The posterior cingulate and its limbic connections are often activated by attentional tasks. Thus, this experiment
provides evidence of basic convergent validity for the imaging method to detect empathy judgments and sug-
gests discriminant validity evidence for a difference between judging whether an offence is worthy of empathy
or is forgivable.
Location
Equipment for central physiological assessment is typically available at large research centers and medical
schools. Individual researchers with technical expertise, funding, space, and support who are interested in fMRI
assessment could consult the Radiological Society of North America. All tasks were designed and presented
using the program Psyscope version 1.2.5 PPC [13] on an Apple Macintosh G3 computer. The computer output
was displayed via an Epson EMP7300 projector on a screen visible to the subject in the scanner.
Results and Comments
Central physiological assessments should be evaluated for their reliability and validity independently, and as
indicators of the processes that might be involved in forgiveness and unforgiveness. Similar to peripheral mea-
sures, it is valuable to consider from interdisciplinary perspectives how these physiological measures are related
to the ways people embody granting and receiving forgiveness and unforgiveness responses. It is wise not to
over-interpret findings of physiological indices or to interpret them without considering self-reports or behavioral
indications that forgiveness has occurred in tandem with the physiological indicators.
BEHAVIORAL MEASURES OF FORGIVENESS
Resource Distribution Measure of State Forgiveness
(Carlisle et al., 2012 ).
Variable
The resource distribution paradigm was designed to function as a behavioral indicator of state forgiveness,
thereby providing triangulating data or, in some cases where self-reports are unavailable, an indirect indication
of forgiveness. Behavioral measures might avoid common method variance from a packet of self-report question-
naires and might address some limitations of self-report forgiveness measures.
Description
Laboratory-based behavioral measures of forgiveness are embedded within a particular method for inducing a
transgression and manipulating forgiveness-related variables. In the Carlisle et al. (2012) experiment, participants
believe that they are exchanging resources with another participant in another room. The resources are raffle tick-
ets for a $50 prize. In Round 1, the partner takes 8 of 10 raffle tickets. In some conditions in Round 2, the partner
provides restitution by giving the participant 9 of 10 tickets; in other conditions the 9 of 10 tickets come from the
experimenter. Also in Round 2, apology was manipulated by a note from partner to participant. In Round 3, the
participant can distribute raffle tickets between self and partner, constituting the behavioral measure of forgive-
ness. In a control condition, the Round 1 distribution of eight of ten tickets to the partner is said to occur by ran-
dom assignment.
This behavioral measure can be paired with self-report measures. Participants rated the motivations underly-
ing their distribution in Round 3. One motive was ‘to express forgiveness.’ Subsequent unpublished research has
also included an item after each round asking participants how ‘forgiving’ they feel toward their partner, embed-
ded with a number of other emotion items. If not manipulating restitution and apology in Round 2, the proce-
dure can be shortened so that the offence occurs in Round 1, and the behavioral measure of forgiveness in
Round 2.
Sample
In the original sample of 136 university students (98 female), the mean number of tickets participants gave
their partners was 4.07 ( SD52.56). Participants who received restitution from their partner distributed more tick-
ets (M55.63, SD51.56) than those who did not receive restitution ( M54.18, SD52.21). Participants receiving491 BEHAVIORAL MEASURES OF FORGIVENESS
IV. INTERPERSONAL STYLES