TABLE 1.
Characteristics of studies in the meta‐analysis
| Study (k = 20) | Percent female | Mean grade | Location | Sessions | Curriculum | Treatment (n) | Comparison (n), group type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hepp‐Dax (1996) | 55% | 5th | United States | 8 | Enright process‐based | 11 | 12, Placebo |
| Freedman and Knupp (2003) | 60% | 8th | United States | 8 | Enright process‐based | 5 | 5, No‐Tx control |
| LaTurner (2006) | 51% | 7th | United States | 3 | Enright process‐based | 41 | 49, No‐Tx control |
| Beck (2005) | 61% | 11th | United States | 6 | REACH model | 38 | 38, No‐Tx control |
| Enright et al. study 1 (2007) | 36% | 1st | Northern Ireland | 17 | Enright story‐based | 36 | 57, No‐Tx control |
| Enright et al. study 2 (2007) | 46% | 3rd | Northern Ireland | 15 | Enright story‐based | 35 | 47, No‐Tx control |
| Lin and Wu (2008) | 50% | 6th | Taiwan | 16 | Enright process‐based | 38 | 38, No‐Tx control |
| Holter et al. study 1 (2008) | 47% | 1st | United States | 17 | Enright story‐based | 75 | 44, No‐Tx control |
| Holter et al. study 2 (2008) | 64% | 3rd | United States | 15 | Enright story‐based | 36 | 42, No‐Tx control |
| Holter et al. study 3 (2008) | 50% | 5th | United States | 15 | Enright story‐based | 40 | 39, No‐Tx control |
| Shechtman et al. (2009) | 51% | 9th | Israel | 12 | REACH model | 65 | 81, Placebo |
| Hui and Chau (2009) | 43% | 6th | Hong Kong | 8 | Enright process‐based | 28 | 28, Alt Tx |
| Lin (2011) | 50% | 6th | Taiwan | 24 | Enright process‐based | 22 | 22, Alt Tx |
| Park et al. (2013) | 100% | 7th | South Korea | 12 | Enright story‐based | 16 | 16, No‐Tx control |
| Taysi and Vural (2015) | 39% | 4th | Turkey | 10 | Enright story‐based | 71 | 47, No‐Tx control |
| Rahman et al. (2018) | 100% | 5th | Pakistan | 16 | Enright story‐based | 4 | 4, Alt Tx |
| Yang and Chen (2017) | 44% | 5th | Taiwan | 8 | Enright process‐based | 27 | 30, Placebo |
| Freedman (2018) | 90% | 11th | United States | 31 | Enright process‐based | 10 | 11, Alt Tx |
| Vassilopoulos et al. (2020) | 43% | 6th | Greece | 6 | Enright‐process based | 21 | 21, No‐Tx control |
| Bonab et al. (2021) | 50% | 8th | Iran | 15 | Enright story‐based | 123 | 101, No‐Tx control |
| Study (k = 20) | Instructor | Disadvantaged area | Severity of offense | Forgiveness instrument | Anger instrument |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hepp‐Dax (1996) | Researcher | Y | Low | EFI‐C | |
| Freedman and Knupp (2003) | Researcher | N | Low | EFI | |
| LaTurner (2006) | Researcher | N | NA | Heartland and Self‐developed | Vengeance scale |
| Beck (2005) | Researcher | N | Low | EFI | Modified Anger scale |
| Enright et al. study 1 (2007) | Teacher | Y | Low | Beck Anger‐Youth | |
| Enright et al. study 2 (2007) | Teacher | Y | Low | EFI‐C | Beck Anger‐Youth |
| Lin and Wu (2008) | Researcher | N | NA | EFI | |
| Holter et al. study 1 (2008) | Teacher | Y | Low | Beck Anger‐Youth | |
| Holter et al. study 2 (2008) | Teacher | Y | Low | Beck Anger‐Youth | |
| Holter et al. study 3 (2008) | Teacher | Y | Low | Beck Anger‐Youth | |
| Shechtman et al. (2009) | School counselor | N | Low | TRIM: avoidance & revenge | |
| Hui and Chau (2009) | Teacher | N | Low | EFI & 1 item | |
| Lin (2011) | Researcher | N | NA | EFI | |
| Park et al. (2013) | Researcher | Y | High | EFI‐C | State‐Trait Anger |
| Taysi and Vural (2015) | Teacher | Y | NA | EFI‐C | Beck‐Anger Youth |
| Rahman et al. (2018) | Researcher | Y | High | EFI‐C | Self‐developed |
| Yang and Chen (2017) | Researcher | N | NA | EFI | |
| Freedman (2018) | Researcher | Y | High | EFI | |
| Vassilopoulos et al. (2020) | Researcher | Y | NA | EFI‐C | Anger Expression Scale for Children—Trait |
| Bonab et al. (2021) | Teacher | N | Low | EFI | State‐Trait & Anger Expression |
“Alt Tx” refers to an alternative treatment comparison group and “No‐Tx” refers to no treatment comparison group. Among forgiveness instruments, “EFI‐C” refers to the Enright Forgiveness Inventory child version and “1 item” refers to a single validation question regarding the participant's forgiveness.