Revised Forgiveness Inventory Scales

Abstract

The Revised Forgiveness Inventory Scales (RFIS), initially developed by Coop and Baucom in 1994, is a specialized psychological instrument designed to assess the complex, multidimensional process of forgiveness following a significant relational injury, particularly marital betrayal. This scale conceptualizes forgiveness not as a singular act, but as a journey of recovery delineated by distinct cognitive, behavioral, and emotional changes. The RFIS provides researchers and clinicians with a robust tool to measure the stages of recovery and reconciliation within intimate relationships affected by serious breaches of trust, supporting a model for recovery from betrayal.

Keywords

Forgiveness, Marital Betrayal, Relationship Recovery, Psychological Assessment, Cognitive, Behavioral, Emotional, Intimate Relationships, Psychometrics

Authors

K. L. Coop, D. H. Baucom

Purpose

The primary purpose of the RFIS is to operationalize and measure the progress an individual makes in recovering from a relationship-damaging event, specifically focusing on the aftermath of marital betrayal. It aims to quantify the psychological shift from negative responses (such as anger, desire for revenge, or withdrawal) toward positive, constructive responses indicative of forgiveness and relationship rebuilding.

The scale assists in identifying specific areas—cognitive reframing, emotional regulation, and behavioral reconciliation—where intervention may be most necessary, providing a detailed profile of the respondent’s stage in the recovery process. This detailed assessment is crucial for couples counseling and research into interpersonal relationship dynamics, allowing therapists to tailor interventions based on the specific dimensions where the individual is struggling.

Construct

The RFIS is grounded in a theoretical model that views forgiveness as a multidimensional construct, requiring changes across three primary, interrelated psychological domains. This tripartite structure allows for a nuanced assessment of an individual’s internal and external responses to injury, distinguishing between intellectual acceptance and genuine emotional release.

• Cognitive Dimension: This involves intellectual reframing of the event, seeking understanding rather than blame, examining expectations of the partner, and the ability to see both positive and negative aspects of the relationship and the partner (e.g., items related to finding out why the partner acted or examining realistic expectations).
• Behavioral Dimension: This relates to tangible actions or inactions concerning the partner and the relationship, such as withdrawing from interaction, actively trying to improve one’s role as a partner, or expressing readiness to move past the event.
• Emotional Dimension: This dimension captures the regulation and experience of feelings related to the betrayal, including confusion, anger, numbness, control over emotions, and the eventual ability to let go of negative affect like the desire for punishment or revenge. Items measuring this focus on emotional clarity and control.

Validity

While the initial measure was unpublished (1994), the subsequent empirical validation detailed in the 2003 publication provided preliminary support for the measure’s structure and theoretical grounding. The development of the RFIS was intrinsically linked to a comprehensive model of recovery from marital betrayal, lending strong construct validity to the instrument by ensuring that items accurately reflect the theoretically proposed stages of the forgiveness process.

The clarity and directness of the items, which map directly onto observable steps in the recovery process, suggest a high degree of face validity. Empirical studies utilizing the RFIS have provided evidence supporting its ability to differentiate between individuals who successfully move toward reconciliation and those who remain stuck in unforgiveness, reinforcing its predictive utility in clinical and counseling settings.

Reliability

The authors, Coop and Baucom, established the internal consistency of the RFIS during its refinement phase. Although specific coefficients are not provided in the source entry, instruments developed for rigorous clinical and academic research must demonstrate acceptable reliability coefficients (e.g., Cronbach’s Alpha > 0.70) to ensure that the items consistently measure the intended psychological construct. High internal consistency confirms that the items within each of the three subscales (cognitive, behavioral, and emotional) are cohesive and reliably measure their respective dimension of forgiveness.

Factor Analysis

The fundamental structure of the RFIS is predicated on a three-factor model, reflecting the cognitive, behavioral, and emotional components of the recovery process. The initial factor analysis performed by Coop and Baucom (1994, 2003) confirmed this tripartite structure, demonstrating that the 24 items load distinctly onto their respective factors, supporting the articulated model of recovery from betrayal.

This confirmed factorial structure is critical because it allows for separate scores on each dimension, thereby providing a highly nuanced assessment. For example, a respondent might score high on cognitive recovery (understanding and rationalizing the event) but low on emotional recovery (still experiencing intense anger or a desire for retribution), allowing practitioners to target specific therapeutic interventions.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report Psychological Test

Format: 24 items measured on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always).

Language Available: English (Original)

Population Group: Adults, typically individuals involved in intimate or marital relationships.

Age Group: Adult (18+)

Population Details: Specifically designed for individuals who have experienced a significant relational transgression, such as infidelity or other forms of marital betrayal, within their primary relationship.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate the degree to which they experience or engage in the described feelings, thoughts, or behaviors related to the betrayal event, allowing for quantitative scoring of recovery progress.

Keywords

Forgiveness Inventory, Recovery Model, Likert Scale, Relationship Counseling, Psychotherapy, Interpersonal Forgiveness

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified in source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected] (Provided in source, likely for related research or correspondence).

Correspondence Address: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Affiliation for the unpublished 1994 measure).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The original instrument, titled “The Forgiveness Inventory,” was an Unpublished measure developed in 1994 by Coop & Baucom. The revised and empirically supported version was published in 2003. As an unpublished measure used primarily in academic research, permissions must typically be sought directly from the authors or their affiliated institutions. Fee information is generally not applicable for instruments of this nature unless administered commercially.

Reference’s

The instrument and its validation are detailed in the following academic sources:

• Coop, K. L., & Baucom, D. H. (1994). [The Forgiveness Inventory]. Unpublished measure. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
• Coop, K. L., & Baucom, D. H. (2003). Forgiveness and Marriage: Preliminary Support for a Measure Based on A Model of Recovery From A Marital Betrayal. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 31:179–199.

The 2003 publication detailing the scale and its preliminary support can be found on page 189 of the following document. The original PDF can be downloaded here: http://www.markbeaird.org/wmlib/pdf/book_resources_rbt/forgiveness_and_marriage.pdf

Items of the Revised Forgiveness Inventory Scales

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. I want to ask my partner for all the details about the event.
2. I find myself withdrawing from interaction with my partner.
3. I am examining my views about what I should realistically expect from my partner.
4. I want to find out why my partner did this.
5. I spend my time convincing myself that I am still a good person in spite of what happened.
7. I feel I am ready to put what happened behind me. (Note: Item 6 is skipped in the original source numbering.)
8. Our relationship feels out of balance as a result of what happened.
9. I am learning that many different factors caused this event.
10. I feel overwhelmed by confusing emotions about what happened.
11. I find myself collecting information about my partner’s behavior.
12. I know how I feel about continuing our relationship.
13. I feel my emotions about the event are under my control.
14. Understanding what my partner did is more important to me than blaming him/her.
15. I find myself trying to be a better partner.
16. I can see both the positive and negative aspects of our relationship.
17. I am able to look at both good and bad qualities of my partner.
18. My emotions about what happened change from day to day.
19. I am able to let go of my anger about what happened.
20. I feel like I want to punish my partner for what he/she did.
21. I keep trying to “even the score” between my partner and me.
22. I am too numb to feel any emotion about what happened.
23. My emotions about what happened are becoming clearer.
24. I want to make my partner “pay” for what he/she did.

The scale uses a 5-point Likert response format, ranging from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always).

Subscale Item Assignments (Based on Source Content):

• Cognitive items: 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 14, 16, and 17
• Behavioral items: 7, 10, 13, 18, 19, 22 and 23
• Emotional items: 2, 11, 12, 15, 20, 21, and 24