ArticlePDF Available

The Grateful Disposition: A Conceptual and Empirical Topography

February 2002
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82(1):112-27

DOI:10.1037//0022-3514.82.1.112

Source
PubMed

Authors:

Michael E Mccullough

University of Miami

Robert Emmons

University of California, Davis

Jo-Ann Tsang

Baylor University

In four studies, the authors examined the correlates of the disposition toward gratitude. Study I revealed that self-ratings and observer ratings of the grateful disposition are associated with positive affect and well-being, prosocial behaviors and traits, and religiousness/spirituality. Study 2 replicated these findings in a large nonstudent sample. Study 3 yielded similar results to Studies I and 2 and provided evidence that gratitude is negatively associated with envy and materialistic attitudes. Study 4 yielded evidence that these associations persist after controlling for Extraversion/positive affectivity. Neuroticism/negative affectivity, and Agreeableness. The development of the Gratitude Questionnaire, a unidimensional measure with good psychometric properties, is also described.

Multiple Regression of Two Measures of Gratitude on the Big Five (Study 2) Predictor variable B S E R 2

…

Figures - uploaded by Jo-Ann Tsang

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Jo-Ann Tsang

Content may be subject to copyright.

The Grateful Disposition: A Conceptual and Empirical Topography

Michael E. McCullough

Southern Methodist University Robert A. Emmons

University of California, Davis

Jo-Ann Tsang

Southern Methodist University

In four studies, the authors examined the correlates of the disposition toward gratitude. Study 1 revealed

that self-ratings and observer ratings of the grateful disposition are associated with positive affect and

well-being, prosocial behaviors and traits, and religiousness/spirituality. Study 2 replicated these findings

in a large nonstudent sample. Study 3 yielded similar results to Studies 1 and 2 and provided evidence

that gratitude is negatively associated with envy and materialistic attitudes. Study 4 yielded evidence that

these associations persist after controlling for Extraversion/positive affectivity, Neuroticism/negative

affectivity, and Agreeableness. The development of the Gratitude Questionnaire, a unidimensional

measure with good psychometric properties, is also described.

Gratitude, as it were, is the moral memory of mankind.

—Georg Simmel

The gratitude of most men is but a secret desire of receiving more

benefits.

—La Rochefoucauld

Despite centuries of reflection, scholars in the humanities con-

tinue to debate whether the disposition to be grateful is a trait

worthy of admiration or of contempt. In one camp, philosophers

such as Seneca, Adam Smith, and Georg Simmel have praised the

value of a grateful disposition for individual and social well-being.

In another, figures such as Aristotle, Epicurus, and La Rochefou-

cauld have concluded that manifestations of gratitude are no more

than thin veils over human beings’ self-interest, or messy emo-

tional ties that make people unnecessarily beholden to their bene-

factors (Harpham, 2000; Roberts, 2000).

Psychologists have done little to contribute to this centuries-old

debate (McCullough, Kilpatrick, Emmons, & Larson, 2001). How-

ever, psychology’s inattention to gratitude belies the considerable

individual differences in gratitude of which laypersons are aware.

People easily call to mind individuals in their lives who seem to be

grateful almost to a fault and others who seem perfectly qualified

for the infamous label “ingrate.” Are these individual differences

real? Do people who consider themselves grateful also appear

grateful to others? What are the typical characteristics of people

who demonstrate a grateful disposition? What is the relationship of

gratitude to measures of affect, prosociality, and spirituality? Psy-

chology is perfectly positioned to help illuminate the nature of

gratitude and its place in human functioning.

Gratitude as an Affective Trait

Rosenberg (1998) proposed that the common forms of affective

experience could be structured hierarchically according to speci-

ficity, temporal stability, pervasiveness in consciousness, and ef-

fects on other psychological systems. Rosenberg placed affective

traits, defined as “stable predispositions toward certain types of

emotional responding” that “set the threshold for the occurrence of

particular emotional states” (p. 249) at the top of the hierarchy. She

considered moods, which “wax and wane, fluctuating throughout

or across days” (p. 250), as subordinate to affective traits, and

emotions, which are “acute, intense, and typically brief psycho-

physiological changes that result from a response to a meaningful

situation in one’s environment” (p. 250), as subordinate to both

affective traits and moods.

Gratitude, like other affects, conceivably could exist as an

affective trait, a mood, or an emotion. The present article is

concerned primarily with gratitude as an affective trait that we call

the grateful disposition or disposition toward gratitude. We define

the grateful disposition as a generalized tendency to recognize and

respond with grateful emotion to the roles of other people’s be-

nevolence in the positive experiences and outcomes that one

obtains.

Facets of the Grateful Disposition

Affective traits lower one’s threshold for experiencing certain

emotional states (Rosenberg, 1998). For example, hostility lowers

Michael E. McCullough and Jo-Ann Tsang, Department of Psychology,

Southern Methodist University; Robert A. Emmons, Department of Psy-

chology, University of California, Davis.

This research was generously supported by a grant from the John

Templeton Foundation. We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Rob-

ert Scott and Spirituality and Health magazine, and Lori Aveni and

Stephan Sain with the collection and management of data for Study 2.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Michael

E. McCullough, Department of Psychology, Southern Methodist Univer-

sity, P.O. Box 750442, Dallas, Texas 75275-0442, or to Robert A. Em-

mons, Department of Psychology, University of California, 1 Shields

Avenue, Davis, California 95616. E-mail: mikem@mail.smu.edu or

raemmons@ucdavis.edu

2002, Vol. 82, No. 1, 112–127 0022-3514/02/$5.00 DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.82.1.112

112

the threshold for experiencing anger. Insofar as the grateful dis-

position creates a reduced threshold for recognizing and respond-

ing with gratitude to the role of other people’s benevolence in

one’s positive outcomes, this disposition might cause several dis-

crete emotional experiences. We use the term facets to refer to the

following elements of the grateful disposition rather than the term

dimensions because we suspect that these elements are not distinct

or independent but, rather, co-occur.

The first facet of the grateful disposition can be called intensity.

A dispositionally grateful person who experienced a positive event

is expected to feel more intensely grateful than would someone

less disposed toward gratitude. A second facet can be called

frequency. A dispositionally grateful person might report feeling

grateful many times each day, and gratitude might be elicited by

even the simplest favor or act of politeness. Conversely, for

someone less disposed toward gratitude, gratitude would be expe-

rienced less frequently. A third facet can be called span. Gratitude

span refers to the number of life circumstances for which a person

feels grateful at a given time. Dispositionally grateful people might

be expected to feel grateful for their families, their jobs, their

health, and life itself, along with a variety of other benefits. People

less disposed to gratitude might experience gratitude for fewer

aspects of their lives. A fourth facet can be called density, which

refers to the number of persons to whom one feels grateful for a

single positive outcome. When asked to whom one feels grateful

for a certain outcome (say, obtaining a good job), a dispositionally

grateful person might list many other people, including parents,

friends, family, and mentors. Someone less disposed toward grat-

itude might feel grateful to fewer people for the same outcome.

The Grateful Disposition and Attributional Breadth

The grateful disposition is not merely a tendency to experience

a particular affect (i.e., gratitude); it also emerges from particular

attributions regarding the causes of one’s positive outcomes.

Weiner (1986) proposed that gratitude became distinct from hap-

piness through a two-step process. First, people recognize that they

have obtained a positive outcome, which causes happiness. Sec-

ond, people attribute their happiness to an external source (viz.,

another person who acted intentionally), and consequently, happi-

ness is labeled as gratitude. Thus, attributions are central to grat-

itude, and attributional style may be central to the disposition

toward gratitude.

Attribution theory in its basic (e.g., Weiner, 1986, 1995) and

clinical (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978) formulations

sets the stage for hypotheses regarding the attributional style of

dispositionally grateful people. Weiner’s (1986) insights lead to

the hypothesis that dispositionally grateful people tend to attribute

their positive outcomes to the effort of other people. Correspond-

ingly, dispositionally grateful people might seem less likely to

attribute their successes and good fortune to their own efforts or

positive qualities, and thus, more prone to the psychological dif-

ficulties associated with the externalizing attributional style (e.g.,

Abramson et al., 1978; Gladstone & Kaslow, 1995).

However, the fact that grateful people tend to recognize the

benevolence of other people in their positive outcomes does not

necessarily mean that they discount their own causal effort. In-

stead, what might distinguish grateful people is an ability to stretch

their attributions to incorporate the wide range of people who

contribute to their well-being. The thirteenth century theologian

and philosopher Thomas Aquinas (cited in Harpham, 2000) ob-

served that recognizing the many people who contribute to one’s

positive outcomes was essential to gratitude:

The nature of a debt to be paid must needs vary according to various

causes giving rise to the debt, yet so that the greater always includes

the lesser. Now the cause of debt is found primarily and chiefly in

God, in that He is the first principle of all our goods: secondarily it is

found in our father, because he is the proximate principle of our

begetting and upbringing: thirdly it is found in the person that excels

in dignity, from which general favors proceed; fourthly it is found in

a benefactor, from whom we have received particular and private

favors, on account of which we are under particular obligation to him.

(Summa Theologica, Question 106, Article 1)

Consider two successful Olympic swimmers—one more and

one less dispositionally grateful. The grateful swimmer would, no

doubt, recognize her own effort in obtaining an Olympic gold

medal. However, because of her grateful disposition, she may also

recognize other people’s benevolent contributions to her success in

addition to her own effort. For example, she also might attribute

her success to the effort of her coaches, her parents, teachers who

tolerated her demanding workout schedule, and even teammates or

competitors who challenged her to swim at her best. Clearly, some

of these people had strong and direct influences on her success,

whereas others’influences may have been more distal and subtle.

Conversely, a less grateful Olympic swimmer might not consider

the full range of people who contributed (albeit perhaps distally

and subtly) to her success, and might therefore attribute her suc-

cess solely to her own effort. Thus, the distinctive attributional

quality of grateful people may not be that they have a more

externalizing style of attributions for their positive outcomes, but

rather, that they recognize the many people who contribute to their

positive outcomes.

Personality Correlates of the Grateful Disposition:

A Superordinate Traits Analysis

Given the preceding analysis, we suspect that the grateful dis-

position is linked to other personality traits, most notably (a)

positive affective traits and well-being, (b) prosocial traits, and (c)

religion/spirituality. To some extent, the correlations of the grate-

ful disposition with these three clusters of individual differences

might be explained in terms of the Big Five (John & Srivastava,

1999) or Five-Factor (McCrae & Costa, 1999) personality

taxonomy.

The Emotions and Well-Being of Grateful People

Grateful people may be prone to positive emotions and subjec-

tive well-being. Several theorists and researchers (e.g., Lazarus &

Lazarus, 1994; Mayer, Salovey, Gomberg-Kaufman, & Blainey,

1991; Ortony, Clore, & Collins, 1988; Weiner, 1986) have noted

that gratitude typically has a positive emotional valence. From this

fact, we surmise that the disposition toward gratitude is rooted in

basic tendencies to experience positive emotions and subjective

well-being. However, there are other reasons to expect that grate-

ful people experience positive emotions and heightened well-

being: Seeing oneself as the beneficiary of other people’s gener-

113

GRATITUDE

osity may lead one to feel affirmed, esteemed, and valued, which

may boost self-esteem and perceived social support. Moreover,

highly grateful people may possess a worldview in which every-

thing they have—and even life itself—is a gift. This level of

appreciation for the good things in one’s life may lead grateful

people to avoid taking benefits for granted. As a result, they may

be less prone to habituate to positive life circumstances, which

might also help sustain their happiness and subjective well-being

over time.

Invoking the Big Five taxonomy, we hypothesized that dispo-

sitionally grateful people have high levels of Extraversion/positive

affectivity and low levels of Neuroticism/negative affectivity be-

cause these two superordinate personality dimensions are highly

relevant to emotional experience. We also suspected that grateful

people experience higher levels of other specific positive emotions

such as happiness, vitality, optimism, and hope, as well as greater

satisfaction with life. Conversely, we suspected that they tend to

experience low levels of negative emotions such as anxiety, de-

pression, and envy.

The Prosocial Traits of Grateful People

Gratitude has been called an “empathic emotion”(Lazarus &

Lazarus, 1994) because it is predicated on the capacity for recog-

nizing the beneficial actions of other people in one’s life. Mc-

Cullough et al. (2001) proposed that gratitude is relevant to the

moral domain in the same way that affects such as guilt (Tangney,

1991), shame (Keltner & Buswell, 1996), empathy (Batson, 1991),

and even contempt, anger, and disgust (Rozin, Lowery, Imada, &

Haidt, 1999) are morally relevant. Specifically, gratitude might be

considered a prosocial affect because it is a response to behaviors

that other people enact to contribute to one’s welfare, and may

actually motivate such behaviors in turn (McCullough et al., 2001;

McCullough & Tsang, in press).

The prosocial nature of gratitude suggests the possibility that the

grateful disposition is rooted in the basic traits that orient people

toward sensitivity and concern for others. Again invoking the Big

Five taxonomy, we suggest that grateful people may tend to be

higher in Agreeableness, which appears to facilitate prosocial and

other-oriented behavior (Koole, Jager, van den Berg, Vlek, &

Hofstee, 2001). Indeed, Saucier and Goldberg (1998) reported that

a two-item personality measure consisting of the adjectives grate-

ful and thankful was correlated r⫽.31 with Agreeableness.

Moreover, one might expect the disposition toward gratitude to be

related to other traits that emerge from Agreeableness such as a

capacity for empathy, willingness to forgive, and a tendency to

offer help and support to others. Grateful people probably are also

disinclined to experience negative interpersonal emotions such as

envy, which is not simply a negative affect, but rather a type of

negative emotion (viz., resentment and disdain) that is directed

specifically at other people (Smith, Parrott, Diener, Hoyle, & Kim,

1999). Relatedly, we expect that dispositionally grateful people are

less concerned with materialistic pursuits, which would be some-

what incompatible with a focus on generosity and helpfulness.

The Spiritual Traits of Grateful People

Just as gratitude accompanies the recognition of the positive

contributions of other people to one’s well-being, dispositionally

grateful people may also be oriented toward recognition of non-

human forces that might contribute to their well-being in a broader,

more existential sense (viz., luck, chance, God, or some other

conception of the divine). Stated another way, grateful people may

tend to be spiritually inclined—a trait that is surprisingly distinct

from the Big Five (Piedmont, 1999; Saucier & Goldberg, 1998).

Justification for this hypothesis comes from several sources.

First, many world religions commend gratitude as a desirable

human trait (see Carman & Streng, 1989; Emmons & Crumpler,

2000), which may cause spiritual or religious people to adopt a

grateful outlook. Second, when confronted with a positive out-

come that cannot be attributed to intentional human effort, such as

a lovely sunset or the gift of sight, spiritually inclined people may

still be able attribute these positive outcomes to a human or

nonhuman agent (viz., God or a higher power) and thus, experi-

ence more gratitude. Third, spiritually inclined people also tend to

attribute positive outcomes to God’s intervention, but not negative

ones (Lupfer, De Paola, Brock, & Clement, 1994; Lupfer, Tolliver,

& Jackson, 1996). As a result, many positive life events that are

not due to the actions of another person (e.g., pleasant weather,

avoiding an automobile accident) may be perceived as occasions

for gratitude to God, although negative events (e.g., a long winter,

an automobile accident) would likely not be attributed to God.

It is possible that causal links between the grateful disposition

and spirituality run in the other direction as well. Allport,

Gillespie, and Young (1948) found that 37% of their college-

student sample cited gratitude as a reason why they were religious.

For these many reasons, we hypothesized that dispositionally

grateful people score higher on measures of spirituality and

religiousness.

Is the Grateful Disposition a Distinct Construct?

Thus far, we have posited that the grateful disposition is real,

unique, and worthy of attention in its own right, even if also

correlated with a host of better understood traits and characteris-

tics. In this situation, it is prudent to anticipate the objection that

the grateful disposition is no more than a repackaging of some

other construct. This objection has prima facie merit for theoretical

and practical reasons. Theoretically, if gratitude is simply a man-

ifestation of more fundamental constructs (e.g., Extraversion/pos-

itive affectivity, Neuroticism/negative affectivity, or Agreeable-

ness), then the grateful disposition might reveal little of enduring

interest about human personality and social functioning. Practi-

cally, if gratitude is simply the product of such better understood

traits, then examining gratitude on its own terms might only

contribute to the explosion of traits (and measures) that has char-

acterized psychology during the twentieth century.

To this objection, one might argue that even if gratitude were

simply a linear combination of more basic constructs, the concept

could still reveal important insights at a different level of analysis.

For example, if gratitude could be reduced to a linear combination

of the Big Five (which most likely it cannot; Saucier & Goldberg,

1998), then gratitude still could be of interest as a characteristic

adaptation that more extraverted (or less neurotic or more agree-

able) people use to navigate their worlds (see McCrae & Costa,

1999).

The objection could also be examined empirically. If the items

used as indicators of the grateful disposition correlate as highly

114 MCCULLOUGH, EMMONS, AND TSANG

with the items on a measure of some other lower order construct—

say, hope, happiness, optimism, vitality, or satisfaction with

life—as they do with each other, then the concept of gratitude

would seem unnecessary for understanding the class of human

behavior or experience in question. Also, if gratitude’s associa-

tions with such lower order constructs can be explained in terms of

their common associations with superordinate traits (e.g., Extra-

version/positive affectivity, Neuroticism/negative affectivity,

Agreeableness) one might safely conclude that the disposition

toward gratitude is a basic adaptation emerging from more basic

personality traits.

Overview of the Studies

In the studies described below, we addressed several objectives

regarding the disposition toward gratitude. First, we developed

self-report measures of the grateful disposition and examined their

convergence with informant ratings. Second, we confirmed that

the disposition toward gratitude is empirically distinct from con-

structs such as life satisfaction, vitality, happiness, hope, and

optimism. Third, we tested the hypotheses that the disposition

toward gratitude is correlated with lower order traits such as (a)

emotions and well-being; (b) prosocial traits such as empathy,

forgiveness, and willingness to help others; and (c) spirituality,

religiousness, and nonmaterialistic attitudes. Fourth, we examined

the relation of the disposition toward gratitude with the Big Five

personality traits. Fifth, we explored whether the associations of

gratitude with lower order traits occurred through their common

associations with the superordinate traits of Extraversion/positive

affectivity, Neuroticism/negative affectivity, and Agreeableness,

as well as with social desirability.

Study 1

Study 1 was an initial investigation of the correlates of the

grateful disposition using two methods for assessing gratitude.

First, we constructed a self-report measure called the Gratitude

Questionnaire–6 (GQ-6). We examined the convergence of the

GQ-6 with informant ratings and confirmed that gratitude was

empirically distinct from a host of other conceptually related

constructs. Then, we examined the correlations of the self-ratings

and informant ratings of the disposition toward gratitude with

measures of positive affect/well-being, prosociality, spirituality/

religiousness, and the Big Five.

Method

Participants

The participants in Study 1 were 238 undergraduate psychology students

(174 women, 57 men, 7 unrecorded). Participants’mean age was 21 years

(range ⫽19–44). Participants received course credit for participating.

Self-Report Measures of Gratitude

We administered 39 positively and negatively worded items that assess

experiences and expressions of gratefulness and appreciation in daily life,

as well as feelings about receiving from others. Items reflected the grati-

tude intensity facet (e.g., “I feel thankful for what I have received in life.”),

the gratitude frequency facet (e.g., “Long amounts of time can go by before

I feel grateful to something or someone.”), the gratitude span facet (e.g. “I

sometimes feel grateful for the smallest things.”), and the gratitude density

facet (e.g., “I am grateful to a wide variety of people.”). Respondents

endorsed each item on a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly

disagree)to7(strongly agree).

Measures of Affectivity and Life Satisfaction

Life satisfaction. The five-item Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS;

Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985) assesses the cognitive compo-

nent of subjective well-being. Items are rated on a 7-point scale ranging

from 1 (strongly disagree)to7(strongly agree). The SWLS has a 2-month

test–retest correlation coefficient of .82 and coefficient alpha of .87 (Diener

et. al., 1985). The SWLS is widely used and well-validated (Pavot &

Diener, 1993).

Vitality. Subjective vitality is a feeling of aliveness, energy, and en-

thusiasm, representing the “nexus of physical and psychological well-

being”(Ryan & Frederick, 1997). It was assessed with the seven-item

Vitality Scale (a sample item is “I have energy and spirit”). The Vitality

Scale is related to both physical and mental health outcomes and possesses

good psychometric properties.

Subjective happiness. The Subjective Happiness Scale (Lyubomirsky

& Lepper, 1999) is a four-item scale that measures global subjective

happiness. The scale has high test–retest reliability, internal consistency,

and self–peer correlations.

Optimism. The widely used Life Orientation Test (LOT; Scheier,

Carver, & Bridges, 1994) is an eight-item scale for assessing dispositional

optimism. Scheier et al. reported a coefficient alpha of .82 and test–retest

stabilities ranging from .56 to .79 across four time periods.

Hope. The Adult Trait Hope Scale (Snyder, et al., 1991) is an eight-

item measure that assesses two dimensions of hope: agency and pathways.

The hope scale possesses favorable psychometric properties and predicts

several measures of performance, health, and adjustment (Snyder, 2000).

Positive and negative affect. The Positive and Negative Affect Scales

(PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) measure general tendencies to

experience positive (e.g., pride) and negative (e.g., guilt) affect. Partici-

pants used a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (very slightly or not

at all)to5(extremely) to indicate how well each of 20 adjectives described

“how [they] generally feel.”Coefficient alphas of the positive and negative

scales range in the middle to upper .80s (Watson et al., 1988).

Psychological symptoms. We measured anxiety and depressive symp-

toms with the Anxiety and Depression scales of the Brief Symptom

Inventory (Derogatis & Spencer, 1982). Participants rate the items on these

subscales with a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all)to5(extremely).

Items in the Anxiety scale describe symptoms characteristic of high levels

of manifest anxiety and the cognitive and somatic correlates of anxiety.

The Depression scale consists of items that characterize clinical depression

including negative moods, low motivation, and social isolation. Derogatis

and Spencer (1982) reported coefficient alphas of .81 for the Anxiety scale

and .85 for the Depression scale.

Measures of Prosociality

Dispositional empathy. The disposition toward empathy was measured

with the Empathic Concern and Perspective-Taking subscales of the Inter-

personal Reactivity Index (Davis & Oathout, 1987). These subscales have

adequate internal consistency (

␣

⫽.73 and .71, respectively, Davis &

Oathout, 1987), and are frequently used to measure empathic disposition.

Social desirability. Social desirability was assessed with the Balanced

Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR; Paulhus, 1998). This 40-item

inventory assesses two self-favoring defensive tendencies: self-deceptive

enhancement (SDE) and impression management (IM). Coefficient alphas

range from .67 to .77 for SDE and .77 to .85 for IM (Paulhus, 1998).

115

GRATITUDE

Measures of Spirituality and Religiousness

Spiritual transcendence. The Spiritual Transcendence Scale (STS;

Piedmont, 1999) is a 24-item scale consisting of subscales for assessing

three dimensions of spirituality: Prayer fulfillment (e.g., “The desires of my

body do not keep me from my prayers or meditations”), universality (“I

believe there is a larger meaning to life”), and connectedness (“Iam

concerned about those who will come after me in life”). Coefficient alphas

for these subscales range from .65 to .85. Subscale scores are moderately

correlated with conventional indexes of religiousness and are relatively

independent of the Big Five (Piedmont, 1999). In the present study, we

used the total scale score as a measure of spirituality.

Self-transcendence. Fifteen items from the self-transcendence subscale

of the Character and Temperament Inventory (Cloninger, Svrakic, &

Przybeck, 1993) were used to assess three aspects of spirituality: self-

forgetful versus self-conscious experience, transpersonal identification ver-

sus self-isolation, and spiritual acceptance versus rational materialism.

Kirk, Eaves, and Martin (1999) developed a 15-item measure (sample item

is “I have had personal experiences in which I felt in contact with a divine

and wonderful spiritual power”) from the full-length 33-item subscale.

Cloninger et al. reported alphas in the low .70s for the 33-item version.

Internal consistency of the 15-item version in the present study was

alpha ⫽.86. Items were endorsed on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging

from 1 (agree)to4(disagree).

Other religious variables. Participants also completed several other

items related to religiousness, including items assessing the importance of

religion (“How important is religion in your life?”), the frequency with

which they attend religious activities (“On average, how often do you

attend religious services?”), the number of religious friends they have

(“Are your friends involved in religious activities?”with none,a few,most,

and all as response options), the amount of time they spent reading

scripture (“How often do you read sacred scriptures?”) and other religious

literature (“How often do you read other religious literature?”), the fre-

quency with which they pray (“How often do you pray?”), the extent to

which they felt they had a personal relationship with God (“To what extent

do you have a personal, unique, close relationship with God?”), and the

extent to which they experience spiritual union with God (“Do you have

experiences where you feel a union with God and gain spiritual truth?”).

Measures of the Big Five

The Big Five Inventory (John, Donahue, & Kentle, 1991) consists of 44

brief descriptive phrases that are prototypical markers for five broad

personality dimensions: Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion,

Neuroticism, and Openness. Alpha reliabilities and test–retest reliabilities

for the five subscales range from .80 to .90 (John & Srivastava, 1999).

Informant Reports

The 238 participants were asked to identify four people (friends, rela-

tives, or romantic partners) who knew them well. Participants asked these

informants to complete an informant rating form that included several

measures. Questionnaires were worded specifically for male and female

targets. Two or more informant reports were returned for 168 individuals.

Of the 639 total informants, 444 (69.5%) were friends or roommates, 54

(8.5%) were boyfriends or girlfriends, 49 (7.7%) were parents, 3 (⬍1%)

were spouses, 60 (9.4%) were other family members, and 29 (4.5%) were

people who knew the participants in some other way.

Gratitude ratings. The informant form included 12 items from the

gratitude item pool described above, with wording changed from the first

person to the third. Informants rated the participants on the same 7-point

scale that participants used in the self-ratings. Within informants, these 12

items had internal consistency reliabilities (

␣

) of approximately .85. Inter-

rater reliability was calculated using the formula for Case 1 in Shrout and

Fleiss (1979, p. 421), using an analysis of variance components (Hoyt &

Melby, 1999). Using this formula, interrater reliability was .65.

Prosocial behavior. Informants were also asked to rate the frequency

with which they were the recipients of prosocial actions performed by the

target person (e.g. “[she/he] loaned me money,”“[she/he] provided com-

passion or sympathy,”“[she/he] made me feel good about myself”) during

“the last month or so.”Informants rated these items on a 5-point Likert-

type scale ranging from 1 (not at all)to5(frequently). We combined scores

on these informant reports into a single five-item measure of perceived

prosocial behavior in the last month.

Informants also completed several measures of their impressions of

participants’general prosocial tendencies (e.g., “[She/he] tends to go out of

[his/her] way to help others,”“[She/he] has volunteered [his/her] time to

help others,”etc.). These items were rated on a 5-point scale ranging

from 1 (not at all characteristic of the participant)to5(extremely char-

acteristic of the participant).

Informants also rated participants with the Big Five Inventory (John et

al., 1991).

Procedures

During a class period, participants received a packet containing the

self-report scales and four envelopes and questionnaire packets containing

the informant-report scales. Participants were instructed to give each en-

velope to an individual who knew them well with the instructions that the

forms should be mailed directly back to the researcher within 1 week. They

were instructed not to discuss the questionnaires or ratings with their

informants. A total of 656 peer reports were returned. Participants for

whom at least three reports were not returned were not included in

aggregate informant reports described below.

Results

Scale Construction: Initial Analyses

First, we conducted correlational and exploratory factor analy-

ses with the 39 items in our initial pool of items for measuring the

grateful disposition. An exploratory factor analysis on the 39 items

revealed one large factor that explained 27% of the total item

variance. Although there were 10 other factors with eigenvalues

exceeding unity, none of these factors accounted for more than 7%

of the total item variance. A scree plot also suggested only one

meaningful factor. From the item pool, we retained six items that

(a) loaded strongly on the first factor and (b) assessed unique

aspects of the grateful disposition. These six items constituted the

initial version of the GQ-6.

Structural Equation Models

The validity of a one-factor solution for the six retained items

was assessed with structural equation models with maximum-

likelihood estimation in EQS Version 5.7b (Bentler, 1995). To

assess goodness of fit, we examined the chi-square, comparative fit

index (CFI) and standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR;

Bentler, 1995) statistics. Hu and Bentler (1998) noted that SRMR

is less sensitive to distribution and sample size, and recommended

its use in combination with CFI when using maximum-likelihood

estimation. CFI values greater than .95 and SRMR values less than

.05 are typically considered to indicate that a structural equation

model is adequately parameterized (Hu & Bentler, 1998), although

values as low as .90 and as high as .10, respectively, are

acceptable.

116 MCCULLOUGH, EMMONS, AND TSANG

First, we estimated a one-factor congeneric measurement model.

This model yielded a large and significant chi-square,

␹

(9, N⫽

235) ⫽30.34, p⬍.001. The CFI, which is less sensitive to sample

size, was also large (.95), indicating that the one-factor model

provided an adequate fit to the data. For our six-item scale, SRMR

was .04. The internal consistency reliability of the six-item scale

was alpha ⫽.82. The final version of the GQ-6 appears in the

Appendix.

Discriminant Validity

We proceeded to distinguish our measure of the grateful dispo-

sition from several related but distinct constructs: satisfaction with

life, vitality, subjective happiness, optimism, and hope. If the

grateful disposition construct is distinct from the latter five con-

structs, then it should be necessary to specify two unique but

correlated factors to account for the covariances among the items

for the GQ-6 and any of the other five scales.

For each of these tests of discriminant validity, we used

EQS 5.7b to estimate a one-factor solution specifying a single

latent construct underlying the items on the GQ-6 and each of the

other respective scales. Second, we estimated a two-factor solution

specifying that the items on the GQ-6 and each of the other

respective scales loaded on distinct but correlated latent variables.

If the addition of a second latent variable to account for the

covariances among both sets of items led to an improvement in

model fit (i.e., if the two-factor model was superior to the one-

factor model), we could conclude that both constructs are neces-

sary for describing the two sets of items, and thus, that the two

constructs are reasonably distinctive.

We evaluated the fit of these one-factor and two-factor models

with the chi-square, CFI, and SRMR indices. We analyzed the

relative improvements in goodness of fit associated with moving

from a one-factor model to a two-factor model with a nested

chi-square test. The nested chi-square test measures the difference

in chi-square values between nested models that differ by one

parameter. Differences in chi-square values themselves are chi-

square distributed, and can be evaluated for statistical significance

by evaluating them against the chi-square distribution with 1

degree of freedom. Statistically significant reductions in chi-square

suggest that the additional parameter improved model specifica-

tion (Hoyle & Panter, 1995).

Gratitude and life satisfaction. The one-factor model combin-

ing the gratitude items with SWLS items fit the data poorly,

␹

(44,

N⫽231) ⫽352.95, p⬍.001, CFI ⫽.71, SRMR ⫽.13. In

contrast, a model with gratitude and life satisfaction as two sepa-

rate factors showed a better fit,

␹

(43, N⫽231) ⫽74.89, p⬍

.001, CFI ⫽.97, SRMR ⫽.04, ⌬

␹

⫽278.06, p⬍.05, demon-

strating that the introduction of a second factor to account exclu-

sively for the covariances among the items on the GQ-6 led to a

significant improvement in model fit. The gratitude and life satis-

faction latent factors were correlated at r⫽.53, p⬍.05.

Gratitude and vitality. The one-factor solution for gratitude

and vitality did not fit the data well,

␹

(65, N⫽234) ⫽481.26,

p⬍.001, CFI ⫽.68, SRMR ⫽.14, and the two-factor solution fit

the data better,

␹

(64, N⫽234) ⫽166.44, CFI ⫽.92, SRMR ⫽

.06, ⌬

␹

⫽314.82, p⬍.05. The gratitude and vitality latent

factors were correlated at r⫽.46, p⬍.05.

Gratitude and happiness. The one-factor model for describing

the relations among the items on the GQ-6 and subjective happi-

ness (Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999) scales did not fit the data

well,

␹

(35, N⫽234) ⫽355.54, p⬍.001, CFI ⫽.66, SRMR ⫽

.12., and the two-factor solution fit the data better,

␹

(34, N⫽

234) ⫽103.90, CFI ⫽.93, SRMR ⫽.05, ⌬

␹

⫽251.64, p⬍.05.

The gratitude and happiness latent factors were correlated at r⫽

.50, p⬍.05.

Gratitude and optimism. We also evaluated the relations

among the items on the GQ-6 and the items on the LOT measure

of optimism. A one-factor model yielded a poor fit on all three

indices:

␹

(54, N⫽233) ⫽275.42, p⬍.001, CFI ⫽.74,

SRMR ⫽.11. In comparison, a two-factor solution with gratitude

and optimism as distinct factors fit the data more acceptably,

␹

(53, N⫽233) ⫽103.16, p⬍.001, CFI ⫽.94, SRMR ⫽.05.

The difference in chi-square between the one-factor and two-factor

models was significant, ⌬

␹

⫽171.86, p⬍.05. The two latent

factors were correlated at r⫽.51, p⬍.05.

Gratitude and hope. We conducted similar tests with Snyder

et al.’s (1991) hope scale. We analyzed the relations between the

GQ-6 items and the items on the agency and pathways subscales

separately. The one-factor model combining gratitude and agency

items was a poor fit to the data,

␹

(35, N⫽232) ⫽192.70, p⬍

.001, CFI ⫽.82, SRMR ⫽.08. The two-factor model with sepa-

rate factors for gratitude and agency appeared more adequate,

␹

(34, N⫽232) ⫽81.79, p⬍.001, CFI ⫽.94, SRMR ⫽.05. The

change in chi-square was significant, ⌬

␹

⫽110.91, p⬍.05,

revealing the two-factor solution to be an improvement in fit over

a one-factor model. The gratitude and agency latent factors were

correlated at r⫽.67, p⬍.05.

Similar analyses were conducted comparing one-factor and two-

factor models of the covariances among the GQ-6 items and the

items on the pathways subscale of the hope scale. The one-factor

model yielded a poor fit,

␹

(35, N⫽233) ⫽273.79, p⬍.001,

CFI ⫽.69, SRMR ⫽.13. The two-factor model displayed a better

fit,

␹

(34, N⫽233) ⫽77.11, p⬍.001, CFI ⫽.95, SRMR ⫽.05,

and was a significant improvement in fit, ⌬

␹

⫽196.68, p⬍.05.

The gratitude and pathways latent factors were correlated at r

⫽.42, p⬍.05.

Correlations With Informant Ratings of Gratitude

Because the GQ-6 appeared to be both psychometrically ade-

quate and sufficiently distinct from several other positive con-

structs, we proceeded to examine the convergence of self-reports

with informant reports of the grateful disposition. We computed a

composite informant rating of the grateful disposition by averaging

informants’ratings on the 12 gratitude items and then averaging

across four informants. Participants’ratings on the GQ-6 (M

⫽5.92, SD ⫽0.88) were positively correlated with mean infor-

mant ratings on the 12-item gratitude scale (M⫽5.52, SD ⫽0.53),

r⫽.33, p⬍.01. Thus, people’s perceptions of their own grateful

disposition show a modest but significant correspondence with

external observers’perceptions.

Correlations of Gratitude With Other Constructs

We correlated the GQ-6 and the mean informant ratings of the

grateful disposition with the other measures of personality. These

correlations appear in Table 1.

117

GRATITUDE

Affect and well-being. As predicted, both the self-report and

informant-report measures of the grateful disposition were corre-

lated positively with all of the measures of positive affect and

well-being (e.g., life satisfaction, vitality, subjective happiness,

optimism, hope, and positive affectivity), and negatively with all

of the measures of negative affect (negative affectivity, anxiety,

and depression).

Prosociality. As predicted, the self-report and informant-

report measures of the grateful disposition were also correlated

positively with the Empathic Concern and Perspective-Taking

subscales of the empathy measure. In addition, the measures of the

grateful disposition were correlated positively with informants’

reports of participants’prosocial behaviors. Participants who were

rated by themselves (and by their informants) as being more

grateful were reported to perform more prosocial behaviors (e.g.,

providing favors, as well as emotional and tangible support) for

their informants than were less grateful people. Moreover, infor-

mants rated grateful people as having more prosocial traits gener-

ally than did the informants of less grateful people.

Religiousness and spirituality. As predicted, the measures of

the grateful disposition were positively correlated with nearly all

of the measures of spirituality and religiousness, including spiritual

transcendence, self-transcendence, and the single-item religious

variables.

Social desirability. Gratitude was modestly correlated with the

SDE (r⫽.19, p⬍.01) and IM (r⫽.21, p⬍.01) subscales of the

social desirability scale. The mean of the informant ratings was

also correlated significantly with SDE (r⫽.17, p⬍.01) but not

with IM (r⫽.07, ns.).

The Big Five. The grateful disposition was related to several of

the Big Five (see Table 1). Specifically, gratitude was correlated

with Agreeableness (positively), Extraversion (positively), and

Neuroticism (negatively) for both self-ratings (i.e., the GQ-6) and

informant ratings. Perhaps most importantly, these correlations

replicated not only within raters, but across raters as well. For

example, self-ratings of Agreeableness were significantly corre-

lated with both self-rated and peer-rated gratitude and vice versa.

Regressing gratitude on the Big Five in self-ratings. We re-

gressed the GQ-6 on the Big Five self-ratings (see Table 2). The

self-reports of the Big Five personality variables explained 21% of

Table 1

Correlations of Two Measures of Gratitude With Measures of

Affectivity and Well-Being, Prosociality, and

Spirituality/Religiousness (Study 1)

Scale GQ–6

Mof

12-item

informant

ratings

Affectivity and well-being

Life satisfaction (SWLS) .53**

.34**

Vitality .46**

.23**

Subjective happiness .50**

.26**

Optimism (LOT) .51**

.28**

Hope

Agency .67**

.21**

Pathways .42**

.18*

Positive and negative affect

Positive subscale .31** .32**

Negative subscale ⫺.31** ⫺.31**

Psychological symptoms (BSI)

Anxiety ⫺.20** ⫺.11

Depression ⫺.30** ⫺.26**

Prosocial traits and behaviors

Dispositional empathy

Empathic concern .28** .17*

Perspective taking .32** .22**

Mof 5 peer-reported prosocial behaviors in past

month .12 .40**

Peer-rated prosocial traits

Goes out of way to do favors for others .14 .47**

Has volunteered time to help others .19* .42**

Tends to be generous with time and resources .22** .50**

Expects other people to do him/her favors ⫺.20** ⫺.41**

Is helpful and unselfish with others .18* .54**

Spiritual and religious variables

Spiritual transcendence (STS) .28** .30**

Self-transcendence (CTI) .24** .19*

Religious variables

Importance of religion .22** .23**

Frequency of attendance .23** .31**

Religious friends .29** .20*

Reading scripture .16* .21**

Other religious reading .09

Prayer .25**

Personal relationship with God .29**

Union with God .29**

Materialism

Success (Richins) ⫺.25**

Centrality (Richins) ⫺.07

Happiness (Richins) ⫺.38**

Possessiveness (Belk) ⫺.17*

Nongenerosity (Belk) ⫺.35**

Envy (Belk) ⫺.34**

Tangibilization (Belk) ⫺.11

Envy (DES) ⫺.39**

Social desirability

Self-deception .34**

Impression management .29**

Big Five

Agreeableness .39**

Conscientiousness .23**

Extraversion .18*

Neuroticism ⫺.32**

Openness .10

Note. LOT ⫽Life Orientation Scale; STS ⫽Spiritual Transcendence

Scale; Richins ⫽Richins Materialism Scale; Belk ⫽Belk Materialism

Scale; DES ⫽Dispositional Envy Scale.

†p⬍.10. * p⬍.05. ** p⬍.01.

122 MCCULLOUGH, EMMONS, AND TSANG

Studies 1 and 2) negative affectivity. Notably, the correlations with

several of the affective and spiritual variables (e.g., life satisfac-

tion, hope, optimism, anxiety, depression, envy, forgiveness, and

materialism) were substantially reduced (i.e., 10 correlation points

or more). The only correlations that did not maintain their valence

and statistical significance were the correlations with anxiety and

the possessiveness subscale of the Belk Materialism Scale. Thus,

gratitude still predicts significant variance in nearly all of these

measures of affect/well-being, prosociality, and spirituality after

controlling for Neuroticism/negative affectivity.

Mean Correlations With Agreeableness Held Constant

The coefficients in Column 5 of Table 7 represent the correla-

tions of the GQ-6 with the measures denoted in the row headings

after controlling for Agreeableness. Notably, correlations with

several prosocial variables (empathy, forgiveness, several materi-

alism subscales) were substantially reduced in magnitude (i.e., 10

correlation points or more). The only correlations that did not

maintain their valence and statistical significance were with the

possessiveness and nongenerosity subscales of the Belk Material-

ism Scale. Thus, gratitude accounts for unique variance in nearly

all of these criteria after controlling for Agreeableness.

Mean Correlations With Social Desirability Held

Constant

Finally, the coefficients in Column 6 of Table 7 represent the

correlations with the measures denoted in the row headings after

controlling for social desirability. The correlations with measures

of several affective, prosocial, and spiritual variables (life satis-

faction, envy, perspective-taking, spiritual transcendence, the envy

subscale of the Belk Materialism Scale, and the Success and

Happiness subscales of the Richins Materialism Scale) were re-

duced substantially (i.e., 10 correlation points or more). However,

only the correlation with the Success subscale failed to maintain

statistical significance. Thus, although socially desirable respond-

ing may explain some of our obtained associations, the control of

social desirability does not affect drastically our general conclu-

sions about the correlates of gratitude.

Table 7

Correlations of the Gratitude Questionnaire–6 With Other Constructs Before and After Controlling for Extraversion/Positive

Affectivity (E/PA), Neuroticism/Negative Affectivity (N/NA), Agreeableness, and Social Desirability (Studies 1–3)

Scale Zero-order correlation Controlling E/PA Controlling N/NA Controlling Agreeableness Controlling social desirability

Measures of affect and well-being

Life satisfaction .51**

.37**

.47**

.38**

Vitality .38**

.30**

.32**

.30**

.34**

Happiness .41**

.34**

.33**

.37**

Hope

Agency .53**

.43**

.44**

.49**

Pathways .32**

.18**

.21**

.25**

.26**

Optimism .41**

.38**

.30**

.35**

.36**

Anxiety ⫺.20**

⫺.18**

⫺.07

⫺.19**

⫺.18*

Depression ⫺.30**

⫺.22**

⫺.15*

⫺.26**

Envy ⫺.39**

⫺.36**

⫺.27**

⫺.30**

⫺.21*

Measures of prosociality

Empathy

Empathic concern .28**

.23**

.31**

.14**

.25**

Perspective-taking .34**

.28**

.13**

.23**

Forgiveness .36**

.25**

.17**

.25**

Materialism

Possessiveness (Belk) ⫺.17*

⫺.22**

⫺.13

⫺.16†

Nongenerosity (Belk) ⫺.35**

⫺.32**

⫺.28**

⫺.16†

⫺.26**

Envy (Belk) ⫺.34**

⫺.32**

⫺.26**

⫺.18*

Tangibilization (Belk) ⫺.11

⫺.11

.00

⫺.09

⫺.07

Success (Richins) ⫺.25**

⫺.24**

⫺.25**

⫺.20*

⫺.15†

Centrality (Richins) ⫺.07

⫺.09

⫺.07

⫺.09

⫺.07

Happiness (Richins) ⫺.38**

⫺.34**

⫺.28**

⫺.27**

Measures of spirituality/religiousness

Self-transcendence .24**

.11

.20**

.16*

.20**

Spiritual transcendence .47**

.36**

.44**

.39**

.23**

Religiousness

.28**

.27**

.32**

.25**

.27**

Note. Belk ⫽Belk Materialism Scale; Richins ⫽Richins Materialism Scale.

Correlations combined from Studies 1 and 2, total N⫽approximately 1,372.

Correlation from Study 1 only, N⫽approximately 205.

Correlations

combined from Studies 1 and 3, total N⫽approximately 340.

Correlation from Study 3 only, N⫽approximately 135.

Correlation from Study 2 only,

N⫽approximately 1,167.

Correlations from Studies 1, 2, and 3, total N⫽approximately 1,507.

Sum of the single-item measures of religiousness

used in Studies 1–3.

†p⬍.10. * p⬍.05. ** p⬍.01.

123

GRATITUDE

General Discussion

The results from the present studies help to paint a portrait of the

dispositionally grateful person. Consistent with our hypotheses,

grateful people appear to be different from their less grateful

counterparts in three interesting psychological domains: (a)

emotionality/well-being, (b) prosociality, and (c) spirituality/reli-

giousness. Compared with their less grateful counterparts, grateful

people are higher in positive emotions and life satisfaction and also

lower in negative emotions such as depression, anxiety, and envy.

They also appear to be more prosocially oriented in that they are

more empathic, forgiving, helpful, and supportive than are their

less grateful counterparts. Relatedly, grateful people are less fo-

cused on the pursuit of materialistic goals. Finally, people with

stronger dispositions toward gratitude tend to be more spiritually

and religiously minded. Not only do they score higher on measures

of traditional religiousness, but they also score higher on nonsec-

tarian measures of spirituality that assess spiritual experiences

(e.g., sense of contact with a divine power) and sentiments (e.g.,

belief that all living things are interconnected) independent of

specific theological orientation.

We attempted to account for the emotional, prosocial, and

spiritual traits of grateful people by appealing to the Big Five

personality taxonomy as an explanatory framework. Disposition-

ally grateful people were consistently more extraverted, more

agreeable, and less neurotic than their less grateful counterparts.

When these three superordinate traits were controlled, many of the

correlations between the disposition toward gratitude and mea-

sures of emotions/well-being, prosociality, and spirituality became

smaller in magnitude.

However, none of these three superordinate traits could com-

pletely account for the correlations of the Big Five with lower

order personality variables. Moreover, although the correlations

with the Big Five were robust, the Big Five only accounted for

approximately 30% of the variance in the disposition toward

gratitude. Even if one were to correct the obtained associations for

measurement error, the Big Five still would account for no more

than 40% to 45% of the variance in the disposition toward grati-

tude, so the disposition toward gratitude is by no means reducible

to a linear combination of them (see also Saucier & Goldberg,

1998). Nevertheless, the present findings regarding the correla-

tions with the Big Five could be useful in formulating a broader

theory of gratitude that accounts for its roots in basic personality

traits. Specifically, it might be fruitful to conceptualize the dispo-

sition toward gratitude in part as a characteristic adaptation that is

preferentially deployed by highly extraverted, minimally neurotic,

and highly agreeable people for navigating their worlds (see Mc-

Crae & Costa, 1999).

Measuring the Grateful Disposition

The grateful disposition can be measured dependably through

self-report and informant report. We developed a six-item self-

report measure that assesses individual differences in gratitude. It

converges well with observer reports and an adjective rating scale

of gratitude like the one used by Saucier and Goldberg (1998). The

GQ-6 has excellent psychometric properties, including a robust

one-factor structure and high internal consistency, especially in

light of its brevity. Moreover, it correlates in theoretically expected

ways with a variety of affective, prosocial, and spiritual constructs.

Therefore, the GQ-6 and its observer form (which we intend to

continue developing) may be of use in future research on gratitude.

Directions for Future Research

McCullough et al. (2001) recently proposed several directions

for future research on gratitude, including research on psychomet-

rics, the role of gratitude in motivating reciprocity, the relations

between gratitude and well-being, and the relations between grat-

itude and spirituality. The present studies addressed several of

these issues, but also suggested ways that these questions could be

refined. The present findings raised several new issues as well.

Is Gratitude a Unique Emotion?

The present results indicate that gratitude as an affective trait is

related but distinct from other traitlike measures of specific emo-

tions (e.g., dispositional happiness, vitality, optimism, hope, de-

pression, anxiety, and envy), but is gratitude distinct at the level of

discrete emotional experience? Some research suggests that it is

(Ellsworth & Smith, 1988; Schimmack & Reisenzein, 1997). For

example, Ellsworth and Smith found that the adjectives loving,

grateful,friendly, and admiring formed a cluster orthogonal to a

happiness/elation/contentment cluster. Gratitude also possesses a

unique pattern of attributions that distinguish it from positive

emotions such as happiness and contentment (e.g., Weiner, Rus-

sell, & Lerman, 1979).

However, questions remain regarding the distinctiveness of grat-

itude. Although theorists have suggested that gratitude may have

unique functions—particularly in the realm of reciprocal altruism

and prosocial behavior (de Waal, 2000; Fredrickson, 2000; Mc-

Cullough et al., 2001; Nesse, 1990; Trivers, 1971)—researchers

have not investigated thoroughly whether gratitude motivates

prosocial behavior in such contexts over and above the effects of

positive emotions generally (see Carlson, Charlin, & Miller, 1988).

In addition, no evidence indicates that discrete episodes of grati-

tude are accompanied by particular patterns of physiological

arousal or a unique facial display. Examining whether gratitude

possesses a unique pattern of action tendencies, physiological

arousal, or facial displays would help in assessing the uniqueness

of gratitude.

The Grateful Emotions and Attributions of Dispositionally

Grateful People

Following Rosenberg’s (1998) hierarchical model of affective

phenomena, we speculated that people with a strong disposition

toward gratitude possess a low threshold for the experience of

grateful emotions in daily life. This lowered threshold for gratitude

might consist of several facets: (a) more intense experiences of

gratitude, (b) more frequent experiences of gratitude, (c) wider

gratitude spans (i.e., feeling grateful for a greater number of

specific circumstances in one’s life), and (d) denser gratitude

episodes (i.e., attributing each positive outcome to a greater num-

ber of people). Relatedly, we have speculated about the general

attributional styles of highly grateful people: Their attributional

styles may be characterized not by a tendency to attribute their

positive outcomes to external sources, but rather by a tendency to

124 MCCULLOUGH, EMMONS, AND TSANG

incorporate a wide variety of people who contribute to their

positive outcomes. Exploring these notions about the emotional

experience and attributions of dispositionally grateful people could

help to elucidate the affective and cognitive mechanisms that

constitute the grateful personality.

Health, Well-Being, and Coping

Finally, given the consistent connections of gratitude to affec-

tive traits and well-being, it might be useful to explore whether

gratitude actually promotes well-being. Pondering the circum-

stances in one’s life for which one is grateful appears to be a

common way of coping with both acute and chronic stressful life

events (e.g., Barusch, 1997; Coffman, 1996), perhaps in a manner

akin to the “benefit-finding”described by Affleck and Tennen

(1996). Moreover, experimental research suggests that discrete

experiences of gratitude and appreciation may cause increases in

parasympathetic myocardial control (McCraty, Atkinson, Tiller,

Rein, & Watkins, 1995), as well as improvements in more molar

aspects of health (Emmons & McCullough, 2000). These prelim-

inary findings may provide the impetus for more detailed investi-

gations of the possibility that gratitude plays a role in health and

well-being, perhaps even as a mediator of the robust association

between religiousness and physical health (for review see McCul-

lough, Hoyt, Larson, Koenig, & Thoresen, 2000).

Conclusion

From the age of Seneca to the present day, scholars in the

humanities have grappled with the nature of gratitude as a human

disposition and affective state. However, gratitude has escaped

systematic attention by psychologists almost completely (Emmons

& Crumpler, 2000; McCullough et al., 2001). The goal of the

present article was to present and test some basic propositions

about the nature of the disposition toward gratitude and its rela-

tionships to affect and well-being, prosociality, spirituality, and the

Big Five. Our findings, though intriguing, are but an initial look at

the disposition toward gratitude. Hopefully, future researchers can

make use of the insights and measurement tools described in the

present article to extend psychology’s understanding of gratitude

and its roles in individual and interpersonal functioning.

References

Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. E. P., & Teasdale, J. (1978). Learned

helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnor-

mal Psychology, 87,49–74.

Affleck, G., & Tennen, H. (1996). Construing benefits from adversity:

Adaptational significance and dispositional underpinnings. Journal of

Personality, 64, 899–922.

Allport, G. W., Gillespie, J. M., & Young, J. (1948). The religion of the

post-war college student. Journal of Psychology,25,3–33.

Barusch, A. S. (1997). Self-concepts of low-income older women: Not old

or poor, but fortunate and blessed. International Journal of Aging and

Human Development, 44, 269–282.

Batson, C. D. (1991). The altruism question. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino,

CA: Multivariate Software.

Carlson, M., Charlin, V., & Miller, N. (1988). Positive mood and helping

behavior: A test of six hypotheses. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 55, 211–229.

Carman, J. B., & Streng, F. J. (Eds.). (1989). Spoken and unspoken thanks:

Some comparative soundings. Dallas, TX: Center for World Thanksgiv-

ing.

Cloninger, C. R., Svrakic, D. M., & Przybeck, T. R. (1993). A psychobi-

ological model of temperament and character. Archives of General

Psychiatry, 50, 975–990.

Coffman, S. (1996). Parents’struggles to rebuild family life after Hurricane

Andrew. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 17, 353–367.

Davis, M. H., & Oathout, H. A. (1987). Maintenance of satisfaction in

romantic relationships: Empathy and relational competence. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 397–410.

Derogatis, L. R., & Spencer, P. M. (1982). The Brief Symptom Inventory:

Administration, scoring, and procedures manual. Baltimore: Clinical

Psychometric Research.

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The

Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment,49,

71–75.

de Waal, F. (2000). Payment for labour in monkeys. Nature, 404, 563.

Ellsworth, P. C., & Smith, C. A. (1988). Shades of joy: Patterns of

appraisal differentiating pleasant emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 2,

301–331.

Emmons, R. A., & Crumpler, C. A. (2000). Gratitude as human strength:

Appraising the evidence. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19,

56–69.

Emmons, R. A., & McCullough, M. E. (2000). Counting blessings versus

burdens: An experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-

being in daily life. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Fisher, R. A. (1928). Statistical methods for research workers (2nd ed.).

London: Oliver & Boyd.

Fredrickson, B. L. (2000, March 7). Cultivating research on positive

emotions. Prevention and Treatment, 3, Article 0001a. Retrieved

October 4, 2001, from http://journals.apa.org/prevention/volume3/

pre0030001a.html

Funder, D. C., & Colvin, C. R. (1997). Congruence of others’and self-

judgments of personality. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.),

Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 617–647). San Diego, CA:

Academic Press.

Ger, G., & Belk, R. W. (1990). Measuring and comparing materialism

cross-culturally. Advances in Consumer Research, 17, 186–192.

Gladstone, T. R. G., & Kaslow, N. J. (1995). Depression and attributions

in children and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Abnor-

mal Child Psychology, 23, 597–606.

Harpham, E. J. (2000, October). The problem of gratitude in Adam Smith.

Paper presented at the Kindling the Science of Gratitude Conference,

Dallas, TX.

Hoyle, R. H., & Panter, A. T. (1995). Writing about structural equation

models. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts,

issues, and applications (pp. 158–176). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hoyt, W. T., & Melby, J. N. (1999). Dependability of measurement in

counseling: An introduction to generalizability theory. The Counseling

Psychologist, 43, 430–447.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M., (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure

modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification.

Psychological Methods,3, 424–453.

John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). The Big Five

Inventory—Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California,

Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research.

John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History,

measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin and O. P.

John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp.

102–138). New York: Guilford.

Johnson, B. T. (1989). DSTAT: Software for the meta-analytic review of

research literatures. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Keltner, D., & Buswell, B. N. (1996). Evidence for the distinctiveness of

125

GRATITUDE

embarrassment, shame, and guilt: A study of recalled antecedents and

facial expressions of emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 10, 155–171.

Kirk, K. M., Eaves, L. J., & Martin, N. G. (1999). Self-transcendence as a

measure of spirituality in a sample of older Australian twins. Twin

Research, 2,61–87.

Koole, S. L., Jager, W., van den Berg, A. E., Vlek, C. A. J., & Hofstee,

W. K. B. (2001). On the social nature of personality: Effects of extra-

version, agreeableness, and feedback about collective resource use on

cooperation in a resource dilemma. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 27, 289–301.

Lazarus, R. S., & Lazarus, B. N. (1994). Passion and reason: Making sense

of our emotions. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lupfer, M. B., De Paola, S. J., Brock, K. F., & Clement, L. (1994). Making

secular and religious attributions: The availability hypothesis revisited.

Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 33, 162–171.

Lupfer, M. B., Tolliver, D., & Jackson, M. (1996). Explaining life-altering

occurrences: A test of the “God-of-the-gaps”hypothesis. Journal for the

Scientific Study of Religion, 35, 379–391.

Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective hap-

piness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators

Research, 46, 137–155.

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Gomberg-Kaufman, S., & Blainey, K. (1991). A

broader conceptualization of mood experience. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 60, 100–111.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1999). A five-factor theory of person-

ality. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality:

Theory and research (2nd ed.; pp. 139–153). New York: Guilford.

McCraty, R., Atkinson, M., Tiller, W. A., Rein, G., & Watkins, A. D.

(1995). The effects of emotions on short-term power spectrum analysis

of heart rate variability. American Journal of Cardiology, 76, 1089–

1093.

McCullough, M. E., Hoyt, W. T., Larson, D. B., Koenig, H. G., &

Thoresen, C. E. (2000). Religious involvement and mortality: A meta-

analytic review. Health Psychology, 19, 211–222.

McCullough, M. E., Kilpatrick, S. D., Emmons, R. A., & Larson, D. B.

(2001). Is gratitude a moral affect? Psychological Bulletin, 127, 249–

266.

McCullough, M. E., & Tsang, J. (in press). Parent of the virtues? The

prosocial contours of gratitude. In R. A. Emmons & M. E. McCullough

(Eds.), The psychology of gratitude. New York: Oxford University

Press.

McCullough, M. E., Worthington, E. L., Jr., & Rachal, K. C. (1997).

Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 73, 321–336.

Murphy, K. R., Jako, R. A., & Anhalt, R. L. (1993). Nature and conse-

quences of halo error: A critical analysis. Journal of Applied Psychol-

ogy, 78, 218–255.

Nesse, R. M. (1990). Evolutionary explanations of emotions. Human

Nature, 1, 261–289.

Ortony, A., Clore, G. L., & Collins, A. (1988). The cognitive structure of

emotions. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Parrott, W. G., & Smith, R. H. (1993). Distinguishing the experiences of

envy and jealousy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64,

906–920.

Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of trait

self-enhancement: A mixed blessing? Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 74, 1197–1208.

Paulhus, D. L., & Reynolds, S. (1995). Enhancing target variance in

personality perceptions: Highlighting the person in person perception.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1233–1242.

Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the Satisfaction With Life

Scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172.

Piedmont, R. L. (1999). Does spirituality represent the sixth factor of

personality? Spiritual transcendence and the five-factor model. Journal

of Personality, 67, 985–1013.

Richins, M. L., & Dawson, S. (1992). A consumer values orientation for

materialism and its measurement: Scale development and validation.

Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 303–315.

Roberts, R. C. (2000, October). The blessings of gratitude: Some concep-

tual remarks. Paper presented at the Kindling the Science of Gratitude

Conference, Dallas, TX.

Rosenberg, E. L. (1998). Levels of analysis and the organization of affect.

Review of General Psychology, 2, 247–270.

Rozin, P., Lowery, L., Imada, S., & Haidt, J. (1999). The CAD triad

hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger,

disgust) and three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity). Jour-

nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 574–586.

Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. (1997). On energy, personality, and health:

Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of

Personality, 65, 529–565.

Saucier, G. (1994). Mini-markers: A brief version of Goldberg’s unipolar

big-five markers. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 506–516.

Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (1998). What is beyond the Big Five?

Journal of Personality, 66, 495–524.

Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Bridges, M. W. (1994). Distinguishing

optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-

esteem): A reevaluation of the Life Orientation Test. Journal of Person-

ality and Social Psychology, 67, 1063–1078.

Schimmack, U., & Reisenzein, R. (1997). Cognitive processes involved in

similarity judgments of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 73, 645–661.

Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in

assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–428.

Smith, R. H., Parrott, W. G., Diener, E., Hoyle, R. H., & Kim, S. H. (1999).

Dispositional envy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25,

1007–1020.

Snyder, C. R. (2000). The past and possible futures of hope. Journal of

Social and Clinical Psychology, 19,11–28.

Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Holleran, S. A., Irving, L. M.,

Sigmon, S. T., Yoshinobu, L., Gibb, J., Langelle, C., & Harney, P.

(1991). The will and the ways: Development and validation of an

individual-differences measure of hope. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 60, 570–585.

Tangney, J. P. (1991). Moral affect: The good, the bad, and the ugly.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 598–607.

Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 4,25–29.

Trivers, R. L. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly

Review of Biology, 46,35–57.

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and vali-

dation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS

scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.

Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New

York: Springer-Verlag.

Weiner, B. (1995). Judgments of responsibility. New York: Guilford.

Weiner, B., Russell, D., & Lerman, D. (1979). The cognition–emotion

process in achievement-related contexts. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 37, 1211–1220.

126 MCCULLOUGH, EMMONS, AND TSANG

Appendix

The Gratitude Questionnaire–6 (GQ-6)

Using the scale below as a guide, write a number beside each statement

to indicate how much you agree with it.

1ⴝstrongly disagree

2ⴝdisagree

3ⴝslightly disagree

4ⴝneutral

5ⴝslightly agree

6ⴝagree

7ⴝstrongly agree

____1. I have so much in life to be thankful for.

____2. If I had to list everything that I felt grateful for, it would be a very

long list.

____3. When I look at the world, I don’t see much to be grateful for.

____4. I am grateful to a wide variety of people.

____5. As I get older I find myself more able to appreciate the people,

events, and situations that have been part of my life history.

____6. Long amounts of time can go by before I feel grateful to

something or someone.

Items 3 and 6 are reverse scored.

Received November 19, 2000

Revision received July 28, 2001

Accepted July 30, 2001 䡲

127

GRATITUDE

A pilot study of a gratitude journaling intervention to enhance spiritual well-being and exercise self-efficacy in Black breast cancer survivors

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2024
BMC PSYCHIATRY

Background Breast cancer (BC) survivorship presents significant health disparities, particularly affecting Black women, who experience a 40% higher BC death rate compared to White women. These disparities are exacerbated by comorbidities, which contribute to poorer overall health outcomes. Additionally, Black BC survivors often face psychosocial challenges, including increased stress and lower well-being, which can lead to adverse physical health effects. This pilot study aims to assess the feasibility and efficacy of a culturally sensitive gratitude journaling intervention designed to enhance spiritual well-being, exercise self-efficacy, and reduce inflammation among Black BC survivors. Methods This pilot study employed a two-group, parallel random-assignment experimental design to compare a gratitude journaling intervention with a general memory journaling control group. Twenty-six Black women aged 40 to 70 years with a history of BC were randomly assigned to either the gratitude journaling intervention group (n = 13) or the control group (n = 13). The gratitude intervention group engaged in gratitude journaling twice weekly for eight weeks, while the control group documented daily memories. Outcomes measured included Gratitude Questionnaire-6, FACIT-Spiritual Well-Being 12 Item Scale, Perceived Stress Scale, Giscombe Superwoman Schema Questionnaire, and the Stage of Motivational Readiness for Physical Activity questionnaire and inflammatory biomarkers. Statistical analyses included the Wilcoxon rank sum test and Fisher’s exact test. Results Twenty-six participants were enrolled, with 73% completing baseline and post-intervention assessments. The intervention group showed a significant improvement in spiritual well-being (p = 0.014) with a large effect size (ES = 0.57). Marginal improvements in exercise self-efficacy were also observed (ES = 0.39). Although there were no significant differences in dispositional gratitude and perceived stress between groups, the intervention group exhibited trends toward increased gratitude and reduced stress. Inflammatory biomarker analysis indicated non-significant changes, though IL-6 levels increased in the intervention group. Conclusion This study demonstrates the feasibility and acceptability of a gratitude journaling intervention among Black BC survivors. The intervention significantly enhanced spiritual well-being and showed promise in improving exercise self-efficacy, suggesting its potential for promoting holistic wellness in this population. These findings provide a foundation for future larger-scale randomized controlled trials to further evaluate the efficacy of gratitude-based interventions for Black BC survivors. Trial registration This study was registered prospectively at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05473026) on 07-13-2022.

Do Trait hope and Trait Gratitude Support the Mental Health of Mothers in low-income Families in Singapore?

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2024

Despite abundant evidence that trait hope and trait gratitude predict higher well-being, there remained little research on whether these dispositions predict mental health among people living with financial challenges in real-life. Focusing on mothers (N = 462) in low-income families in Singapore, this study examined three questions. First, what hope-gratitude clusters would characterize the mother participants? Second, would the mothers’ trait hope and gratitude predict their depression and anxiety? Third, how might these dispositions moderate the relationships between economic hardship and depression and anxiety? Cluster analysis identified four naturally occurring clusters comprising high and low levels of both dispositions. Both dispositions negatively predicted depression and anxiety as expected. It was only among participants in clusters characterized by higher levels of trait hope - regardless of the level of trait gratitude - that the negative relationship between economic hardship and depression was non-significant. The relationships between economic hardships and both depression and anxiety were negative and significant in clusters with lower levels of trait hope regardless of trait gratitude. The results suggest that while trait hope and gratitude correlated negatively with depression and anxiety, trait gratitude does not appear to mitigate the negative relationships between economic hardship and both mental health outcomes and trait hope appears to reduce only the relationship between economic hardship and depression.

The Influence of Gratitude on Work Engagement in Employees at Boarding School Sunan Drajat

Article

Jan 2025

This study aims to empirically examine the effect of gratitude on work engagement in employees of Pondok Pesantren Sunan Drajat Lamongan. This research method uses quantitative research. The research subjects were 177 employees of the boarding school Sunan Drajat Lamongan. Data collection techniques using the work engagement scale which is based on the dimensions of Schaufeli & Bakker. Data collection techniques are the most important step in research, because objective main from study is get data. Work engagement scale contains 19 items with coefficient reliability (α = 0.856), used for to reveal level work engagement related vigor (5 items), dedication (6 items), and absorption (8 items) that are owned respondent research. Gratitude scale adapted from Watkins and Fitzgerald's gratitude scale in Listiyandini, consists of over 30 items with coefficient reliability (α = 0.888) was used for to reveal like what is gratitude from Respondent study. Data analysis techniques in research this is simple linear regression with using a computer program. The computer program used for statistical data analysis with Statistical Product and Service Solution (SPSS) version 25.0. The work engagement scale consists of 19 items. Gratitude is measured using the components proposed by Fitzgerald and Watkins. The gratitude scale consists of 30 items. The data analysis technique uses simple regression analysis. The results showed that the Anova F test was 115.488 with a significant level of 0.001. This means that the value of 0.001 <0.05, it can be said that the hypothesis is accepted, namely that there is an influence of gratitude on work engagement. This study has an R value of 0.253 and an R Square of 0.399, which can be said that the gratitude variable has an influence of 39.9% on the work engagement variable.

How do policy environments shape public service motivation during the national disaster? Evidence from large-scale survey experiments

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2024
J Publ Pol

This study examines the impact of COVID-19-induced policy environments on civil servants’ public service motivation (PSM), a topic not yet adequately researched. Using a vignette survey experiment, we investigate how four types of COVID-19 policy environment information – 1) total deduction of annual leave compensation, 2) a significant increase in working hours, 3) positive assessments of government responses from domestic audiences, and 4) positive assessments of government responses from other advanced democracies – shape civil servants’ PSM during the pandemic. We analyze original data from over 4,000 South Korean civil servants in central and local governments, gathered as part of a representative survey. Results show that reducing compensation to prepare the disaster relief fund has a negative impact, whereas recognition by advanced democracies has a positive impact on PSM. Our analysis suggests the importance of policy environments in both motivating and demotivating civil servants during a pandemic crisis.

Uncovering mechanisms of subjective support focused cognitive behavioral therapy in improving subjective support among (pre)frail community-dwelling older adults: a randomized controlled trial

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2025
CURR PSYCHOL

Subjective support-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (SS-CBT) could increase subjective support among (pre)frail community-dwelling older adults, however, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. We conducted a randomized controlled trial, in which the SS-CBT group (n = 50) received SS-CBT once a week for eight weeks and the wait-list control group (n = 50) received no intervention. The dependent variable was subjective support, and potential mediators included self-esteem, gratitude, cognitive distortions, interpersonal competence and rumination. Measurements took place before and after the intervention. We found that interpersonal competence mediated the effectiveness of SS-CBT on both perceived support availability (β = 2.030, 95%CI = 1.164, 3.081) and perceived support adequacy (β = 6.37, 95%CI = 3.52, 9.74), while self-esteem only mediated the effectiveness of SS-CBT on perceived support availability (β = 1.621, 95%CI = 0.502, 2.843). Gratitude, cognitive distortions, and rumination neither mediated the effectiveness of SS-CBT on perceived support availability nor on perceived support adequacy. These findings highlight self-esteem and interpersonal competence as the mechanisms through which SS-CBT increases subjective support, especially perceived support availability. This implicates that the SS-CBT should exclusively emphasize the apparent active ingredients (self-esteem and interpersonal competence) to promote its efficiency.

Toward positive parenting: Exploring the relationship between empathy and gratitude and parental attitudes

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2025

Background: Despite many studies on parental attitudes, the extent to which parents’ emotional resources of parents, such as empathy and gratitude, are associated with parental behaviours and attitudes towards children remains unclear. Purpose: The aim of the study was to examine the relationship between the emotional disposition to being grateful and empathetic in parents and their positive parenting attitudes as emotional warmth, autonomy support, and democratic attitude. In addition, the relationship between empathy, gratitude, and negative attitudes such as punitive, permissive discipline and anxious intrusiveness was assessed. Methodology: A sample of 712 Polish parents of children aged between six months and twelve years completed the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, the Gratitude Resentment and Appreciation Test, and the Parental Behaviours and Dimensions Questionnaire. Results: The two proposed structural equation models (SEM) confirmed that empathy and gratitude are predictors of positive and negative parenting dimensions. In addition, gratitude plays a mediating role between different dimensions of empathy and parenting behaviours. Emotional empathy, personal distress and simple appreciation are the most significant factors for positive parental attitudes. Punitive and permissive attitudes are associated with empathy, but not with gratitude. In contrast, anxious intrusiveness is associated with both empathy and gratitude. Conclusions: These findings contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between parents’ emotional resources and their parental behaviours. The results suggest that parents should enhance the experience of empathy and gratitude in their daily lives, as these emotions strengthen positive parental behaviours and weaken negative parenting.

Manevi Bakımda Anadolu Bilgeliğini Bir Yöntem Olarak Kullanmak: Mevlânâ’nın Mesnevî-i Şerif Örneği

Article

Dec 2024

Muhammed Tosun

Bu çalışma, Mevlânâ’nın Mesnevî-i Şerif adlı eserinin manevi bakım süreçlerinde bir yöntem olarak kullanımı üzerine odaklanmaktadır. Anadolu bilgeliğinin önemli bir temsilcisi olan Mevlânâ’nın öğretileri manevi bakım uygulamalarında bireylerin manevi ve psikolojik iyilik hallerine katkı sağlayabilecek bir zenginlik sunmaktadır. Çalışma, Mesnevî'de yer alan sevgi, sabır, yardımseverlik, iyilik, adalet, şükür ve hırsa kapılmama gibi temel değerlerin manevi bakım süreçlerinde nasıl ele alınabileceğini incelemektedir. Bu bağlamda çalışmanın amacı, Mevlânâ’nın öğretilerinin bireylerin psikolojik iyilik haline olumlu etkilerini analiz etmek ve bu öğretilerin manevi bakım uygulamalarıyla nasıl ilişkilendirilebileceğini ortaya koymaktır. Çalışmada nitel araştırma yöntemleri kullanılmış ve kapsamlı bir literatür taraması yapılmıştır. Literatür taraması, Mevlânâ’nın öğretilerinin modern psikoloji ve manevi bakım süreçleriyle nasıl ilişkilendirilebileceği konusunda geniş bir çerçeve sunmuştur. İçerik analizi yöntemiyle Mesnevî’de yer alan öğretiler tematik olarak incelenmiş, bu temaların manevi bakımda nasıl uygulanabileceği araştırılmıştır. Analiz sürecinde Mevlânâ’nın öğretilerinin bireylerin içsel dönüşümlerini nasıl destekleyebileceği ve bu öğretilerin bireylerin manevi iyilik halleri üzerindeki etkileri ele alınmıştır. Ayrıca Mesnevî’nin manevi bakımda kullanımı, bireylerin yaşam kalitelerini ve duygusal dengelerini artırma potansiyeli ile değerlendirilmiştir. Psikolojik yorumlama aşamasında ise, Mevlânâ’nın öğretilerinin modern psikoloji kavramlarıyla ilişkisi incelenmiş ve bireylerin manevi gelişim süreçlerine nasıl katkı sağladığı analiz edilmiştir. Bu bağlamda sevgi, sabır, şükür gibi değerlerin, bireylerin hem ruhsal hem de sosyal uyumlarını destekleyen unsurlar olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Özellikle, Mevlânâ’nın şükür ve adalet gibi değerleri, bireylerin hem kendilerine hem de çevrelerine yönelik daha pozitif bir tutum geliştirmelerine yardımcı olabileceği öngörülmüştür. Sonuç olarak bu çalışma, Mevlânâ’nın Mesnevî-i Şerif eserinin manevi bakımda nasıl etkin bir şekilde kullanılabileceğini göstermekte ve bu tür öğretilerin manevi bakım süreçlerine nasıl entegre edilebileceğini açıklamaktadır. Çalışma, bireylerin manevi ve ruhsal gelişimlerinde Mesnevi’deki değerlerin bireylerin psikolojik sağlığına katkı sağlayabilecek önemli bir araç olduğunu ileri sürmektedir. Mevlânâ’nın öğretileri, hem kişisel gelişimi destekleyen hem de toplumsal uyumu artıran yönleriyle manevi bakımda önemli bir rol oynayabilir. Bu nedenle, Anadolu bilgeliğinin manevi bakım uygulamalarında etkin bir yöntem olarak kullanılabileceği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Cultivating Spiritual Well-Being in a University Setting

Article

Dec 2024
AM J HEALTH PROMOT

Is gratitude science inclusive? A scoping review on gratitude in individuals with diverse needs and exceptionalities

Article

Dec 2024
ASIAN J PSYCHOL

Jesus Alfonso D. Datu

Past meta‐analytic, systematic and narrative reviews have painted a highly optimistic backdrop on the psychological, physical and social rewards associated with gratitude. However, as most of these reviews focused on how gratitude facilitates optimal psychological functioning in typically developing samples, question remains on the extent to which these findings are generalizable to individuals with diverse special needs or disabilities. This scoping review aims to map scholarly evidence on the psychological benefits of gratitude in individuals with various special needs and exceptionalities. Most studies relied on the dispositional gratitude model (~59%) and cross‐sectional designs (~75%) in investigating gratitude in people with diverse needs. Majority of empirical investigations also focused on studying gratitude in Western cultural contexts such as the United States. Further, prior studies showed that gratitude increased positively valenced well‐being outcomes. Future theoretical implications and scholarly directions are charted.

Gratitude in Context: Proposing the Dyadic Process Model of Interpersonal Gratitude

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2024

Research has suggested that the quality of gratitude exchanges varies, with some exchanges resulting in positive outcomes and others resulting in null and negative outcomes for intimates. However, a current conceptual model outlining the conditional nature of interpersonal gratitude exchanges is lacking within the literature. In this paper, we introduce the Dyadic Process Model of Interpersonal Gratitude, an updated conceptual model that delineates the boundary conditions of interpersonal gratitude exchanges. Using the model, we propose that the benefits associated with interpersonal gratitude expressions depend on the context in which gratitude operates, articulating the influence of communication factors and contextual factors on interpersonal gratitude exchange outcomes. Drawing from the Dyadic Process Model of Interpersonal Gratitude, we provide implications for future research and gratitude‐based interventions.

Enhancing Target Variance in Personality Impressions: Highlighting the Person in Person Perception

Article

Full-text available

Dec 1995

D. A. Kenny (1994) estimated the components of personality rating variance to be 15, 20, and 20% for target, rater, and relationship, respectively. To enhance trait variance and minimize rater variance, we designed a series of studies of personality perception in discussion groups (N = 79, 58, and 59). After completing a Big Five questionnaire, participants met 7 times in small groups. After Meetings 1 and 7, group members rated each other. By applying the Social Relations Model (D. A. Kenny and L. La Voie, 1984) to each Big Five dimension at each point in time, we were able to evaluate 6 rating effects as well as rating validity. Among the findings were that (a) target variance was the largest component (almost 30%), whereas rater variance was small (less than 11%); (b) rating validity improved significantly with acquaintance, although target variance did not; and (c) no reciprocity was found, but projection was significant for Agreeableness.

Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of trait self-enhancement: A mixed blessing?

Article

Full-text available

May 1998

Delroy Paulhus

Reactions to trait self-enhancers were investigated in 2 longitudinal studies of person.perception in discussion groups. Groups of 4-6 participants met 7 times for 20 rain. After Meetings 1 and 7, group members rated their perceptions of one another. In Study 1, trait self-enhancement was indexed by measures of narcissism and self-deceptive enhancement. At the first meeting, self-enhancers made positive impressions: They were seen as agreeable, well adjusted, and competent. After 7 weeks, however, they were rated negatively and gave self-evaluations discrepant with peer evaluations they received. In Study 2, an independent sample of observers (close acquaintances) enabled a pretest index of discrepancy self-enhancement: It predicted the same deteriorating pattern of interpersonal perceptions as the other three trait measures. Nonetheless, all self-enhancement measures correlated positively with self-esteem.

Measuring and comparing materialism cross-culturally

Article

Full-text available

Jan 1990
Adv Consum Res

A five-factor theory of personality

Article

Full-text available

Jan 1999

Evidence for the Distinctness of Embarrassment, Shame, and Guilt: A Study of Recalled Antecedents and Facial Expressions of Emotion

Article

Full-text available

Mar 1996

Following proposals regarding the criteria for differentiating emotions, the current investigation examined whether the antecedents and facial expressions of embarrassment, shame, and guilt are distinct. In Study 1, participants wrote down events that had caused them to feel embarrassment, shame, and guilt. Coding of these events revealed that embarrassment was associated with transgressions of conventions that govern public interactions, shame with the failure to meet important personal standards, and guilt with actions that harm others or violate duties. Study 2 determined whether these three emotions are distinct in another domain of emotion-namely, facial expression. Observers were presented with slides of 14 different facial expressions, including those of embarrassment, shame, and candidates of guilt (self-contempt, sympathy, and pain). Observers accurately identified the expressions of embarrassment and shame, but did not reliably label any expression as guilt.

Passion and Reason: Making Sense of Our Emotions

Book

Oct 2023

In Passion and Reason, Lazarus draws on his four decades of pioneering research to bring readers the first book to move beyond both clinical jargon and feel-good’ popular psychology. In plain, accessible language, Lazarus explains how emotions are aroused, how they are managed, and how they critically shape our views of ourselves and the world around us. Dr Lazarus explores the latest findings on the short and long-term causes and effects of various emotions, including the often conflicting research on stress management and links between negative emotions and heart disease, cancer, and other aspects of physical and psychological health.

Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) administration, scoring, and procedures manual

Article

Jan 1982

The Grateful Disposition: A Conceptual and Empirical Topography

Abstract and Figures