Rethinking Apology in Tort Litigation Deficiencies in Comprehensiveness Undermine Remedial Effectiveness

Folmer, Chris Reinders; Mascini, Peter; Leunissen, Joost M.

doi:10.1515/rle-2018-0042

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this way, such evidence may contrast our specific, timely, spontaneous and rather extensive apologies with generic, tardy, nonspontaneous, or partial apologies. Doing so may be particularly important in light of findings that perpetrators of torts may avoid particular elements when apologizing (e.g., admitting responsibility), despite victims’ desire for them (Reinders Folmer, Mascini, & Leunissen, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond compensation? Examining the role of apologies in the restoration of victims’ needs in simulated tort cases.

Folmer

Desmet

Boom

2019

Law and Human Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tort law currently debates the value of facilitating apology to enhance the restoration of victims’ nonmaterial needs, and to promote dispute resolution. However, the extent to which apology can augment these outcomes beyond conventional, monetary reparations is not yet clear. The present research aimed to provide some first insights into this question, by means of 2 experimental studies conducted among community members recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk; Study 1) and Prolific (Study 2). Participants imagined a scenario in which they became victims of a traffic accident. Study 1 (N = 81, 42 men, 39 women, Mage = 35.90) manipulated the resulting harm (personal injury or property loss) to examine which needs participants experienced, and what remedies (apology, compensation) they desired. Factor analysis revealed (nonmaterial) needs for interpersonal treatment, responsibility taking, closure, and punishment, and (material) needs for compensation; these needs were as prominent after property loss as after personal injury. Nonmaterial needs predicted greater desire for apology (and not compensation). Study 2 (N = 485, 286 men, 199 women, Mage = 31.03) examined how these remedies impacted the satisfaction of these needs and dispute resolution by manipulating apology (no apology, apology), compensation level (partial, approximate, or exact), and harm within the same scenario. Apologies enhanced the restoration of participants’ nonmaterial needs. However, settlement remained mostly contingent on compensation: (modest) effects of apology were restricted to partial compensation. These findings, therefore, imply that apologies could augment victims’ restoration after torts, but may be limited as a catalyst for settlement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond compensation? Examining the role of apologies in the restoration of victims’ needs in simulated tort cases.

Folmer

Desmet

Boom

2019

Law and Human Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much of the research on apologies in law has focused on the effects of apologies on their recipients. But additional exploration of what motivates offenders to apologize (Leunissen, De Cremer, and Reinders Folmer 2012), what barriers they face (Shumann 2018), what psychological benefits there are in choosing not to apologize (Okimoto, Wenzel, and Hedrick 2013;White 2009), the content of the apologies that are actually offered (Leunissen, De Cremer, Reinders Folmer and van Dijke 2013;Reinders Folmer, Mascini, and Leunissen 2019), and the effects of apologizing on offenders' perceptions and future behavior (Zaiser and Giner-Sorolla 2013) would be quite useful.…”

Section: Cross-disciplinary Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Apologies, Remorse, and Amends: Empirical Legal Studies Across Domains and Disciplines

Robbennolt

2024

EJELS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of apologies in law is offered as an example of a topic that cuts across legal fields, and one that is quintessentially interdisciplinary. Because apologies are an often-desired response in the wake of a wrongful act, they can be significant in many legal settings. Apologies or the lack thereof affect attributions of responsibility and blame, provide information, and alter relationships. Apologies play a role in motivating or forestalling legal action, shape settlement in civilcases, influence punishment in criminal cases, provide alternate or complementary means of accountability, and impact relations among parties to conflict from the interpersonal to the geopolitical. An understanding of apologies is enriched by research conducted by legal scholars, sociologists and psychologists, economists and political scientists, historians and linguists, and criminologists, using methods drawn from each of these fields. This range of empirical research is necessary to successfully develop a better understanding of the desire for, effects of, and limits of apologies across varied legal contexts and the implications for client counseling and legal strategy, for legal reform and systems design, for political decision making, and for procedural, restorative, and transitional justice.

show abstract

“…In de rechtswetenschap wordt dan ook veel nagedacht over de mate waarin het aanbieden van excuses moet worden vergemakkelijkt (Zwart-Hink & Seinen, 2020), of bij de rechter kan worden gevorderd (Van Dijck, 2017). Bestaand experimenteel onderzoek naar excuses richt zich onder meer op de impact van excuses op de bereidheid om tot een schikking te komen (Robbennolt, 2003), de verhouding tussen excuses en materiële compensatie (Reinders Folmer, Desmet & Van Boom, 2017), en de mate waarin de inhoud van het excuus samenhangt met de effectiviteit van het excuus (Reinders Folmer, Mascini & Leunissen, 2019).…”

Section: Aansprakelijkheidsrechtunclassified

Naar een gedragseconomie van het recht

Coerts,

Laarman,

Rutgers

et al. 2023

Law and Method

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioral economics builds on insights from behavioural sciences, primarily psychology, and aims to explain the behaviour of (groups of) individuals under conditions of scarcity. It applies an empirical methodology grounded in econometrics and based on experimental research. The authors' proposition is that behavioural law and economics rooted in experiments is a valuable approach to legal studies that complements pre-existing law and economics. Experiments maximise the opportunity to identify causal links and norms as building blocks of the law as interventions in human behaviour, and hence are well suited in the context of empirical legal studies. The research design menu includes variables such as hypothetical decisions versus actual behaviour, experiments with or without full randomisation, pure or quasi, lab versus field, and natural experiments versus experiments that can be manipulated.Behavioural economics operates under conditions of incentive compatibility and the no-deception principle. In this article, the authors set out a research agenda for behavioural law and economics research, covering private law (consumer and contract law as well as liability and tort law), administrative law, and economic law.

show abstract

Rethinking Apology in Tort Litigation Deficiencies in Comprehensiveness Undermine Remedial Effectiveness

Cited by 3 publications

References 38 publications

Beyond compensation? Examining the role of apologies in the restoration of victims’ needs in simulated tort cases.

Beyond compensation? Examining the role of apologies in the restoration of victims’ needs in simulated tort cases.

Apologies, Remorse, and Amends: Empirical Legal Studies Across Domains and Disciplines

Naar een gedragseconomie van het recht

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About