that victims who punish their offender are subsequently more likely to forgive. Notably, punishment means that victims get justice (i.e. just deserts), which facilitates forgiveness. Study 1 reveals that participants were more likely to forgive a friend's negligence after being primed with punishment than after being primed with inability to punish. In Study 2, participants were more forgiving towards a criminal offender if the offender was punished by a judge than if the offender escaped punishment, a finding that was mediated by the just deserts motive. Study 3 was in the context of actual recalled ongoing interpersonal relations and revealed that punishment predicted forgiveness indirectly via just deserts, not via victims' vengeful motivations. It is concluded that punishment facilitates forgiveness because of its capacity to restore a sense of justice. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Disappointment With God and Well‐Being: The Mediating Influence of Relationship Quality and Dispositional Forgiveness

This study examined the extent to which disappointment with God influenced the psychological and spiritual well‐being of 160 churchgoers, and the potential mediating influences of relationship quality (spiritual maturity and relationship commitment) and dispositional forgiveness. Disappointment with God was positively related to depression and stress and negatively related to spiritual well‐being, dispositional forgiveness, spiritual maturity, and relationship commitment. The latter 3 were negatively related to depression and stress and positively associated with spiritual well‐being. The results suggest an explanation for why religious individuals disappointed with God tend to experience reduced well‐being outcomes. Counseling implications are discussed.     

Reasons for Exercise and Body Esteem: Men's Responses to Self-Objectification

In this study, we applied the construct of self-objectification to men, specifically to examine the role of reasons for exercise in men's responses to objectification. A questionnaire that assessed self-objectification, reasons for exercise, body esteem, and self-esteem was voluntarily completed by 153 Australian participants between the ages of 18 and 35 years (82 men and a comparison group of 71 women). Self-objectification and appearance-related reasons for exercise were significantly negatively related to body esteem for both men and women. Self-objectification was also positively related to appearance-related reasons for exercise. The latter was found to mediate the relationship between self-objectification and body esteem for both men and women. Men were just as likely as women to exercise for appearance-related reasons. Together, the results suggest that objectification may be sensibly applied to men and that exercising for appearance-related reasons appears to exacerbate the negative impact that self-objectification has on both men's and women's esteem.     

Strategies for Coping With Interpersonal Hurt: Preliminary Evidence for the Relationship Between Coping and Forgiveness

This study provides a preliminary empirical test suggesting a coping framework that describes the behavioral, cognitive, and emotion‐focused activities related to the process that may lead to forgiveness. Among 170 participants, the study explored the coping strategies people use when they respond to an interpersonal hurt and also the general use of coping strategies. After controlling for dispositional forgiveness, results indicated that people use similar coping techniques both for general stressors and for interpersonal hurt. They prefer avoidance coping strategies early in the forgiveness process and approach strategies in the middle and later stages. Applied implications are discussed.     

Justice and forgiveness: Experimental evidence for compatibility

A 3 (justice prime: restorative, retributive, no prime) × 3 (contextual prime: criminal justice system, intimate relationship, workplace) experimental design was used with 173 participants reading hypothetical transgression scenarios to test the hypothesis that people associate forgiveness more with restorative justice than with retributive justice, and that such relationships hold regardless of the social context. As predicted, there were main effects for justice prime, with participants more likely to associate benevolent responding, and less likely to associate revenge and avoidant responses, with restorative justice than with retributive justice. They were also more likely to associate benevolence, and less likely to associate revenge and avoidant responses, with intimate relationships than with criminal justice and the workplace. Also as predicted, there was no interaction between justice and context for benevolence and revenge. Although one should be cautious about extrapolating from ‘no difference’ hypotheses, these results provide some indication that the forgiveness-justice relationship may be generalised beyond the criminal justice system.     

When does priming justice promote forgiveness? On the importance of distributive and procedural justice for self and others

Two studies show that thinking about justice can both enhance and impede forgiveness, depending on whether thoughts about distributive and procedural justice for self and others are activated. In Study 1 (n = 197), participants expressed more forgiveness towards a prior transgressor when primed to think about justice for self or procedural justice for others, and less forgiveness when primed to think about distributive justice for others. Study 2 (n = 231) used an alternate priming method and replicated these effects by inducing an interpersonal transgression and measuring forgiveness intentions, emotions and behavior. Study 2 also showed that priming justice influences forgiveness especially when the perceived severity of an interpersonal offense is high. The current research shows that activating justice cognitions can enhance or impinge on forgiveness in predictable ways. We discuss contributions to emerging justice theory, potential implications, and future directions.     

Why Drug Testing in Elite Sport Does Not Work: Perceptual Deterrence Theory and the Role of Personal Moral Beliefs1

Performance‐enhancing drug use by elite athletes is a modern sporting and social concern. We applied a long‐overdue theoretical framework, perceptual deterrence, to predicting the banned drug‐use decisions of 116 elite Australian footballers and soccer players. The strongest influence on athletes' hypothetical decisions to use drugs was their personal moral beliefs and health concerns, each of which also mediated the relationship between drug testing and athletes' decisions to use banned substances. Drug testing had little influence on athletes' imagined drug use decisions, although there are athletes for whom legal sanctions are necessary. The results have important implications for the way in which authorities fund and frame future anti‐drug initiatives; particularly the relationship between drug testing and athletes' personal moral beliefs.     

When and how forgiving benefits victims: Post‐transgression offender effort and the mediating role of deservingness judgements

For all the well‐established benefits of forgiveness for victims, when and how is forgiving more likely to be beneficial? Three experimental studies found that forgiving is more likely to be beneficial when victims perceived reparative effort by offenders such that offenders deserve forgiveness. Deservingness judgements were elicited by manipulating post‐transgression offender effort (apology/amends). When offenders apologized (Study 1; recall paradigm) or made amends (Study 2; hypothetical paradigm) and were forgiven—relative to transgressors who did not apologize/make amends but were still forgiven—forgiving was beneficial. These findings—that deserved forgiveness is more beneficial for victims than undeserved forgiveness—were replicated when forgiving itself was also manipulated (Study 3). Moreover, Study 3 provided evidence to indicate that if a victim forgives when it is not deserved, victim well‐being is equivalent to not forgiving at all. Of theoretical and practical importance is the mediating effect of deservingness on relations between post‐transgression offender effort and a victim's personal consequences of forgiving.