The authors also argue that an offense can be deemed intrapersonal since any harmful action also harms the perpetrator in some way, (that is if the offense is deemed as a harmful act) since the guiltiness or remorse that the perpetrator might feel impacts his/her own self-perception negatively (Hall &. Fincham, 2005). Endeavours that impact only the wrongdoer, for instance, self-harm, would be regarded intrapersonal. Self-forgiveness uses the notion that an individual has to identify the offense either to self or others, de-personalised the behavior act the person committing it and endorsement of the independence of the individual from the act so as to come to terms with it and self-forgiveness. This is like act that I did was bad, but I, myself, am not bad. The self-forgiveness element free the perpetrator from self-damnation and also opens that path to constructive progression in a somewhat more healthy route. This journal entry also describes the constructive results that might arise due to self-forgiveness, as well as the likelihood of pseudo-self-forgiveness, wherein the wrongdoer does not acknowledge the depth of his or her offensive behavior, and. therefore, in a state of self-denial, wherein true self-forgiveness cannot be attained.
In this article, the authors use a qualitative research method to come up with their findings. They offered a conceptual analysis of self–forgiveness wherein they defined and distinguished it from interpersonal forgiveness, as well as pseudo self-forgiveness.