Forgiveness and Forgiveness Flexibility among University Students: An Experimental Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to understand the effectiveness of Forgiveness Group Therapy on forgiveness and forgiveness flexibility levels among university students. 16 students who studied at Mersin University joined the study. Enright’s Process Model of Psychological Forgiveness Scale was utilized when the program is designed. The group counseling program was conducted in the presence of two psychological counselors and a supervisor. The Heartland Forgiveness Scale and Forgiveness Flexibility Scale were used to gather data. The main purpose of that program was forgive to others. To analyze the effectiveness of the Forgiveness Group Counseling Therapy on forgiveness and forgiveness flexibility, the experimental design was implied. Pre and post-test were implied to two groups which were experimental and control groups. The data which collected owing to scales was analyzed by using non-parametric methods in SPSS program. The results showed that forgiveness the others and forgiveness flexibility increased for the experimental group while forgiveness of self and forgiveness of the situation wasn’t.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".