Common = Ineffective? A Replication Attempt of the Normative Dilution Effect in the Context of Apologies

The normative dilution effect suggests that perceiving a behavior as normative can undermine its effectiveness, particularly in contexts where its communicative value matters. Intergroup apologies offer a compelling test case for this effect, as conveying sincere motives is key to their effectiveness in promoting forgiveness. To date, only one quantitative study (Okimoto et al., 2015) has tested this effect. In two experimental studies and one correlational study, I aimed to replicate and extend the normative dilution effect by introducing ulterior motives as a mechanism linking perceptions of apology commonness to reduced perceptions of sincerity. Across two samples of Australian participants (Ntotal = 1,087) and a sample of American participants (N = 314), I found no evidence supporting the normative dilution effect. When experimentally induced to perceive political apologies as more common, Australian participants did not attribute more ulterior motives to the apologizer, perceive apologies as less sincere, or report being less willing to forgive Japan for the mistreatment of Australian POWs. Additionally, when Americans were asked to imagine transgressor groups issuing apologies across different types of conflict, viewing political apologies as more common was associated with the perception that apologies would be more sincere and with a greater willingness to forgive the transgressor. I discuss the implications of these findings for the normative dilution theory.

Author dc:creator

• Vlada Trofimchuk (23292109)

• Psychology
• Social

Statement dc:rights

• In Copyright
• Open Access after 2028-01-01

DOI dc:identifier

https://doi.org/10.25417/uic.31451812.v1

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:figshare.com:article/31451812