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 27 may do little to improve the relationship following a hurtful event. This may explain why the findings for loyalty were so weak in this study. Relational Repair and Negative Avoidance The findings for relational repair and negative avoidance were also weak. Relational repair had a small, positive association with forgiveness, which is consistent with McCullough’s interpersonal forgiveness model, but relational repair was unrelated to apology. These findings suggest that even when people forgive their partners for engaging in hurtful words or actions, they may not be motivated to engage in relational repair strategies such as spending extra time together and being extra romantic. Such behaviors may reward the errant partner for engaging in the hurtful action, and as Rusbult, Drigotas, and Verette (1994) argued, people may have a hard time enacting rewarding behaviors when they feel punished. The errant partner, rather than the hurt partner, may be more likely to engage in these types of relational repair tactics. Thus, integrative communication, which is direct and prosocial but not as rewarding, may be a more appropriate conciliatory behavior for hurt individuals to use as a way of signaling forgiveness. The findings for negative avoidance were disappointing when held up to the predictions made based on McCullough’s (1997, 1998) model. Negative avoidance was operationalized with the tactics of ignoring the partner, decreasing contact, and giving the “silent treatment.” These tactics are typically perceived to be both avoidant and aggressive (Guerrero et al., 1995), which should make them prime candidates for distinguishing between forgiveness and nonforgiveness. Yet in the present study negative avoidance showed only a weak (albeit significant) association with forgiveness, and no association with apology. When entered along with the other destructive responses in the regression analysis, negative avoidance lost all its power for predicting forgiveness. Apparently, de-escalation is a much better predictor of forgiveness than is negative avoidance. This makes sense given that de-escalation provides a more forceful way of

Authors: Bachman, Guy. and Guerrero, Laura.
first   previous   Page 27 of 39   next   last



background image
Forgiveness and Communication 27
may do little to improve the relationship following a hurtful event. This may explain why the
findings for loyalty were so weak in this study.
Relational Repair and Negative Avoidance
The findings for relational repair and negative avoidance were also weak. Relational
repair had a small, positive association with forgiveness, which is consistent with McCullough’s
interpersonal forgiveness model, but relational repair was unrelated to apology. These findings
suggest that even when people forgive their partners for engaging in hurtful words or actions,
they may not be motivated to engage in relational repair strategies such as spending extra time
together and being extra romantic. Such behaviors may reward the errant partner for engaging in
the hurtful action, and as Rusbult, Drigotas, and Verette (1994) argued, people may have a hard
time enacting rewarding behaviors when they feel punished. The errant partner, rather than the
hurt partner, may be more likely to engage in these types of relational repair tactics. Thus,
integrative communication, which is direct and prosocial but not as rewarding, may be a more
appropriate conciliatory behavior for hurt individuals to use as a way of signaling forgiveness.
The findings for negative avoidance were disappointing when held up to the predictions
made based on McCullough’s (1997, 1998) model. Negative avoidance was operationalized with
the tactics of ignoring the partner, decreasing contact, and giving the “silent treatment.” These
tactics are typically perceived to be both avoidant and aggressive (Guerrero et al., 1995), which
should make them prime candidates for distinguishing between forgiveness and nonforgiveness.
Yet in the present study negative avoidance showed only a weak (albeit significant) association
with forgiveness, and no association with apology. When entered along with the other
destructive responses in the regression analysis, negative avoidance lost all its power for
predicting forgiveness. Apparently, de-escalation is a much better predictor of forgiveness than is
negative avoidance. This makes sense given that de-escalation provides a more forceful way of


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
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 27 of 39   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.