Forgiveness from the Heart: A Psychophysiological Study DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Dixie Doreen Hu Graduate Program in Psychology The Ohio State University 2016 Dissertation Committee: Julian F. Thayer, Advisor Ruchika S. Prakash Amelia Aldao Copyrighted by Dixie Doreen Hu 2016 Abstract Interpersonal forgiveness is a burgeoning area of research in psychology and has been linked to lower levels of depression and perseverative cognitive states such as rumination. As much of the extant research employs self-reported assessments of forgiveness, the aims of the present work are to test a novel operational definition of forgiveness using behavioral outcomes from economic games—specifically, the Ultimatum Game (UG) and Dictator Game (DG)—and to explore how such behavior corresponds with phasic heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV), individual differences, and psychosocial variables. Participants (n = 89; age M = 19 years; 46% female) were instrumented with continuous electrocardiogram and were seated for a 5- minute resting baseline, a pre-post adaptation of the DG and UG with digital opponents, randomization to forgiveness or rumination imagery, and a 5-minute recovery period. Participants reported affective ratings as a manipulation check as well as questionnaires on state and trait forgiveness, hostility, and rumination. Forgiving behavior was operationalized as more generous monetary offers to previously unfair, provoking opponents (positive value for post- minus pre-manipulation DG offer). As hypothesized, individuals who imagined forgiving previously unfair, provoking opponents showed more behavioral forgiveness in their return offers and reported less negative affect ii compared to those instructed to ruminate. The Forgive group also showed reduced HR reactivity and increased HRV during imagery and when instantiating forgiveness behavior compared to the Ruminate group. Behavioral forgiveness was positively correlated with trait forgiveness and benevolence motivation, and negatively correlated with hostility, revenge motivation, and avoidance motivation. No individual differences by gender or baseline HRV emerged in forgiving behaviors, and no gender differences emerged in physiological responding; however, rumination surprisingly predicted forgiving behavior among men only. The results support the behavioral paradigm, corroborate a model of neurovisceral integration with respect to phasic HRV changes, and suggest that forgiving may recruit executive functions in parallel with emotion regulation processes. Forgiveness may proffer cardioprotective benefits via reduced cardiovascular reactivity, while attention to gender differences in the link between forgiveness and rumination is encouraged in future research and intervention. iii For Azalea Elizabeth Schrock and Eyatta Fischer. Azalea, may you fly and soar to the vast lengths your mind, heart, and soul conceive. Eyatta, Heaven took you weeks shy of your doctoral defense. This work is dedicated to you, your achievements, and your legacy. iv Acknowledgments Heartfelt gratitude is extended to Alex M. Schrock for his tireless support, practical advice, and day-to-day guidance. I would also like to thank my mother, Yolanda Miranda, for her unconditional support and love, without which this work would not have been possible. Gratitude is extended to the members of the Emotions and Quantitative Psychophysiology lab, advisor Julian Thayer, and committee members Ruchika Prakash and Amelia Aldao. v Vita December 2008 ..............................................B.S. Psychology, Magna cum Laude, Department of Psychology, University of Texas at El Paso September 2009 .............................................Gaskill Fellow, Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University September 2010 to present ............................Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University September 2011 .............................................M.A. Psychology, Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University April 2014 .....................................................Doctoral Candidate, Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University Publications Park, G.-H., Vasey, M. W., Kim, G. Hu, D. D., Thayer, J. F. (August, 2016). Trait anxiety is associated with negative interpretations when resolving valence ambigutiy of surprised faces. Frontiers in Psychology. Retrieved August 5, 2016 from http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01164. vi Hill, L K., Hu, D. D., Koenig, J., Sollers , J. J. III, Kapuku, G., Wang, X., Snieder, H., & Thayer, J. F. (2015). Ethnic differences in resting heart rate variability: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychosomatic Medicine, 77, 16-25. Cooper, T. V., Blow, J., & Hu, D. (2014). Pilot study evaluating testicular self- examination and its correlates in Hispanic college men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 15, 105-109. Hu, D., Taylor, T., Blow, J., & Cooper, T. V. (2011). Multiple health behaviors: Patterns and correlates of diet and exercise in a Hispanic college sample. Eating Behaviors, 12, 296-301. Hill, L. K., Hu D., Williams, D. P., Sofletea, G., Cochran, J., Sollers, J. J., & Thayer J. F. (2010). Effects of autonomic innervation on the heart as a function of effector tissue. Biomedical Sciences Instrumentation, 46, 202-207. Prochaska, J. J., Hall, S. M., Humfleet, G., Muñoz, R., Reus, V. Gorecki, J., & Hu, D. (2008). Physical activity as a strategy for maintaining tobacco abstinence: A randomized trial. Preventive Medicine, 47, 215-220. Fields of Study Major Field: Psychology Minor Concentration: Quantitative Psychology vii Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgments............................................................................................................... v Vita ..................................................................................................................................... vi List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... x Chapter 1: Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Methods .......................................................................................................... 23 Chapter 3: Results ............................................................................................................ 33 Chapter 4: Discussion ...................................................................................................... 49 References ......................................................................................................................... 61 Appendix A: Tables and Figures ...................................................................................... 71 viii List of Tables Table 1. Manipulation check: pre- and post-imagery mood ratings (M (SD)) ................. 71 Table 2. Behavioral outcomes by condition (M (SD)) ..................................................... 72 Table 3. Baseline cardiovascular activity by condition and gender (M (SD)) .................. 73 Table 4. Behavioral Outcomes by gender and HRV (M (SD))......................................... 74 Table 5. Bivariate correlations among psychosocial variables and forgiving behaviors (n = 87) .................................................................................................................................. 75 Table 6. Linear regression of psychosocial correlates on the DG2 offer .......................... 76 Table 7. Linear regression of psychosocial correlates on the mean offer difference ....... 77 ix List of Figures Figure 1. Experimental paradigm ..................................................................................... 79 Figure 2. Dictator Game task ............................................................................................ 80 Figure 3. Ultimatum Game sample provocation .............................................................. 81 Figure 4. Forgiving and retaliatory behaviors in economic games .................................. 82 Figure 5. Mean offer difference in Forgive and Ruminate groups ................................... 83 Figure 6. Heart rate (HR) changes from baseline during DG1, Manipulation, DG2, and Recovery ........................................................................................................................... 84 Figure 7. Heart rate (HR) by condition across all tasks ................................................... 85 Figure 8. RMSSD changes from baseline by condition ................................................... 86 Figure 9. RMSSD by condition across all tasks ............................................................... 87 Figure 10. Absolute high frequency power (HF) changes from baseline......................... 88 Figure 11. Absolute high frequency (HF) power by condition across all tasks ............... 89 Figure 12. Absolute low frequency power (LF) changes from baseline. ......................... 90 Figure 13. Absolute low frequency (LF) power by condition across all