intervention research to promote forgiveness, we might assume that reduced unforgiveness implies forgiveness.
But in studies that do not directly target forgiveness, it is important either to supplement the TRIM-12 with a
measure of forgiveness or use a measure of positivity that suggests that forgiveness might have occurred.
McCullough and Hoyt (2002) used seven items taken from the WFS that indicated benevolent motives toward
the offender to provide more assurance that the TRIM was assessing forgiveness. (These items were listed in
Note 1 in McCullough & Hoyt; we might designate them TRIM-B7.) McCullough et al. (2003) later constructed a
measure of benevolent motives toward the offender from five (TRIM-B5) of the seven items in McCullough
and Hoyt.
Finally, McCullough et al. (2010) used Rasch modeling within IRT to scale the TRIM-R, TRIM-A, and a six-
item benevolence scale (the TRIM-B6) to make up the TRIM-18. They treated this combined measure as a mea-
sure of forgiveness indicating reduced unforgiving motives and simultaneous increased benevolence motives by
reverse-scoring the TRIM-R and TRIM-A items.
Sample
McCulloughl et al. (1998b) established initial psychometric data on the TRIM with university students
(N5239). Students responded to the 18 items on Wade’s original Revenge and Avoidance subscales. The individ-
ual subscales might be more appropriate for different samples, and might also be used independently. For exam-
ple, married couples often have very low scores on TRIM-R and moderate scores on TRIM-A after experiencing a
transgression. For divorced couples, TRIM-R scores tend to be higher, but because they are separated and in
many cases remarried or living at great distances from each other, their TRIM-A scores are low. They must exert
little energy to avoid someone who is virtually out of their life already.
Reliability
Internal Consistency
McCullough et al. (1998b) reported that for 5-item TRIM-R the Cronbach alpha coefficient was .90; for 7-item
TRIM-A α5.86.McCullough and Hoyt (2002) found for TRIM-B7 α5.85.McCullough et al. (2003) found that, for
the TRIM-B5 α5.91 to .93. McCullough et al. (2010) used IRT and thus they did not calculate the alpha coefficient.
The Person separation reliability, which is interpreted analogously to Cronbach’s alpha, was .92; the item separation
reliability was 1.0, indicating evenly spaced items in terms of difficulty of endorsement. The TRIM-B5
(McCullough et al., 2003 ) had Cronbach alpha coefficients from .91 to .93 in various samples. The TRIM-18 was sub-
jected to item response analysis (McCullough et al., 2010). The fit of the 18 items to the Rasch model, using an
unweighted least-squares fit statistics, was between .73 and 1.55; the expected value is 1.0, scores greater than 1.5 are
considered to indicate a less than optimal fit, and scores of 2.0 are considered unacceptable. Thus, for the sample of
372 undergraduates, the TRIM-18 measured forgiveness well according to IRT (McCullough et al., 2010).
Test/C0Retest
In McCullough et al. (1998a), TRIM-12 scores over three weeks were correlated r5.86 and r5.79, for TRIM-R
and TRIM-A, respectively, and over eight weeks r5.53,r5.44, for TRIM-R and TRIM-A, respectively, and over
nine weeks r5.64,r5.65, for TRIM-R and TRIM-A, respectively. For the TRIM-B5 ( McCullough et al., 2003 ),
temporal stability correlations weekly for four weeks ranged from .87 (one week) to .52 (four weeks), which is
appropriate for a state measure of forgiveness for a particular transgression in college students.
Validity
Convergent/Concurrent
TRIM-R and TRIM-A were correlated ( McCullough et al., 1998b ; Study 3) with a linear composite of the
Dyadic Adjustment Scale (Spanier, 1979) and the Commitment Inventory (Constraint and Dedication; Stanley &
Markman, 1992) at .37 to .62. In McCullough et al. (1998b , Study 4), TRIM-R was correlated with negative affec-
tivity ( r5.32), and self-deception ( r5.30). TRIM subscales were positively correlated with single-item measures
of forgiveness at r52.67 and r52.41 fo rTRIM-R and TRIM-A, respectively. There was evidence supporting
construct validity.
Divergent/Discriminant
InMcCullough et al. (1998b , Study 4), TRIM-R was correlated negatively with impression management
(r52.17), but TRIM-A was not correlated with negative affectivity, self-deception, or impression management.480 17. MEASURES OF FORGIVENESS
IV. INTERPERSONAL STYLES