This article was downloaded by: [University of New Mexico]On: 28 November 2014, At: 06:24Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

The Journal of SocialPsychologyPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20

“I'm Sorry, Please Don't HurtMe”: Effectiveness of Apologieson Aggression ControlJoel Daniel Frederickson aa Bethel UniversityPublished online: 06 Nov 2010.

To cite this article: Joel Daniel Frederickson (2010) “I'm Sorry, Please Don't Hurt Me”:Effectiveness of Apologies on Aggression Control, The Journal of Social Psychology,150:6, 579-581, DOI: 10.1080/00224540903365356

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224540903365356

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ew M

exic

o] a

t 06:

24 2

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

The Journal of Social Psychology, 2010, 150(6), 579–581

Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

REPLICATIONS AND REFINEMENTS

“I’m Sorry, Please Don’t Hurt Me”:Effectiveness of Apologies on Aggression

Control

JOEL DANIEL FREDERICKSONBethel University

ABSTRACT. The author attempted to replicate Ohbuchi, Kameda, and Agarie’s (1989)study which found that giving an apology, with or without harm removal, reducedaggressive responses among a sample of Japanese college women. The author foundsimilar results with a U.S. sample of college women. The results provide evidence forcross-cultural similarity in the effectiveness of apologies in reducing aggressive responses.

Keywords: apology, aggression, cross-cultural

PREVIOUS RESEARCH HAS FOUND THAT apologies can be effectivein influencing attributions and impression management (see Struthers, Eaton,Santelli, Uchiyama, & Shirvani, 2008 for a recent review). In their study with 58Japanese women who were enrolled in introductory psychology courses, Ohbuchi,Kameda, and Agarie (1989) found that giving an apology, with or without harmremoval, can reduce aggressive responses. This study is an attempt to replicatethese results with a U.S. sample.

Participants were 51 women from a Midwestern university who were enrolledin introductory psychology courses. They received course credit for participating.Each participant was told that the study was examining the Mozart effect. Theywere administered 24 “IQ” items. The undergraduate research assistant (RA) whowas administering the items via an overhead projector presented seven of theitems in such a way that the participant could not get the items correct (e.g., upside

Address correspondence to Joel Daniel Frederickson, Bethel University, PsychologyDepartment, 3900 Bethel Dr., St. Paul, MN 55112, USA; frejoe@bethel.edu (e-mail).

579

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ew M

exic

o] a

t 06:

24 2

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

580 The Journal of Social Psychology

down; for too short of time). When finished, the lead experimenter came in theroom, looked at the results, and commented on the poor performance. This repre-sents the harm done to the participant caused by the RA’s mistakes. At this pointthe participant received one of four responses: (1) apology from the RA plus harmremoval (i.e., harm removed by publicly acknowledging that it was not the partic-ipant’s fault), (2) apology with no harm removal (i.e., apology made in private),(3) no apology but harm removal (experimenter tells participant that the RA musthave made some mistakes), or (4) no apology or harm removal. The participantthen completed a survey that included a rating on a 0–100 scale of the RA’s “skillsas a psychologist.” It was explained to the participant that their rating of the RAwould be reflected in the RA’s final grade. Ohbuchi, et al (1989) used the samemeasure of aggression.

A 2 (presence or absence of apology) × 2 (presence or absence of harmremoval) ANOVA was used to analyze the impact of the conditions on aggression.There was a significant main effect for the apology condition, F(1,47) = 10.91,p = .002, η2 = 0.19. Participants who received the apology were less aggres-sive (i.e., gave higher ratings for the RA’s skills as a psychologist; M = 86.12,sd = 7.55) than those who did not receive an apology (M = 73.88, sd = 15.67;Cohen’s d = 1.05). There was no significant main effect for harm removal orinteraction between conditions (F < 1.0, η2 < 0.03 for both).

These results are quite similar to those found with a sample of Japanesewomen (Ohbuchi et al., 1989). Although they gave overall lower ratings, Japanesewomen in the 1989 study also were significantly less aggressive in the apol-ogy condition (M = 63.95) compared to the no apology condition (M = 49.72),F(1,54) = 8.78, p < .01, η2 = 0.14. There was also no main effect for harmremoval and no interaction (F < 1.0, η2 < 0.03 for both). For each study, anapology, regardless of harm removal, significantly reduced aggressive responses.Previous studies (e.g., Itoi, Ohbuchi, & Fukuno, 1996) have found differ-ences in perceptions and expectations regarding apologies between Japanese andAmericans. However, the evidence here indicates that apologies reduce aggressiveresponses for women in both cultures.

AUTHOR NOTE

Joel Daniel Frederickson, PhD, is Professor and Chairperson of thePsychology Department at Bethel University.

REFERENCES

Itoi, R, Ohbuchi, K, & Fukuno, M. (1996). A cross-cultural study of preference of accounts:Relationship closeness, harm severity, and motives of account making. Journal ofApplied Social Psychology, 26, 913–934.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ew M

exic

o] a

t 06:

24 2

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

Frederickson 581

Ohbuchi, K., Kameda, M, & Agarie, N. (1989). Apology as aggression control: Its rolein mediating appraisal of and response to harm. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 56, 219–227.

Struthers, C. W., Eaton, J., Santelli, A. G., Uchiyama, M. & Shirvani, N. (2008). The effectsof attributions of intent and apology on forgiveness: When saying sorry may not help thestory. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 983–992.

Received March 14, 2008Accepted October 27, 2008

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ew M

exic

o] a

t 06:

24 2

8 N

ovem

ber

2014