Catherine Philpot

What Happens When Groups Say Sorry: The Effect of Intergroup Apologies on Their Recipients

Despite the increased incidence of intergroup apology in public life, very little empirical attention has been paid to the questions of whether intergroup apologies work and if so, why. In a series of experiments, Australians read scenarios in which Australian interests had been harmed by an outgroup. Participants were then told that the outgroup had either apologized or had not apologized for the offense. Although the presence of an apology helped promote perceptions that the outgroup was remorseful, and although participants were more satisfied with an apology than with no apology, the presence of the apology failed to promote forgiveness for the offending group. This was the case regardless of whether the effectiveness of apology was measured cross-sectionally (Experiment 1) or longitudinally (Experiment 2). It was also the case when the apology was accompanied by victims advocating forgiveness (Experiment 3) and was independent of the emotionality of the apology (Experiment 4). In contrast, individuals who apologized for intergroup atrocities were personally forgiven more than those who did not apologize (Experiment 4). Theoretical and applied implications are discussed.

Peace Psychology in the Balkans: In Times Past, Present, and Future

This chapter provides an overview of the contributions that Peace Psychologists have made to the understanding of conflict and peace in the Balkan region. The recent history of physical violence in Balkan nations, such as Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Macedonia and Romania, make this an important area of analysis given its potential to broaden our understanding of peace and conflict processes world-wide. The analysis provided in this chapter is multi-directional in its consideration of past, present and future realities. Explanations for the history of conflict in the region are identified, the present realities of peace and conflict explored and pathways to a more peaceful future proposed. The analysis is also multi-faceted considering both micro-level and macro-level factors relevant to the history and future of peace in the region. Micro-level factors, such as social norms, individual attitudes and relations to other ethnic groups, are shown to have complex interactions with macro-level factors, such as politics and economics, in predicting both peace and violence in the Balkan region. The analysis is relevant to academic disciplines as diverse as peace studies, politics and sociology, but remains firmly embedded within a peace psychological framework.

On the Promotion of Positive Peace for Indigenous Australians: Ideas from Across the Tasman

This chapter critically examines the status of positive and negative peace relations between indigenous minorities and non-indigenous majorities in both Australia and New Zealand. The analysis identifies catalysts and barriers to peace in both locations focusing on the similar psychological mechanisms underlying these intergroup relations. For example, beliefs of relative deprivation held by non-Indigenous peoples can be seen to underlie resistance to the apology to Indigenous Australians, as well as support for a reduction in Māori-specific government policy in New Zealand. Claims that New Zealand’s approach to the relationship with the Māori people should serve as a model for other countries to follow are tempered in this analysis by the identification of areas in which New Zealand still has lengths to go to achieve positive peace. Similarly, significant contextual differences between Australia and New Zealand prevent a simplistic transplantation of New Zealand’s ‘solutions’ to issues faced by Australian Indigenous peoples. We do, however, see the future of positive peace in both countries as dependent on three key principles: ripeness for change in non-indigenous communities, indigenous voice and activism and development of a shared vision between indigenous and non-indigenous people.