CENTRAL PHYSIOLOGICAL MEASURES
Variables
Forgiveness research has embraced functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as a central physiological
measure ( Farrow et al., 2001 , 2008; Pietrini et al., 2004 ).
Description
In an early study, Farrow et al. (2001) employed fMRI to assess which brain structures were active when mak-
ing judgments about what one might forgive (or not forgive), empathize with, and make judgments about in
social situations. Farrow et al. (2001) found that forgivability and empathy judgments were associated with left
fronto-temporal activity, unlike fairness judgments. Subsequently, Farrow and Woodruff (2005) measured brain
activity in patients with post-traumatic stress disorder and with schizophrenia. The regions of the brain assessed
were areas involved in making forgivability and empathy judgments, as determined in Farrow et al. (2001) .
The patients attended forgiveness-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (10 weekly 1-hour sessions) and had
higher forgivability and empathy judgments post-test vs. pre-test in 13 patients with post-traumatic stress disor-
der and 14 patients with schizophrenia.
Similarly, Pietrini et al. (2004) used fMRIs to assess participants who imagined a hurtful event and were
then instructed to either forgive or focus on the hurt. In the hurt-focus condition, females showed more activity
in the anterior cingulate cortex (which was associated with state forgiveness and the capacity to be forgiving)
than did males.
Pietrini et al. (2004) used positron emission tomography (PET) to measure cerebral bloodflow during anger
and aggression. Harmon-Jones (2004) used electroencephalographic (EEG) measures to show that responses
of sympathy opposed anger arousal, decreasing anger-related left-frontal cortical activity and orbitofrontal
activation.
Sample
Farrow et al. (2001) studied 10 participants (7 male, 3 female). Farrow and Woodruff (2005 ,Farrow et al.,
Farrow et al., 2008) studied 27 participants (13 with post-traumatic stress disorder and 14 with schizophrenia).
Pietrini et al. (2004) studied 10 healthy participants (5 males, 5 females).
Reliability
The reliability of functional brain imaging techniques is difficult to evaluate. Diverse study designs and experi-
mental tasks, head motion, software and hardware variety, and lack of standardized procedures contribute to dif-
ficulty in establishing the reliability of functional imaging ( Seixas & Lima, 2011 ). Though no standards currently
exist for acceptable levels of fMRI reliability, a recent review shows that most studies have reliability estimates
(i.e., intra-class correlation coefficients) ranging between .33 and .66 ( Bennett & Miller, 2010 ).
InFarrow et al. (2001) , participants were presented with three scenarios, which they read carefully and then
imagined for 16 seconds. They then made five discriminations (7 seconds each) related to each scenario.
Scenarios required judgments of basic social reasoning (control condition), empathic judgments (i.e., can you be
empathic toward the offending party), and forgivability judgments (i.e., is the offence forgivable). Although no
computations of estimated reliability were presented, some measure of reliability was achieved by using five sim-
ilar judgments /C0instead of a single judgment /C0in each imagined condition.
Validity
Critics have questioned the validity of fMRI techniques ( Logothetis, 2008; Vul, Harris, Winkielman, & Pashler,
2009), and some have even questioned what specific type of neurological activity is reflected by blood oxygen-
ation levels ( Attwell & Iadecola, 2002 ). Interpreting areas that ‘light up’ under during an experience might not be
causal to the experience. Rather, directly causal pathways might be inhibitory pathways with the areas that ‘light
up’ being results, not causes, of the mental activity that presumably is being monitored. Despite limitations in
reliability and validity, functional brain imaging tools remain the best currently available assessments of in vivo
brain activity ( Bennett & Miller, 2010; Logothetis, 2008 ).
In the Farrow et al. (2001) study, brain areas activated by social reasoning and empathy were found to be simi-
lar to previous research studies on those cognitive tasks. Forgivability judgments activated many of the same
areas as empathy judgments, but the posterior cingulate activation was unique to the forgivability judgments.490 17. MEASURES OF FORGIVENESS
IV. INTERPERSONAL STYLES