MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404978798 · doi:10.1186/s40359-024-02238-y

The interplay of forgiveness by God and self-forgiveness: a longitudinal study of moderating effects on stress overload in a religious Canadian sample

2024· article· en· W4404978798 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sebastian Binyamin Skalski‐Bednarz

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Psychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicForgiveness and Related Behaviors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKatholische Universität Eichstätt-IngolstadtInternational Visegrad Fund
KeywordsForgivenessPsychologySocial psychologyPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A consistent link between self-forgiveness and well-being has been established, yet a full understanding of self-forgiveness and its correlates, particularly in relation to forgiveness by God, remains limited, especially given that most existing data are cross-sectional. This study sought to address this gap by investigating the interplay between self-forgiveness and perceived forgiveness by God in reducing stress overload among religious individuals over time. METHODS: This study involved 211 religious individuals in Canada, 55% of whom were female. Through multilevel analyses, the research examined the between-person, within-person, and cross-level effects of these forms of forgiveness on stress across three waves conducted over a total 12-month period. RESULTS: The findings suggested that the effectiveness of self-forgiveness in mitigating stress may be significantly influenced by the perception of forgiveness by God, with the greatest stress reduction occurring when forgiveness by God was perceived at higher levels. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the potential value of incorporating spiritual dimensions into psychological approaches to stress management, offering insights into the complex relationships between different forms of forgiveness and their impact on mental health of religious individuals. Future research is encouraged to further explore these dynamics across diverse cultural and religious contexts.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PsychologySame topicForgiveness and Related BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207