The effectiveness of interpersonal apologies is well established, but most existing research has examined the benefits of isolated apologies. How do apologies function when considered in the context of a transgressor’s apology baseline—the frequency with which they tend to apologize for their behavior? We examined whether people consider others’ apology baselines when evaluating both their character and specific apologies from them. In Study 1, participants judged a character with a high (vs. low) apology baseline as higher in communion and lower in agency. In Study 2, participants judged romantic partners with high (vs. low) apology baselines as higher in communion, but only lower in agency when they perceived these frequent apologies as low-quality. In both studies, having a high apology baseline was also indirectly associated with more favorable reactions to a specific apology via higher communion judgments, revealing the role of apology baselines in shaping conflict resolution processes.
AbeleA. E.BruckmüllerS. (2011). The bigger one of the “big two”? Preferential processing of communal information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(5), 935–948.
2.
AbeleA. E.WojciszkeB. (2014). Communal and agentic content in social cognition: A dual perspective model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 195–255.
3.
BakanD. (1956). Clinical psychology and logic. American Psychologist, 11(12), 655–662.
4.
BrooksA. W.DaiH.SchweitzerM. E. (2014). I’m sorry about the rain! Superfluous apologies demonstrate empathic concern and increase trust. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(4), 467–474.
5.
BrownP.LevinsonS. C. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In GoodyE. N. (Ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction (pp. 56–311). Cambridge University Press.
6.
CarrereS.GottmanJ. M. (1999). Predicting divorce among newlyweds from the first three minutes of a marital conflict discussion. Family Process, 38, 293–301.
ChaudhryS. J.LoewensteinG. (2019). Thanking, apologizing, bragging, and blaming: Responsibility exchange theory and the currency of communication. Psychological Review, 126(3), 313–344.
9.
CramerP. (2000). Defense mechanisms in psychology today: Further processes for adaptation. American Psychologist, 55, 637–646.
10.
DarbyB. W.SchlenkerB. R. (1982). Children’s reactions to apologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(4), 742–753.
11.
EckesT. (2002). Paternalistic and envious gender stereotypes: Testing predictions from the stereotype content model. Sex Roles, 47(3), 99–114.
12.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.
13.
FehrR.GelfandM. J.NagM. (2010). The road to forgiveness: A meta-analytic synthesis of its situational and dispositional correlates. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 894–914.
14.
FiedlerK.SchottM.MeiserT. (2011). What mediation analysis can (not) do. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1231–1236.
15.
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J.GlickP. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 77–83.
16.
ForestA. L.KilleD. R.WoodJ. V.HolmesJ. G. (2014). Discount and disengage: How chronic negative expressivity undermines partner responsiveness to negative disclosures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(6), 1013–1032.
17.
GoffmanE. (1971). Relations in public. Basic Books.
18.
HayesA. F. (2013). Methodology in the social sciences. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
19.
HayesA. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications.
20.
HoltgravesT.Joong-NamY. (1990). Politeness as universal: Cross-cultural perceptions of request strategies and inferences based on their use. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(4), 719–729.
21.
HowellA. J.DopkoR. L.TurowskiJ. B.BuroK. (2011). The disposition to apologize. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 509–514.
22.
KatzL. F.GottmanJ. M. (1993). Patterns of marital conflict predict children’s internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 940–950.
23.
Kiecolt-GlaserJ. K.NewtonT. L. (2001). Marriage and health: His and hers. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 472–503.
24.
KimP. H.DirksK. T.CooperC. D.FerrinD. L. (2006). When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence-vs. integrity-based trust violation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99(1), 49–65.
25.
KirchhoffJ.WagnerU.StrackM. (2012). Apologies: Words of magic? The role of verbal components, anger reduction, and offence severity. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 18, 109–130.
26.
LeunissenJ. M.De CremerD.DijkeM. H.van Reinders FolmerC. P. (2014). Forecasting errors in the averseness of an apology. Social Justice Research, 27(3), 322–339.
27.
LeunissenJ. M.SedikidesC.WildschutT. (2017). Why narcissists are unwilling to apologize: The role of empathy and guilt. European Journal of Personality, 31, 385–403.
28.
MorrisonR. L. (2008). Negative relationships in the workplace: Associations with organisational commitment, cohesion, job satisfaction, and intention to turnover. Journal of Management and Organization, 14, 330–344.
29.
OhtsuboY.MatsunagaM.TanakaH.SuzukiK.KobayashiF.ShibataE.HoriR.UmemuraT.OhiraH. (2018). Costly apologies communicate conciliatory intention: An fMRI study on forgiveness in response to costly apologies. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(2), 249–256.
30.
OhtsuboY.WatanabeE. (2009). Do sincere apologies need to be costly? Test of a costly signaling model of apology. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30(2), 114–123.
31.
OkimotoT. G.WenzelM.FeatherN. T. (2012). Retribution and restoration as general orientations towards justice. European Journal of Personality, 26(3), 255–275.
32.
OkimotoT. G.WenzelM.HornseyM. J. (2015). Apologies demanded yet devalued: Normative dilution in the age of apology. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 60, 133–136.
33.
PaulhusD. L.TrapnellP. D. (2008). Self-presentation of personality: An agency-communion framework. In JohnO. P.RobinsR. W.PervinL. A. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 492–517). The Guilford Press.
34.
ScherS. J.DarleyJ. M. (1997). How effective are the things people say to apologize? Effects of the realization of the apology speech act. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26, 127–140.
35.
SchumannK. (2012). Does love mean never having to say you’re sorry? Associations between relationship satisfaction, perceived apology sincerity, and forgiveness. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29, 997–1010.
36.
SchumannK. (2014). An affirmed self and a better apology: The effect of self-affirmation on transgressors’ responses to victims. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 54, 89–96.
37.
SchumannK. (2018). The psychology of offering an apology: Understanding the barriers to apologizing and how to overcome them. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27, 74–78.
38.
SchumannK.DragottaA. (2020). Is moral redemption possible? The effectiveness of public apologies for sexual misconduct. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 90, Article 104002.
39.
SchumannK.DweckC. S. (2014). Who accepts responsibility for their transgressions?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 1598–1610.
40.
SchumannK.OrehekE. (2019). Avoidant and defensive: Adult attachment and quality of apologies. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(3), 809–833.
41.
SchumannK.RossM. (2010). Why women apologize more than men: Gender differences in thresholds for offensive behavior. Psychological Science, 21, 1649–1655.
42.
ShroutP. E.BolgerN. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4), 422–445.
43.
TabakB. A.McCulloughM. E.LunaL. R.BonoG.BerryJ. W. (2012). Conciliatory gestures facilitate forgiveness and feelings of friendship by making transgressors appear more agreeable. Journal of Personality, 80(2), 503–536.
44.
TavuchisN. (1991). Mea culpa: A sociology of apology and reconciliation. Stanford University Press.
45.
WalfischT.Van DijkD.KarkR. (2013). Do you really expect me to apologize? The impact of status and gender on the effectiveness of an apology in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(7), 1446–1458.
46.
WeinerB.GrahamS.PeterO.ZmuidinasM. (1991). Public confession and forgiveness. Journal of Personality, 59(2), 281–312.
47.
WootenD. B. (2009). Say the right thing: Apologies, reputability, and punishment. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(2), 225–235.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
