CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 40Forgiveness and Related BehaviorsEmotions and Moral BehaviorSocial and Intergroup Psychology

Humble and apologetic? Predicting apology quality with intellectual and general humility

Open access
Ludwig, Justin M., Schumann, Karina, Porter, Tenelle·2022·Personality and Individual Differences
DOI 10.1016/j.paid.2021.111477
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Apologies are powerful predictors of reconciliation, but transgressors often fail to offer optimal, high-quality apologies that are comprehensive and non-defensive. We tested whether intellectual humility and general humility predict the use of high-quality apologies versus taking no action to resolve a conflict, and the processes that mediate these associations using online vignette experiments. In Study 1 (N = 397), transgressors with greater intellectual humility offered higher-quality apologies and were less likely to take no action following a relational offense. However, these associations did not remain significant when controlling for general humility. In Study 2 (N = 394), intellectual humility uniquely predicted greater apology comprehensiveness and less inaction following an intellect-based offense, demonstrating its context-specific associations with apology behavior. By contrast, general humility was a robust predictor of higher-quality apologies and less inaction across offense contexts. Consistent with recent theorizing on psychological barriers to apologizing, both studies also found support for the mediating roles of empathic effort and self-protection.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.paid.2021.111477

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Scores on self-reported trait-level intellectual humility are positively associated with behaviours understood to be central to intellectual humility (including information-seeking, cognitive flexibility, acknowledgement of intellectual failings and argument evaluation).

    “Scores on self- reported trait- level intellectual humility (across different measures) are also positively associated with scores on self- report measures of other epistemic traits, such as intellect and open- mindedness, and to behaviours understood to be central to intellectual humility (including information- seeking, cognitive flexibility, acknowledgement of intellectual failings and argument”

    From Predictors and consequences of intellectual humility (2022) · cites this paper as [44]

  • Scores on self-reported trait-level intellectual humility (across different measures) are positively associated with scores on self-report measures of other epistemic traits, such as intellect and open-mindedness.

    “Scores on self- reported trait- level intellectual humility (across different measures) are also positively associated with scores on self- report measures of other epistemic traits, such as intellect and open- mindedness, and to behaviours understood to be central to intellectual humility (including information- seeking, cognitive flexibility, acknowledgement of intellectual failings and argument”

    From Predictors and consequences of intellectual humility (2022) · cites this paper as [44]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ludwig, J. M., Schumann, K., & Porter, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Ludwig, Justin M.
ORCID
Venue
Personality and Individual Differences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-04
Volume
188
Pages
111477
ISSN
0191-8869 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.paid.2021.111477
OpenAlex
W4200067628
Cited by
40
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4
FWCI
2.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Personality and Individual Differences (publishedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Forgiveness and Related Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
intellectual humility, reconciliation, conflict resolution, self-protection, transgressors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review