The intention-to-behavior process is analyzed with respect to implementation intentions. These intentions link an intended goal-directed behavior to an anticipated situational context. The reported experimental evidence suggests that implementation intentions create a heightened accessibility of the mental representation of the specified situational cues and induce direct (automatic) control of the intended behavior through these cues. The formation of implementation intentions promotes goal achievement through both of these processes because they eliminate classic problems associated with the control of goal-directed action. Similarities and differences to other theoretical approaches on intentions, planning, and action control are discussed.

Goal Achievement: The Role of Intentions

Interpersonal forgiving was conceptualized in the context of a 2-factor motivational system that governs people's responses to interpersonal offenses Four studies were conducted to examine the extent to which forgiving could be predicted with relationship-level variables such as satisfaction, commitment, and closeness; offense-level variables such as apology and impact of the offense; and social-cognitive variables such as offunder-focused empathy and rumination about the offense Also described is the development of the transgression-related interpersonal motivations inventory--a self-report measure designed to assess the 2-component motivational system (Avoidance and Revenge) posited to underlie forgiving The measure demonstrated a variety of desirable psychometric properties, commending its use for future research As predicted, empathy, apology, rumination, and several indexes of relationship closeness were associated with self-reported forgiving

Interpersonal Forgiving in Close Relationships: II. Theoretical Elaboration and Measurement

Forgiving is a motivational transformation that inclines people to inhibit relationship-destructive responses and to behave constructively toward someone who has behaved destructively toward them. The authors describe a model of forgiveness based on the hypothesis that people forgive others to the extent that they experience empathy for them. Two studies investigated the empathy model of forgiveness. In Study 1, the authors developed measures of empathy and forgiveness. The authors found evidence consistent with the hypotheses that (a) the relationship between receiving an apology from and forgiving one's offender is a function of increased empathy for the offender and (b) that forgiving is uniquely related to conciliatory behavior and avoidance behavior toward the offending partner. In Study 2, the authors conducted an intervention in which empathy was manipulated to examine the empathy-forgiving relationship more closely. Results generally supported the conceptualization of forgiving as a motivational phenomenon and the empathy-forgiving link.

https://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/73/2/321.pdf

Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships

Social exclusion was manipulated by telling people that they would end up alone later in life or that other participants had rejected them. These manipulations caused participants to behave more aggressively. Excluded people issued a more negative job evaluation against someone who insulted them (Experiments 1 and 2). Excluded people also blasted a target with higher levels of aversive noise both when the target had insulted them (Experiment 4) and when the target was a neutral person and no interaction had occurred (Experiment 5). However, excluded people were not more aggressive toward someone who issued praise (Experiment 3). These responses were specific to social exclusion (as opposed to other misfortunes) and were not mediated by emotion.

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/81/6/1058.pdf

If You Can't Join Them, Beat Them: Effects of Social Exclusion on Aggressive Behavior

Two studies were conducted to examine the implications of an apology versus a denial for repairing trust after an alleged violation. Results reveal that trust was repaired more successfully when mistrusted parties (a) apologized for violations concerning matters of competence but denied culpability for violations concerning matters of integrity, and (b) had apologized for violations when there was subsequent evidence of guilt but had denied culpability for violations when there was subsequent evidence of innocence. Supplementary analyses also revealed that the interactive effects of violation type and violation response on participants' trusting intentions were mediated by their trusting beliefs. Combined, these findings provide needed insight and supporting evidence concerning how trust might be repaired in the aftermath of a violation.

https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3367&context=lkcsb_research

Removing the Shadow of Suspicion: The Effects of Apology Versus Denial for Repairing Competence- Versus Integrity-Based Trust Violations

Two studies examined the effects of an apology on a victim's aggression and explored the psychological mechanisms underlying such effects. In Study 1, female undergraduates were psychologically harmed and then received an apology by another female student. In Study 2, male undergraduates were asked to role play a victim in a hypothetical harm situation. Results indicate that when the harm-doers apologized, as opposed to when they did not, the victim-subjects refrained from severe aggression against them. Regression analyses suggested that such aggression-inhibitory effects of an apology were mediated by impression improvement, emotional mitigation, and reduction in desire for an apology within the victims. It was also found that when the harm was severe, such effects of an apology on aggression were attenuated. The more severe the harm is, the more extensive of an apology may be needed to alleviate the victim's anger and aggression.

Ken ichi Ohbuchi

Papers

Apology as aggression control: its role in mediating appraisal of and response to harm