This research aims to separate the effect of a promise from an apology, examine interactional justice as a theoretical mechanism explaining the relationship between these accounts and post‐violation trust, examine how message content compares to the gesture of sending a message, and test offense severity as a moderator.
This study employed the Trust Game.
Results indicated significant apology × promise and apology × promise × offense severity interactions on interactional justice, and interactional justice fully mediated the relationship between promises and post‐violation trust.
Although this study was completed using a laboratory game with anonymous partners, results suggest that interactional justice provides a means for relationships to quickly get back on track after a violation. Specifically, promises provide “forward‐looking” information (trustworthy intent) and interpersonal sensitivity (demonstration of courtesy and concern) that enable interactional justice to affect subsequent trust.
These findings attest to the efficacy of clear accounts to foster interactional justice; in particular, apologies lead to higher interactional justice for less serious offenses. Furthermore, accounts that are “forward‐looking” lead to higher post‐violation trust via interactional justice perceptions.
Recent empirical studies suggest that apologies are associated with higher post‐violation trust, but, unlike this article, have not explicated this process or its boundary conditions.
