1
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
To Forgive, or Not to Forgive: How the Sincerity of Apologies Online Affect Forgiveness
Jane Doe
Florida International University
2
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
To Forgive, or Not to Forgive: How the Sincerity of Apologies Online Affect Forgiveness
Everybody makes mistakes. From mundane situations such as accidentally grabbing
someone else’s lunch to more unique incidents like breaking mom’s favorite vase. While they
are not limited to mistakes, an expected apology follows transgressions by recognizing
responsibility, consequences, and emotions. Apologies are a two-way street, with the
transgressor apologizing and the victim(s) receiving the apology and potentially forgiving the
transgressor. However, this act of communication and hopeful mitigation can be driven by
numerous emotions that affect its delivery and impression (Hareli & Eisikovits, 2006).
Equivalently, the decision on whether that apology should be accepted and forgiven by the
recipient is also a product of multiple influences, including type of apology and offense removal
(Zeichmeister et al., 2004). A novel factor is the environment, specifically the online
environment of the internet and social media platforms. Thus, our study is fixated on analyzing
how favorable participants find apologies with varying levels of sincerity (i.e. sincere or
insincere) presented on the social network system Twitter, as well as apologies compared to
receiving no apology at all. Overall, the study seeks to reveal how the manner in which a
transgressor apologizes affects their self-image and perception of the apology.
Even apologies serve a purpose, which is namely to restore relationships between the
transgressor and the audience and to repair images of an individual’s self as perceived by others
at a social value, otherwise known as efforts to save “face” (Hareli & Eisikovits, 2006; Hu et al.,
2019; Matley, 2018). Media figures, such as celebrities and politicians, often engage in
apologizing as a strategy to maintain a positive image in the eyes of the public after causing a
transgression that defies norms (Hu et al., 2019). Self-presentation, or “face” on social media,
has been found to demonstrate a positivity bias, where positive forms of self-presentation defined
3
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
by norms within an online environment are favorable compared to negative forms (norm
defying) (Matley, 2018). Positive self-presentation aims to form a positive impression, such as a
photo of a date one planned out for their partner, while negative self-presentation may risk
ruining that impression by expressing socially undesirable behavior such as hateful comments.
This “saving face” factor encourages apologizing after transgressions to cancel out the offense
that damages an individual’s image and reputation, and thus regain that positive self.
Additional components that comprise an apology are the emotions in which the
transgressor elicits the apology from. These social emotions are key in the process between
relationships, as delivery can affect how the message is received. In a study by Hareli and
Eisikovits (2006), participants were asked to envision being insulted and getting their feelings
hurt by a friend. When the participants were provided with an apology from this friend later on,
each apology included the same phrase but differed in cause of the apology mentioned. The
causes were stated to be either of the social emotions: guilt, shame, or pity, as well as
combinations of two or all three. The apology was then rated in terms of forgiveness and anger
toward that friend. The findings suggest that when guilt and shame were stated as the cause for
the apology, ratings of forgiveness were higher. However, expressing pity decreased the
participant’s forgiveness and increased anger towards the transgressor. The participants
perceived apologies motivated by guilt and shame as sincere, although guilt was considered more
sincere than shame when comparing an apology driven by guilt and shame to those driven solely
by guilt (Hareli & Eisikovits, 2006). Perception of sincerity within the apology and forgiveness
had a strong positive correlation, suggesting that the social emotions (i.e. guilt and shame) may
serve as an indicator for perceived sincerity of apologies, and thus impact whether the
transgressor will be forgiven or not (Hareli & Eisikovits, 2006). This highlights that the
4
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
perception of an apology, not just the apology itself, is the true indicator in whether a
relationship has successfully been mended or if the transgressor’s public image has been
cleansed. Similar, in a study performed by Zechmeister et al. (2004), participants would perceive
apologies distinctively by the presence or absence of certain components. Participants considered
apologies insincere when the transgressor apologized, but did not remove the offense, and
considered apologies sincere when the transgressor apologized, removed offense, and augmented
an effort to make amends. Accordingly, the insincere apologies were the least forgivable, and the
sincere apologies were more likely to be forgiven (Zechmeister et al., 2004). The exchange of an
apology and forgiveness is extremely complex beyond the surface, and it is more difficult
considering the two parties involved might not be on the same page.
Further research by Leunissen et al. (2013) observed and found that guilt mediates the
perpetrator’s willingness to apologize depending on the intentions behind the transgression.
Perpetrators preferred to apologize for an unintentional transgression more so than intentional
ones. A disparity existed between perpetrators and victims, where perpetrators are more likely to
admit following a transgression if it was unintentional, but victims were more likely to expect an
apology when the transgression is intentional. A victim’s need for an apology is mediated,
instead, by anger (Leunissen et al., 2013). Additionally, Kirchhoff et al. (2012) conducted
research on the relevancy of verbal components within an apology and how it relates to
forgiveness. Leunissen et al. (2013) propose that the apology mismatch can function as an index
for whether perpetrators are forgiven. The findings suggest that an apology is predicted more so
by the perpetrator’s needs and, as such, are forgiven more when they apologize (Leunissen et al.,
2013). Thus, the transgressor’s higher need to apologize after unintentional transgressions
promotes its probability of being forgiven compared to intentional transgressions.
5
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
Considering the elaborate process of apologies known thus far—how function and
feelings affect sincerity, and hence, forgiveness—researchers are looking into how much more
complex it gets when moved onto an online environment. Social network systems have expanded
audiences and communities from local to worldwide, making every post and detail much more
profound. This goes back to one’s sense of self and what we want presented online. Matley
(2018) investigates this concept by observing the function of speech acts on the platform app
Instagram and examines how the hashtag #sorrynotsorry functions as a non-apology marker.
Apologies operate as speech acts that serve as justification and accountability for behavior
online, all to make users’ social value return to the positive scale (Matley, 2018; Hu et al., 2019).
This is especially interesting considering how individuals can choose to present their whole lives
for the world to see or keep themselves hidden behind anonymous accounts. This allows for
perpetuation of self-conflict between social approval and sharing offensive opinions. Hashtags
on social media are used to search for content, but also provides the user with the control to
manipulate the interpretation of a post’s content (Matley, 2018). The #sorrynotsorry hashtag
(essentially the phrase “Sorry, not sorry”), as studied by Matley (2018), has two components: the
“sorry” and the “not sorry”. The “sorry” element functions as a face-mitigation strategy, which
attenuates the offenses made within the content of the post in order to reestablish a positive face.
The “not sorry” attached along conflicts with the initial “sorry” by expressing disregard for the
recipient’s emotions, which threatens positive face and diminishes social approval (Matley,
2018). Moreover, the ironic hashtags attached to posts can be detrimental to social status.
To add onto this research, our present study aims to explore essentially how differing
levels of sincerity and the presence of an apology, using hashtags on a social network system
attached to an apology post, can affect the favorability of whether the transgressor can be
6
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
forgiven. Participants were all given a scenario in which Charlie Webb, a user on the social
media platform Twitter, apologizes for an incident at the mall. Participants were randomly
assigned to different conditions where Charlie offers either a sincere apology, an insincere
apology, or no apology. The participants were then asked to rate Charlie’s actions and how
favorable they view the apology offered.
In general, it was predicted that participants in the sincere apology condition viewed the
apology (and apologizer) more favorably than participants in both the no apology and insincere
apology conditions, though participants viewed an insincere apology less favorably than no
apology.
More specifically, if participants view a sincere apology (compared to an insincere
apology or no apology), then they will more strongly agree that the apology showed an
acknowledgement of wrongfulness and an acceptance of responsibility, though participants who
viewed an insincere apology will more strongly disagree with these statements compared to
those who saw no apology. In addition, if participants viewed a sincere apology (compared to an
insincere apology or no apology), then they will more strongly agree that the apology is sincere,
with participants ironically finding no apology more sincere than an insincere apology.
7
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
References
Hareli, S., & Eisikovits, Z. (2006). The role of communicating social emotions accompanying
apologies in forgiveness. Motivation and Emotion, 30(3), 189-197.
http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1007/s11031-006-9025-x
Hu, M., Cotton, G., Zhang, B., & Jia, N. (2019). The influence of apology on audiences’
reactions toward a media figure’s transgression. Psychology of Popular Media Culture,
8(4), 410–419. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000195
Leunissen, J., de Cremer, D., Reinders Folmer, C., & van Dijke, M. (2013). The apology
mismatch: Asymmetries between victim's need for apologies and perpetrator's
willingness to apologize. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 315324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.12.005
Matley, D. (2018). “Let's see how many of you mother fuckers unfollow me for this”: The
pragmatic function of the hashtag #sorrynotsorry in non-apologetic Instagram posts.
Journal of Pragmatics. 133. 66-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.06.003
Zechmeister, J. S., Garcia, S., Romero, C., & Vas, S. N. (2004). Don't apologize unless you
mean it: A laboratory investigation of forgiveness and retaliation. Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 23(4), 532–564. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.23.4.532.40309