Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This study investigates potential gender differences in perceptions of repentant apologies within abusive interpersonal relationships. The specific purposes of this study are: to determine if men and women who have experienced domestic violence perceive the repentant nature of the apology differently from men and women who have not experienced domestic violence. Also, to determine if gender differences exist in perceptions of repentant apologies given in abusive relationships within experienced groups as well as within non-experienced groups.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper reports a study that begins to fill a gap in the existing research on apologies by focusing on the social-structural determinants that influence individuals who have committed norm violations against others to choose (or not to choose) apology as a primary strategy for addressing their wrongdoing with the victims. Specifically, the study focuses on the relationship of power -- superior or subordinate -- between wrong doer and victim, and seeks to answer the questions: (1) Is the power relationship significant for wrongdoers’ selection of a conflict resolution strategy? (2) Is style of moral reasoning (how choice of strategy is justified) significantly related to wrong doers’ selection of strategies? (3) Does the strength or weakness of the possible liabilities (negative repercussions, either for wrong doers or for victims, significantly influence strategy selection and style of moral reasoning? (4) Is perceived institutional legitimacy (the “just” authority of superiors) significantly related to wrong doers’ responses, i.e. their selection of strategies and styles of moral reasoning? Although this study ultimately is directed toward the institutional settings of criminal justice, the roles of professor and student offered a paradigmatic example of social relationships that are institutionally structured around the unequal power of each group. A survey was conducted of approximately 100 respondents from each group to indicate the strength of their agreement about a series of possible responses to five hypothetical scenarios that involved wrongdoing and potential conflict.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The area of transitional justice has focussed on governmental wrongs to a large extent, and in this area work on truth and reconciliation in both municipal and international law has used calls for apologies as part of the arsenal of reparation. In the area of civil liability (private law, especially negligence) a tranche of legislation protecting apologies has grown up in a large range of jurisdictions. This paper seeks to explore the difference in function between public and private apologies and how they relate to the areas of public and private law (loosely defined). In particular the paper seeks to understand how law as a system interacts with public and private apologies, considering apologies as representative of a moral system as opposed to a legal system.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Abstract
The purpose of this study was to test the potential situational and cultural factors that influence individuals’ apologetic intentions in conflict situations. The research examines how offender responsibility, offense severity, and prior relationship between offender and victim influence individuals’ decisions to apologize when they offend others. Moreover, the study investigated the salience of autonomy and image face concerns for self and others and the role of these face concerns in determining individuals’ apologetic intentions when an offense occurs. The major findings of the current study are as follows: (a) no difference was found in self and other face concerns and apologetic intentions between two cultural groups: Americans and Chinese; (b) responsibility was positively associated with self and other face concerns and apology; (c) severity was positively associated with self face concerns; (d) relationship was negatively associated with self face concerns and positively associated with other face concerns; (e) other face concern was associated positively with apology; and (f) culture moderated the effect of responsibility on apology.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Based on Brown and Levinson’s (1987) politeness theory and Ting-Toomey’s (1988) face negotiation theory, the current study examined the cultural differences between U.S. and Chinese participants (N = 317) regarding face concerns and apology intention. Participants read vignettes that varied in relationship types (in-group versus out-group members) and situation types (negative face versus positive face threatened) and responded to scales measuring realism of the vignettes, intention to apologize, and five types of face concerns. One of the findings showed that Chinese participants, compared to U.S. participants, had stronger intention to apologize when their act threatened the other person’s positive face, while U.S. participants, compared to Chinese participants, had stronger intention to apologize when their act threatened the other person’s negative face. Other findings and implications of the findings are discussed in more detail in the paper.