Sorry to ask but … how is apology effectiveness dependent on apology content and gender?

Abstract

While it is well understood that the content included in an apology matters, what constitutes an effective apology may differ depending on the gender of the person delivering it. In this article, we test competing theoretical perspectives (i.e., role congruity theory and expectancy violation theory [EVT]) about the relative effectiveness of apologies that include language that conforms (or not) with the gender stereotypes ascribed to the apologizer. Results of four studies supported an EVT perspective and showed that apologies were perceived to be relatively more effective when they contradicted gender stereotypes (i.e., communal [agentic] apologies by men [women]). Specifically, Study 1 provided an initial test of the competing hypotheses using celebrity apologies on Twitter. Then, results of three experiments (Studies 2, 3a, and 3b) built upon these initial findings and tested the psychological mechanisms proposed by EVT to explain why counterstereotypical apologies are beneficial (i.e., attributions of interpersonal sensitivity [assertiveness] and enhanced perceptions of benevolence [competence] for men [women]). Our contributions to theory and practice are discussed.

The role of truth in victim–offender mediation: Victims of crime who feel they know the “whole” truth are more receptive to apologies.

“…There are also some potential constraints on the present findings by race and gender that we could not account for. For example, previous research demonstrates that race and gender can affect responses to crime and apologies (ForsterLee et al, 2006; Polin et al, 2024). It could be that the present findings are constrained depending on characteristics of victims and offenders (e.g., race and/or gender) and/or characteristics of the crime (e.g., if racially motivated).…”