Political apologies have been argued to contribute to reconciliation among groups and nations but their efficacy has also been questioned. This paper examines the acceptance of political apologies, their content and the protagonists in the victim nation, the perpetrator nation and their subgroups. Guided by studies on the structure of apologies, it distinguishes 10 features of apologies, seven of which concern their content and three of their protagonists. Following the analysis of apology statements by Japan to South Korea, the paper further breaks these features (factors) down into 32 elements (levels). The acceptance of around 70,000 possible apology combinations is examined in a randomized conjoint experiment, which was embedded in online quota‐based surveys in Japan (n = 2700) and South Korea (n = 3000). The analysis reveals that the content of apologies matters, protagonists matter more than content and some subgroups matter more than protagonists. The subgroup analysis showed that some within‐country differences are larger than cross‐country differences, which challenges the SIT. Apology statements that would be acceptable in both nations are summarised.

Prior research found that egoistic (vs. altruistic) messages were more effective in influencing the willingness to blood donation in Caucasian British students who were committed blood donors. We investigated what types of messages could effectively influence the blood donation intention of young Chinese students who had never donated blood (non-donors). Participants were asked to read a poster showing either an altruistic or egoistic message that was framed either positively or negatively. Results revealed that Chinese non-donors were more willing to donate blood when they read an altruistic rather than an egoistic message. The negatively-framed egoistic-focused message was the least effective in persuading Chinese non-donors to donate blood. Suggestions for future blood donation promotion campaigns and advertisements were made.