Abstract
Marital forgiveness is considered an important psychological process in managing conflicts and repairing emotional damage in marriage. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a native marital forgiveness scale based on the social and psychological model of McCullough et al. (1998). The study consisted of two stages: the first stage with 351 participants for exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and the second stage with 443 participants for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), convergent and criterion-based validity, and reliability analysis. The scale development process included a literature review, a qualitative study with interviews of Iranian participants from different cultures, item generation, content-based validity, and scale administration. EFA analysis identified four main factors including “avoidance”, “tendency for revenge”, “conditional forgiveness”, and “unconditional forgiveness”, which explained a total of 61.79% of the variance. (CFA) confirmed the four-factor structure and the second-order model and showed that the scale has good fit, convergent validity, criterion-based validity, and high reliability (α=0.93). The results showed that marital forgiveness is associated with a decrease in avoidance and desire for revenge and an increase in positive relationship behaviors, and the presented scale is considered an appropriate tool for measuring the willingness to forgive one's spouse's transgressions in Iranian-Islamic culture.

Introduction
Marital forgiveness has emerged as a significant psychological process in managing conflicts and repairing emotional injuries in marriage. Couples inevitably face conflicts in their marital life, ranging from daily disagreements to severe destructive events such as infidelity. When couples cannot effectively address these conflicts, marital relationships—including important dimensions such as intimacy and satisfaction—become disrupted (Fincham et al., 2004; Gordon et al., 2009). Studies have shown that conflict resolution techniques and communication skills alone are less effective than expected when dealing with serious problems like infidelity (Gottman, 2011). Consequently, forgiveness has been proposed as an effective strategy for resolving marital problems (Gordon & Baucom, 2003). Forgiveness has been shown to positively correlate with marital satisfaction, commitment, and relationship stability (Fincham & Beach, 2002; Gordon et al., 2009; Novak et al., 2017).
Various theoretical models have been proposed to explain how forgiveness occurs. Enright et al. (1996) presented a four-stage model involving awareness of emotional reactions, seeking strategies to manage negative feelings, cognitive reappraisal of the offense, and developing empathy toward the offender. Worthington et al. (2005) conceptualized forgiveness as having decision and emotional components and developed a five-stage REACH model (Recall, Empathy, Altruism, Commitment, Hold). In a different approach, McCullough et al. (1998) proposed a socio-psychological model emphasizing motivational systems, suggesting that hurtful events can create fear and anxiety, leading to avoidance of the partner and potentially anger and vengefulness. Forgiveness likelihood decreases when avoidance and vengefulness are present, while factors such as empathy, perspective-taking, and compassion reduce avoidance and vengeful behaviors and increase positive behavior toward the offender (McCullough, 2000). Research has also shown that individuals are more willing to forgive their partners to maintain the relationship, but this willingness depends on relationship satisfaction, marital commitment, and intimacy with the offender (Paleario et al., 2005; Novak et al., 2017; Donovan & Priester, 2020).
Cross-cultural studies have revealed that coping with hurtful events and decisions to forgive differ across cultures (Hook et al., 2009; Sandage & Williamson, 2005). In individualistic cultures, forgiveness motivation often stems from a desire for inner peace and personal well-being, while in collectivistic cultures, forgiveness is more influenced by maintaining social harmony (Ho & Worthington, 2020; Joo et al., 2019). Iranian culture exhibits combined characteristics (Karremans et al., 2011; Kararmak, 2008), and studies have shown that Iranians consider factors such as offense severity, apology, and remorse in their forgiveness decisions, showing less tendency toward unconditional forgiveness (Bugay & Mullet, 2013). Although several Western marital forgiveness scales (such as TRIM and MOFS) have been translated into Persian and used in Iran, these instruments, without revision of cultural-indigenous components, define forgiveness in a reduced form based solely on avoidance, vengefulness, and benevolence components. They overlook factors such as family elders' intercession, the role of religious beliefs in forgiveness, and the distinction between conditional versus unconditional forgiveness—factors that emerged prominently in qualitative interviews with Iranian couples. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and validate a marital forgiveness scale tailored to Iranian-Islamic culture based on McCullough et al.'s (1998) socio-psychological model.

Research Methodology
This mixed-methods study was conducted in five phases: literature review, qualitative study, item development, content validation, and psychometric evaluation. In the qualitative phase, 13 married individuals were purposively selected and interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis in MAXQDA 20, leading to the identification of four main themes: avoidance, vengefulness, conditional forgiveness, and unconditional forgiveness. The quantitative phase involved two study groups. The first study (for exploratory factor analysis) included 351 married individuals (227 women, 124 men) aged 21-70 years. The second study (for confirmatory factor analysis, convergent validity, criterion-related validity, and reliability) included 443 married individuals (341 women, 102 men) aged 21-66 years. Sampling used a combination of snowball and convenience methods through online platforms.
Instruments included the researcher-developed Marital Forgiveness Scale, the Marital Offense-Specific Forgiveness Scale (MOFS), the Rumination Scale, and a demographic information form. Content validity was assessed by five experts using CVI and CVR indices. Data analysis employed SPSS 27 for exploratory factor analysis, reliability assessment, and correlation analyses, and AMOS 25 for confirmatory factor analysis. Exploratory factor analysis used principal axis factoring with direct oblimin rotation. Confirmatory factor analysis evaluated model fit using multiple indices including CFI, TLI, RMSEA, and SRMR. Convergent validity was assessed through correlations with MOFS, and criterion-related validity through correlations with rumination. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha coefficients. Ethical considerations included informed consent, confidentiality, and voluntary participation.

Discussion
Factor Structure: A Four-Dimensional Model of Marital Forgiveness
Exploratory factor analysis with principal axis factoring and direct oblimin rotation extracted four factors with eigenvalues exceeding 1.0, collectively explaining 61.81% of the total variance. Factor loadings ranged from 0.45 to 0.94. The four factors were labeled: Avoidance (11 items, loadings 0.45-0.91), Unconditional Forgiveness (8 items, loadings 0.54-0.88), Vengefulness (4 items, loadings 0.47-0.94), and Conditional Forgiveness (3 items, loadings 0.77-0.87). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the four-factor model with acceptable fit indices (χ²/df=2.95, CFI=0.93, TLI=0.92, SRMR=0.05, RMSEA=0.07). The second-order model also demonstrated adequate fit (χ²/df=3.53, CFI=0.91, TLI=0.90, SRMR=0.08, RMSEA=0.08). This four-dimensional structure aligns with McCullough et al.'s (1998) socio-psychological model while extending it through the addition of conditional forgiveness as a culturally specific dimension.
Avoidance emerged as the strongest factor, explaining 37.43% of the variance. Items such as "I was cold toward my spouse" and "I distanced myself physically from my spouse" had the highest loadings. This finding aligns with previous research identifying avoidance as a primary response to marital offenses (Paleario et al., 2009; McCullough et al., 1998). However, in Iranian culture, avoidance appears not merely as an emotional response but as a deliberate behavioral strategy to express dissatisfaction and pressure the spouse toward compensation. This is consistent with qualitative studies in Turkey (Biyik Sar & Cihan, 2024) and India (Sandilya & Shahnawaz, 2014), showing that in collectivistic cultures, avoidance serves as an indirect communication tool for expressing dissatisfaction and regulating relationships. The strong correlation between avoidance and vengefulness (r=0.74) suggests that in Iranian culture, these two negative motivations are tightly intertwined and often co-occur.
Vengefulness was operationalized through items such as "I wanted to punish my spouse for what he/she imposed on me" and "I wanted to see my spouse suffer," with loadings of 0.94 and 0.85, respectively. This construct's strength in Iranian culture aligns with research in other collectivistic cultures like Turkey (Erkan, 2015; Çelik et al., 2022) and China (He et al., 2018), showing that in cultures emphasizing social harmony and relational justice, vengefulness following marital offenses—especially infidelity—is particularly strong and measurable. The high correlation between vengefulness and avoidance distinguishes the Iranian cultural context from Western models that treat these as relatively independent (McCullough et al., 1998). This finding is consistent with Ho and Worthington (2020), who showed that in collectivistic cultures, negative forgiveness motivations often manifest simultaneously due to social normative pressures and fear of others' judgment.
Conditional Forgiveness represents a significant innovation of this study compared to Western instruments. This dimension refers to forgiveness contingent upon the offending spouse's actions such as apology, remorse expression, efforts to compensate, and behavioral change. Items like "I forgave my spouse for trying to make amends" and "I forgave my spouse for admitting their mistake" loaded at 0.87 and 0.80, respectively. This dimension's presence in Iranian culture aligns perfectly with previous research in Iran and Turkey. Bugay and Mullet (2013) demonstrated in their comparative study that Iranians and Turks, compared to French individuals, are less accepting of unconditional forgiveness and place greater emphasis on factors like apology, compensation, and behavioral correction as preconditions for forgiveness. Biyik Sar and Cihan's (2024) qualitative study on Turkish couples also identified "compensation-based forgiveness" as a prevalent pattern. In Iranian culture, this finding aligns with the collectivistic nature of society and emphasis on relational justice and restoring balance in relationships. From an Islamic perspective, this concept relates closely to "acceptance of repentance" and "conditional forgiveness upon reform" as mentioned in Quranic verses, suggesting that forgiveness as a moral virtue does not necessarily mean overlooking justice but can accompany conditions for compensation and reform. The positive correlation between conditional forgiveness and rumination (r=-0.25) and negative correlations with avoidance and vengefulness indicate that individuals more inclined toward conditional forgiveness experience fewer negative motivations.
Unconditional Forgiveness refers to forgiveness without expectation of apology or compensation. Items such as "I put everything behind me because he/she was my spouse" and "I preferred to accept what happened and move on" capture this dimension. Theoretically, this dimension is closely related to the concept of "pardon" in Islamic teachings—forgiveness without expectation of compensation—which is considered a higher moral virtue. This dimension positively correlated with education and religious beliefs, confirming that unconditional forgiveness in Iran functions more as a moral-religious value than a relational strategy. This finding aligns with research on forgiveness in collectivistic cultures (Ho & Worthington, 2020; Joo et al., 2019), indicating that unconditional forgiveness is often emphasized as a moral virtue rather than a relational strategy in these cultures. The negative correlations of unconditional forgiveness with avoidance (r=-0.48) and vengefulness (r=-0.44) indicate that individuals more inclined toward unconditional forgiveness experience fewer negative motivations. However, the positive correlation with conditional forgiveness (r=0.68) suggests that these two types of forgiveness are not mutually exclusive in Iranian culture, and individuals may employ both depending on situation, offense severity, and personal characteristics.
Psychometric Properties and Cultural Considerations
The scale demonstrated excellent psychometric properties. Cronbach's alpha coefficients for dimensions ranged from 0.86 to 0.93, and the total scale alpha was 0.93. Composite reliability values exceeded 0.85, and AVE values exceeded 0.50 for all dimensions, supporting convergent validity. Discriminant validity was established through Fornell-Larcker criterion, with the square root of AVE for each factor exceeding inter-factor correlations. Concurrent validity was supported through significant positive correlations with MOFS (r=0.42-0.58), and criterion-related validity through significant correlations with rumination (r=0.14-0.37), with avoidance and vengefulness showing stronger correlations than conditional and unconditional forgiveness.
The four-dimensional structure represents an advancement over existing Western instruments. Unlike TRIM and MOFS, which conceptualize forgiveness solely through avoidance, vengefulness, and benevolence, this scale includes both conditional and unconditional forgiveness dimensions. The inclusion of conditional forgiveness is particularly significant for Iranian-Islamic culture, where forgiveness is often contingent upon apology, remorse, compensation, and behavioral change. This dimension captures the emphasis on relational justice and balance restoration that characterizes collectivistic cultures. Additionally, the modification of avoidance items to reflect culturally appropriate expressions of dissatisfaction (such as silence and emotional distancing) and the replacement of items with cultural taboos with more common marital transgressions (such as disrespect toward spouse's family or role-related neglect) contribute to the scale's ecological validity.
The coexistence of positive and negative motivations in the forgiveness process represents another important finding. Correlations between avoidance and vengefulness with conditional and unconditional forgiveness were negative and significant (ranging from -0.40 to -0.60), but these correlations were not perfect (covariance less than 0.50). This finding confirms that forgiveness and negative motivations can coexist within the same individual, and forgiveness is not a dichotomous state but a continuum (McCullough et al., 1998; Paleario et al., 2009). In Iranian culture, this coexistence of forgiveness and resentment may persist longer than in individualistic cultures because collectivistic norms encourage maintaining relationship appearances even when resentment persists.
Clinical and Research Implications
The developed scale has several clinical applications. In initial assessments of couples seeking counseling, therapists can identify which of the four motivations—avoidance, vengefulness, conditional forgiveness, or unconditional forgiveness—predominates in each partner. Based on scale scores, therapists can select intervention strategies accordingly. For couples with high scores on avoidance and vengefulness, interventions should first focus on reducing these negative motivations, while for couples with high scores on conditional forgiveness, interventions can focus on strengthening effective apology and compensation. In forgiveness-based couple therapies (Baskin & Enright, 2004) or emotion-focused therapy (Woldarsky & Greenberg, 2014), the scale can serve as a pre-test and post-test measure to assess motivational changes.
From a research perspective, this scale enables cross-cultural studies comparing Iran with other countries, particularly regarding differences in conditional versus unconditional forgiveness. Researchers can use this instrument to investigate relationships between forgiveness and variables such as marital satisfaction (Çelik et al., 2022), emotional divorce, attachment (Karadogan & Tagay, 2022), and mental health (Gotzepe & Kislak, 2019) in Iranian populations and test structural equation models examining causal relationships among these variables.

Conclusion
This study successfully developed and validated a culturally adapted Marital Forgiveness Scale for Iranian-Islamic culture based on McCullough et al.'s (1998) socio-psychological model. The four-factor structure—Avoidance, Vengefulness, Conditional Forgiveness, and Unconditional Forgiveness—demonstrated strong psychometric properties including excellent internal consistency, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and criterion-related validity. The inclusion of conditional forgiveness represents a significant innovation, capturing cultural emphasis on apology, remorse, compensation, and behavioral change as preconditions for forgiveness in Iranian society.
The findings demonstrate that while McCullough's motivational model provides a useful framework, cultural adaptation requires modifications to reflect collectivistic cultural values, religious teachings, and indigenous relational patterns. The coexistence of positive and negative motivations in the forgiveness process suggests that forgiveness should be conceptualized as a continuum rather than a dichotomous state in Iranian culture. The scale has practical applications in couple therapy, pre-marital counseling, and research on marital relationships.
Limitations include convenience sampling, focus on Tehran residents, reliance on self-report measures, lack of test-retest reliability data, and potential social desirability bias. Future research should conduct test-retest reliability studies, establish norms across different provinces and ethnic groups, examine relationships with clinical variables using structural equation modeling, and develop and evaluate forgiveness-based intervention programs. Cross-cultural comparisons using this scale can contribute to understanding cultural similarities and differences in marital forgiveness processes.