Intergroup apologies: Does it matter what they say? Experimental analyses.

Abstract

Intergroup apologies are common in public life, yet their experimental analysis has remained sparse. In 2 online vignette studies we analyzed which content of public intergroup apologies (PIAs) increases the acceptance of the apology by the victimized group and their intergroup forgiveness. Concerning that question we predicted that a PIA including more relevant components of apology is more effective than PIAs including fewer of these components (first hypothesis). We also purported that this particularly applies after more severe transgressions (second hypothesis). For Study 1 (N 289) the chosen intergroup setting was gender discrimination in Germany and in Study 2 (N 110) the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992–1995). We varied the severity of transgression in 2 steps in Study 1 and number of components in the PIA in 5 steps in both studies. The first hypothesis was supported by both studies. However, the data also showed that the components that had to be included in the PIA to increase the effectiveness of the apology varied across Study 1 and 2. In addition, the relevant effects applied to the acceptance of the apology but not to intergroup forgiveness. The second hypothesis was not supported. Implications for conflict transformation and further research are discussed.