Trust maintenance as a function of construal level and attributions: The case of apologies

When do recipients of an apology (“trustors”) base their decision to trust a perpetrator (a “trustee”) on the attributional information embedded in an apology? Attributions provide a detailed account of the trustee's causal involvement in committing a transgression. We therefore argue that trustors in a low construal level mindset use this information in their trusting decision. However, trustors in a high construal level mindset likely consider all apologies as simple statements of regret, regardless of the attributional information they contain. We find support for this argument in four laboratory experiments. This research nuances the idea that to restore trust by means of an apology, the trustee must only use an effective attribution for a negative outcome. We also present a more realistic understanding of the process leading from apologies to trust than has been offered in previous work by simultaneously considering the role of the trustor and that of the trustee in the trust restoration process.

[1]  Jin X. Goh,et al.  Mini Meta-Analysis of Your Own Studies: Some Arguments on Why and a Primer on How , 2016 .

[2]  D. Cremer,et al.  Getting it done and getting it right: Leader disciplinary reactions to Followers’ moral transgressions are determined by construal level mindset , 2015 .

[3]  Yair Berson,et al.  Leading from different psychological distances: A construal-level perspective on vision communication, goal setting, and follower motivation , 2015 .

[4]  James G. Field,et al.  Correlational effect size benchmarks. , 2015, The Journal of applied psychology.

[5]  Karina Schumann.  Does love mean never having to say you’re sorry? Associations between relationship satisfaction, perceived apology sincerity, and forgiveness , 2012 .

[6]  D. Cremer,et al.  When social accounts promote acceptance of unfair ultimatum offers: The role of the victim’s stress responses to uncertainty and power position , 2011 .

[7]  David De Cremer,et al.  In Money We Trust? The Use of Financial Compensations to Repair Trust in the Aftermath of Distributive Harm , 2011 .

[8]  James R. Davis,et al.  An examination of emotional empathy, attributions of stability, and the link between perceived remorse and forgiveness , 2011 .

[9]  Kentaro Fujita,et al.  Promoting prospective self-control through abstraction ☆ , 2010 .

[10]  Y. Trope,et al.  Construal-level theory of psychological distance. , 2010, Psychological review.

[11]  Ying-Ching Lin,et al.  Attributions and Outcomes of Customer Misbehavior , 2010 .

[12]  Brian Sternthal,et al.  Value from Regulatory Construal Fit: The Persuasive Impact of Fit between Consumer Goals and Message Concreteness , 2010 .

[13]  K. Dirks,et al.  The Repair of Trust: A Dynamic Bilateral Perspective and Multilevel Conceptualization , 2009 .

[14]  A. Kaikati,et al.  Values as Predictors of Judgments and Behaviors: The Role of Abstract and Concrete Mindsets , 2009, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[15]  Judy Eaton,et al.  The effects of attributions of intent and apology on forgiveness: When saying sorry may not help the story ☆ , 2008 .

[16]  D. Ferrin,et al.  When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence- vs. integrity-based trust violation , 2006 .

[17]  Yaacov Trope,et al.  You focus on the forest when you're in charge of the trees: power priming and abstract information processing. , 2006, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[18]  Y. Trope,et al.  The influence of abstract and concrete mindsets on anticipating and guiding others' self-regulatory efforts ☆ , 2004 .

[19]  Brian R. Dineen,et al.  The Road to Reconciliation: Antecedents of Victim Willingness to Reconcile Following a Broken Promise , 2004 .

[20]  D. Ferrin,et al.  Removing the shadow of suspicion: the effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence- versus integrity-based trust violations. , 2004, The Journal of applied psychology.

[21]  Deepak Malhotra,et al.  Attributions of trust and the calculus of reciprocity , 2003 .

[22]  Shankar Ganesan,et al.  Service failure and recovery: The impact of relationship factors on customer satisfaction , 2003 .

[23]  M. Lupfer,et al.  When Bad (Good) Things Happen to Good (Bad) People: The Impact of Character Appraisal and Perceived Controllability on Judgments of Deservingness , 1999 .

[24]  Emilie L. Lin,et al.  The Effects of Prior Processing Episodes on Basic level Superiority , 1997, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[25]  Joyce E. Berg,et al.  Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History , 1995 .

[26]  Daniel J. McAllister.  Affect- and Cognition-Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations , 1995 .

[27]  Robin R. Vallacher,et al.  Levels of personal agency: Individual variation in action identification. , 1989 .

[28]  B. Weiner,et al.  An attributional analysis of reactions to stigmas. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[29]  Tara S. Behrend,et al.  Please Accept My Sincerest Apologies: Examining Follower Reactions to Leader Apology , 2014 .

[30]  Sean M. McCrea,et al.  Construal level mind-sets moderate self- and social stereotyping. , 2012, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[31]  Y. Trope,et al.  Flexibility and Consistency in Evaluative Responding: The Function of Construal Level , 2010 .

[32]  Nurit Shnabel,et al.  A needs-based model of reconciliation: Perpetrators need acceptance and victims need empowerment to reconcile. , 2010 .

[33]  Edward C. Tomlinson,et al.  The Role Of Causal Attribution Dimensions In Trust Repair , 2009 .

[34]  James C. Beaty,et al.  Effect size and power in assessing moderating effects of categorical variables using multiple regression: a 30-year review. , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[35]  Jacob Cohen.  QUANTITATIVE METHODS IN PSYCHOLOGY A Power Primer , 1992 .