These Are Not Just Words: A Cross-National Comparative Study of the Content of Political Apologies

IF 2 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL International Review of Social Psychology Pub Date : 2021-07-08 DOI:10.5334/irsp.503
Marieke Zoodsma, J. Schaafsma, Thia Sagherian-Dickey, Jasper Friedrich
{"title":"These Are Not Just Words: A Cross-National Comparative Study of the Content of Political Apologies","authors":"Marieke Zoodsma, J. Schaafsma, Thia Sagherian-Dickey, Jasper Friedrich","doi":"10.5334/irsp.503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Countries around the world increasingly try to redress past human rights violations by offering apologies. The debates surrounding many of these political apologies suggest they do not necessarily satisfy victims’ needs. Little is known, however, about the actual content of these apologies and the extent to which they include the elements that are often seen as essential to healing processes. In this exploratory study, we conducted a cross-national comparative analysis of the texts of political apologies (N = 203, offered by 50 countries) and coded whether they included a statement of sorry, apology, or regret (IFID), and an acknowledgement of wrongdoing, acceptance of responsibility, promise of non-repetition, promise of reparations, recognition of victim suffering, victim re-inclusion, victim praise, or a recognition of moral values/norms. We found that the majority of political apologies only include a selection of these elements, with some countries offering more comprehensive apologies than others. Most apologies, however, do contain an IFID, an acknowledgment of wrongdoing and a recognition of suffering, although there is variation in how this is expressed. This variation can be linked to the receiving group (i.e., within-country or not), the contentiousness of the apology in a country and – albeit weakly – the cultural context. Based on these findings, we suggest that when considering the impact of political apologies, it is crucial to consider quantity (how many apology components are included) as well as quality (how this is done).","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.503","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Countries around the world increasingly try to redress past human rights violations by offering apologies. The debates surrounding many of these political apologies suggest they do not necessarily satisfy victims’ needs. Little is known, however, about the actual content of these apologies and the extent to which they include the elements that are often seen as essential to healing processes. In this exploratory study, we conducted a cross-national comparative analysis of the texts of political apologies (N = 203, offered by 50 countries) and coded whether they included a statement of sorry, apology, or regret (IFID), and an acknowledgement of wrongdoing, acceptance of responsibility, promise of non-repetition, promise of reparations, recognition of victim suffering, victim re-inclusion, victim praise, or a recognition of moral values/norms. We found that the majority of political apologies only include a selection of these elements, with some countries offering more comprehensive apologies than others. Most apologies, however, do contain an IFID, an acknowledgment of wrongdoing and a recognition of suffering, although there is variation in how this is expressed. This variation can be linked to the receiving group (i.e., within-country or not), the contentiousness of the apology in a country and – albeit weakly – the cultural context. Based on these findings, we suggest that when considering the impact of political apologies, it is crucial to consider quantity (how many apology components are included) as well as quality (how this is done).
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
这些不只是文字:政治道歉内容的跨国比较研究
世界各国越来越多地试图通过道歉来纠正过去侵犯人权的行为。围绕许多政治道歉的争论表明,这些道歉不一定能满足受害者的需求。然而,人们对这些道歉的实际内容以及它们在多大程度上包含了通常被视为对愈合过程至关重要的元素知之甚少。在这项探索性研究中,我们对政治道歉文本(N=203,由50个国家提供)进行了跨国家比较分析,并编码它们是否包括道歉、道歉或遗憾声明(IFID),以及承认不当行为、接受责任、承诺不再重复、承诺赔偿、承认受害者痛苦,受害者的重新融入、受害者的赞扬或对道德价值观/规范的认可。我们发现,大多数政治道歉只包括这些要素,一些国家提供的道歉比其他国家更全面。然而,大多数道歉都包含IFID、对不法行为的承认和对痛苦的承认,尽管表达方式各不相同。这种差异可能与接受群体(即国内外)、道歉在一个国家的争议性以及文化背景有关,尽管这种差异很弱。基于这些发现,我们建议,在考虑政治道歉的影响时,至关重要的是要考虑数量(包括多少道歉成分)和质量(如何做到这一点)。
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
5.20
自引率
8.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Review of Social Psychology (IRSP) is supported by the Association pour la Diffusion de la Recherche Internationale en Psychologie Sociale (A.D.R.I.P.S.). The International Review of Social Psychology publishes empirical research and theoretical notes in all areas of social psychology. Articles are written preferably in English but can also be written in French. The journal was created to reflect research advances in a field where theoretical and fundamental questions inevitably convey social significance and implications. It emphasizes scientific quality of its publications in every area of social psychology. Any kind of research can be considered, as long as the results significantly enhance the understanding of a general social psychological phenomenon and the methodology is appropriate.
期刊最新文献
Sunk Cost Effects for Time Versus Money: Replication and Extensions Registered Report of Soman (2001) Collective Behaviours: Mediation Mechanisms Underlying the Influence of Descriptive and Injunctive Norms An Unfinished Chapter: The Impact of Belgians’ Social Representations of Colonialism on their Present-Day Attitudes Towards Congolese People Living in Belgium How Neoliberal are You? Development and Validation of the Neoliberal Orientation Questionnaire Group Dominance, System Justification, and Hostile Classism: The Ideological Roots of the Perceived Socioeconomic Humanity Gap That Upholds the Income Gap
×
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