The mandate of the collective: Apology representativeness determines perceived sincerity and forgiveness in intergroup contexts

Michael Wenzel, Tyler Okimoto, Matthew Hornsey, Eleanor Lawrence-Wood, Anne-Marie Coughlin

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    10 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The sincerity of an apology is often critical for it to be viewed positively by victims. For collective apologies, we argue that sincerity takes on a particular meaning: It is a function of the apology’s perceived representativeness for the offender group’s will or sentiment. Consistent with this notion, when an apologetic (vs. nonapologetic) message was democratically chosen (Study 1) or explicitly endorsed by the majority of the offending outgroup (Study 2), it was considered more sincere and, through this, led to more forgiveness. Furthermore, while disagreement about an apology within the offender group reduced its perceived representativeness and sincerity, this was less so when the dissenters could be subtyped: when disagreement was correlated with an existing subgroup within the offending outgroup (Study 3) and in line with expectations for that subgroup (Study 4). This research shows that victim group members consider intragroup processes within the offending outgroup for attributions of sincerity.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)758-771
    Number of pages14
    JournalPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin
    Volume43
    Issue number6
    Early online date2017
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Jun 2017

    Keywords

    • collective apologies
    • forgiveness
    • intergroup processes
    • representativeness
    • sincerity

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'The mandate of the collective: Apology representativeness determines perceived sincerity and forgiveness in intergroup contexts'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this