376 Part IV Dispositional Theories
Their beliefs are lightly held and easily reshaped when convenient. In contrast, a
second group of people have an intrinsic orientation. These people live their religion
and find their master motive in their religious faith. Rather than using religion for
some end, they bring other needs into harmony with their religious values. They have
an internalized creed and follow it fully. The publication of Allport and Ross’s (1967)
ROS spawned a tremendous research literature on these two different motivations
for religion and their relationship to both mental and physical health.Religious Motivation and Mental Health
Forgiveness is often thought of as a religious virtue having no place in non-
denominational psychotherapy, but empirical psychologists have begun to study
this emotionally-laden process, clarifying what it is and what it is not, and discov-
ering its positive association with mental health (e.g., Worthington, Witvliet, Pie-
trini, & Miller, 2007). Empirical approaches to forgiveness define this process as
occurring within an individual (that is, the forgiven need not know they are for-
given), and involving a positive attitude change toward a transgressor or particular
transgression. Furthermore, generally speaking, clinical psychology has taken a
jaundiced view of religious faith as part of a mentally healthy personality, but
Allport’s framework on religious motivation, as opposed to simply religiosity per
se, provides some interesting ways for mental health professionals to work with
their clients’ religious faith or spirituality during therapy (Bergin, 1980).
One recent study explored whether intrinsic versus extrinsic religiosity influ-
ences individuals’ conceptualizations of forgiveness and their attitudes toward
forgiveness as a therapeutic intervention (Seedall & Butler, 2014). Over 300 par-
ticipants completed a survey that assessed their intrinsic versus extrinsic motiva-
tions for religion using a variation of the ROS. These participants were then
randomly assigned to read one of three harm scenarios that might be addressed in
either couples or family therapy: domestic violence, sexual affair, or sexual abuse.
Participants then rated their understanding of forgiveness and also rated how
acceptable they found a forgiveness therapeutic treatment in the context of the
harm scenario. The researchers hypothesized that intrinsically religious people
would be more likely than the extrinsically religious to accept forgiveness as a
therapeutic treatment, and less likely to endorse misconceptions about the nature
of forgiveness. One of these common misconceptions is assuming that forgiveness
represents pardoning or condoning harm (it does not).
Seedall and Butler (2014) found that, as hypothesized, intrinsically religious
participants were significantly more accepting of forgiveness in therapy than
extrinsically religious participants were. Furthermore, as predicted, intrinsic religi-
osity predicted fewer misconceptions regarding forgiveness, and this may be why
individuals who approach religion with a more intrinsic than extrinsic motivation
are more prepared to accept forgiveness as a strategy in therapy. This suggests that
couples and family therapists working with religious clients might do well to deter-
mine the religious motivations of these clients in order to best facilitate mentally-
healthy forgiveness work in therapy. Those who are more extrinsically religious
may need to have the personal benefits of forgiveness spelled out for them in order
that they not foreclose on this potentially healing experience due to misconceptions