ForgivenessNCT04374357
Examining Prison Inmates' Attitudes and Internal Emotional States
An observational study of Forgiveness, run by University of Wisconsin, Madison at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This study is the first part of a two-tiered research project to propose a novel approach-forgiveness therapy-to corrections. This study is a non-intervention study and aims to demonstrate the need to introduce the concepts of forgiveness and Forgiveness Therapy within prisons. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age, men onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Forgiveness
- How many people
- 103 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 20 Mar 2017to 11 Nov 2017
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- Men only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: Prison inmates from a maximum-security prison in Wisconsin, United States.
Who may be able to join
- Male prison inmates, who have never participated in forgiveness therapies, were recruited voluntarily from a maximum-security prison in Wisconsin, United States.
Who cannot join
- have participated in forgiveness workshops
- are not from maximum security prison
- female; (due to the all-male prison context)
- are illiterate (cannot write their stories and finish the scales)
- have been diagnosed with cognitive disorders or cognitive function impairment
- receive one-on-one treatment with the psychologist in prison
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Columbia Correctional Institution
Portage, Wisconsin, 53901
About this study
Official title: Examining Prison Inmates' Attitudes and Internal Emotional States: Forgiveness, Anger, Anxiety, Depression, Hope, and Social Desirability
This study is the first part of a two-tiered research project to propose a novel approach-forgiveness therapy-to corrections. This study is a non-intervention study and aims to demonstrate the need to introduce the concepts of forgiveness and Forgiveness Therapy within prisons. This study is focused on the extent to which men in a maximum-security prison experienced considerable injustice against them (such as in a family context as he was growing up) prior to committing serious crimes. Variables associated with this prior unjust treatment included the level of forgiveness and variables of current psychological well-being. Since this study provided the rationale and participants' matching data (eligibility) for the subsequent interventional study (Study 2, "Proposing Forgiveness Therapy in Prison") in which psychological treatments applied to the inmates, investigator refer to this study as Study 1.
Read the detailed description
Current study (Study 1) consisted of 103 men in a maximum-security prison in the Midwestern United States. The research aimed to demonstrate the necessity of introducing forgiveness concepts and Forgiveness Therapy within the prison. This study collected percentage and correlational data regarding the presence of hurtful unfair treatments and psychological compromises, recognizing the style of the story-recalling (e.g. repetitive angry retelling; focus on damage; focus on fear; focus on despair, and so forth), rating of the injury types, and severity and age of occurrence. Inmates' stories were coded and analyzed by up to five researchers. The first wave of data examined a) whether participants have been treated deeply unfairly prior to their crime and imprisonment and the degree of severity; b) the degree to which the participants' show both excessive anger and unforgiveness toward those who acted unjustly as well as their expressions in crimes-direct contribution to their choice of harming the innocent; and c) the relationship among the excessive anger, forgiveness, and related emotional sufferings and psychological distresses such as anxiety and depression. Case studies were also conducted. Reliability and validation of 30-Item Enright forgiveness inventory (EFI-30) in the prison context were also tested. In general, we tested the following hypotheses:
- Do most inmates in this maximum-security prison experience severe unfair treatment against them before their criminal perpetrations?
- Do most inmates in this maximum-security prison have low forgiveness towards the person who deeply hurt them?
- Do disproportional number of inmates in this maximum-security prison have clinical compromises (e.g. excessive anger, anxiety, and depression) related to their past injustice?
- Does higher degree of anger/anxiety in inmates correlates to the less forgiving behavior towards those who hurt them in the past, prior to their crime?
Study 1 also provided participant matching data (criteria for eligible participants) for the Forgiveness Therapy experiments of subsequent interevtional study
- Conditions
- Forgiveness
- Keywords
- Forgiveness
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Score on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Measures of Anger
National Institutes of Health PROMIS Measures of Anger (five items) was used. Items are statements about the frequency of feeling angry in the past seven days. An example is "In the past 7 days, I felt like I was ready to explode." Participants need to respond to each item on a 5-point scale from "Never" to "Always." The total scores for the anger scale range from 5 to 25. The higher scores a participant rated in one scale, the angrier participant was, in contrast with those who scored lower.
Measured: Baseline
Score on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Measures of Anxiety
National Institutes of Health PROMIS Measures of Anxiety (seven items) was used. Items are statements about the frequency of feeling anxious in the past seven days. An example is "In the past seven days, I found it hard to focus on anything other than my anxiety." Participants need to respond to each item on a 5-point scale from "Never" to "Always." The total scores for the anxiety scale range from 5 to 35. The higher scores a participant rated in one scale, the more anxious participant was, in contrast with those who scored lower.
Measured: Baseline
Score on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Measures of Depression
National Institutes of Health PROMIS Measures of Depression (eight items) was used. Items are statements about the frequency of feeling depressed in the past seven days. An example is "In the past seven days, I felt like a failure." Participants need to respond to each item on a 5-point scale from "Never" to "Always." The total scores for the anxiety scale range from 5 to 40. The higher scores a participant rated in one scale, the more depressed participant was, in contrast with those who scored lower.
Measured: Baseline
Score on Herth Hope Index
The Herth Hope Index was used as an instrument. It has 12 items and assesses optimism toward the future with questions, such as "I have a positive outlook on life"; "I believe that each day has potential". These questions assess connectedness to positive expectations for the future, inter-connectedness with other people, and inner positive expectancy. Participants responded on a 4-point scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." Two items need to be reversely coded, and the total hope score ranges from 12 to 48. A higher score means more hopefulness toward the future.
Measured: Baseline
Score on Enright Forgiveness Inventory
Enright Forgiveness Inventory Short Form (30 items) was used as a measurement of forgiveness. It includes three subscales: affect, behavior, and cognition, with 10 items in each subscale. The introductory material at the beginning asks participants to focus on the worst injustice they experienced before their first imprisonment, and to indicate the person who unfairly treated them, time to event, degree of hurt and a brief description of the experience. Then participants were asked to think about the person who hurt them and rate the 30 items on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." Half of the items are negative statements, and reverse coding is done in the data analysis. An example of the positive items is "I feel warm toward him/her," and a negative one is "Regarding this person, I disapprove of him/her." The total forgiveness scores range from 30 to 180, with each subscale scores in the range of 10 to 60. A higher score means more forgiving.
Measured: Baseline
Score on Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale
The Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (20-item short version) was used here to measure if a participant is "faking good" to meet the social desirability in psychological tests. It also assesses the degree to which each participant is taking this set of questionnaires seriously or not. This 20-item short version of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale was developed by Strahan and Gerbasi, with 20 statements using a true/false response format. An example is "I never hesitate to go out of my way to help someone in trouble." A participant gets 1 point for each "True" response and 0 point for each "False" response to 10 socially desired statements, and the reverse points to 10 not socially desired statements. Scores range from 0 to 20. A higher score represents a higher tendency of "faking good" in the test.
Measured: Baseline
Score on Maltreatment and Abuse Chronology of Exposure (MACE) Scale
The MACE scale includes 52 items and measures retrospectively ten types of maltreatment during each year of childhood from 1 to 18 years old. The ten subscales or types of maltreatment measured include: emotional neglect, non-verbal emotional abuse, parental physical maltreatment, parental verbal abuse, peer emotional abuse, peer physical bullying, physical neglect, sexual abuse, witnessing interparental violence, and witnessing violence to siblings.
Measured: Baseline
Type of Past Injustice/Unfair Treatment assessed through category 1-5
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for the type of injustice: 1-physical (e.g. hitting that can damage), 2-sexual, 3-verbal (e.g. words meant to demean), 4-failure to protect or provide (emotional abuse such as constant ignoring; failure to protect the person's psychological health; physical danger to the participant such as no food or shelter or only occasional food or shelter, for example), 5-secondary (adversity towards those who are important to the person, such as the person witnessed that father beat mother). Note: Emotional abuse cuts across all of the above categories, 1-5.
Measured: Baseline
Age of participant at the time of unjust treatment
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for the age of the injustice/unfair treatment occurred.
Measured: Baseline
"Severity of Childhood Injustice" assessed on score 1-6
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for the severity of childhood injustice. Childhood injustice was scored as 1-2: mild; Scored as 3-4: moderate; Scored as 5-6: severe.
Measured: Baseline
"Severity of Injustice Impact on participant's future life" assessed on score 1-6
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for the severity of injustice impact for their future life after the unfair treatment. Scored as 1-2: mild; Scored as 3-4: moderate; Scored as 5-6: severe.
Measured: Baseline
Percentage on participants who shared the experience of injustice with anyone
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for whether they shared this/those experience(s) with anyone, or anyone asked before. If so, who? Investigator collected participants' answers in word and analyzed the percentage data.
Measured: Baseline
Percentage on participants who seeked help after the injustice experience
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for whether anyone recognized/helped with healing their hurt. If so, who? Investigator collected participants' answers in word and analyzed the percentage data.
Measured: Baseline
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted5 May 2020
- Study start20 Mar 2017
- Primary completion11 Nov 2017
- Study completion11 Nov 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (9)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for ForgivenessStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of Wisconsin, MadisonThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 103 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Wisconsin, Madison
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Department of Corrections, State of Wisconsin
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Robert D Enright, PhD, Principal investigator, University of Wisconsin, Madison
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04374357
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2016-0593
- Other IDs
- A173000, EDUC/EDUC PSYCH
- Status last verified
- Jun 2020
- First submitted
- 28 Apr 2020
- Last updated
- 9 Jun 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Erzar T, Yu L, Enright RD, Kompan Erzar K. Childhood Victimization, Recent Injustice, Anger, and Forgiveness in a Sample of Imprisoned Male Offenders. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2019 Jan;63(1):18-31. doi: 10.1177/0306624X18781782. Epub 2018 Jun 21.
PubMed 29926759Lee YR, Enright RD. A Forgiveness Intervention for Women With Fibromyalgia Who Were Abused in Childhood: A Pilot Study. Spiritual Clin Pract (Wash D C ). 2014 Sep;1(3):203-217. doi: 10.1037/scp0000025. Epub 2014 Aug 25.
PubMed 25914886Waltman MA, Russell DC, Coyle CT, Enright RD, Holter AC, M Swoboda C. The effects of a forgiveness intervention on patients with coronary artery disease. Psychol Health. 2009 Jan;24(1):11-27. doi: 10.1080/08870440903126371.
PubMed 20186637Hansen MJ, Enright RD, Baskin TW, Klatt J. A palliative care intervention in forgiveness therapy for elderly terminally ill cancer patients. J Palliat Care. 2009 Spring;25(1):51-60.
PubMed 19445342Reed GL, Enright RD. The effects of forgiveness therapy on depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress for women after spousal emotional abuse. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2006 Oct;74(5):920-9. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.74.5.920.
PubMed 17032096Lin WF, Mack D, Enright RD, Krahn D, Baskin TW. Effects of forgiveness therapy on anger, mood, and vulnerability to substance use among inpatient substance-dependent clients. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004 Dec;72(6):1114-21. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.72.6.1114.
PubMed 15612857McKay KM, Hill MS, Freedman SR, Enright RD. Towards a feminist empowerment model of forgiveness psychotherapy. Psychotherapy (Chic). 2007 Mar;44(1):14-29. doi: 10.1037/0033-3204.44.1.14.
PubMed 22122165Yu, L., Gambaro, M., Komoski, M. C., Song, M. J., Song, M., Teslik, M., Wollner, B., & Enright, R. D. (2018). The Silent Injustices against Men in Maximum Security Prison and the Need for Forgiveness Therapy: Two Case Studies. Journal of Forensic Psychology, 3, 137. DOI: 10.4172/2475-319X.1000137.
Enright, R. D., Erzar, T., Gambaro, M., Komoski, M. C., O'Boyle, J., Reed, G., & ... Yu, L. (2016). Proposing Forgiveness Therapy for those in Prison: An Intervention Strategy for Reducing Anger and Promoting Psychological Health. Journal of Forensic Psychology, 1, 116. DOI: 10.4172/2475-319X.1000116.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Jun 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Examining Prison Inmates' Attitudes and Internal Emotional States: Forgiveness, Anger, Anxiety, Depression, Hope, and Social Desirability
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04374357
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2016-0593
- Conditions
- Forgiveness
- Keywords
- Forgiveness
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 103 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Wisconsin, MadisonUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Department of Corrections, State of Wisconsin
- Study start
- 20 Mar 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 11 Nov 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 11 Nov 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 5 May 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study is the first part of a two-tiered research project to propose a novel approach-forgiveness therapy-to corrections. This study is a non-intervention study and aims to demonstrate the need to introduce the concepts of forgiveness and Forgiveness Therapy within prisons. This study is focused on the extent to which men in a maximum-security prison experienced considerable injustice against them (such as in a family context as he was growing up) prior to committing serious crimes. Variables associated with this prior unjust treatment included the level of forgiveness and variables of current psychological well-being. Since this study provided the rationale and participants' matching data (eligibility) for the subsequent interventional study (Study 2, "Proposing Forgiveness Therapy in Prison") in which psychological treatments applied to the inmates, investigator refer to this study as Study 1.
Detailed description
Current study (Study 1) consisted of 103 men in a maximum-security prison in the Midwestern United States. The research aimed to demonstrate the necessity of introducing forgiveness concepts and Forgiveness Therapy within the prison. This study collected percentage and correlational data regarding the presence of hurtful unfair treatments and psychological compromises, recognizing the style of the story-recalling (e.g. repetitive angry retelling; focus on damage; focus on fear; focus on despair, and so forth), rating of the injury types, and severity and age of occurrence. Inmates' stories were coded and analyzed by up to five researchers. The first wave of data examined a) whether participants have been treated deeply unfairly prior to their crime and imprisonment and the degree of severity; b) the degree to which the participants' show both excessive anger and unforgiveness toward those who acted unjustly as well as their expressions in crimes-direct contribution to their choice of harming the innocent; and c) the relationship among the excessive anger, forgiveness, and related emotional sufferings and psychological distresses such as anxiety and depression. Case studies were also conducted. Reliability and validation of 30-Item Enright forgiveness inventory (EFI-30) in the prison context were also tested. In general, we tested the following hypotheses:
- Do most inmates in this maximum-security prison experience severe unfair treatment against them before their criminal perpetrations?
- Do most inmates in this maximum-security prison have low forgiveness towards the person who deeply hurt them?
- Do disproportional number of inmates in this maximum-security prison have clinical compromises (e.g. excessive anger, anxiety, and depression) related to their past injustice?
- Does higher degree of anger/anxiety in inmates correlates to the less forgiving behavior towards those who hurt them in the past, prior to their crime?
Study 1 also provided participant matching data (criteria for eligible participants) for the Forgiveness Therapy experiments of subsequent interevtional study
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Sex
- Male only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Prison inmates from a maximum-security prison in Wisconsin, United States.
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Male prison inmates, who have never participated in forgiveness therapies, were recruited voluntarily from a maximum-security prison in Wisconsin, United States.
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- have participated in forgiveness workshops
- are not from maximum security prison
- female; (due to the all-male prison context)
- are illiterate (cannot write their stories and finish the scales)
- have been diagnosed with cognitive disorders or cognitive function impairment
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Score on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Measures of Anger
Time frame: Baseline
National Institutes of Health PROMIS Measures of Anger (five items) was used. Items are statements about the frequency of feeling angry in the past seven days. An example is "In the past 7 days, I felt like I was ready to explode." Participants need to respond to each item on a 5-point scale from "Never" to "Always." The total scores for the anger scale range from 5 to 25. The higher scores a participant rated in one scale, the angrier participant was, in contrast with those who scored lower.
Score on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Measures of Anxiety
Time frame: Baseline
National Institutes of Health PROMIS Measures of Anxiety (seven items) was used. Items are statements about the frequency of feeling anxious in the past seven days. An example is "In the past seven days, I found it hard to focus on anything other than my anxiety." Participants need to respond to each item on a 5-point scale from "Never" to "Always." The total scores for the anxiety scale range from 5 to 35. The higher scores a participant rated in one scale, the more anxious participant was, in contrast with those who scored lower.
Score on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Measures of Depression
Time frame: Baseline
National Institutes of Health PROMIS Measures of Depression (eight items) was used. Items are statements about the frequency of feeling depressed in the past seven days. An example is "In the past seven days, I felt like a failure." Participants need to respond to each item on a 5-point scale from "Never" to "Always." The total scores for the anxiety scale range from 5 to 40. The higher scores a participant rated in one scale, the more depressed participant was, in contrast with those who scored lower.
Score on Herth Hope Index
Time frame: Baseline
The Herth Hope Index was used as an instrument. It has 12 items and assesses optimism toward the future with questions, such as "I have a positive outlook on life"; "I believe that each day has potential". These questions assess connectedness to positive expectations for the future, inter-connectedness with other people, and inner positive expectancy. Participants responded on a 4-point scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." Two items need to be reversely coded, and the total hope score ranges from 12 to 48. A higher score means more hopefulness toward the future.
Score on Enright Forgiveness Inventory
Time frame: Baseline
Enright Forgiveness Inventory Short Form (30 items) was used as a measurement of forgiveness. It includes three subscales: affect, behavior, and cognition, with 10 items in each subscale. The introductory material at the beginning asks participants to focus on the worst injustice they experienced before their first imprisonment, and to indicate the person who unfairly treated them, time to event, degree of hurt and a brief description of the experience. Then participants were asked to think about the person who hurt them and rate the 30 items on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." Half of the items are negative statements, and reverse coding is done in the data analysis. An example of the positive items is "I feel warm toward him/her," and a negative one is "Regarding this person, I disapprove of him/her." The total forgiveness scores range from 30 to 180, with each subscale scores in the range of 10 to 60. A higher score means more forgiving.
Score on Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale
Time frame: Baseline
The Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (20-item short version) was used here to measure if a participant is "faking good" to meet the social desirability in psychological tests. It also assesses the degree to which each participant is taking this set of questionnaires seriously or not. This 20-item short version of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale was developed by Strahan and Gerbasi, with 20 statements using a true/false response format. An example is "I never hesitate to go out of my way to help someone in trouble." A participant gets 1 point for each "True" response and 0 point for each "False" response to 10 socially desired statements, and the reverse points to 10 not socially desired statements. Scores range from 0 to 20. A higher score represents a higher tendency of "faking good" in the test.
Score on Maltreatment and Abuse Chronology of Exposure (MACE) Scale
Time frame: Baseline
The MACE scale includes 52 items and measures retrospectively ten types of maltreatment during each year of childhood from 1 to 18 years old. The ten subscales or types of maltreatment measured include: emotional neglect, non-verbal emotional abuse, parental physical maltreatment, parental verbal abuse, peer emotional abuse, peer physical bullying, physical neglect, sexual abuse, witnessing interparental violence, and witnessing violence to siblings.
Type of Past Injustice/Unfair Treatment assessed through category 1-5
Time frame: Baseline
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for the type of injustice: 1-physical (e.g. hitting that can damage), 2-sexual, 3-verbal (e.g. words meant to demean), 4-failure to protect or provide (emotional abuse such as constant ignoring; failure to protect the person's psychological health; physical danger to the participant such as no food or shelter or only occasional food or shelter, for example), 5-secondary (adversity towards those who are important to the person, such as the person witnessed that father beat mother). Note: Emotional abuse cuts across all of the above categories, 1-5.
Age of participant at the time of unjust treatment
Time frame: Baseline
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for the age of the injustice/unfair treatment occurred.
"Severity of Childhood Injustice" assessed on score 1-6
Time frame: Baseline
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for the severity of childhood injustice. Childhood injustice was scored as 1-2: mild; Scored as 3-4: moderate; Scored as 5-6: severe.
"Severity of Injustice Impact on participant's future life" assessed on score 1-6
Time frame: Baseline
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for the severity of injustice impact for their future life after the unfair treatment. Scored as 1-2: mild; Scored as 3-4: moderate; Scored as 5-6: severe.
Percentage on participants who shared the experience of injustice with anyone
Time frame: Baseline
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for whether they shared this/those experience(s) with anyone, or anyone asked before. If so, who? Investigator collected participants' answers in word and analyzed the percentage data.
Percentage on participants who seeked help after the injustice experience
Time frame: Baseline
After participants write their stories by the instructions and leading questions provided, these stories were coded by 3-5 independent researchers for whether anyone recognized/helped with healing their hurt. If so, who? Investigator collected participants' answers in word and analyzed the percentage data.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Jun 2020.
- Background: PubMed 29926759Erzar T, Yu L, Enright RD, Kompan Erzar K. Childhood Victimization, Recent Injustice, Anger, and Forgiveness in a Sample of Imprisoned Male Offenders. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2019 Jan;63(1):18-31. doi: 10.1177/0306624X18781782. Epub 2018 Jun 21.
- Background: PubMed 25914886Lee YR, Enright RD. A Forgiveness Intervention for Women With Fibromyalgia Who Were Abused in Childhood: A Pilot Study. Spiritual Clin Pract (Wash D C ). 2014 Sep;1(3):203-217. doi: 10.1037/scp0000025. Epub 2014 Aug 25.
- Background: PubMed 20186637Waltman MA, Russell DC, Coyle CT, Enright RD, Holter AC, M Swoboda C. The effects of a forgiveness intervention on patients with coronary artery disease. Psychol Health. 2009 Jan;24(1):11-27. doi: 10.1080/08870440903126371.
- Background: PubMed 19445342Hansen MJ, Enright RD, Baskin TW, Klatt J. A palliative care intervention in forgiveness therapy for elderly terminally ill cancer patients. J Palliat Care. 2009 Spring;25(1):51-60.
- Background: PubMed 17032096Reed GL, Enright RD. The effects of forgiveness therapy on depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress for women after spousal emotional abuse. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2006 Oct;74(5):920-9. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.74.5.920.
- Background: PubMed 15612857Lin WF, Mack D, Enright RD, Krahn D, Baskin TW. Effects of forgiveness therapy on anger, mood, and vulnerability to substance use among inpatient substance-dependent clients. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004 Dec;72(6):1114-21. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.72.6.1114.
- Background: PubMed 22122165McKay KM, Hill MS, Freedman SR, Enright RD. Towards a feminist empowerment model of forgiveness psychotherapy. Psychotherapy (Chic). 2007 Mar;44(1):14-29. doi: 10.1037/0033-3204.44.1.14.
- BackgroundYu, L., Gambaro, M., Komoski, M. C., Song, M. J., Song, M., Teslik, M., Wollner, B., & Enright, R. D. (2018). The Silent Injustices against Men in Maximum Security Prison and the Need for Forgiveness Therapy: Two Case Studies. Journal of Forensic Psychology, 3, 137. DOI: 10.4172/2475-319X.1000137.
- BackgroundEnright, R. D., Erzar, T., Gambaro, M., Komoski, M. C., O'Boyle, J., Reed, G., & ... Yu, L. (2016). Proposing Forgiveness Therapy for those in Prison: An Intervention Strategy for Reducing Anger and Promoting Psychological Health. Journal of Forensic Psychology, 1, 116. DOI: 10.4172/2475-319X.1000116.
- Project descriptions on this studyLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Forgiveness
RecruitingObservational study
Influence of Resentment and Forgivingness on Quality of Life in People Living With HIV
Forgiveness, Hiv
Recruiting
Positive Psychology for Early Cognitive Decline: Effects on Cognitive and Brain Function
Subjective Cognitive Decline (SCD), Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI)
Not yet recruiting
The Effect of a Self-Compassionate Mindfulness Psychoeducation Program Implemented in Prison on Internalized Stigma, Emotion Regulation, and Forgiveness in Juvenile Delinquents
Juvenile Delinquency
RecruitingObservational study
Prospective Multicenter Study of the Relationship Between Virological Effectiveness and Compliance in HIV-1-infected Patients Treated With Bictegravir
HIV Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) Adherence
Not yet recruiting
Emotion, Aging, and Forgiveness: Protocol for a Feasibility of Randomized Controlled Trial
Emotion-Focused Therapy, Aging
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Robert D Enright, PhD principal investigator
University of Wisconsin, Madison
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Forgiveness, run by University of Wisconsin, Madison at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Jun 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Score on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Measures of Anger (time frame: Baseline). The study lists 13 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04374357, which also lists 9 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Jun 2020.