Aboriginal and non-aboriginal Australia: The dilemma of apologies, forgiveness, and reconciliation.

Australian Psychologist

Philpot

2015

In the last three decades, there has been an explosion in the frequency with which leaders of groups have issued official apologies for collective transgressions. These apologies are commonly assumed to lay a pathway to forgiveness and reconciliation, but empirical examination of the downstream consequences of collective apologies is still in its infancy. In this article, we review a series of studies-including interview studies, survey studies, and experiments-that question the assumed wisdom that collective apologies lead to intergroup forgiveness. Reasons for the muted evidence of an apology-forgiveness link at the intergroup level are elaborated, and implications for how best to issue gestures of reconciliation and remorse are discussed.

Section: Apologies and The Satisfaction Of Reconciliation Needs: Is Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Apologies and The Satisfaction Of Reconciliation Needs: Is Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collective Apologies and Their Effects on Forgiveness: Pessimistic Evidence but Constructive Implications

Hornsey

Australian Psychologist

Philpot

2015

“…Qualitative studies with victim groups suggest that they expect prosocial outcomes to follow an intergroup apology. In an interview study with Australian Aboriginals, for example, participants emphasized how members of the perpetrator group—White Australians—might come to understand their plight when an apology is offered (Mellor, Bretherton, & Firth, 2007). Indeed, speaking before the Australian government apology, Australian Aboriginal participants suggested that the merit of the apology would be in helping White Australians understand the past and understand Indigenous people.…”

Section: What Are the Outcomes Of The Intergroup Apology? Empirical Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critical Review of Official Public Apologies: Aims, Pitfalls, and a Staircase Model of Effectiveness

Social Issues Policy Review

Hornsey

Philpot

2011

115

148

The world has entered into an “age of apology,” in which governments, armies, and corporations have increasingly begun apologizing for their role in committing historical and contemporary harms. Although it is widely assumed that such apologies help promote intergroup forgiveness, this assumption has not been subjected to a great deal of empirical investigation, and the little research that exists presents a mixed picture. In this article, we present some of the political and ideological arguments for and against providing intergroup apologies. We then critically review the research on the outcomes of apologies, with an eye to developing concrete strategies for maximizing apology effectiveness. Drawing on these discussions, a staircase model for effective intergroup apologies is offered that has implications for social policy. Although we present some pessimism regarding the outcome of intergroup apologies, this article provides arguments for the necessity of formal intergroup apologies and for policy that maximizes their positive effects.

“…Lastly, research on intergroup apology has used a methodological approach that provides only a single snapshot in time-taken either before the apology is offered or after it has been expressed (Augoustinos & LeCouteur, 2004;McGarty et al, 2005;Mellor, Bretherton, & Firth, 2007) or its aftereffects (Nadler & Liviatan, 2006;Wohl, Hornsey, & Bennett, 2012). Research has not examined victimized group members' views of an intergroup apology at both the time of its offering and again following the passage of time.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Victim and Perpetrator Groups' Responses to the Canadian Government's Apology for the Head Tax on Chinese Immigrants and the Moderating Influence of Collective Guilt

Matheson

Branscombe

et al. 2013

Political Psychology

European and Chinese Canadians' perceptions and expectations of the Canadian government's apology for the head tax placed on Chinese immigrants during the early twentieth century were examined, along with Chinese Canadians' willingness to forgive the transgression. Among both European and Chinese Canadians, beliefs about the importance attributed to the event and perception of the apology as deserved and sincere heightened expectations of improved intergroup relations. Collective guilt acceptance among European Canadians heightened the relation between perceived sincerity and positive expectations, whereas collective guilt assignment by Chinese Canadians heightened the relation between sincerity and forgiveness. A one‐year follow‐up of whether Chinese Canadians were equally satisfied with the apology indicated that their willingness to grant forgiveness had waned, and although on the whole expectations of improved relations were met, those who assigned more collective guilt were less convinced. Intergroup apologies and their effectiveness at facilitating intergroup relations are discussed.