How,when, and why transgressors’ narcissism affects motivation to apologize (or not)

Four studies were conducted to test the association between transgressors’ narcissism and their motivation to apologize or not, the extent to which victims’ vengeful and forgiving feedback moderated the association, and whether guilt and shame mediated the moderated association. Overall, narcissism was negatively related to apology and positively related to nonapology. However, these associations were qualified by victim feedback such that those with higher degrees of narcissism who received vengeful feedback were more nonapologetic and aggressive toward victims compared to those who received forgiving feedback. Finally, shame did not explain the moderated relation, however, the results for guilt were mixed.     

When and how forgiving benefits victims: Post‐transgression offender effort and the mediating role of deservingness judgements

For all the well‐established benefits of forgiveness for victims, when and how is forgiving more likely to be beneficial? Three experimental studies found that forgiving is more likely to be beneficial when victims perceived reparative effort by offenders such that offenders deserve forgiveness. Deservingness judgements were elicited by manipulating post‐transgression offender effort (apology/amends). When offenders apologized (Study 1; recall paradigm) or made amends (Study 2; hypothetical paradigm) and were forgiven—relative to transgressors who did not apologize/make amends but were still forgiven—forgiving was beneficial. These findings—that deserved forgiveness is more beneficial for victims than undeserved forgiveness—were replicated when forgiving itself was also manipulated (Study 3). Moreover, Study 3 provided evidence to indicate that if a victim forgives when it is not deserved, victim well‐being is equivalent to not forgiving at all. Of theoretical and practical importance is the mediating effect of deservingness on relations between post‐transgression offender effort and a victim's personal consequences of forgiving.     

Third-party forgiveness: (not) forgiving your close other's betrayer

Building on attribution and interdependence theories, two experiments tested the hypothesis that close friends of victims (third parties) are less forgiving than the victims themselves (first parties). In Experiment 1, individuals imagined a scenario in which either their romantic partner or the romantic partner of a close friend committed the identical relationship offense. Third parties were less forgiving than first parties, a phenomenon we termed the third-party forgiveness effect. This effect was mediated by attributions about the perpetrator's intentions and responsibility for the offense. In Experiment 2, first and third parties reported an actual offense and their subsequent unforgiving motivations. The third-party forgiveness effect was replicated and was mediated by commitment to the perpetrator. Perpetrator apology or amends to the victim increased third-party forgiveness. Future third-party research can expand interpersonal forgiveness research beyond the victim-perpetrator dyad.     

Apology as aggression control: its role in mediating appraisal of and response to harm

Two studies examined the effects of an apology on a victim's aggression and explored the psychological mechanisms underlying such effects. In Study 1, female undergraduates were psychologically harmed and then received an apology by another female student. In Study 2, male undergraduates were asked to role play a victim in a hypothetical harm situation. Results indicate that when the harm-doers apologized, as opposed to when they did not, the victim-subjects refrained from severe aggression against them. Regression analyses suggested that such aggression-inhibitory effects of an apology were mediated by impression improvement, emotional mitigation, and reduction in desire for an apology within the victims. It was also found that when the harm was severe, such effects of an apology on aggression were attenuated. The more severe the harm is, the more extensive of an apology may be needed to alleviate the victim's anger and aggression.     

How acts of forgiveness restore a sense of justice: Addressing status/power and value concerns raised by transgressions

Commonly it is understood that forgiveness means sacrificing justice. However, the present study shows that the act of forgiving can increase a sense of justice, which in turn facilitates benevolent sentiments towards the offender. University students (N = 88) imagined themselves as victims and, after the offender either did or did not offer an apology, they either were or were not instructed to express their forgiveness to the offender (via an email). Results showed that, irrespective of apology, the expression of forgiveness led to a greater sense of justice in victims, mediated via feelings of status/power and the perception of a value consensus with the offender. The feeling of justice further mediated the effects of the forgiveness expression in terms of reducing hostile emotions, revenge motivation and retributive attitudes, as well as increasing the willingness to reconcile with the offender. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Apology in the criminal justice setting: evidence for including apology as an additional component in the legal system

The criminal justice system has reached unprecedented scope in the United States, with over 6.4 million people under some type of supervision. Remedies that have the potential to reduce this number are continually being sought. This article analyzes an innovative strategy currently being reconsidered in criminal justice: the apology. Despite a legal system that only sporadically acknowledges it, evidence for the use of apology is supported by social science research, current criminal justice theories, case law, and empirical studies. Social psychological, sociological and socio-legal studies pinpoint the elements and function of apology, what makes apologies effective, and concerns about apology if it were implemented in the criminal justice system. Theoretical evidence is examined (including restorative justice, therapeutic jurisprudence, crime, shame, and reintegration) to explore the process of apology in the criminal justice context. Attribution theory and social conduct theory are used to explain the apology process specifically for victims and offenders. A brief examination of case law reveals that though apology has no formal place in criminal law, it has surfaced recently under the federal sentencing guidelines. Finally, empirical evidence in criminal justice settings reveals that offenders want to apologize and victims desire an apology. Moreover, by directly addressing the harmful act, apology may be the link to reduced recidivism for offenders, as well as empowerment for victims. This evidence combined suggests that apology is worthy of further study as a potentially valuable addition to the criminal justice process.     

The psychologic of forgiving

Psychologic is an attempt to systematize the commonsense psychology embedded in ordinary language. In this system, the concepts of respect, anger, and guilt, are directly linked, since messages of disrespect, and only those, create anger in the receiver and guilt in the sender. This paper deals with the process of forgiving, whereby respect is reaffirmed and anger and guilt are alleviated. Forgiving depends on clarification of misunderstanding as well as on apology and atonement. The distinction between forgiving others and forgiving oneself is treated. It is concluded that what goes on inside persons and between persons has the same structure.     

基于虚拟博弈任务对冒犯者得到宽恕后行为的研究:人格的调节作用

为探讨人格特质对得到宽恕与否与冒犯者后续行为之间关系的影响,基于虚拟的囚徒困境博弈范式,并结合人格问卷的测试,对369名大学生进行了研究。结果发现:(1)宽恕情境下的被试更倾向于不再伤害对方;(2)得到宽恕的程度与冒犯者善待对方的程度呈显著的正相关;(3)大五人格中的宜人性在得到宽恕与否与冒犯者后续行为之间关系中起调节作用,而大五人格的其他四个维度调节作用不显著;(4)特质性感恩在得到宽恕与否与冒犯者后续行为之间关系中起调节作用。据此可得出结论,冒犯者得到宽恕后更倾向于不再伤害被冒犯者,且受到部分人格特质的调节。     

Understanding the Relationship Between State Forgiveness and Psychological Wellbeing: A Qualitative Study

Over the last 20 years, increasing attention has been given to associations between dispositional forgiveness and specific mental health problems. However, few studies have assessed whether forgiving real-life interpersonal hurts may be related to diverse psychological health outcomes. The present study addresses this gap by investigating, in depth, relationships between perceptions about state forgiveness and a variety of mental wellbeing outcomes as well as exploring perceptions about the factors that may modify such effects. Developing an understanding of a forgiveness wellbeing relationship is of relevance to healthcare workers, researchers and policy makers with an interest in improving public health. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted, and data were analysed using grounded theory methods. From England and Ireland, eleven adults who were affiliated with religious/spiritual and secular/atheist groups were recruited using purposive and convenience sampling methods. Key themes that appeared to be related to the effects of unforgiveness were: increases in negative affect; reduction in cognitive abilities and barriers to psychological and social growth. For the majority of participants, state forgiveness had strong ties to participants perceived sense of mental wellbeing, including reductions in negative affect, feeling positive emotions, positive relations with others, spiritual growth, a sense of meaning and purpose in life as well as a greater sense of empowerment. The data also revealed a number of factors that may positively or negatively influence a forgiveness–wellbeing link such as: viewing an offender as spiritually similar or different, responsibility/karma, blaming, wanting restitution/apology as well as practices such as meditation and prayer. The findings suggest that forgiving a range of real-life interpersonal offences may be an important determinant of psychological wellbeing, particularly among religious/spiritual populations. Further research is, however, needed.     

Accepting Forgiveness

Forgiving wrongdoers who neither apologized, nor sought to make amends in any way, is controversial. Even defenders of the practice agree with critics that such “unilateral” forgiveness involves giving up on the meaningful redress that victims otherwise justifiably demand from their wrongdoers: apology, reparations, repentance, and so on. Against that view, I argue here that when a victim of wrongdoing sets out to grant forgiveness to her offender, and he in turn accepts her forgiveness, he thereby serves some important ends of apology and reparation, no matter what else he did—or did not do—by way of repair. Although much overlooked, the simple act of accepting forgiveness joins victim and offender in affirming and acting upon some important shared background assumptions, including many of those expressed in standard apologies. Perhaps more surprisingly, I argue that accepting forgiveness also fulfills the duty to counteract any concrete harm wrongfully inflicted. The argument helps explain some otherwise puzzling features of forgiveness, including that a victim can change her offender’s normative status, making him a less fitting target of the resentment, indignation and shunning of others, and even his own guilt pangs, simply by forgiving him.

     

What happens when groups say sorry: the effect of intergroup apologies on their recipients

Despite the increased incidence of intergroup apology in public life, very little empirical attention has been paid to the questions of whether intergroup apologies work and if so, why. In a series of experiments, Australians read scenarios in which Australian interests had been harmed by an outgroup. Participants were then told that the outgroup had either apologized or had not apologized for the offense. Although the presence of an apology helped promote perceptions that the outgroup was remorseful, and although participants were more satisfied with an apology than with no apology, the presence of the apology failed to promote forgiveness for the offending group. This was the case regardless of whether the effectiveness of apology was measured cross-sectionally (Experiment 1) or longitudinally (Experiment 2). It was also the case when the apology was accompanied by victims advocating forgiveness (Experiment 3) and was independent of the emotionality of the apology (Experiment 4). In contrast, individuals who apologized for intergroup atrocities were personally forgiven more than those who did not apologize (Experiment 4). Theoretical and applied implications are discussed.     

When forgiving enhances psychological well-being: the role of interpersonal commitment

The present research addresses the question of when and why forgiving might enhance psychological well-being. The authors predict that forgiving is associated with enhanced well-being but that this association should be more pronounced in relationships of strong rather than weak commitment. This hypothesis received good support in Studies 1-3. Studies 2 and 3 addressed the issue of why forgiving might be associated with psychological well-being, revealing that this association was reduced after controlling for psychological tension (i.e., a psychological state of discomfort due to conflicting cognitions and feelings). Study 4 revealed that in the context of marital relationships, tendencies toward forgiving one's spouse exhibited a more pronounced association with psychological well-being than did tendencies to forgive others in general.     

A Long Time Coming: Delays in Collective Apologies and Their Effects on Sincerity and Forgiveness

Political apologies by one group to another often occur a significant period of time after the original transgression. What effect does such a delay have on perceptions of sincerity and forgiveness? A delayed apology could reflect the offender group's reluctance to apologize, or, alternatively, it could represent time and consideration spent on developing an appropriate response. In the latter case, the delayed apology would represent a sincere acknowledgment of the harm done, whereas in the former case it would not. In two studies, we found that a verbal collective apology, when delayed, was perceived to be less sincere than when offered more immediately following a transgression, and this translated to less forgiveness. However, in Study 2, the negative effects of time delay on sincerity and forgiveness were mitigated or reversed when the apology was in the form of commemoration. The commemorative apology, in particular when delayed, gave rise to favorable attributions (including representativeness of apologizing group, commitment to remember, and giving voice to victims), which mediated the effects on sincerity. The results suggest that collective apologies that are offered with considerable delay appear less meaningful and less deserving of a forgiving response, unless the apologizing group is able to express consideration and thoughtfulness through the apology process.     

如何道歉更有效:调节聚焦与信息框架的作用

本研究结合调节聚焦理论探讨了如何道歉更有效。两个实验通过启动不同调节聚焦,创设冒犯情境并呈现不同框架的道歉信息,考察调节聚焦与道歉框架对道歉效果的影响。结果表明,向促进聚焦的受害者呈现积极框架的道歉信息、向防御聚焦的受害者呈现消极框架的道歉信息能改善受害者对冒犯者的评价,降低交往回避倾向,获得较好的道歉效果,且正确感是此种影响发生的内在机制。     

Getting Even or Getting Equal? Retributive Desires and Transitional Justice

This article examines the effect that different policy interventions of transitional justice have on the desires of the victims of human rights violations for retribution. The retributive desires assessed in this article are conceptualized as individual, collective, and abstract demands for the imposition of a commensurate degree of suffering upon the offender. We suggest a plausible way of reducing victims' retributive desires. Instead of "getting even" in relation to the suffering, victims and perpetrators may "get equal" in relation to their respective statuses, which were affected by political crimes. The article hypothesizes that the three classes of transitional justice: (1) reparation that empowers victims by financial compensation, truth telling, and social acknowledgment; (2) retribution that inflicts punishment upon perpetrators; and (3) reconciliation that renews civic relationship between victims and perpetrators through personal contact, apology, and forgiveness; each contributes to restoring equality between victims and perpetrators, and in so doing decreases the desires that victims have for retribution. In order to test our hypotheses, we conducted a survey of former political prisoners in the Czech Republic. Results from the regression analysis reveal that financial compensation, social acknowledgement, punishment, and forgiveness are likely to reduce victims' retributive desires.     

The forgiveness process in primary and secondary victims of violent and sexual offences

It is possible that the physical and mental health of crime victims might be improved by forgiving those who have offended against them. To date, no research has been undertaken to examine the processes that influence victims' forgiveness. The goal of this project was to examine the forgiveness process in primary and secondary victims of violent and sexual crimes. In Study 1, qualitative data were collected by interviewing 21 people who had been affected by sexual or other violent crime. Data analysis identified five themes that were common to both primary and secondary victims, namely benefit of forgiveness, self‐forgiveness, perspective taking, offender behaviour, and time. An empowerment theme was unique to primary victims, and a principal victim theme was unique to secondary victims. To further explore these qualitative findings, a quantitative survey of 60 primary and secondary victims was conducted. Results confirmed that primary victims are pragmatic forgivers who are internally focused and forgive because that will benefit their healing. Conversely, secondary victims did not think forgiveness benefited, or would impact on, their own or the primary victim's recovery process. Neither group saw forgiveness as a moral issue, nor thought that forgiveness should influence whether an offender should face court.     

Forgiveness,its factors,and unforgivable acts in romantic relationships: A mixed-methods study

Using a mixed-methods approach, this study investigates forgiveness, the factors of forgiveness, and unforgivable acts, and analyzes relational and gender differences in participants' qualitative answers. Open-ended questions were answered by 649 participants from Slovakia (532 dating, 117 married; 517 women, 132 men). Responses were analyzed qualitatively using the Consensual Qualitative Research-Modified method, then transformed into quantitative data in order to statistically compare the groups. The results showed that dating individuals tended to see forgiveness as working on the relationship, whereas married individuals viewed forgiveness as an emotional process. Married individuals were more likely to report that shared commitments helped them to forgive. Dating partners tended to look at the situational context. Men were more likely to report that forgiveness was key to the relationship. When forgiving their partner, men focused on internal factors, whereas women needed an apology and acts of love. Infidelity was the most common unforgivable transgression. Therapists may benefit from a more nuanced understanding of forgiveness in dating and married individuals.     

Offenders’ claims of taking the victims’ perspective can promote forgiveness,or backfire! The moderating role of correctly voicing the victims’ emotions in collective apologies

In the context of collective apologies, we investigate whether offenders’ claim to have taken the victims’ perspective enhances victims’ conciliation. We argue this depends on whether offenders acknowledge emotions in victims that match victims’ emotional experience. In Studies 1 and 2 (Ns = 152 and 171), using scenarios, we experimentally manipulated offenders’ claim and the qualitative or quantitative match of acknowledged emotions. When acknowledged emotions matched victims’ experience, claimed perceptive‐taking increased conciliatory victim responses; but when emotions did not match, the offenders’ claim reduced conciliatory victim responses. In Study 3 (N = 138), African‐Americans were presented with the U.S. government's apology for slavery. We manipulated the perspective‐taking claim and measured the similarity of the emotion profile expressed in the apology to that experienced by African‐Americans over their enslavement. With greater mismatch, the perspective‐taking claim backfired, reducing conciliatory responses. Correct acknowledgment of emotions is key for victims perceiving perspective‐taking and responding conciliatorily.     

Taking up offenses: secondhand forgiveness and group identification

When a person or group is mistreated, those not directly harmed by the transgression might still experience antipathy toward offenders, leading to secondhand forgiveness dynamics similar to those experienced by firsthand victims. Three studies examine the role of social identification in secondhand forgiveness. Study 1 shows that the effects of apologies on secondhand victims are moderated by level of identification with the wronged group. Study 2 shows that identification with the United States was associated with less forgiveness and greater blame and desire for retribution directed at the 9/11 terrorists, and these associations were primarily mediated by anger. Finally, Study 3 shows that participants whose assimilation needs were primed were less forgiving toward the perpetrators of an assault on ingroup members than participants whose differentiation needs were primed, an effect that was mediated by empathy for the victims.