The research involved individuals who were using a computer and given 10 euros (about $13.40 in U.S. currency) to either keep or give to a companion they communicated with online. The money was tripled so that the accomplice actually acquired 30 euros. The companion then had to decide how much to return, but only gave back 5 euros.
Some individuals received an apology for this meager amount, whereas others had been informed to think about they'd received an apology.
The participants who imagined an apology valued it greater than those that actually acquired an apology.
The findings, printed in the journal Psychological Science, suggests that individuals do a poor job of predicting what is actually needed to resolve conflicts. They want an apology and conider it worthwhile but the actual apology is much less satisfying than expected, mentioned researcher David De Cremer of Erasmus University in the Netherlands.
"I think an apology is a first step in the reconciliation process ... but you need to show that you will do something else," he said in a journal news release.
The results suggest that an apology might be more effective at convincing outside observers that the wrongdoer feels remorse rather than making the slighted person feel better, the researchers said.
