Boundaries of apologies: Children avoid transgressors who give the same apology for a repeat offence

• Published in: Cognitive development Vol. 64; p. 101264
• Main Authors: Waddington, Owen, Jensen, Keith, Köymen, Bahar
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Inc 01.10.2022
• Subjects: Apologies; Moral development; Moral reasoning; Reoffending; Reoffending; Apologies; Moral reasoning; Moral development
• ISSN: 0885-2014; 1879-226X
• DOI: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2022.101264

Following a transgression, apologies serve as assurances of better future behaviour. Here, we investigated 5- and 6-year-old children’s responses when these assurances were violated, with the same transgression being repeated, and the role that reason-giving plays in such assurances. Participants (N = 72, 38 girls, UK-based) witnessed a recurring harm that was caused either by an apologetic actor who gave different reasons after each transgression (Different Reason condition), the same reason (Same Reason condition), or who was present but not responsible for the damage done (Baseline condition). We found that children were most trusting of the actor in the Baseline condition, followed by the Different Reason condition, and least trusting in the Same Reason condition. Both ages were also slower to trust the actor in the Same Reason condition compared to the other two conditions. From age 5, children begin to recognise the boundaries of apologies and when they may not suffice. •Children saw an actor give the same or different reasons for a repeated harm.•5- and 6-year-olds trusted the actor less when she gave the same reason.•Both ages were slower to trust the actor when she gave the same reason.•From age 5, different reasons are needed to justify repeating the same harm.