Sorry is the Hardest Word The Role of

Sorry is the Hardest Word: The Role of Self-Control in Apology Joshua Guilfoyle, Elizabeth van Monsjou, Ward Struthers, & Nikan Eghbali ABSTRACT RESULTS: STUDY 1 MANIPULATION: STUDY 2 Despite its benefit in repairing relationships following an interpersonal transgression, apologizing can be a daunting and difficult process to carry out. Instead, transgressors have a tendency to respond in nonapologetic ways. Self-control may be one factor that can affect transgressors’ willingness to engage in apologetic versus non-apologetic responses. Self-control refers to the ability to override automatic and desirable responses such as non-apologies in favor of less desirable but adaptive responses such as apologies. In this research, we conducted one non-experimental and one experimental study to test the relation between trait (Study 1) and state self-control (Study 2) and transgressors’ willingness to engage in apologetic versus non-apologetic responding. Briefly, having dispositional or state self-control is related to increased dispositional and state apology and decreased non-apology responses. STUDY 1 Attentional Control Task STUDY 2 ‘e’ and ‘spacebar’ Task Figure 1. Severe Depletion Task Procedure b = 0. 54, SE = 0. 09, t(198) = 6. 05, p < 0. 001*** b = 0. 28, SE = 0. 11, t(198) = 2. 40, p = 0. 017* Participants • Community sample (N = 200, 51% male, 48% female, Mage = 39. 4, SD = 14. 4). • Post-hoc power analysis indicated 85% power (r =. 21; Richard, Bond, & Stokes-Zoota, 2003). Procedure • Participants completed trait self-control (Tangney, Baumeister, & Boone, 2004) and trait apology (Howell, Dopko, Turowski, & Buro, 2011) measures. • Participants recalled a time within the last 6 months in which they committed an interpersonal transgression by hurting another person. • Participants completed state apology and non-apology measures about the recalled transgression. Thought Suppression Task (White Bear) Stroop Test RESULTS: STUDY 2 (Outliers > 2 SD removed, N = 5) Self-Control Apology • t(116. 33) = 2. 68, p = 0. 008***, 95% CI [-1. 12, -0. 17] • d = 0. 47 Self-Control Non-Apology • t(116. 98) = 2. 27, p = 0. 025*, 95% CI [0. 44, 0. 66] • d = 0. 40 b = -0. 18, SE = 0. 08, t(198) = -2. 16, p = 0. 032* RESULTS: STUDY 2 CONCLUSION Participants • Undergraduate sample (N = 131, 72% female, 28% male, Mage = 21. 5, SD = 4. 65). • Sample determined for 80% power (r =. 21; Richard, Bond, & Stokes. Zoota, 2003). • Trait and state self-control affect transgressors’ willingness to apologize versus not apologize. Procedure • Participants recalled a time they committed an interpersonal transgression that was unresolved. • Participants completed a severe depletion task to manipulate selfcontrol (low vs. high; Vohs, Baumeister, & Schmeichel, 2012). See Figure 1. • Following manipulation, participants completed state apology and non-apology measures about how they would respond to the victim. • Transgressors with low self-control were more likely to engage in nonapologetic responding, whereas those with high self-control were less likely. • Transgressors with high self-control were more likely to apologize, whereas those with low self-control were less likely.