The tethered humanity hypothesis among victims of interpersonal harm: The role of apologies, forgiveness, and the relation between self-, other-, and meta-perceptions of humanity

IF 4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Group Processes & Intergroup Relations Pub Date : 2022-12-01 DOI:10.1177/13684302221101317
J. Vaes, Noemi Orabona, Özge Muslu, Margherita Piazza
{"title":"The tethered humanity hypothesis among victims of interpersonal harm: The role of apologies, forgiveness, and the relation between self-, other-, and meta-perceptions of humanity","authors":"J. Vaes, Noemi Orabona, Özge Muslu, Margherita Piazza","doi":"10.1177/13684302221101317","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When interpersonal harm is inflicted, victims stop seeing themselves as fully human. The tethered humanity hypothesis proposes that victims restore a full human status when perpetrators undertake attempts at reconciliation and victims manage to reestablish the humanness of their perpetrators. In two studies, we tested this hypothesis and manipulated the perpetrators attempts at apologizing for their misconduct. Participants were either included or socially excluded and received a full or self-exonerating apology or a hostile message when they were excluded. Results indicated that victims dehumanized themselves and their ostracizers when they were socially excluded and managed to regain a full human status and rehumanized their perpetrators when a full apology was uttered. Moreover, regression analyses indicated that different humanness judgments (self, other, and meta-humanness) become tethered only when perpetrators apologized, while forgiving the perpetrator always correlated with the rehumanization of the self regardless of the perpetrator’s apology.","PeriodicalId":48099,"journal":{"name":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","volume":"25 1","pages":"2021 - 2041"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302221101317","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

When interpersonal harm is inflicted, victims stop seeing themselves as fully human. The tethered humanity hypothesis proposes that victims restore a full human status when perpetrators undertake attempts at reconciliation and victims manage to reestablish the humanness of their perpetrators. In two studies, we tested this hypothesis and manipulated the perpetrators attempts at apologizing for their misconduct. Participants were either included or socially excluded and received a full or self-exonerating apology or a hostile message when they were excluded. Results indicated that victims dehumanized themselves and their ostracizers when they were socially excluded and managed to regain a full human status and rehumanized their perpetrators when a full apology was uttered. Moreover, regression analyses indicated that different humanness judgments (self, other, and meta-humanness) become tethered only when perpetrators apologized, while forgiving the perpetrator always correlated with the rehumanization of the self regardless of the perpetrator’s apology.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人际伤害受害者中的束缚人性假说:道歉、宽恕的作用以及对人性的自我、他人和元认知之间的关系
当人际关系受到伤害时,受害者不再将自己视为完整的人。拴系人性假说认为,当加害者试图和解,而受害者设法重建加害者的人性时,受害者就恢复了完整的人的地位。在两项研究中,我们检验了这一假设,并操纵了肇事者为自己的不当行为道歉的尝试。参与者要么被纳入社会,要么被排除在外,当他们被排除在外时,他们会收到一封完整的道歉信,要么是自我辩解的道歉信,要么是一条充满敌意的信息。结果表明,当受害者被社会排斥时,他们会使自己和排斥他们的人失去人性,而当他们发出完整的道歉时,他们会设法重新获得完整的人的地位,并使他们的肇事者重新变得人性化。此外,回归分析表明,不同的人性判断(自我、他者和元人性)只有在加害者道歉时才会被束缚,而无论加害者是否道歉,宽恕加害者总是与自我的再人性化相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
76
期刊介绍: Group Processes & Intergroup Relations is a scientific social psychology journal dedicated to research on social psychological processes within and between groups. It provides a forum for and is aimed at researchers and students in social psychology and related disciples (e.g., organizational and management sciences, political science, sociology, language and communication, cross cultural psychology, international relations) that have a scientific interest in the social psychology of human groups. The journal has an extensive editorial team that includes many if not most of the leading scholars in social psychology of group processes and intergroup relations from around the world.
期刊最新文献
Judgments toward displays of national (dis)loyalty in members of nations other than one’s own: Universalistic and parochial perspectives Two Paths to Violence: Individual versus Group Emotions during Conflict Escalation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories “Ins and outs”: Ethnic identity, the need to belong, and responses to inclusion and exclusion in inclusive common ingroups Divergent views of party positions: How ideology and own issue position shape party perception through convergence and divergence processes Corrigendum to “Tackling loneliness together: A three-tier social identity framework for social prescribing”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1