Relationship between Personality Factors
and Level of Forgiveness among College
Students
Mueen Abid
Sameera Shafiq
Iram Naz
Maryam Riaz
Department of Psychology
University of Gujrat, Gujrat Pakistan
Abstract
In this study, the association between big five personality
factors and level of forgiveness has been measured with
the help of two standardized questionnaires. These are
Universiti Sains Malaysia Personality Inventory
(USMaPand the Hartland Forgiveness Scale. A sample of
500 college students (200 males and 300 females; age
range= 15-22 years) were selected by proportionate
stratified sampling technique, from five major colleges of
situated in Gujrat. The results showed significant
correlation among big five personality factors and level of
forgiveness. Results revealed that there was a significant
and positive relationship among conscientiousness,
extroversion, openness, agreeableness and level of
forgiveness. It was concluded that neuroticism was
significantly negatively correlated with level of
forgiveness. The implication and the limitations of the
study are discussed.
Keywords: Big five personality factors, Forgiveness,
Students, positive psychology.
1. Introduction
God has created each and every person unique. Everyone
have different patterns of thinking, feeling, and behavior.
Therefore, each person may behave differently even in
similar situation. Basically it depends on personality
traits, a person has born with. By maintaining unique
personality traits and characteristics people live in this
world successfully and build healthy interpersonal
relationships. Some personality traits help people to build
and maintain warm relationship with others. They might
forgive others and ignore their mistakes easily and whole
heartedly. Forgiveness is a way of smoothing social
relationships and maintaining one’s wellbeing.
Personality traits have a strong relationship with the level
of forgiveness. People with different personality traits
have different level of forgiveness that depends on how a
person thinks about other persons and the situations. So it
is interesting and important to explore the relationship
between personality traits and level of forgiveness
particularly among college students because the empirical
findings of this kind of research is helpful to identify
intensity of soft feelings and warmth youth is having with
reference to differences in their characteristics.
1.1 Big Five Personality Factors
Personality traits have a great influence on every action of
people. These traits make a person unique and everyone
has different thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Derlega,
Winstead, and Jones (2000) have stated that our
personality is composed of comparatively stable,
interpersonal characteristics and processes that
differentiate one person from another. However, there are
some common traits in which different people are found
to be similar. That is why personality psychologists have
emphasized both individual differences and consistencies
in behavior. According to Worthington and Scherer
(2004) inability to forgive in our daily life is a main root
of psychological suffering. Research has shown that in
such type of circumstances forgiveness is a real managing
technique to promote mental health and overall well-being
in an individual. McCullough (2001) has stated that
psychologist and researchers have tried to investigate the
relationship between personality traits and forgiveness in
order to recognize which types of people are inclined to
be more forgiving in their relationships with others (as
cited in Wang, 2008).Mahatma Gandhi has said, “The
weak can never forgive; forgiveness is an attribute of the
strong” (as cited in Denmark et al. 2006, p. 5).
On the basis of the variability in the behavior of
people, researchers have differentiated between states and
traits. A state is a temporary reaction of a person to any
current situation. Traits are enduring and permanent
patterns of behavior. These traits reflect individual
differences (Derlega, Winstead, Jones, 2000). Personality
traits have a great impact on people’s behavior either in
positive or negative direction. Mischel (1968) has
described human personality as existing within a strong
harmony and has classified traits on the basis of “Big
Five” personality dimensions. The measurements were
developed from the study of the natural terms people use
in their native language to communicate to communicate
with each other, to measure the personality traits (John,
Nauman, & Soto, 2008). The classification of personality
traits is usually denoted as OCEAN. The word “OCEAN”
is a shortening for the name of five factors. These five
different factors are known as the “Big 5”. Big five factors
are Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness,
Neuroticism, and Openness (Ewen,1998; Costa &
McCrar, 1992).
 Figure 1.1 Big Five Personality Factors and Underlying Traits (Costa &McCrar, 1992)
1.2 Forgiveness
Today’s researchers have dedicated a great deal of
consideration to the issue of forgiveness (Inrig, 2006).
Forgiveness is defined as a procedure that involves a
change in feelings, sentiment, and thoughts about a
wrongdoer. It is a deliberate and charitable procedure
determined by a conscious choice to pardon an offender.
This procedure occurs as a result of reduced inspiration to
hit back a criminal regardless of his or her engagements.
Therefore, the needs arose in a forgiver to reduce negative
emotions related with a wrongdoer. Forgiveness is a
gradual process (Denmark et al. 2006). Forgiveness
turned out to be a blessing as it took away a person out for
all of our inner troubles. In various situations, forgiveness
lessens depression, improves our selfesteem and wipes
out past pains (Engel, 2001). The process of forgiveness is
very complicated and time taking process. Apologies are
often considered to be more important first step for a true
forgiveness. That is not impossible but very painful and
difficult, for those people who have been wound, they
have to forget and forgive a sinner even if a significant
excuse is not forthcoming from him or her (Engel, 2001).
Forgiveness is very important for curing different
psychological problems by brining positive changes in
one’s emotions, to get better physical and mental health
and in order to resolve different conflict among
individuals and diverse type of groups (Denmark et al.
2006). It is considered to be a very important factor to
keep relationships smooth and healthy with others as it
has a lot of benefits on physical and mental health of
people. People, who do not forgive, create a lot of
difficulties for their self and others and they cannot
maintain their relationship. Therefore it is important to
explore that which personality traits have more tendencies
to forgive. The major goal of the present study is to
examine a correlation between big five personality factors
and level of forgiveness among students.
2. A Review of Empirical Research
The purpose of thestudy was to identify association and
strength of each of personality trait variables as related
with the ability of forgiveness among college students.
Hafnidar (2013) has conducted a research to identify
relationship between five factor of personality and
forgiveness.
Results of study indicated that agreeableness was much
positively linked to forgiveness of self and forgiveness of
others. Likewise, extraversion and conscientiousness was
also positively correlated to forgiveness. Wang (2008)
conducted a study in order to identify correlation between
forgiveness and big five personality factors on Taiwanese
college students. And result of study indicated that
agreeableness and neuroticism were significantly related
to forgiveness measure. Al -Sabeelah, Alraggad and
Ameerh, (2014) conducted a research on personality traits
and level of forgiveness on 450 Jordanian university
students. The results of study showed a positive and a
significant correlation between personality traits and level
of forgiveness other than neuroticism. Rangcanadhan and
Todorov (2010) have administered a self-report
questionnaire on 59 participants, suggesting that
personality traits have a great impact on the decision
related to forgiveness.
The hypotheses of the present study are:
H1: Students whose personality traits fall in the category
of extroversion and conscientiousness will have a
moderate tendency to forgive.
H2: Students whose personality traits fall in the category
of openness and neuroticism will have low tendency to
forgive.
H3: Students whose personality traits fall in the category
of agreeableness will have high tendency to forgive.
3. Materials and Methods
The research design comprised of correlational survey
method.

3. 1. Sample
The study was conducted on 500 college students of
Gujrat (300 females and 200 males) with age range of 15
to 25 years. In first step, five Government girls and boys
colleges of Gujrat were randomly selected. Fatima Jinnah
College, Marghzar College, Government Sir Syed College
were included in the category of girls’ colleges. Zamindar
College and Science College were included in the
category of boys’ colleges. In second stage inclusion and
exclusion criteria was decided. All the students from F.A
and B.A programs (Undergraduates) were included and
all the students from master classes (Gragudates) were not
included in this study. In third stage proportionate
stratified sampling technique was used for the selection of
the sample of study.
3.2. Instruments
One demographic sheet and two standardized
questionnaire were used in order to collect data.
Demographics data about students related to gender, age,
class, department and Institution was collected. These
characteristics were chosen on the basis of the review of
literature. In order to collect data about big five
personality factors “USM” Personality Inventory
(USMaP-i) was used. This scale was developed Yusoff
and Ahmad in (2010). It consisted of 60 items, measuring
conscientiousness, extroversion, openness, agreeableness
and neuroticism. It was a five point likert scale. To
measure the level of forgiveness Heartland Forgiveness
Scale was used. It consists of 18 items and it was a 7 point
likert scale. This scale was developed by Laura, Snyder,
and Hoffman in 2005.
3.3. Procedure
For the collection of data, permission was taken from the
principals of selected colleges and from the authors of
standardized questionnaires. Sample of study was selected
by using proportionate stratified sampling technique.
After the selection of sample, questionnaires were
distributed to the students individually. The purpose of the
studywas elaborated to the respondents and informed
consent was taken. The items appearing difficult to the
respondents were discussed. It was conveyed to
respondents that their personal information would be kept
confidential. Data were collected in five weeks. After the
collection of data, data were analyzed and interpreted.
SPSS.16 was used for the interpretation of data.

4. Results
Table.4. 1: Frequencies and Percentage of Demographics Variables of Respondents (N = 500)

Variables Categories f %
Gender Male 200 40
Female 300 60
Age 15-20 372 74.4
20-25 128 25.6
Class 1st year 211 43
2nd year 185 37
3rd year 45 9
4th year 29 5
Associate Degree 30 6
Departments Art 294 58.8
Pre-medical 88 17.6 Commerce 65 13 Education 2 .4
IT 10 2
Islamic Studies 4 .8
Pre-engineering 3 .6
General Science 13 2.6
BSC 21 4.2
Colleges F.J College 101 20.2
Sir SayedCollege 99 19.8
Science College 100 20
MargzarCollege 100 20
ZamindarCollege 100 20
Table no 1 shows frequencies and percentage of students years. It was identified that more respondents were from
for their gender, age, class, department and institution. In 1st year art group and a large respondents were taken from
above table there were 40 % males and 60 % females and Fatima Jinnah College as compare to other colleges.
the most frequent age range of the respondents was 15-20
Table 4.2: Correlation between big five Personality Factors and Forgiveness (N = 500)
Variables Conscientiousness Extroversion
Forgiveness .464** .444**
Sig. .000 .001
** p = 0.01.
Table.2 represents correlation between big five
personality factors and forgiveness. Spearmen correlation
was used in order to identify correlation between
personality factors and level of forgiveness. Results show
a significant correlation between personality factors and
forgiveness. It is identified that conscientiousness,
extroversion, openness and agreeableness are significantly
and positively correlated to forgiveness. There is a
significant negative relationship between neuroticism and
forgiveness. On the basis of above results, it is concluded
that agreeableness personality trait is strongly related with
the forgiveness while extroversion and conscientiousness
are moderately correlated to forgiveness. It can be
concluded that level of forgiveness is low in students with
high neurotic tendencies. Further, there is low level of
relationship between openness and extroversion with the
forgiveness among college students.
5. Discussion
The first hypothesis of the current study was, “Students
whose personality traits fall in the category of
extroversion and conscientiousness will have moderate
tendency to forgive”.
So in the light of present results it was concluded that
there is a significant moderate level of relationship among
extraversion (r = .444**), conscientiousness (r = .464**)
and level of forgiveness (see table no 1 and 2). Therefore,
hypothesis is accepted.
The second hypothesis of the current study was, “Students
whose personality traits fall in the category of openness
and neuroticism will have a low tendency to forgive.” The
value of correlation coefficient indicating that there was a
significant positive low level of relationship between
openness (r = .206**) and forgiveness. While, there was a
significant negative low level of relationship between
neuroticism (r = -.207**) and forgiveness (see table no 4
and 6). These results supported the hypothesis of current
study. The third hypothesis of the current study was that
“Students whose personality traits fall in the category of
agreeableness will have high tendency to forgive.”
Findings of study indicated that agreeableness personality
traits (r = .897**) are highly correlated with level of
forgiveness (see table no 5). These results supported the
hypothesis of present research. Overall it is concluded that
respondents who scored high on agreeableness personality
Openness agreeableness neuroticism
.206** .897** -.207**
.000 .000 .001
traits also scored high on forgiveness measure. The
students with agreeableness personality traits have high
tendency to forgive. On the other hand, students with
conscientiousness and extroversion personality traits have
moderate tendency to forgive but not highly correlated.
The students with extroversion and openness personality
traits havelow tendency to forgive others. However,
neuroticism is negatively correlated with level of
forgiveness. The Finding of the present study are
supported by the previous researches (Maltby et al., 2008;
McCullough, 2001) as these have identified that people
with agreeable and emotionally stable traits have a high
tendency to forgive. The findings of this research are very
applicable to bring the social change and to increase the
understanding of parents and teachers about different
personality traits as it plays role in the level of forgiveness
among youth.
5.1. Conclusions
Present study concluded that conscientiousness,
extroversion, openness and agreeableness are positively
correlated with level of forgiveness. Neuroticism is
negatively correlated with forgiveness measure. All the
hypotheses of this study were accepted. It is identified
that big five personality factors are an important predictor
of the level of forgiveness among college students. The
findings of this study are very important for the
betterment of social relationship of students. This study is
very applicable for teachers and parents to increase
understanding of personality traits that promote level of
forgiveness. By promoting forgiveness life can be saved
from a lot of conflicts.
5.2. Limitations and Suggestion of the Study
The important limitation of the study was that private
colleges and master level students were not included in
research because of limited time period. Due to above
limitations it was suggested that all the private colleges
and master level students should be included in further
research. The sample should be taken from diverse type of
population in order to improve the generalize ability of
research. There should be enough time and resources in
order to conduct research.
Sociology Mind
2013. Vol.3, No.1, 99-105
Published Online January 2013 in SciRes
(http://www.scirp.org/journal/sm)
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/sm.2013.31015
The Relationship between Personality
Traits with Life Satisfaction
Abbas Ali Hosseinkhanzadeh11, Mahboobe Taher2
1
Faculty of Literature & Humanistic Sciences, University of Guilan,
Rasht, Iran
2
Faculty of Education & Psychology, University of Mohaghegh
Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran
Email: *Khanzadeh@ut.ac.ir
Received September 2nd, 2012; revised November 6th, 2012; accepted
November 21st, 2012
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between
personality traits with life satisfaction among employed women in
higher education centers of Rasht. This study was performed on 206
employed women in higher education centers of Rasht selected by
classified random sampling they answered the NEO questionnaire
(Costa & McCrae, 1992) and the Satisfaction with Life Scale
(Diener et al., 1985). Extraversion, conscientious and openness had
a significant negative correlation with life satisfaction, and
agreement has significant positive correlation with life satisfaction.
The results of stepwise regression showed that personality traits can
explain 19 percent of the variance in life satisfaction, interaction of
income and education has not significant effect on the life
satisfaction. The results of one way ANOVA indicated that there
isn’t significant difference between employed women life
satisfaction and personality trait in diversity higher education
centers. Life satisfaction is influenced by interaction of different
factors that one of these factors is personality traits.
Keywords: Personality Traits; Life Satisfaction; Employed Women
Introduction
Subjective well-being as a cognitive process involves
comparison of individual’s perception from their current
position with their expectations that is associated with life
satisfaction. Expectations of an individual are the main factors in
judging the well-being (McDowell, 2010). The subjective well-
being became surge of interest when positive psychology
established as a branch of science in 2000 (Seligman &
Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Shyder & Lopez, 2002; quoted by
Jovanovic, 2010). From the view point of Diener (1984)
subjective well-being consists of three components of life
satisfaction, existence of positive excitations, and inexistence of
negative excitations. Life satisfaction is cognitive aspect of well-
being and it refers to general assessment of individual’s life
(Diener, Suh, & Oishi, 1997).
In other words, in order to achieve well-being there must be
life satisfaction which is its indicator and it is closely associated
with physical and mental health (Melendez et al., 2009). The
concept of life satisfaction is main issue that has to be study,
because life satisfaction is foundation of welfare and health,
hence parallel to increasing longevity, quality, meaningful and
welfare of life must to take in consideration as well (Ozer,
2000). Happiness and being satisfied from various aspects of life
are the basic components of a positive attitude towards the
1 Corresponding author.
Copyright © 2013 SciRes.
individual’s life, cheerful and life satisfaction are the top goals
of life (Zaki, 2006). Investigation of subjective well-being are
important due to: 1) To provide mental
health, physical health and increasing
longevity; 2) To demonstrate the value of
cheerfulness for human being; 3) To measure index of life
quality beside economical and social indicators as well as the
degree of health or crime (Diener et al., 2003; quoted by
Kochaki & Goodarzi, 2007). However, attention to issue of life
satisfaction in comparing with depression and anxiety was much
less in hu- manities (Rindel, Miosen, & Hyez, 1999). So, the
lack of re- search in this area is quite significant and requires
further studies.
Some of the experts agree that well-being is quite resistant to
changes because often determine by genes (Diener et al., 1999;
quoted by Soons & Loiefbroer, 2009). Others, also believe that
life satisfaction is influenced by interaction of different factors,
for instance; Gibson (1986) underlines social interaction,
Emmos & Diener (1985) focus on personality factors, according
to George (1981), social economical status is other vital factor,
Willits & Krider (1988) believe that religion is other factor that
affects on degree of life satisfaction. The quality of life is
outcome of complex interaction between the internal and
external factors. Personality is internal factor that associate with
life satisfaction (Larsen & Buss, 2005; quoted by Masthoff,
2006). In a review study by Diener shed lighted that effect of
personal factors on life satisfaction is important as
environmental factors (Borg et al., 2008). Even though the
important events of life have long effects on the individual’s
well-being, but we expect to have the personality traits more
effective (Soons & Loief- broer, 2009).
Traits are defined as fixed structure, hierarchically, and inborn
(Remero et al., 2009). Some researchers believe that five factor
of personality traits could explain one of third variance in life
satisfaction (Schmmal et al., 2004; quoted by Wood et al.,
2008). According to different researches five factors model of
personality (Big Five) is a dominant model in psychology of
personality (Jovanovic, 2010). Assessment about model of
personality five factors includes neurosis, extraversion,
openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness (Costa &
McCrae,
1992; quoted by White, Hendrick, S., & Hendrick, C., 2004).
There are several researchers found that personality attributes
are predictors of subjective well-being (Jovanovic, 2010); since
MacCrae & Costa several times has been proved that
extraversion related with positive emotion and neurosis is
related with negative emotion (Hills & Argyle, 2001).
Conscientious factor, also could be predictor for cognitive
assessment of subjective well-being (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998);
some of the studies have been shown that conscientious is the
strongest predictor of life satisfaction that could explained by
aim of progressing (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998; Joseph & Hyes,
2003; quoted by Schimmack, Schupp, &Wayner, 2008);
conscientious people are leaning to progress and to get more
well-being (Boyce, Wood, & Brown, 2010). Conscientious
people are tending to life statuses that are beneficial for well-
being (McCrae & Costa, 1991; quoted by Wood & Brown,
2010). Although, generally the conscientiousness has positive
relationship with well-being and performance that this
relationship has been reported between the 2% to 3% (Steel et
al., 2008), but depending on the situations this pattern might
 reversed, thus high level of conscientiousness could threat the
well-being (Bass, Wood, & Brown, 2010), agreeableness fa-
cilitate positive experiences in social situations and progressing
and increases the well-being (Hayes & Joseph, 2002).
Attribution of openness people could lead to experience new
things in order to facilitate well-being (McCare & Costa, 1991;
quoted by Stephan, 2009), also openness people try to
experience new things in order to develop themselves, and
people with these characteristics have positive life satisfaction,
because they are involved in activities that satisfy their
psychological needs (Stephan, 2009); various studies highlight
different agent of the factors that raised in the personality five
factor model, according to various studies, different factors play
a greater role in explanation of life satisfaction, the five factor
Research Hypothesis
1) There is a significant relationship between personality traits
and life satisfaction of employed women in higher education
centers.
Research Questions
1) Is there any significant relationship between personality
traits and life satisfaction among employed women whether they
are married or not?
2) Are there any significant differences between personality
traits and life satisfaction among married and single groups?
3) Which one of the personality traits has a greater role in
explaining women’s life satisfaction?
4) Are there any significant differences between life
satisfaction among employed women either married or single?
5) Are there any significant differences in personality traits
among employed women who are married or not?
6) Are there any significant differences in degree of life sa-
tisfaction among employed women in various higher education
institutions such as Islamic Azad University, Payame Noor
University, University of Medical Science and Guilan University?
Method
Research method of present study is correlation and the research
design has been an anticipative study. The population of study
included all women who hold higher than bachelor degree except
scientific commission in higher education centers of Rasht.
According to the collected information from personnel department
of higher education institutions, cases are in total 448 that are as
follows due to the university separation: 14 women from Payame
Noor University, 114 women from Islamic Azad University, 200
women from University of Medical Science and 120 women from
Guilan University. We used method of Krejcie-Morgan (1970)
sample size which is 46%, thus 206 samples chosen by classified
random sampling respectively are as follows: 7 from Payame Noor
University, 52 from Islamic Azad University, 92 from University
of Medical Science and 55 from Guilan University (n = 90).
Instruments
Five Factor Personality Shorts Form Questionnaire: It
comprised on 60 buoys and also, scale is scoring with continuum of
five degrees (from completely agree to completely disagree).
Several studies have confirmed the reliability and validity of this
scale, for instance in a seven year longitudinal study were obtained
that reliability coefficients between 0.51 to 0.82 and the validity
coefficients between the 0.63 to 0.81 (McCrae & Costa, 1992).
Psychometric attributions of this test are calculated among Iranian
samples. The coefficients of Cronbach’s alpha in each main factors
of neurosis, extraversion, agreement, openness, and conscientious
respectively are obtained as 0.86, 0.73, 0.80, 0.87, and 0.70, to
investigate content validity of this test between two form of self
report (observer assessment form) was used to correlate the
maximum rate of 0.66 extraversion factor and minimum rate of
0.45 in the agreement factor (Grossi
Farshi, 2001).
personality traits can explain the one of third variance on life
satisfaction since by factors such as personality traits can
influence to life satisfaction (Schmmal et al., 2004; quoted by
Wood et al., 2008), present study examines the role of this factor
on life satisfaction. On the other side, we still do not have
adequate da- ta about relationship between employ of women
with their life satisfaction despite of presenting women in
working area have increased significantly, because until recently
main researches focused on male’s experiences rather than
females (Beatty, 1996; Long & Kahn, 1993). In any case, with
respect to importance of quality of life in employed women, this
study examines the relationship between personality traits and
life satisfaction among employed women in higher education
centers of Rasht.
Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS): This scale designed by
Diener and his colleagues (1985). It has five questions, which
examines life satisfaction of individual in a seven degree of Likert
scale (from strongly agree to strongly disagree) which individual
could achieve score of 5 - 45 on this scale, Diener and his
colleagues has been reported adequate validity (convergent and
discriminative practices) and also adequate reliability for this scale.
Results
Out of 206 participations after eliminating values and throws,
200 participations put into final analysis that 57 were single and
143 were married. Mean of age and income in sample group
respectively are 35.47 years and 500$. Statistic of variable is
presented on Table 1. It should be noted that scores for NEO in
scale are from 0 - 4 and life satisfaction is in the average of 1 - 7.
According to Table 1 average of life satisfaction among
employed women in higher education is equal with 4.47, which is
moderate level. Also, between the personality dimensions, highest
mean related to the neurosis (2.40) which is in moderate level,
while the lowest mean is related to extraversion (1.41), which is
low level. On the other side, scores of neurosis and openness
respectively allocated the highest and lowest disper- sion due to
experience. Table 1 shows which there is signifi- cant negative
correlation (p ≤ .01) between life satisfaction and extraversion (r =
−26%) and conscientiousness (r = −21%). Thus, sample groups that
have higher scores in these traits, have lower level of satisfaction.
Conversely, trait of agreement has a positive correlation with life
satisfaction (r = 15%, p ≤ .05). Positive and significant correlations
Between the NEO five personality traits in the range of .15 to .46
are normal and expected. Table 2 presents the matrix correlation
among variables to distinguish the single and married women.
According to Table 2, average of life satisfaction respec- tively
in the married and single groups is 4.51 and 4.39. The average
range of personality traits in the single group are between 1.59 -
1.89 and in the married ones are 1.44 to 2.38. Figure 1 shows
profile of NEO personality traits for both groups. According to the
chart, profile of both groups is very similar and traits like
extraversion, openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness are on
lower levels and the neurosis trait is located on the middle level.
Conversely according to Table 2, correlation of agreement (r = .19,
p ≤ .05) and conscientious (r = .24, p ≤ .01) with life satisfaction is
significant in the married group. Table 2, has also shown that
extraversion correlation (n =
−.40, p ≤ .01) and openness (r = .39, p ≤ .01) with life satisfac-
Table 1.
tion in a single group is significant and inverse. Also, it has been
mentioned correlation of variables in the married ones respectively
are −.23 and −.19 which is meaningful on scale of .01 and .05,
Fisher Z test was used to compare correlation between extraversion
and life satisfaction in a single and married ones, which the results
was significant (Z = 3.83, p ≤ .01). As a result the inverse
correlation between extraversion and life satisfaction of single
women was stronger than married ones. Results of Fisher test has
been shown that to compare openness correlation with life
satisfaction in the both groups are signifi- cant (Z = 2.11, p ≤ .05).
Thus, correlation of openness and life satisfaction variables are
stronger in single group.
According to Table 3, none of the F statistics outcome of one-
way ANOVA analysis is significant. Thus, between both groups
there is no significant difference in average of life satisfaction and
personality traits. According to Table 2 and Figure 1, the mean
value of the descriptive variables in the two groups is statistically
Mean, standard deviation, coefficients of correlation between variables and Cronbach’s alpha.
Variable M SD
significant, which is also confirmed by Table 3. The test result of
one-way ANOVA analysis has also shown that between life
satisfaction between employed women in various higher education
centers (Guilan University, Islamic Azad University, Payame Noor
University and University of
Medical Science) statistically there is no significant differences
(f(3,197) = .16, p ≥ .05). The test also showed that type of institution
does not have any effect on personality traits (p ≥ .05).
According to Table 4, has been observed that by using step-
wise model, in the last step out of personality traits, 4 traits
1 2 3 4 5 6

1) Life satisfaction 4.47 1.14 .89

2) Neurosis 2.40 .40 .11 .43

3) Extraversion 1.41 .39 −.28** .15* .53

4) Openness 1.82 .32 −.26** .25** .41** .48

5) Agreeableness 1.92 .38 .15* .45** .29** .26** .50

6) Conscientious 1.60 .30 .49

−.24** .19** .45** .46** .34**

Note: Notice: Alpha coefficients are on the diameter of the sub-matrix. *p ≤ .05, **p ≤ .01.
Table 2.
Mean, standard deviation, correlation coefficients between variables, separation to
different
status.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Statistics M 4.51 2.38 1.44 1.83 1.93 1.68

Variable M SD 1.11 .39 .37 .31 .38 .30

1) Life satisfaction 4.39 1.19 - .12 .23** −.19* .19* −.24**

2) Neurosis 2.46 .42 .10 - .23** .30** .48** .26**

3) Extraversion 1.35 .43 −.40** .04 - .38** .35** .43**

4) Openness 1.79 .34 −.39** .17 .44** - .28** .45**

5) Agreement 1.89 .41 .05 .18 .18 .21 - .33**

6) Conscientious 1.59 .31 −.25 .04 -

.49** .48** .37**

Note: Notice: On higher of original diameter statistics related to the married women (n = 143) and on the lower of statistics related to single women (n = 57). *p ≤ .05, **p ≤ .01.
Table 3.
Analysis of one way ANOVA for the effects of marital status on the research.
SS MS F(1, 198)

Between group 1) Life

.45 .45 .50
satisfaction
Within group 255.16 1.29
 Between group 2) .25 .25 1.55
Neurosis
Within group 31.41 .16

Between group 3) .35 .35 2.34

Extraversion
Within group 29.39 .35

Between group 4) .08 .08 .76

Openness
Within group 19.86 .10

Between group 5) .05 .05 .34

Agreement
Within group 29.31 .15

Between group 6) .01 .01 .07

Conscientious
Within group 18.34 .09

Table 4. edict life

Summarizes the analysis of stepwise regression satisfaction (n =
to pr 200 ).
Variables B SEB β R2 ∆R2 F

First step .08 .08 16.63**

Extraversion −.82 .20 −.28**

Second step .13 .05 15.15**

Agreeableness .73 .21 .25**

Third step .17 .04 13.65**

Openness −.79 .25 −.22**

Fourth step .19 .02 11.65**

Conscientious −.64 .29 −.17*

Note: **p ≤ .01, *p ≤ .05.

conscientiousness with −.17 is associated with changes in life
satisfaction (t = 2.21, p ≤ .05). Likewise as seen, only neurosis is not
located in the model. At the final step, regression equation to
predict life satisfaction for 200 samples is as follows:
(Conscientiousness) (−.17) + (Openness) (−.22)
+ (Agreeableness) (.25) + (Extraversion) (−.28)
= Life satisfaction
(extraversion, agreeableness, openness and conscientious) of
personality traits are able to explain 19% of variance in life satisfaction.
On the first step, variable of extraversion inversely and significantly is
predicting 8% of life (F(1,198) = 16.63, p ≤ 0/01). So that each of standard
deviation change in extraversion is associated with −0.28 followed by
change in the variable of satisfaction (t = 4.08, p ≤ .01). In the second
step, also with adding agreeableness to extraversion model is successful
in predicting life satisfaction and ability of predicting increases about 5%
(F(2,197) = 15.15, p ≤ .01). Beta coefficient of agree- ment directly and
significantly engaged to predict life satisfaction (t = 3.56, p ≤ .01). On the
third step with adding openness due to experience has ability to predict
significant model and increases about 4% (F(3,196) = 13.6, p ≤ .01).
According to the third step each deviation that decreases in openness is
associate with increasing deviation −0.22 in life satisfaction (t = 3.06, p ≤
.01). In the final model, with adding conscientiousness to the previous
three variables, the ability of prediction was sig nificant and increased
about 2% (F(4,195) = 11.65, p ≤ .01).
Figure 1. According to the fourth step, every deviation that changes in
Profile of NEO personality traits for married and single women.
Table 5 has been presented result of stepwise regression
analysis to predict life satisfaction by personality traits to
differentiate both groups of single and married women which
lead to different results.
According to Table 5 has been observed that in the group of
single employed women, extraversion and openness have
ability to predict reversely and significantly the life
satisfaction. In contrast with the married group of employed
women, extraversion, conscientious and agreeableness are the
most appropriate personality traits to predict the life
satisfaction (F(3,139) = 10.43, p ≤ .01). Equation of regression to
differ- rentiate married and single women are as follows:
(Openness) (−.27) + (Extraversion) (−.27)
= Life satisfaction of single women (Agreement) (.36)
+ (Conscientiousness) (−.25) + (Extraversion) (−.25)
= Life satisfaction of married women
Discussion
Present study has taken place to determine the relationship
between personality traits and life satisfaction among Iranian
employed women in higher education centers. In investigating
profile of NEO personality traits has been observed that among
sample of Iranian employed women traits such as extraversion,
agreeableness, openness and conscientiousness are lower than
average level which can explained by cultural and religious
differences. On the whole according to post extraversion: they
are introversion, conservative and serious, regarding to post
openness: they are humble, dominant on their works, regarding
to post agreeableness: they are stubborn, skeptical, supercilious
and likely to be rivalry, and according to after
conscientiousness: they do not prefer to have pre-determined
program. On the other side, usually according to the mean
point of neurosis, they are calm and they have ability to cope
with their pressures. The mean point of life satisfaction
between sample groups was on the moderate level that in order
to explain, precisely their family relationship and job
satisfaction must be measured.
Due to the research findings, there is no significant relation-
ship between neurosis and life satisfaction which this result is
not consistent with research findings of Hills & Argyle (2001),
Soon & Loief
broer (2009),
Keyes,
Shmotkin, &
Ryff (2002).
These
discrepancies,
can explain
with previous
studies which
examined
relationship
between
neurosis and
well-being
that indicated
there is
negative correlation between neurosis and post subjective well
being, because according to the previous studies neurosis is the
main factor to develop emotional disturbance, while the
presented study focused on the post cognitive well-being (life
satisfaction).
There is significant and direct relationship between agreement
and life satisfaction that these findings are consistent with
research findings of Hayes & Joseph (2002) which showed that
agreeableness could facilitate the positive experiences in social
situations. Results of correlation analysis showed that there is
negative significant relationship between conscientiousness and
life satisfaction. This outcome is not consistent with some of the
previous studies as DeNeve & Cooper (1998), Hayes & Joseph
(2002) and Steel & colleagues (2009), found that there is
positive significant relationship between conscientious and life
satisfaction, they underline that conscientious people are tending
to achieve success and further progress which could support
well-being.
Consistent to this study Boyce, Wood and Brown (2010), found
that sometimes when people experience failure, there could be
negative significant relationship between conscientiousness and life
satisfaction. In terms of failure, well-being reduces between the
conscientious people, at this point conscientiousness become
dangerous for well-being and production. Conscientious people may
linage their failure with lack of abi- lity (lasting reason for failure)
which this attribution style is associate with depression, anxiety and
consequently leads to low life satisfaction. Analysis of this result
needs to further re- searches, because we found that according to
some interviews with employees of this study, the fact in their
employment is their economical needs rather than their personal
interest. This factor can justify lower conscientiousness and inverse
correlation of life satisfaction.
Results of one-way ANOVA analysis showed that there is no
significant differences of life satisfaction between married and single
women which this conclusion is consistent with results of Myers &
Diener (1997), stated that there is no significant relationship between
marital status and life satisfaction. This finding could explain without
consideration their marital status, only employment itself could lead
them to positive emotional such as economically being independent
and sense of being valuable that finally results with life satisfaction.
Also results of one-way ANOVA analysis showed that there are no
significant differences in personality traits between married and
single women, to support this finding by Bergman and colleagues
(1993), pointed out that some of the characteristics and dimensions of
such traits raised in the five factors model of personality are
inherited, so marital status does not have significant effect on them.
On the other side, analysis of one-way ANOVA test showed that
there is no significant difference in extend of employed women
between life satisfaction and personality traits in the various higher
education centers (Guilan University, Payame Noor University,
Islamic Azad University,
University of Medical
Science). This means
that there are no
significant differences in
degree of life
satisfaction between
women who work at
Guilan University with
their colleagues in other
universities. Because of
similarity between
activities, needs, job
demands, environment,
role of social status,
days, hours, salaries and
be- nefits between
samples, the type of universities that they are working in, could not
be facts for making differences in life satisfaction or personality
traits.
Presented study only focused on employed women, regarding to
this, might be suggest that in further researches to study various
backgrounds like house wife’s to compare between va- riables, thus
relationship between personality traits and life sa- tisfaction could
study very carefully. Second limitation could be social factors. Based
on this findings suggest that in further studies to include factors such
as optimism, hope, religious and other factors that could affect life
satisfaction.
Thanks and Appreciation
Thanks to the university authorities of Guilan University, University
of Medical Science, Islamic Azad University and Payame Noor
University of Guilan province, also thanks to all staff who sincerely
and honestly helped us in implementing this study.
 SPIRITUAL PSYCHOLOGY AND COUNSELING
Forgiveness, Religiousness, and Life
Satisfaction: An Empirical Study on Turkish
and Jordanian University Students
Ali Ayten1 Hamza Ferhan2
Marmara University
Necmettin Erbakan University
Abstract
Forgiveness has been examined in the science of psychology and its sub-
departments like psychology of religion with the focus on the interrelations
between personality, attachment, health, religiosity, and so on. In this article,
forgiveness has been investigated in the context of its relation with
religiosity and life satisfaction. The main aim of the study is to delineate
the role of religiosity on forgiveness and life satisfaction. Furthermore, the
relationship between forgiveness and demographics (gender and age) and
the effect of cultural differences on forgiveness have also been investigated
in this study. A further goal of this paper will be to describe the effect of
forgiveness on life satisfaction. In order to discern the abovementioned goals,
the Interpersonal Forgiveness Scale and Life Satisfaction Scale were applied to
a sample of 295 students from Yarmouk University in Irbid, Jordan, and
Marmara University in Istanbul, Turkey. According to the findings, female
students had higher means in “vengeance,” a sub-department of forgiveness,
than male students. Female students were more likely to be satisfied with life
than male students.
Keywords
Religiosity • Life satisfaction • Interpersonal forgiveness • Comparative study
Forgiveness was a topic that had received much attention in
the fields of religion and philosophy in the past. Many role
models for forgiveness exist in holy books of different religions
(Ayten, 2014; Sambur, 2001). Philosophers and theologians
evaluated forgiveness from religious and philosophical points of
view. Theologians highlighted the importance of forgiveness in
religion for both the relationship between God and the individual
and between people themselves. Furthermore, theologians not
only focused on this importance but also referred to forgiveness
as the fuel that maintains these relations (Al-A’sfahani, 2002).
Various philosophers have considered forgiveness as a virtue
(Comte-Sponville, 2012). For instance, Muslim philosophers
also confirmed theologians’ notions as well as adding detailed
descriptions of forgiveness. Al-Tûsî (2007, p. 96) classified
forgiveness as virtue under generosity (karam) and defined it as
“abandoning the punishment of a transgression even though one
has the ability to do this.” Moreover, Al-A’sfahani (2009, p.
1Correspondece to: Ali Ayten (PhD), Psychology of Religion Department,
Theology Faculty, Marmara University, Mahir İz Cad. No. 2 Altunizade
Üsküdar, İstanbul Turkey.
Email: aliayten@marmara.edu.tr
2Sociology of Religion Program, Institute of Social Sciences, Necmettin
Erbakan University, Konya Turkey. Email: hamza_f@hotmail.com
Citation: Ayten, A., & Ferhan, H. (2016). Forgiveness, religiousness,
and life satisfaction: An empirical study on Turkish and Jordanian
university students. Spiritual Psychology and Counseling, 1, 79-84.
http://dx.doi.org/10.12738/spc.2016.1.0006
257) interrelated forgiveness (‘afv) with the virtue of clemency
(hilm) and defined it as “not punishing a transgressor for their
transgression;” forgiveness is accepted as an aspect of the virtue
of clemency. Worthington, Witvliet, Pietrini, and Miller (2007),
conceptualized forgiveness as having both cognitive and
emotional components. Psychologists Christopher Peterson and
Martin Seligman (2004, p. 30) has classified forgiveness within
the value of temperance. Social scientists began studying
forgiveness from the psychological perspective in the 1960s.
After the development of positive psychology, it was accepted
as one of the most important virtues and studied in relation to
different variables such as religiousness, health, personality, and
more (Ayten, 2009; Egan & Todorov, 2009; Elliott, 2011;
Hirsch, Webb, & Jeglic; 2011; Lewis, 2005; Rye & Pargament;
2002; Toussaint & Friedman, 2009; Toussaint, Owen, &
Cheadle, 2012; Van Dyke & Elias, 2007; Webb, Chickering,
Colburn, & Heisler, 2005).
This paper intends to examine the relationship between
religiosity, forgiveness, and life satisfaction. At the same time,
it aims to investigate the links between gender, country, and
the three variables mentioned above. In this article, the
following hypotheses have been constructed to address the
aims of the research:
(H1) There are positive relationships between gender,
forgiveness, religiosity, and life satisfaction.
(H1a) Women score higher than men in interpersonal
forgiveness, religiosity, and life satisfaction.
(H2) There is no relationship between different countries as
far as forgiveness, religiosity, or life satisfaction.
(H3) There is a positive relationship between religiosity and
life satisfaction.
(H4) There is a positive relationship between religiosity and
forgiveness.
(H5) There is a positive relationship between forgiveness and
life satisfaction.
Method
The survey method and questionnaire technique were used
in this research. The “Islamic Religiosity Measure-Short
Form” and “Interpersonal Forgiveness Scale” were
performed on the subjects. Analyses of factor, reliability, t-
test, and regression were used for data analysis.
Participants
Of the university students studying in Istanbul, Turkey,
and Irbid, Jordan, 295 participants were recruited. The non-
random snowball sampling technique was used to collect
data.
Of the sample, 59% (N = 174) were Turkish and 41% (N =
121) were Jordanian. For gender, 75.6% (N = 223) were
females and 24.4% (N = 72) were males. The average age of
the study participants was 22 years (SD = 4.3), and their ages
ranged from 17 to 50 years old.
Measures
Background information. Participants responded to
several demographic questions that provided data on age,
gender, country, marital status, and faculty type.
Religiosity. In order to measure the level of subjective
religiosity of students, one question was utilized: “How do
 you evaluate your level of religiosity?” The question
measured participants’ religiosity on a seven-point scale
Forgiveness. Students’ inclined level of forgiveness was
measured by the Interpersonal Forgiveness Scale. Reliability
and validity analyses were conducted by Ayten (2009). The
Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin parameter and Bartlett test showed the
suitability of data for factor analysis [KMO = .88, x 2=
1894.523, p = .000]. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the
scale were acceptable (Interpersonal Forgiveness total α = .87;
avoidance α = .83; hopefulness α = .74, and vengeance α =
.71). The findings from the factor and reliability analyses
showed that the measure was acceptable and useable for
assessing people’s propensity towards forgiveness (see Ayten,
2009). In this study, the question of “I investigate the reason
behind their deed” was removed from the scale because of its
low factor loading. The scale was translated into Arabic by the
researchers to measure the level of forgiveness of the
Jordanian students. A new reliability analysis was conducted
for this study. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the measure
were acceptable (Interpersonal Forgiveness total α = .839;
avoidance α = .754; hopefulness α = .766, and vengeance α =
.694).
Life satisfaction. The Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener,
Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985) was used to measure the
participants’ level of life satisfaction.
The scale was translated into Turkish by Ayten (2012). The
Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin parameter and Bartlett test were found to be
Table 1
Forgiveness, Religiosity, Life Satisfaction according to Gender
Dependent Variables Gender M SD
Male (N = 72) 3.63
Forgiveness
Female (N = 223) 3.75
Male (N = 72) 4.34
Life Satisfaction
Female (N = 223) 4.78
Male (N = 72) 4.31
Religiosity
Female (N = 223) 4.24
ranging from 1 to 7. A “1” indicated a low level of
religiosity, and a “7” indicated a high level.
acceptable in terms of suitability of data for factor analysis [KMO
= .81, x2 = 323,367, p = .000]. The Arabic version of the scale
was used for the Jordanian students. The scale was translated into
Arabic by Abdel-Khalek (2008). Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for
the scale was found to be α = .83 and the correlation coefficients
showing the relations among items in the scale ranged between r
= .34 and r = .73.
Procedure
Data from the present study was collected between May and
June of 2015 from students studying in Yarmouk University in
Irbid, Jordan, and Marmara and Istanbul Universities in Istanbul,
Turkey. The sample was recruited using the non-random snowball
sampling technique. Questionnaires were distributed to
participants in the classrooms. The researcher informed the
participants about the objectives of the study and what their
participation would entail. If needed, the researcher also answered
participants’ questions regarding the study and the questionnaire.
Completion of the questionnaire took approximately 15 minutes
based on voluntary participation.
Results
Religiosity, Forgiveness, Life Satisfaction, and Gender
In the present research, the independent sample t-test was
carried out in order to examine whether or not religiosity,
forgiveness, and life satisfaction were related to gender. The
results of t-test analysis are presented in Table 1.
t p
.53
1.790 .090
.55
4.3
-2.721 .008
4.7
1.26
.430 .668
1.19
 Females (M = 3.75, SD = .55) scored higher on the In subjective religiosity no gender differences were
forgiveness scale than males (M = 3.63, SD = .53). found between males and females (t(114.806) = .430; p = .668).
However, the difference between the two groups in terms Religiosity, Forgiveness, Life Satisfaction, and Country
of gender did not reach a level of statistical significance The independent sample t-test was carried out in order to
(t(123.054) = -1.790, p = .090). assess the differences between Jordanian and Turkish
Females (M = 4.78, SD = 4.7) recorded higher life- students in subjective religiosity, life satisfaction, and
satisfaction scores than males (M = 4.34, SD = 4.3). The forgiveness. The results of t-test analysis are presented in
difference between the two groups for life satisfaction was Table 2.
statistically significant (t(110.728) = -2.721; p = .008).
Table 2
Forgiveness, Religiosity, Life Satisfaction according to Country
Dependent Variables Samples M SD t p
Turkish (N = 174) 3.79 .52
Forgiveness 2.637 .009
Jordanian (N = 121) 3.63 .56
Turkish (N = 174) 4.95 .94
Religiosity 16.299 .000
Jordanian (N = 121) 3.26 .77
Turkish (N = 174) 4.71 1.04
Life Satisfaction .507 .613
Jordanian (N = 121) 3.64 1.29

Turkish students recorded higher forgiveness scores (M
= 3.79, SD = .52) than their Jordanian counterparts (M =
3.63, SD = .56). Moreover, the difference between the two
groups was statistically significant (t(246.615) = 2.637, p =
.009).
The significant statistical difference between the two
groups was indicated within subjective religiosity (t(280.470)
= 16.299, p = .000). The Turkish students (M = 4.95, SD
= .94) recorded higher subjective religiosity than the
Jordanian students (M = 3.26, SD = .77).
As for life satisfaction, no significant difference was
found between the two groups (t(221.390) = .507, p = .613).
The Relationship between Religiosity and Forgiveness
Regression analysis (enter method) was used to assess
whether religiosity has an effect on interpersonal
forgiveness. The results of regression analysis are
presented in Table 3.

Table 3
Linear Regression to Predict Forgiveness with Religiosity
DV: Forgiveness β p R2 ( p) ΔR2 ( p)
.265 .000 .070 (.000) .067 (.000)

According to regression analysis, religiosity was a
significant predictor of interpersonal forgiveness.
Religiosity accounted for 6% of the variance in
forgiveness (ΔR2 = .067, F = 22.179, p = .000). In
regards to the beta coefficients, a positive correlation
was found between religiosity and forgiveness (β = .265,
t = 4.790, p = .000). The results indicated that
interpersonal forgiveness increased as religiosity
Table 4
Linear Regression of Religiosity as a Predictor of Life Satisfaction
DV: Life Satisfaction β p
.200 .001
According to the analysis, religiosity was a significant
predictor of life satisfaction. Religiosity accounted only
for 3% of the variance in forgiveness (ΔR2 = .037, F =
12.230, p = .000). In regards to the beta coefficients, a
positive correlation was found between religiosity and
life satisfaction (β = .200, t = 3.497, p = .001). The
results indicated that life satisfaction increased as
increased. These findings support the research
hypothesis that there is positive relationship between
forgiveness and religiosity (H4).
Religiosity and Life Satisfaction
In order to assess the role of religiosity in life
satisfaction, regression analysis was used. The results of
regression analysis are presented in Table 4.
R2 ( p) ΔR2 ( p)
.040 (.000) .037 (.000)
religiosity increased. These findings support the research
hypothesis that there is positive relationship between life
satisfaction and religiosity (H3).
Forgiveness and Life Satisfaction
Simple linear regression analysis was used to measure
the effect of forgiveness on life satisfaction. The results
of regression analysis are presented in Table 5.
 Table 5
Linear Regression of Forgiveness as a Predictor of Life Satisfaction
DV: Life Satisfaction β p
.121 .038
According to regression analysis, which was
conducted to find the role of forgiveness in life
satisfaction, forgiveness was found to be a significant
predictor of life satisfaction. Forgiveness only accounted
for 1% of the variance in life satisfaction (ΔR2 = .011, F =
4.344, p = .000). In regard to the beta coefficients, a
positive correlation was found between forgiveness and
life satisfaction (β = .121, t = 2.084, p = .038). The
results indicated that life satisfaction increased as
forgiveness increased. These findings support the
research hypothesis that there is positive relationship
between life satisfaction and forgiveness (H5).
Discussion and Conclusion
The main aim of this paper was to examine the
relationship between religiosity, forgiveness, and life
satisfaction within the sample of university students.
Moreover, the aim was to discern the role of religion and
country in students’ religiosity, forgiveness, and life
satisfaction. The questions of “What is the role of
religiosity in forgiveness?” and “How do forgiveness and
religiosity promote life satisfaction?” were answered
through a comparison study which was carried out on
Muslim samples from Turkey and Jordan.
The findings showed no statistically significant
relationship to exist between gender and religiosity. This
finding did not support the hypothesis regarding the
relationship between gender and religiosity (H1). This
finding was also not consistent with other studies which
had been conducted on different samples. On the
contrary, various studies have shown a statistically
significant relationship to exist between gender and
religiosity. Most studies on forgiveness have indicated
that females score higher in religiosity than males
(Ayten, 2010; el-Mehârib, 2003; Hucâr & Abdulkerim,
2006; Yapıcı, 2007; Walter & Davie, 1998).
The findings from this study indicated that males
recorded higher scores in the forgiveness sub-dimension
of vengeance than females. This showed that female
students were more likely to forgive than males. This
finding also shows consistency with some other studies.
For instance, Miller, Worthington, and McDaniel (2008)
examined 70 studies investigating the link between
gender and forgiveness and found that females had a
higher inclination towards forgiveness than males.
According to the current findings, females scored
higher in life satisfaction than males. This finding is
consistent with some studies (e.g., Ayten, 2012; Patel,
R2 ( p) ΔR2 ( p)
.015(.000) .011(.000)
Ramgoon, & Paruk, 2009), while inconsistent with other
studies (Abdel-Khalek & al-Nayal, 2015; Ayten & Gashi,
2012; Idemudia & Mahri, 2011; Hamîse, 2013).
This study hypothesized that no difference exists
between Turkish and Jordanian students in terms of
inclination towards forgiveness, life satisfaction, or
subjective religiosity due to their similar cultural and
religious backgrounds (H2). However, Turkish students
had higher scores in forgiveness than their Jordanian
counterparts. Many previous comparison studies have
shown that cultural differences play a role in forgiveness
and life satisfaction (Ayten & Gashi, 2012; Bagnulo,
Munoz-Sastre, & Mullet, 2009; Devsirî, 201; Munoz-
Sastre, Vinsonneau, Neto, Girard, & Mullet, 2003).
Although Krause (2012), has documented both
significant and non significant differences on forgiveness
levels with respect to ethnic identity; and Paz, Neto, and
Mullet (2008) study has shown no significant
differentiation with respect to ethnicity.
Depending on the current findings or the findings from
other studies, one could conclude that (a) intensity and
forms of forgiveness might change according to race and
culture, or (b) differences between collectivist and
individualistic societies are not always valid as far as life
satisfaction and forgiveness.
Many previous studies have shown a positive
relationship to exist between religiosity and forgiveness
(Ayten, 2009; Escher, 2013; Lutjen, Silton, & Flannelly,
2012; Uysal, 2015). Similarly, the findings of the current
study have demonstrated a statistically significant
relationship to exist between religiosity and interpersonal
forgiveness.
Religiosity and forgiveness was hypothesized to have
positive effects on life satisfaction (H3 and H5).
Supporting these hypotheses, the findings showed that
religiosity and forgiveness relate positively to life
satisfaction. These findings were consistent with many
other findings obtained from previous studies (Ayten,
2014; Ayten & Gashi, 2012; Egan & Todorov, 2009;
Ismail & Desmukh, 2012; Macaskill, 2012; Suhail &
Chaudry, 2004; Toussaint & Friedman, 2009; Webb,
Dula, & Brewer, 2012).
The current study was the first unique comparison
study on the relationship between religiosity, forgiveness,
and life satisfaction using two Muslim samples from
Turkey and Jordan. Hence, it had a number of
limitations. The first limitation was in regard to the way
the sample was constituted. It did not represent all age
groups and was limited to university students. It might be
beneficial in the future to extend the sample to wider
groups. The second limitation was in regard to
measurement. In order to assess participants’ religiosity,
a one-item questionnaire was used. It might be quite
useful to measure religious inclinations of samples with
an Islamic Religiosity Scale consisting of various
questions and dimensions.