One half of Team SorryWatch is now off in the desert, perhaps with no pants on, perhaps not. (This was a reference to one of our most popular posts, in which Sumac reported about a camp at Burning Man that specialized in helping people apologize. It’s a great post; read it if you haven’t.) The tragic, left-behind non-Burner therefore decided to take her mind off her loneliness by compiling a roundup of recent apology research.

Let’s begin with the work of Oberlin psychology professor Cindy Frantz. Prompted by a student, she ran studies determining that yes, there is such a thing as a “too-early apology.” A precipitous apology “can make the victim feel like the perpetrator did not take the time to understand their perspective and therefore doesn’t understand what they did wrong.” So rather than leaping into the discomfort/reaction-to-criticism breach, take some time to ponder why the other person is so hurt or angry. Educate yourself, ask questions, listen, and then apologize once you’ve truly understood the impact of your actions. Celebrities and politicians often screw this up. “For an apology to be effective, the perpetrator has to understand the victim’s worldview and experience,” Frantz told Williams Magazine. “That’s where my work on too-early apologies informs my understanding of public apologies—the central theme here is the perpetrator’s ability (or inability) to take the victim’s perspective.” (How long is optimal to wait before apologizing? ALAS. More research is needed.)

Moving on, here’s an interesting look at the impact of apologies in social rejections. It was published in the journal Frontiers in Psychology by researchers at Dartmouth and UT Austin. Let’s say you’ve just turned down a request to go out for drinks, or told a colleague you’d prefer not to work on a project together. Should you apologize? Surprisingly, probably not. Lead author Gili Freedman and her colleagues note that “apologies may backfire within a social rejection because they may make targets feel compelled to express forgiveness without actually making targets feel forgiveness and may make the target feel the rejector is not sincere.” In other words, when you apologize, the other person feels pressure to say “that’s okay”…even if IT IS NOT. “Social norms dictate that we forgive someone if they apologize,” Freedman et al write. “Therefore, targets are put in a position where they are expected to forgive the rejection even if they do not believe the apology is sincere.”

You should probably read this paper because it includes the phrase “participants allocated more hot sauce” (metaphorical hot sauce! to be theoretically ingested, punitively, by the person who socially rejected the participant in an experiment!) and “A Hurt Feelings score was computed.” Snarly is personally computing her Hurt Feelings score at all times. Check yourself before you wreck yourself.

Another fun finding in this study: Social rejections with apologies were felt to be less sincere than social rejections without apologies. And perhaps ironically, the rejector becomes LESS likely to actually be forgiven than if they hadn’t apologized at all.

The study also notes that sometimes people who apologize aren’t interested in real forgiveness. Sometimes they just want to feel better themselves (“I said I was sorry, whew, all good!”), and sometimes, in Freedman and company’s words, they “may just want the quickest solution (i.e., the most efficient form of rejection).” The authors also note, dovetailing with Frantz’s research, that more time between the social rejection and the reaction might change the outcomes.

Finally, there’s the question of wording. Does it matter if you apologize first, then give the social rejection, or if you give the social rejection, and then apologize for it? We need MOAR RESEARCH! But there are hints! Researchers in the business realm have found that when you’re writing a “nope” letter to a job applicant, it’s better to put the rejection right up front, so that the applicant immediately knows what’s what. “Previously, letter writers were cautioned to begin with a positive statement (i.e., a buffer), but research on buffers found that rejected applicants were more upset because they were then surprised by the rejection after reading something positive.” Thus: We regret to inform you that you suck.

More research on apologies and power (does being powerful make your apology more or less likely to be accepted?) in another post.

PS. Snarly truthfully did not want to go to Burning Man. It has dirt. She makes no apologies.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share