All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Relations Among Apology, Forgiveness, and Communicative Responses to Hurtful Messages
Unformatted Document Text:  Forgiveness and Communication 17 that include only significant predictor variables. Trimming the models provides a more accurate estimate of the variance accounted for by the significant variables. To test H4 and H7, which predicted that forgiveness mediates the relationship that apology shares with conciliatory and destructive communication, respectively, a series of regression analyses was conducted as per Baron and Kenney (1986). According to these authors, evidence for mediation is present when: (a) a predictor variable is significantly correlated with the dependent measure, (b) a predictor variable is significantly correlated with the mediating variable, and (c) the strength of the predictor variable’s association with the dependent measure weakens after the mediating variable is added to a regression equation. Thus, to test H4 and H7, bivariate correlations were first examined. Then hierarchical regressions were conducted on each of the relevant communicative responses with apology entered first, followed by forgiveness. Results The Association between Apology and Forgiveness The bivariate correlations used to test the hypotheses are displayed in Table 2. As predicted in H1, there was a significant positive association (r= .41) between the extent to which the errant partner was perceived to have sincerely apologized and the degree to which the hurt partner granted forgiveness. Conciliatory Responses Associations with Apology. H2 predicted that apology would associate positively with the three constructive responses to hurtful messages—(a) relational repair, (b) integrative communication, and (c) loyalty. Bivariate correlations (see Table 2) showed that apology shared a significant positive relationship with integrative communication, but not with loyalty or relational repair. In the analysis regressing apology on the three constructive responses, both loyalty ( = -.16, t= -2.61, p = .01) and integrative communication ( = .32, t= 5.22, p < .001)

Authors: Bachman, Guy. and Guerrero, Laura.
first   previous   Page 17 of 39   next   last



background image
Forgiveness and Communication 17
that include only significant predictor variables. Trimming the models provides a more accurate
estimate of the variance accounted for by the significant variables.
To test H4 and H7, which predicted that forgiveness mediates the relationship that
apology shares with conciliatory and destructive communication, respectively, a series of
regression analyses was conducted as per Baron and Kenney (1986). According to these authors,
evidence for mediation is present when: (a) a predictor variable is significantly correlated with
the dependent measure, (b) a predictor variable is significantly correlated with the mediating
variable, and (c) the strength of the predictor variable’s association with the dependent measure
weakens after the mediating variable is added to a regression equation. Thus, to test H4 and H7,
bivariate correlations were first examined. Then hierarchical regressions were conducted on each
of the relevant communicative responses with apology entered first, followed by forgiveness.
Results
The Association between Apology and Forgiveness
The bivariate correlations used to test the hypotheses are displayed in Table 2. As
predicted in H1, there was a significant positive association (r= .41) between the extent to which
the errant partner was perceived to have sincerely apologized and the degree to which the hurt
partner granted forgiveness.
Conciliatory Responses
Associations with Apology. H2 predicted that apology would associate positively with
the three constructive responses to hurtful messages—(a) relational repair, (b) integrative
communication, and (c) loyalty. Bivariate correlations (see Table 2) showed that apology shared
a significant positive relationship with integrative communication, but not with loyalty or
relational repair. In the analysis regressing apology on the three constructive responses, both
loyalty ( = -.16, t= -2.61, p = .01) and integrative communication ( = .32, t= 5.22, p < .001)


Convention
Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 17 of 39   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.