No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The current research examined whether mindfulness promotes offender apologies. In Study 1, we found a positive relation between trait mindfulness and one’s disposition to apologize. In Study 2, we found a positive effect of a mindfulness intervention on state apology for a laboratory-induced transgression. In Study 3, an online mindfulness intervention was found to have a positive effect on apologetic (vs. nonapologetic) behavior for transgressors. In Study 4, we found preliminary support for reduced negative self-focused cognitions and emotions when testing a parallel mediation model. We also found support for negative self-focused, as well as positive other-focused, cognitions and emotions when testing a serial mediational model. Our findings are discussed within broader theoretical questions concerning the psychological factors that promote and prevent apologies and the role of mindfulness in constructive responses to transgressions from the perspective of offenders.

The current research investigated the role of transgressors' social power on their motivation to apologize or not. Based on power approach theory (Keltner et al., 2003), we predicted that high-power transgressors would be less motivated to apologize and more motivated to engage in nonapology (e.g., shifting blame, minimizing the transgression) than their low-power counterparts. We further predicted that the relation between social power and apology and nonapology would be explained by transgressors' self-other focus. Four multimethod (nonexperimental, experimental), multisample (community, undergraduate) studies supported our predictions. Results are discussed within the context of the extant social motivation literature and applied implications. Public Significance StatementThe current research explores how individuals' social power influences their willingness to engage in apologies and nonapologies (e.g., making excuses). We demonstrate high-power transgressors are more willing to engage in nonapology and less willing to engage in apology. Conversely, those with low power are more willing to engage in apology and less willing to engage in nonapology. However, highpower transgressors who take an other-focus become the most apologetic. Applied implications of this research include interventions to affect social power, self-other focus, and conciliatory behavior.