Forgiveness Working: Forgiveness, Health, and Productivity in the Workplace.

PURPOSE: Associations between forgiveness and health promotion in the workplace were examined as mediating effects of workplace interpersonal stress. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Multiple Washington, DC, office-based and Midwestern manufacturing workplaces. PARTICIPANTS: Study 1: 108 employees (40 males and 68 females); mean age was 32.4 years. Study 2: 154 employees (14 males and 140 females); mean age was 43.9 years. MEASURES: Questionnaires measured forgiveness, unproductivity, absenteeism, stress, and health problems. ANALYSIS: Bivariate and multiple correlation/regression and structural equation models were used. Indirect effects were estimated with bootstrapping methods. RESULTS: In study 1, forgiveness of a specific workplace offense was inversely associated with unproductivity ( r = -.35, P < .001) and mental ( r = -.32, P = .001) and physical ( r = -.19, P = .044) health problems. In study 2, trait forgiveness was inversely associated with unproductivity (ß = -.20, P = .016) and mental (ß = -.31, P < .001) and physical health problems (ß = -.28, P = .001), and workplace interpersonal stress partially mediated these associations (indirect effects = -.03, -.04, -.05, respectively). CONCLUSION: The association of forgiveness and occupational outcomes is robust. Forgiveness may be associated with outcomes by (at least partially) reducing stress related to workplace offenses. Forgiveness may be an effective means of coping following being emotionally hurt on the job that may promote good health, well-being, and productivity.

Forgiveness-reconciliation and communication-conflict-resolution interventions versus retested controls in early married couples.

The first 6 months of marriage are optimal for marriage enrichment interventions. The Hope-Focused Approach to couple enrichment was presented as two 9-hr interventions--(a) Handling Our Problems Effectively (HOPE), which emphasized communication and conflict resolution, and (b) Forgiveness and Reconciliation through Experiencing Empathy (FREE). HOPE and FREE were compared with repeated assessment controls. Couples were randomly assigned and were assessed at pretreatment (t1); 1 month posttreatment (t2) and at 3- (t3), 6- (t4), and 12-month (t5) follow-ups using self-reports. In addition to self-report measures, couples were assessed at t1, t2, and t5 using salivary cortisol, and behavioral coding of decision making. Of 179 couples who began the study, 145 cases were analyzed. Both FREE and HOPE produced lasting positive changes on self-reports. For cortisol reactivity, HOPE and FREE reduced reactivity at t2, but only HOPE at t5. For coded behaviors, control couples deteriorated; FREE and HOPE did not change. Enrichment training was effective regardless of the focus of the training.

Forgiveness, health, and well-being: a review of evidence for emotional versus decisional forgiveness, dispositional forgivingness, and reduced unforgiveness.

The extant data linking forgiveness to health and well-being point to the role of emotional forgiveness, particularly when it becomes a pattern in dispositional forgivingness. Both are important antagonists to the negative affect of unforgiveness and agonists for positive affect. One key distinction emerging in the literature is between decisional and emotional forgiveness. Decisional forgiveness is a behavioral intention to resist an unforgiving stance and to respond differently toward a transgressor. Emotional forgiveness is the replacement of negative unforgiving emotions with positive other-oriented emotions. Emotional forgiveness involves psychophysiological changes, and it has more direct health and well-being consequences. While some benefits of forgiveness and forgivingness emerge merely because they reduce unforgiveness, some benefits appear to be more forgiveness specific. We review research on peripheral and central nervous system correlates of forgiveness, as well as existing interventions to promote forgiveness within divergent health settings. Finally, we propose a research agenda.

Maxi-K channels localize to caveolae in human myometrium: a role for an actin-channel-caveolin complex in the regulation of myometrial smooth muscle K+ current.

Multiple cell-signaling pathways converge to modulate large-conductance, voltage- and Ca2+-sensitive K+ channel (maxi-K channel) activity and buffer cell excitability in human myometrial smooth muscle cells (hMSMCs). Recent evidence indicates that maxi-K channel proteins can target to membrane microdomains; however, their association with other proteins within these macromolecular complexes has not been elucidated. Biochemical isolation of detergent-resistant membrane fractions from human myometrium demonstrates the presence of maxi-K channels in lipid raft microdomains, which cofractionate with caveolins. In both nonpregnant and late-pregnant myometrium, maxi-K channels associate and colocalize with caveolar scaffolding proteins caveolin-1 and caveolin-2, but not caveolin-3. Disruption of cultured hMSMC caveolar complexes by cholesterol depletion with cyclodextrin increases an iberiotoxin-sensitive K+ current. Co-immunoprecipitations have indicated that the maxi-K channel also is associated with both alpha- and gamma-actin. Immunocytochemical analysis indicates colocalization of maxi-K channels, actin, and caveolin-1 in primary cultures of hMSMCs. Further experiments using immunoelectron microscopy have shown the proximity of both actin and the maxi-K channel within the same cell surface caveolar structures. Functionally, disruption of the actin cytoskeleton in cultured hMSMCs by cytochalasin D and latrunculin A greatly increased the open-state probability of the channel, while stabilization of actin cytoskeleton with jasplakinolide abolished the effect of latrunculin A. These data indicate that the actin cytoskeleton is involved as part of a caveolar complex in the regulation of myometrial maxi-K channel function.