The Identity of “I’m sorry”: Perceptions of Apologies in False Confessions and the Influence of Suspect Gender

Abstract

Apologies serve as a mediator between victims and wrongdoers to promote forgiveness and enhance moral perceptions, while ostensibly reinforcing the guilt of the offender. These effects are further tempered by the gender of the apologizer. Paradoxically, content analyses show that apologies are not uncommon in false confessions and may reinforce false judgements of guilt. The current experiment aimed to elucidate the role that suspect gender and gender stereotypes of apologies play in shaping observer perceptions of coercion and guilt within confession contexts. This experiment conformed to a 2 (suspect gender: woman vs. man) x 3 (gender expectations of the apology: no apology control vs. feminine apology vs. masculine apology) between-subjects design. I hypothesized that apologies would be perceived as more effective when the suspect’s gender and the apology type were congruent (e.g., a woman offering a feminine-styled apology). Additionally, I predicted that confessions would be viewed as less likely to be false or coerced under gender-congruent conditions and that verdicts would more likely be guilty when the suspect’s gender and apology type aligned. Contrary to expectations, the results indicated no significant effects of gender and apology type congruence on perceived apology effectiveness, perceptions of coercion, or guilt assessments. These findings challenge assumptions about the automatic influence of gender norms in legal contexts and highlight the complexity of decision-making processes in response to confessions