Self-forgiveness has been conceptualized as a coping strategy that may improve health and well-being. To better understand the functions of self-forgiveness, this meta-analysis examines the correlates of self-forgiveness associated with physical and mental health. For physical health, across 18 samples and 5,653 participants, the correlation was .32. For psychological well-being, across 65 samples and 17,939 participants, the correlation was .45. To augment this primary focus on physical and mental health correlates, we estimated the relationships between self-forgiveness and specific mental health constructs and relationship outcomes. Implications for future basic and applied research on self-forgiveness are discussed.

A theory of relational humility asserts that humility can promote strengthening social bonds. To complement prior, cross-sectional research on this topic, two longitudinal studies were conducted. In Study 1, college students in romantic relationships (N = 123), all of whom had been hurt or offended by their partners within the last two months, completed measures of humility and unforgiveness for six consecutive weeks. Relational humility predicted unforgiving motives (lagged by one time-point). In Study 2, we examined college students (N = 84) in small groups that did three tasks intended to challenge humility. Round-robin ratings were used over the course of three measurement occasions to evaluate whether trait humility predicted formation of strong social bonds. As predicted, trait humility was associated with greater group status and acceptance. We concluded that, by using longitudinal methods, there is support for the proposition that humility can help repair and form relationships with strong social bonds.

Two studies provide evidence for distinguishing intellectual humility (IH) from general humility (GH). Humility involves (a) an Accurate View of Self and (b) the ability to regulate egotism and cultivate an other-oriented stance; IH is a subdomain of humility that involves (a) having an accurate view of one’s intellectual strengths and limitations and (b) the ability to negotiate ideas in a fair and inoffensive manner. First, we present a theoretical framework for distinguishing these constructs. In Study 1, with a sample of undergraduate students (N = 1097), we used confirmatory factor analysis to provide empirical evidence for this distinction. We also found that IH predicted unique variance in openness to experience relative to GH. In Study 2, we examined additional evidence of discriminant validity with another sample of college students (N = 355). IH also predicted unique variance in need for cognition, objectivism, and religious ethnocentrism relative to GH.

Although many scholars have sharply distinguished humility from modesty, several research teams recently conceptualized modesty as a subdomain of humility. In the present study, we compare these competing conceptualizations using confirmatory factor analyses. In Study 1, a model with general humility (i.e. second-order factor) predicting the subscales of the Relational Humility Scale (RHS) and the Modesty facet of the HEXACO-PI showed adequate fit; and modesty showed one of the stronger factor loadings on the higher order factor. In Study 2, we used a set of items designed to sharpen the potential distinction between modesty (i.e. interpersonal behavior involving moderating attention to self) and humility. Then, we tested a model with a general humility factor (i.e. second-order factor) predicting subscales of the RHS and modesty items. Once again, modesty items loaded strongly on the higher order factor.