When the happy victimizer says sorry: Children's understanding of apology and emotion

Previous research suggests that children gradually understand the mitigating effects of apology on damage to a transgressor's reputation. However, little is known about young children's insights into the central emotional implications of apology. In two studies, children ages 4–9 heard stories about moral transgressions in which the wrongdoers either did or did not apologize. In Study 1, children in the no‐apology condition showed the classic pattern of ‘happy victimizer’ attributions by expecting the wrongdoer to feel good about gains won via transgression. By contrast, in the apology condition, children attributed negative feelings to the transgressor and improved feelings to the victim. In Study 2, these effects were found even when the explicit emotion marker ‘sorry’ was removed from the apology exchange. Thus, young children understand some important emotional functions of apology.     

Hope as a Predictor of Interpersonal Suicide Risk

The current study hypothesized that (1) hope would negatively predict burdensomeness, thwarted belongingness, and acquired capability to enact lethal injury; (2) hope would negatively predict suicidal ideation; and (3) the interpersonal suicide risk factors would predict suicidal ideation. Results indicated that hope negatively predicted burdensomeness and thwarted belongingness, but positively predicted acquired capability to enact suicide. Contrary to our second hypothesis, hope did not predict suicidal ideation, but interpersonal risk factors for suicide predicted suicidal ideation. Results are discussed in terms of implications for hope theory and Joiner's (2005) interpersonal risk factors for suicide, and for clinical practice.     

When a Lot of Knowledge Is a Dangerous Thing The Debilitating Effects of Plan Complexity on Verbal Fluency

Three experiments examined the relationships among plan complexity, access to planned actions, and verbal fluency while pursuing a persuasion goal. Consistent with theoretical expectations, complex planners were less fluent than less complex planners under high access conditions. Persons whose access was raised were less fluent than those whose access was not raised. A second experiment showed that reduced fluency was not induced by lowering of self-confidence. The third experiment replicated the findings of the second experiment and demonstrated that the questioning procedure used to raise access in the first two experiments produced increases in plan complexity as suggested by theory. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for the study of strategic communication.