Tort law currently debates the value of facilitating apology in order to enhance the restoration ofvictims' non-material needs, and to promote dispute resolution. However, the extent to whichapology can augment these outcomes beyond conventional, monetary reparations is not yet clear.The present research aimed to provide some first insights into this question, by means of twoexperimental studies conducted among community members recruited through MTurk (Study 1)and Prolific (Study 2). Participants imagined a scenario in which they became victims of a trafficaccident. Study 1 (N = 81, 42 men, 39 women, Mage = 35.90) manipulated the resulting harm(personal injury or property loss) to examine which needs participants experienced, and whatremedies (apology, compensation) they desired. Factor analysis revealed (non-material) needsfor interpersonal treatment, responsibility taking, closure, and punishment, and (material) needsfor compensation; these needs were as prominent after property loss as after personal injury.Non-material needs predicted greater desire for apology (and not compensation). Study 2 (N =485, 286 men, 199 women, Mage = 31.03) examined how these remedies impacted thesatisfaction of these needs and dispute resolution by manipulating apology (no apology,apology), compensation level (partial, approximate, or exact), and harm within the samescenario. Apologies enhanced the restoration of participants' non-material needs. However,settlement remained mostly contingent on compensation: (modest) effects of apology wererestricted to partial compensation. These findings therefore imply that apologies could augmentvictims' restoration after torts, but may be limited as a catalyst for settlement
