Apologies are a common part of human interaction, yet not all apologies feel equally sincere or effective. Some ring hollow, while others seem genuine and heartfelt. What accounts for this difference? Recent research in psychology and linguistics sheds light on the subtle ways in which the language we use during an apology can influence how sincere it feels. The key lies in the concept of effort—both the effort the apologizer signals they are making and the effort they ask of the listener.
Shiri Lev-Ari, an associate professor of psychology at Royal Holloway, University of London, has conducted pioneering research exploring what makes an apology sound authentic. Her work reveals that apologies which convey greater effort through the choice of words tend to be perceived as more sincere. This research helps explain why some apologies resonate more deeply than others, especially in an era where public apologies—from celebrities to politicians—are frequently scrutinized and analyzed.
Lev-Ari’s interest in apologies stems from her broader research focus on language as a social tool. Apologies are fascinating because, on the surface, they are "cheap talk": anyone can apologize at any time without necessarily meaning it, which might suggest they carry little weight. Yet, in reality, apologies are powerful social acts that can repair relationships and build trust. Lev-Ari wanted to understand how language helps convey true remorse and sincerity despite the low cost of the act itself.
A central concept in her research is "iconicity" in language. Iconicity occurs when the sounds or form of a word resemble or suggest its meaning. For example, words containing the vowel sound /i/ often connote smallness or diminutiveness, like "itsy-bitty" or "tiny." This phenomenon is consistent across many languages worldwide. Lev-Ari wondered whether, in the context of apologies, speakers use linguistic forms to iconically signal the effort they are putting into the apology, thereby convincing listeners of their sincerity.
Effort is crucial in apologies because, intuitively and intuitively, we believe that the more effort someone puts into making amends, the more genuine their remorse. Lev-Ari illustrates this with an example: imagine two students where one accidentally harms the other. In one scenario, the offending student immediately goes out of their way—perhaps traveling to a different class—to apologize in person, inconveniencing themselves. In the other scenario, the student apologizes only when it is convenient, such as the next time they happen to see the other person. Common sense and research alike suggest that the first apology feels more sincere because it involves more effort and inconvenience.
Lev-Ari’s research sought to determine whether this notion of effort is reflected in the actual language people use when apologizing. Do people use words that are harder to say or more effortful to signal how sorry they are? She identifies two key factors that influence how much effort it takes to say a word: length and frequency. Longer words naturally require more time and motor effort to pronounce. Additionally, less common words are more difficult to recall and articulate, thus demanding greater cognitive effort.
However, there is an important balance to strike. While an apologizer might want to show they are putting in effort, they ideally do not want to burden the listener with effortful language that is hard to understand. Lev-Ari hypothesizes that effective apologies tend to use longer words, which are effortful to say but generally easier for listeners to process due to their distinctiveness and clarity. On the other hand, infrequent or rare words, while effortful for the speaker, also impose a higher cognitive load on the listener, making the apology less accessible.
To test these ideas, Lev-Ari conducted two studies. First, she analyzed real-world data by examining Twitter apologies from both celebrities and ordinary users. She compared apology tweets to other tweets by the same individuals and found that apology messages tend to contain longer words but not necessarily rarer words. This suggests that people naturally choose language that signals effort without making the message difficult for others to understand.
The second study involved an experiment where participants rated different versions of apologies that had the same meaning but varied in word length and frequency. For example, phrases like “My action doesn’t reflect my true self” and “My action does not represent my true character” convey the same sentiment but differ in word choice and complexity. Participants consistently rated apologies with longer words as more apologetic, while word frequency had little impact on perceived sincerity.
These findings highlight that longer words may serve as a linguistic marker