Abstract
The present research examined the idea that the effectiveness of apologies on promoting fairness perceptions depends on how meaningful and sincere the apology is experienced. More precisely, it was predicted that apologies are more effective when they are communicated by an authority being respectful to others. A study using a cross-sectional organizational survey showed that an apology (relative to giving no apology) revealed higher fairness perceptions, but only so when the authority was respectful rather than disrespectful. In a subsequent experimental laboratory study the same interaction effect (as in Study 1) on fairness perceptions was found. In addition, a similar interaction effect also emerged on participants’ self-evaluations in terms of relational appreciation (i.e., feeling valued and likeable). Finally, these self-evaluations accounted (at least partly) for the interactive effect on fairness perceptions.
References
(1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. New York: Sage.
(1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
(1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529.
(1987). The predicament of injustice: The management of moral outrage. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9, 289–319.
(2005). How can explanations be used to foster organizational justice. In , Handbook of organizational justice (pp. 469–498). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: Interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 189–208.
(1998). The moderating effect of self-esteem in reaction to voice: Converging evidence from five studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 394–407.
(1999). The utility of experimental research in the study of transformational/charismatic leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 10, 531–540.
(2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386–400.
(1989). Children’s reactions to transgressions: Effects of the actor’s apology, reputation and remorse. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 353–364.
(2002). Respect and cooperation in social dilemmas: The importance of feeling included. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1335–1341.
(2003a). Noneconomic motives predicting cooperation in public good dilemmas: The effect of received respect on contributions. Social Justice Research, 16, 367–377.
(2003b). Why inconsistent leadership is regarded as procedurally unfair: The importance of social self-esteem concerns. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 535–550.
(2004). The influence of accuracy as a function of leader’s bias: The role of trustworthiness in the psychology of procedural justice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 293–304.
(2006). Why do people care about procedural fairness?: The importance of belongingness in responding and attending to procedures. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 211–228.
(2005). Self-uncertainty and responsiveness to procedural justice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 157–173.
(2007). The effects of trust in authority and procedural fairness on cooperation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 639–649.
(2002). How do leaders promote cooperation? The effects of charisma and procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 858–866.
(1990). Laboratory vs. field research in industrial and organizational psychology. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5, 1–34.
(1985). A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36, 305–323.
(2007). Silence speaks volumes: The effectiveness of reticence in comparison to apology and denial for repairing integrity- and competence-based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 893–908.
(1977). Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of “voice”“and improvement of experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 108–119.
(2005). Better late than early: The influence of timing on apology effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 201–207.
(1999). Once bitten: Defection and reconciliation in a cooperative enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly, 9, 69–86.
(1971). Relations in public. New York: Basic Books.
(1990). Looking fair versus being fair: Managing impressions of organizational justice. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 111–157.
(1991). Development and validation of a scale for measuring self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 895–910.
(2006). When more blame us better than less: The implications of internal versus external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence versus integrity-based trust violation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 49–65.
(2004). Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence- versus integrity-based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 104–118.
(1993). Procedural fairness and self-esteem. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 313–325.
(2000). The nature and function of self-esteem: Sociometer theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 1–62.
(1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the fairness in social relationships. In , Social exchange theory (pp. 27–55). New York: Plenum.
(1995). An integrative model of organization trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.
(1983). In defence of external invalidity. American Psychologist, 38, 379–387.
(1989). Apology as aggression control: Its role in mediating appraisal of and response to harm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 219–227.
(2003). Apologies and legal settlement: An empirical examination. Michigan Law Review, 102, 460.
(1975). Attitude inferences from salient and relevant cognitive content about behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 829–840.
(1997). How effective are the things people say to apologize? Effects of the realization of the apology speech act. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26, 127–140.
(1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
(1981). The use of apologies in social predicaments. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44, 271–278.
(2006). Promises and lies: Restoring violated trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 1–19.
(2003). To justify or excuse: A meta-analytic review of the effects of explanations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 444–458.
(1988). Factors affecting perceptions of political candidates accused of sexual and financial misconduct. Political Psychology, 9, 273–280.
(2005). In search of the active ingredient of respect: A closer look at the role of acceptance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 809–818.
(2006). The added value of respect: Reaching across inequality. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 535–546.
(2004). When social accounts backfire: The exacerbating effects of a polite message or an apology on reactions to an unfair outcome. Journal of Applied Psychology, 34, 322–341.
(2006). Violating equality in social dilemmas: Emotional and retributive reactions as a function of trust, attribution, and honesty. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 894–906.
(2004). The road to reconciliation: Antecedents of victim willingness to reconcile following a broken promise. Journal of Management, 30, 165–187.
(1997). The psychology of legitimacy. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 323–344.
(1996). Understanding why the justice of group procedures matter: A test of the psychological dynamics of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 913–930.
(1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In , Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–191). New York: Academic Press.
(1998). Social justice and social movements. In , Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 595–632). New York: McGraw-Hill.
(1999). Justice, social identity, and group processes. In , The psychology of the social self (pp. 223–264). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2001). Fundamental research by means of laboratory experiments is essential for a better understanding of organizational justice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 254–259.
(2004). Group belongingness and procedural justice: Social inclusion and exclusion by peers affects the psychology of voice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 66–79.
(2001). Self-esteem and outcome fairness: Differential importance of procedural and outcome considerations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 621–628.
