Does sorry work? The impact of apology laws on medical malpractice

Ho, Benjamin; Liu, Elaine

doi:10.1007/s11166-011-9126-0

Cited by 49 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The theory can explain and/or offer an alternative account for a wide range of findings, including why thanking can act as a behavioral reinforcer (e.g., Grant & Gino, 2010;Panagopoulos, 2011;Rind & Bordia, 1995), why bragging is more acceptable in some cultures than others (Kurman, 2001), why women apologize more than men (Schumann & Ross, 2010), why not receiving an apology can lower a victim's self-esteem (Luchies, Finkel, McNulty, & Kumashiro, 2010), why an effective way to gain status is to do favors for others, but not accept favors from others (Flynn, Reagans, Amanatullah, & Ames, 2006), why apologizing can reduce aggression and the desire to punish (e.g., Darby & Schlenker, 1982;Ho & Liu, 2011;Ohbuchi et al, 1989), and why effective leadership can involve giving away credit but only if the leader's competence is not under question (Owens & Hekman, 2012). Furthermore, only a subset of the theory's predictions are tested in this article.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…RET builds on several streams of previous research, including empirical work on these communications in both psychology and economics (e.g., Abeler et al, 2010;Algoe & Zhaoyang, 2016;Darby & Schlenker, 1982;Deutsch & Lamberti, 1986;Grant & Gino, 2010;Ho, 2012;Ho & Liu, 2011;Hodgins & Liebeskind, 2003;Kim et al, 2004Kim et al, , 2006McGovern et al, 1975;Schlenker & Darby, 1981;Weiner, Graham, Peter, & Zmuidinas, 1991;Williams & Bartlett, 2015); empirical and theoretical work on person perception, self-presentation, and personal relationships in social psychology (e.g., Baumeister, 1982;P. Brown & Levinson, 1987;Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002;Fiske, Xu, Cuddy, & Glick, 1999;Goffman, 1959Goffman, , 1967Leary & Allen, 2011;Schlenker & Weigold, 1992); theoretical work on signaling from evolutionary biology (e.g., Grafen, 1990;Maynard-Smith & Harper, 2003;Zahavi, 1975;Zahavi & Zahavi, 1997); and empirical and theoretical work on language and communication in cognitive psychology (e.g., Goodman & Stuhlmüller, 2013;Grice, 1975;Pinker, 2011;Pinker, Nowak, & Lee, 2008;van Rooij, 2003;Yoon, Tessler, Goodman, & Frank, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Thanking, Apologizing, Bragging, and Blaming: Responsibility Exchange Theory and the Currency of Communication

Chaudhry¹,

Loewenstein²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the time we are children, we are taught to say “thank you” and “I’m sorry.” These communications are central to many social interactions, and the failure to say them often leads to conflict in relationships. Research has documented that, alongside the impact they can have on relationships, apologies and thanks can also impact material outcomes as small as restaurant tips and as significant as settlements of medical malpractice lawsuits. But, it is trivial to utter the words; how can such “cheap talk” carry so much value? In this paper, we propose a “responsibility exchange theory” that explains why these communications are not costless, and which draws connections between four forms of communication that have not previously been connected: thanking, apologizing, bragging, and blaming. All four of these communications relay information about credit or blame, and thus introduce image-based costs and benefits for both the communicator and the recipient of communication: Each of the four communications involves a tradeoff between appearing competent and appearing warm. By formalizing these social psychological insights with a utility-based approach to modeling communication, and by applying game theoretic analysis, we offer new insights about social communication. We test several of the model’s novel predictions about strategic communication in two experiments: The first involves hypothetical choices in a scenario study, and the second involves real choices in a live interaction. We end with a discussion of the theory’s place in the literature and consider extended predictions and applications as examples of future directions for research.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Thanking, Apologizing, Bragging, and Blaming: Responsibility Exchange Theory and the Currency of Communication

Chaudhry¹,

Loewenstein²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent research in medical malpractice suggests that such possibilities have merit. Ho and Liu (2010) find that apology laws reduce the average medical malpractice settlement and lead to a faster resolution of cases. Further, the authors find lower malpractice claims against doctors for minor injuries because of apology laws.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Research on the effectiveness of apologies in medical malpractice cases shows that this remedial tactic is quite effective at reducing litigation in health care organizations such as individual hospitals (Wu 1999;Robbennolt 2003;Mazor et al 2004;Wu et al 2009). Furthermore, incidences of malpractice litigation have decreased in states where apology laws have been enacted (Ho and Liu 2010).…”

Section: Background and Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Practitioner Summary of Can Auditors Reduce Negligence Verdicts? An Examination of Remedial Tactics

Cornell

Eining

Warne

2012

Current Issues in Auditing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY:This article summarizes our recent study, ''The Use of Remedial Tactics in Negligence Litigation '' (Cornell et al. 2009). Auditors face significant litigation risk when adverse economic events occur with clients, even when the auditors followed Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS) when they conducted the audit. Civil litigation rules in many U.S. jurisdictions allow plaintiffs to compel testimony from defendants during trial proceedings. We investigated whether auditors could use verbal remediation tactics to reduce the likelihood of guilty verdicts when accused of professional negligence. In a mock trial setting, we examined whether an apology and/or a first-person justification offered by an auditor-defendant results in fewer negligence verdicts against audit firms. Our results indicate that, when an auditor testifies and expresses an apology and/or a first-person justification, jurors find the auditor guilty of negligence about half as often as when no remedial tactic is used. These findings provide evidence that auditors accused of negligence may effectively utilize such tactics to defend their audit decisions and actions.

show abstract

Nurse practitioner scope of practice and patient harm: Evidence from medical malpractice payouts and adverse action reports

Markowitz

Smith

2023

J Policy Anal Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many states have recently changed their scope of practice laws and granted full practice authority to nurse practitioners, allowing them to practice without oversight from physicians. Physician groups have argued against this change, citing patient safety concerns. In this paper, we use a ratio‐in‐ratio approach to evaluate whether the transition to full practice authority results in harm to patients as proxied by malpractice payouts and adverse action reports against nurse practitioners. We find no evidence of such harm, and instead find that physicians may benefit from the law change in terms of reduced paid malpractice cases against them.

show abstract

Does sorry work? The impact of apology laws on medical malpractice

Abstract: Apologies, Apology laws, Medical malpractice, Litigation, K13, K32,

Cited by 49 publications

References 36 publications

Thanking, Apologizing, Bragging, and Blaming: Responsibility Exchange Theory and the Currency of Communication

Thanking, Apologizing, Bragging, and Blaming: Responsibility Exchange Theory and the Currency of Communication

Practitioner Summary of Can Auditors Reduce Negligence Verdicts? An Examination of Remedial Tactics

Nurse practitioner scope of practice and patient harm: Evidence from medical malpractice payouts and adverse action reports

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About