After last week’s post on apologies, a few readers sent me links on the psychology of effective apologies. Maximally effective apologies include the following elements:
- Expression of regret
- Explanation of what went wrong
- Acknowledgment of responsibility
- Declaration of repentance
- Offer of repair
- Request for forgiveness
Taking responsibility means acknowledging mistakes you made that hurt the other person, and it’s one of the most important and neglected ingredients of most apologies, especially those in the media.
Saying something vague like, “I’m sorry if you were offended by something I said,” implies that the hurt feelings were a random reaction on the part of the other person. Saying, “When I said [the hurtful thing], I wasn’t thinking. I realize I hurt your feelings, and I’m sorry,” acknowledges that you know what it was you said that hurt the other person, and you take responsibility for it.
Overall, this seems like plausible advice. Ideal apologies will indeed have all six elements. The harsh reality, though, is that ideal apologies often require the superpower of telepathy. Why? Because the person who wants to apologize doesn’t understand why the other person is upset, and the person who wants an apology refuses to explain themselves. So unless the would-be apologizer can read minds, “sorry for whatever I did” is the best he can do.
The bigger question, though is: How will people actually use this research? Will they learn to make better apologies? Or simply to expect better apologies? I suspect that the latter effect will far exceed the former. If this suspicion is correct, the ironic result of this research is to exacerbate conflict rather than defuse it.
Why do I have this pessimistic view? For starters: As far as I can recall, I have never received an ideal apology – or anything close to it. In fact, I doubt I’ve received a dozen halfway decent apologies in my entire life. If I held this dearth against people, I wouldn’t have a friend left in the world. Instead of expecting apologies from others, I generally make excuses on their behalf.
My motives are partly strategic and partly sincere.
Strategically speaking, I know that demanding good apologies probably won’t work. People are stubborn and self-righteous. Unless I bite my tongue and appease them, I will be very lonely. You could object, “With friends like that, who needs enemies?” But if a friend unapologetically tramples my feelings five days a year, but makes me happy the other 360 days, I count myself lucky.
Sincerely speaking, I know that lively social interaction is an inherently risky activity. Boring, superficial conversations are safe: “Nice weather we’re having?” “Yes, quite.” As soon as you stray from that time-worn path, you might accidentally say the wrong thing. So if someone hurts your feelings as a result, the wise reaction is normally, “It’s all part of the game, no big deal.”
Wouldn’t I like to receive an apology every now and then? Sure. Wouldn’t I prefer apologies that contain an expression of regret, explanation of what went wrong, acknowledgment of responsibility, declaration of repentance, offer of repair, and request for forgiveness? Sure again. But in my book, even a “Sorry I hurt your feelings” with a sincere tone is amazingly above the bar. If offered, I’ll cheerfully take it. So should you.
READER COMMENTS
LEB
Jan 12 2021 at 11:20am
Finally some good sense on this topic! I have had more than one person exploit my sincere attempt to make peace by insisting that my apology needed to fit their perfectionist standard. Truthfully, what they really wanted was not so much an apology as my forced assent to their moral superiority.
David Leiser
Jan 12 2021 at 11:41am
In our paper “varieties of trust betrayals” we show that the context (social norms vs personal ties) determine emotional response and therefore what an apology must be like to set things right.
See https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12130
Philo
Jan 12 2021 at 11:57am
It seems you are very slow to take offense; as you say: “if someone hurts your feelings . . ., no big deal.” Therefore, it is a rare occasion on which someone recognizes that he had better apologize to you; so far as he can tell, “Bryan wasn’t upset by what I said/did.” But if you are going to have repeated interactions, it will probably be better to let him know about your negative reaction—if not by acting offended, then by unemotional remonstrance. Maybe, even without your show of negativity, he will hurt your feelings only 5 days out of 365; but it would be better if—as will often be the case—you could reduce the 5 to, say, 2, or 1, or zero, by asking him not to say/do it again.
Apologizing has both a backward and a forward aspect: the apologizer acknowledges his past error, perhaps offering recompense to show his sincerity, and also promises no future repetition. The two are connected psychologically, but not logically: it is quite possible to think one has done no wrong while, at the same time, sincerely promising not to do it again. (Admittedly, one may be more likely to adhere to such a promise if one regards the behavior not just as unwelcome to the other person, but as flatly wrong.) For practical purposes the forward aspect is much the more important: the past is unchangeable, but the future is somewhat within our control.
RPLong
Jan 12 2021 at 1:27pm
This is great advice, especially the closing paragraph!
You are probably correct to say that this kind of research teaches people to expect, rather than to give, effective apologies. But that’s okay – I can’t control what other people do, I can only control what I do. So, if I take it upon myself to try to make better apologies, I’ll be doing my part to make the world a little better. Not only will I be making more effective apologies, I’ll also be modeling better apology-behavior to everyone who sees it.
This latter point is important to me because reading EconLog has done much more for me than just taught me economic concepts. The bloggers here are all so clear in their writing and clever in their arguments, and above all, kind and respectful in their debates. That’s made a big impact on me, and I like to think it has influenced me in my life.
Maybe giving better apologies is something I can do to pay it forward.
zeke5123
Jan 12 2021 at 10:48pm
Perhaps there is also the aspect that the apologizer really doesn’t think they did something wrong, but really cares about the offended party and wishes them not to feel hurt.
I’ve been there before in situations with my wife; sometimes, even after fully understanding her position I sincerely believe she is being unreasonable but at the same time she is my wife — I want her to be happy.
Why should an apology merely be about changing behavior as opposed to expressing care to the offended party?
Robert
Jan 13 2021 at 2:52pm
Apology from the movie “A Fish Called Wanda”:
“Alright, alright, I apologize. I’m really, really sorry. I apologize unreservedly. I offer a complete and utter retraction. The imputation was totally without basis in fact, and was in no way fair comment, and was motivated purely by malice. And I deeply regret any distress that my comments may have caused you or your family, and I hereby undertake not to repeat any such slander at any time in the future.”
Seems to cover all the bases.
For those who did not see the movie (Spoiler Alert), the apology was somewhat coerced.
Jose Pablo
Jan 13 2021 at 8:27pm
I think that the reason why people don’t make explicit why they are offended by you is because that requires “to verbalize” a feeling, which is a very difficult task.
Very often, while verbalizing what looked like a completely coherent position “as a feeling” its internal incoherence comes to light … and in front of the “offender”!
AMT
Jan 14 2021 at 8:57pm
Anyone who says these SIX components are required is stupid. This is necessarily true because expressing regret and declaring repentance are the same thing. So we are already down to five steps.
Also, acknowledgment of responsibility is implicit in apologizing. If you aren’t responsible for the mistake, why are you apologizing?! “Sorry” says “I’m at fault.”
It’s also not always necessary to explain what went wrong because it’s often obvious.
I think that the only critical part of an apology is conveying your sincerity to the other party. Some of those steps such as offer of repair helps to display sincerity, and explaining what went wrong might be part of showing sincerity as well. But far more important than any of those components to convey sincerity is tone of voice and body language/facial expression, but the offer of repair could sometimes be very important as well (especially to economists, or people in a consumer/business transaction situation). And as I commented on your last post, your apology is not sincere if you do not make efforts to avoid making the same mistake in the future. That is a bit separate from apologizing, but I suppose you could say “this won’t happen again,” although this is a case where actions matter far more than words.
Comments are closed.