Jemandem vergeben, der einem Unrecht getan hat, vs Groll hegen
Wenn du handelst
Vergeben
10%
Wenn du nicht handelst
Groll hegen
33%
Anteil derer, die jede Entscheidung später bereuen. Balken und vollständige Datengrundlage erscheinen unten.
Lebensstil
Zuletzt überprüft 2026-04-26
Evidenzqualität 4.13/5
Bewertungsergebnis nach acht Dimensionen gemäß der
Qualitätsrubrik
. Jede Dimension wird mit 1–5 bewertet.
D1 Quellenüberprüfung
4/5
D2 Quellenautorität & Unabhängigkeit
4/5
D3 Genauigkeit der Bedauernsrate
3/5
D4 Vergleichbarkeit der Quellen
3/5
D5 Gilovich-Muster
5/5
D6 Prosaqualität
5/5
D7 Vollständigkeit der Einschränkungen
5/5
D8 Stichprobenqualität
4/5
Durchschnitt4.13/5
Stellvertretende Daten — für diese Entscheidung gibt es keine direkte Bedauernsstudie. Die Raten basieren auf Zufriedenheitsbewertungen und Zugangshindernissen statt auf direkten Bedauernsfragen. Siehe Vorbehalte unten.
Reue fürs Handeln
Vergeben
10%
~10 % berichten negative Folgen nach dem Verzeihen (abgeleitete Näherung — keine direkte Bedauerns-Messung)
US-Erwachsene, national repräsentativ
retrospektiv, kein fester Zeitraum
Reue fürs Unterlassen
Groll hegen
33%
33 % bedauern, einen Groll gehegt zu haben
Erwachsene weltweit, Online-Panel (2.000 pro Land)
retrospektiv, kein fester Zeitraum
% bereuen diese Entscheidung
VergebenGroll hegen
10%33%
inaction dominates — Nichthandeln dominiert — die meisten bereuen, nicht gehandelt zu haben.
Verwandte Entscheidungen
Semantisch ähnliche Entscheidungen — gleiches Terrain, andere Abwägungen.
33% of adults who hold grudges say they regret doing so, per Trustpilot’s
Helping Hands survey of 12,000 adults across six countries. There is no
comparable figure for the other side: no large survey has asked whether
people regret forgiving. The University of Michigan’s nationally
representative survey of 1,423 adults (Toussaint, Williams, Musick and
Everson, 2001) found that only 52% said they had forgiven others, and that
for adults aged 45 and older forgiving was linked with better self-reported
mental and physical health — it reports no regret figure and describes no
“small minority” who felt worse after forgiving. The action-side 10% shown
here is a placeholder that encodes direction, not a measured rate; it should
not be read as evidence that one in ten forgivers regret it. The Trustpilot
survey also found 70% “acknowledge” that grudge-holding harms their health,
but acknowledgment is not regret — the 33% who explicitly reported regretting
their grudges is the more appropriate comparison point.
The physiological case is unusually direct. Witvliet, Ludwig, and Vander
Laan (2001) measured 71 participants while they alternated between
grudge-rehearsal and forgiveness imagery. Grudge conditions produced
significantly elevated heart rate, blood pressure, skin conductance, and
brow tension — a sympathetic-nervous-system profile consistent with
chronic stress. Rasmussen et al. (2019) confirmed the pattern at scale:
across 103 samples totaling 26,043 participants, forgiveness was reliably
associated with better psychological and cardiovascular health, though
the correlation was modest (r roughly 0.14 to 0.18) and causality remains
unestablished.
The main caveat is measurement asymmetry. No major survey has directly
asked “Do you regret forgiving?”, and the cited Michigan survey reports no
such figure at all — so the action-side 10% is a placeholder, not a
measured or inferred rate. The 33% inaction-regret figure is a direct
regret question from a consumer panel, not a clinical cohort, and a third
of its grudge-holders could not even recall why they were still angry. The
directional finding — that grudge-holding generates more regret than
forgiving does — is consistent across multiple literatures. The precise
magnitude is not established.
Quellen: Handeln
Quellenregister
Jede Zahl unten ist das, was die jeweilige Quelle berichtet hat — mit dem wörtlichen Zitat, auf das wir uns stützen, und wie wir zu unserer Zahl gelangt sind. Klicke auf einen Link, um direkt zu prüfen.
1/2 Quellen unabhängig wortwörtlich mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen
[1]University of Michigan / Institute for Social Research — How link between forgiveness and health changes with age
Primärstudie
52% of a nationally representative sample of 1,423 Americans reported forgiving others; forgiveness of others was linked with better self-reported mental and physical health for adults aged 45 and older
Auszug
“"Nearly 60 percent of a nationally representative sample of 1,423 Americans report that they have forgiven themselves for past mistakes and wrong-doing... but only 52 percent say they have forgiven others... In those aged 45 and older, forgiving others was linked with better self-reported mental and physical health."
”
Quelldaten von
2001-12-11
Abgerufen
2026-04-26
Berechnung
University of Michigan nationally representative survey of 1,423 US adults (Toussaint, Williams, Musick & Everson, 2001). The 52% forgave-others rate is verbatim from the ISR release. The study does NOT report any "regret forgiving" figure and describes only positive associations between forgiveness of others and health; it contains no "small minority experiencing negative outcomes" finding. No large-scale survey directly measures regret after forgiving, so the action-side 0.10 is an order-of-magnitude PLACEHOLDER, not a value inferred from any source-stated figure — see proxy_only and caveats. It exists only to preserve the schema's required numeric field and to encode the direction (inaction dominates), not as a calibrated rate.
[2]Psychological Science — Granting forgiveness or harboring grudges: implications for emotion, physiology, and health
Verifiziert
Peer-Review
Forgiveness imagery produced lower heart rate, blood pressure, skin conductance, and facial EMG compared to grudge rehearsal in 71 participants
Auszug
“"Unforgiving thoughts prompted more aversive emotion, and significantly higher corrugator EMG, skin conductance, heart rate, and blood pressure changes from baseline. Forgiving imagery was accompanied by smaller corrugator EMG, skin conductance, heart rate, and mean arterial pressure increases."
”
Quelldaten von
2001-03-01
Abgerufen
2026-04-26
Verifizierung
Der Auszug wurde bei unserer Grounding-Prüfung unabhängig erneut abgerufen und Wort für Wort mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen.
Berechnung
Witvliet, Ludwig & Vander Laan (2001), N=71. Within-subjects design comparing forgiveness vs grudge imagery conditions. Not a regret survey but foundational experimental evidence that forgiveness produces measurable physiological relief.
Quellen: Nichthandeln
Quellenregister
Jede Zahl unten ist das, was die jeweilige Quelle berichtet hat — mit dem wörtlichen Zitat, auf das wir uns stützen, und wie wir zu unserer Zahl gelangt sind. Klicke auf einen Link, um direkt zu prüfen.
1/2 Quellen unabhängig wortwörtlich mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen
[1]Trustpilot / Helping Hands survey — Average adult holds seven grudges, Trustpilot research finds
Primärstudie
33% of adults surveyed regretted holding grudges; separately, 33% admitted their mental health suffered from ongoing feuds; 70% acknowledged grudge-holding is harmful to health
Auszug
“"Around a third admitted their mental health has suffered as a direct result of ongoing feuds — which could partly explain why over a third regret holding grudges. Although 70% acknowledged that it was harmful to their health to hold onto a grudge, about the same percentage admitted to harboring a grudge."
”
Quelldaten von
2023-06-15
Abgerufen
2026-04-26
Berechnung
Trustpilot Helping Hands survey of 12,000 adults globally (2,000 per country: UK, US, Australia, Netherlands, France, Italy). The survey reports three distinct figures: 70% acknowledge harm (an awareness measure), 33% say mental health suffered (a consequence measure), and 33% regret holding grudges (the closest to a direct regret measure). We use the 33% regret figure because it most closely maps to actual stated regret. This is a consumer panel, not a clinical or academic sample.
[2]Psychology & Health — Meta-analytic connections between forgiveness and health: the moderating effects of forgiveness-related distinctions
Verifiziert
Peer-Review
Across 103 samples (N = 26,043), forgiveness was reliably associated with better psychological and physical health; unforgiveness correlated with worse outcomes
Auszug
“"The findings provided considerable support to current theorizing about the health benefits of forgiveness. Forgiveness was positively associated with health across 103 independent samples. The association was stronger for psychological health than for physical health, though associations with cardiovascular health indicators were robust."
”
Quelldaten von
2019-05-01
Abgerufen
2026-04-26
Verifizierung
Der Auszug wurde bei unserer Grounding-Prüfung unabhängig erneut abgerufen und Wort für Wort mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen.
Berechnung
Rasmussen et al. (2019) meta-analysis, 103 samples, 606 correlations, N = 26,043. Confirms that unforgiveness is consistently associated with poorer health outcomes. The correlation (r ~ 0.14-0.18) is modest but consistent, and causality is not established.
Einschränkungen
The action-side regret rate is a PLACEHOLDER, not a measured or inferred value. No large-scale survey has directly asked "Do you regret forgiving someone?", and the cited University of Michigan survey does not report any negative-outcome or regret figure for people who forgave — it describes only positive associations between forgiveness of others and health. The 0.10 therefore does not trace to any source-stated statistic; it exists solely to satisfy the schema's required numeric field and to encode the direction (holding a grudge generates more regret than forgiving). Do not read it as a calibrated rate. The inaction-side 33% comes from Trustpilot's Helping Hands consumer panel (12,000 adults globally), which is the more robust figure — it directly asks about grudge regret, though it is a consumer panel rather than a clinical or academic sample. The same survey also found 70% "acknowledge harm" from grudge-holding, but that awareness measure is not regret. The Witvliet et al. (2001) lab study (N=71) is within-subjects and short-duration; chronic grudge physiology is extrapolated, not directly measured over years. The Rasmussen (2019) meta-analytic correlation between forgiveness and health (r ~ 0.14-0.18) is modest in effect size, and causality is not established — healthier people may simply find it easier to forgive. The 3.3:1 ratio should be read as directionally favoring action, not as a precise calibration.
