View Item 

Show simple item record

Say the right thing: Apologies, reputability, and punishment
dc.contributor.authorWooten, David B.
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-05T16:41:44Z
dc.date.available2018-02-05T16:41:44Z
dc.date.issued2009-04
dc.identifier.citationWooten, David B. (2009). "Say the right thing: Apologies, reputability, and punishment." Journal of Consumer Psychology 19(2): 225-235.
dc.identifier.issn1057-7408
dc.identifier.issn1532-7663
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/141849
dc.description.abstractThis research investigates how and when apologies work. Findings from three studies suggest that apologies influence punishment decisions, but not by reducing concerns about recidivism or perceptions of bad intentions. The extent to which future expectancies or perceived intent mediates the effects of apologies on punishment depends on the offender’s reputability. However, the perceived appropriateness of the response fully mediates the effect of apologies on punishment, regardless of the offender’s reputability. Overall, the findings suggest that saying the right thing helps those who do the wrong thing, but not by influencing others’ beliefs about their past intentions or future behaviors.
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.publisherPantheon Books
dc.titleSay the right thing: Apologies, reputability, and punishment
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPsychology
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.contributor.affiliationumMarketing at the Stephen M. Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan, 701 Tappan Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48109‐1234, USA
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/141849/1/jcpy225.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jcps.2009.02.017
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Consumer Psychology
dc.identifier.citedreferenceG.D. Reeder, M.B. Brewer. A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception. Psychological Review. 1979; 86 (1): 61 – 79.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceP.H. Kim, D.L. Ferrin, C.D. Cooper, K.T. Dirks. Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence‐ versus integrity‐based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2004; 89 (1): 104 – 118.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLazare, A., (1996). Go ahead say you’re sorry. Psychology Today, 28 (1), 40–43, 76, 78.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceK.J. Main, D.W. Dahl, P.R. Darke. Deliberative and automatic bases of suspicion: Empirical evidence of the sinister attribution error. Journal of Consumer Psychology. 2007; 17 (1): 59 – 69.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceR.M. McFatter. Sentencing strategies and justice: Effects of punishment philosophy on sentencing decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1978; 36 (12): 1490 – 1500.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceL. McShane. Imus’s apology does nothing to quiet a chorus of critics. 2007, Washingtonpost.com, April 9
dc.identifier.citedreferenceA.B. Monga, D.R. John. When does negative brand publicity hurt? The moderating influence of analytic versus holistic thinking. Journal of Consumer Psychology. 2008; 18 (4): 320 – 332.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceC. O’Connor. Who’s sorry now? An orgy of apologies spreading across the world. 2004, Denver Post, August 15, L1
dc.identifier.citedreferenceK. Ohbuchi, M. Kameda, N. Agarie. Apology as aggression control: Its role in mediating appraisal of and response to harm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1989; 56 (2): 219 – 227.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceG.D. Reeder. Trait–behavior relations and dispositional inference. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1993; 19 (5): 586 – 593.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceG.D. Reeder, M.D. Coovert. Revising an impression of morality. Social Cognition. 1986; 4 (1): 1 – 17.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceK. Rotte, M. Chandrashekaran, S.S. Tax, R. Grewel. Forgiven but not forgotten: Covert uncertainty in overt responses and the paradox of defection‐despite‐trust. Journal of Consumer Psychology. 2006; 16 (3): 283 – 294.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceB.R. Schlenker. Impression management: The self‐concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. Montery, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing. 1980.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJ.J. Skowronski, D.E. Carlston. Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of explanations. Psychological Bulletin. 1989; 105 (1): 131 – 142.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceA.K. Smith, R.N. Bolton, J. Wagner. A model of customer satisfaction with service encounters involving failure and recovery. Journal of Marketing Research. 1999; 36 (3): 356 – 372.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceE.G. Walster, W. Walster, E. Berscheid. Equity: Theory and research. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. 1978.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceM. Bennett, C. Dewberry. ‘I’ve said I’m sorry, haven’t I?’ A study of the identity implications and constraints that apologies create for their recipients. Current Psychology. 1994; 13 (1): 10 – 20.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJ.G. Blodgett, D.J. Hill, S.S. Tax. The effects of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice on post‐complaint behavior. Journal of Retailing. 1997; 73 (2): 185 – 210.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceW. Boulding, A. Kalra, R. Staelin, V.A. Zeithaml. A dynamic process model of service quality: From expectations to behavioral intentions. Journal of Marketing Research. 1993; 30 (1): 7 – 27.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceB.W. Darby, B.R. Schlenker. Children’s reactions to apologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1982; 43 (4): 742 – 753.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceB.W. Darby, B.R. Schlenker. Children’s reactions to transgressions: Effects of the actor’s apology, reputation, and remorse. British Journal of Social Psychology. 1989; 28: 353 – 364.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceD. Ferguson. Golf Channel anchor Kelly Tilghman suspended two weeks for ‘lynch’ comment. 2008. www.StarTribune.com, January 10
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJ. Frank. Sorry is no longer the hardest word. Marketing Focus. 2000. www.marketing.haynet.com/feature00/1012/,; visited October 7, 2001
dc.identifier.citedreferenceK. Frieswick. Say you’re sorry: In some lawsuits, falling on your sword may be smarter than wielding it. 2001, CFO.Com: Tools and Resources for Financial Executives, May 1, www.cfo.com/Article?article*2922, visited February 14, 2002
dc.identifier.citedreferenceE. Goffman. Interaction ritual. New York: Pantheon Books. 1967.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceE. Goffman. Relations in public. New York: Basic Books. 1971.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceG.J. Gold, B. Weiner. Remorse, confession, group identity, and expectancies about repeating a transgression. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 2000; 22 (4): 291 – 300.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceL.T. Hosmer. Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Academy of Management Review. 1995; 20 (2): 379 – 403.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceI.W. Hung, R.S. Wyer Jr.. The impact of implicit theories on responses to problem‐solving print advertisements. Journal of Consumer Psychology. 2008; 18 (3): 223 – 235.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceH.H. Kelley. Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine, ed. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. 1967, Vol. 15.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
jcpy225.pdf
Size:
1.566MB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe its collections in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in them. We encourage you to Contact Us anonymously if you encounter harmful or problematic language in catalog records or finding aids. More information about our policies and practices is available at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.