What is it about?
After a conflict ends, an offer of help from a former opponent should be a good thing, but research shows people often respond to it with suspicion instead of gratitude. This research, conducted with Kosovo Albanians regarding Serbs, tested whether different kinds of apology could change that. Across three studies, people imagined receiving spontaneous help from either a member of their own group or a member of the other group. Without any apology, or with a formal government apology, people consistently assumed the outgroup helper had selfish motives and were reluctant to accept the help. However, when the apology came from a single ordinary member of the other group, or was described as supported by the majority of that group, people attributed real empathy and good intentions to the helper and were much more willing to accept their help. People also felt more at peace with the other group and more open to future contact. The key reason this happened was that these more credible apologies made people see the other group as more fully human.
Featured Image
Photo by Toa Heftiba on Unsplash
Why is it important?
In real post-conflict situations, gestures of goodwill between former enemies are often met with distrust rather than appreciation, which can quietly undermine reconciliation efforts. This research identifies a specific lever that changes that dynamic: who delivers an apology and on whose behalf. Official, government-level apologies, the kind most commonly offered in real-world diplomacy, did almost nothing to shift people's reactions. Apologies that came across as personal and genuine, or as representing the broader population rather than just its leaders, were far more effective. This has direct relevance for how reconciliation processes are designed, suggesting that grassroots and personal gestures may do more good than formal state apologies alone.
Perspectives
This was one of the earlier studies in a line of work I have continued to pursue, and it captures something I find genuinely important: reconciliation is not just about what is said, it is about who is saying it and whether it makes the other side feel human again. I remember being struck by how strongly people resisted even well-intentioned help from a former adversary, almost reflexively, until the apology shifted how human that person seemed to them. That feels like a small detail, but it may be one of the more practical levers available to people trying to rebuild trust after conflict.
Dr Islam Borinca
National University of Ireland Maynooth
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Overcoming negative reactions to prosocial intergroup behaviors in post-conflict societies: The power of intergroup apology, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, July 2021, Elsevier,
DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104140.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
