Political apologies and their acceptance: Experimental evidence from victims and perpetrators nations.

Political apologies have been argued to contribute to reconciliation among groups and nations but their efficacy has also been questioned. This paper examines the acceptance of political apologies, their content and the protagonists in the victim nation, the perpetrator nation and their subgroups. Guided by studies on the structure of apologies, it distinguishes 10 features of apologies, seven of which concern their content and three of their protagonists. Following the analysis of apology statements by Japan to South Korea, the paper further breaks these features (factors) down into 32 elements (levels). The acceptance of around 70,000 possible apology combinations is examined in a randomized conjoint experiment, which was embedded in online quota-based surveys in Japan (n = 2700) and South Korea (n = 3000). The analysis reveals that the content of apologies matters, protagonists matter more than content and some subgroups matter more than protagonists. The subgroup analysis showed that some within-country differences are larger than cross-country differences, which challenges the SIT. Apology statements that would be acceptable in both nations are summarised.

The Social Consequences of Frequent Versus Infrequent Apologizing.

The effectiveness of interpersonal apologies is well established, but most existing research has examined the benefits of isolated apologies. How do apologies function when considered in the context of a transgressor's apology baseline-the frequency with which they tend to apologize for their behavior? We examined whether people consider others' apology baselines when evaluating both their character and specific apologies from them. In Study 1, participants judged a character with a high (vs. low) apology baseline as higher in communion and lower in agency. In Study 2, participants judged romantic partners with high (vs. low) apology baselines as higher in communion, but only lower in agency when they perceived these frequent apologies as low-quality. In both studies, having a high apology baseline was also indirectly associated with more favorable reactions to a specific apology via higher communion judgments, revealing the role of apology baselines in shaping conflict resolution processes.

Meaningless gestures or pathway to healing and reconciliation? Comparing the perspectives on political apologies in victim and non-victim communities in El Salvador, the Republic of Korea and the United Kingdom.

Political apologies have been theorized to play an important role in healing and reconciliation processes in post-conflict settings. Whether they actually fulfil this function, however, remains unclear as the voices and perspectives of victim communities have largely been underrepresented in research. To address this, we examined the role of apologies that were offered for the El Mozote massacre (El Salvador), the Jeju 4.3 massacres (Republic of Korea) and Bloody Sunday (United Kingdom), according to members of these communities and the broader public. Although we anticipated that victim community members should find the apology more valuable and meaningful and should, therefore, be more positive about its role in healing and reconciliation processes, we found that this varies across countries. This variation could be explained by people's trust in the country's institutions. Across the samples, we found that the apology was seen as a relatively important gesture. For the apology to be perceived as impactful, however, it had to be seen as a meaningful (i.e. sincere) gesture. Our findings suggest that apologies have a role to play in the aftermath of human rights violations, but that it is essential to take the broader context into account.

Duties of Candour in Healthcare: The Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing but the Truth?

The creation of professional and statutory duties of candour has formalised the requirement for clinicians and healthcare organisations to be honest with patients and families when treatment has gone wrong. This article explains the background to creating both duties, analyses the concept of candour, the role of apologies, and considers evidence about compliance. It argues that making candour a statutory requirement appropriately reflects the ethical imperative of telling the truth about harm and is a powerful signal for honesty. However, being candid is not easy in the context of complex professional cultures, the realities of delivering care in under-funded health systems, and in the shadow of possible legal and regulatory proceedings. Proposals in the current Health and Care Bill to create investigatory 'safe spaces' which prohibit the disclosure of information submitted to the Health Service Safety Investigations Body undermine candour. This article argues against such proposals, which are both wrong in principle and highly problematic in practice. Candour should be respected as a cardinal principle governing not only the conduct of those providing care, but also those who investigate such incidents. Harmed patients and their families deserve to know the whole truth.

When Apologies become Meaningful: Perceptions of Apologies in Environmental Justice Communities.

In the United States, people of color from low income and working-class backgrounds are at disproportionate risk to pollution and other environmental stressors. These environmental justice communities (EJCs) can also experience increased risk when a natural disaster collides with a preexisting environmental risk. The current research is an exploratory field study that examines perceptions of environmental risk after a natural disaster and how meaningful a public apology would be in three communities. Residents (N=161) in two EJCs and a community without documented risks reported their environmental concerns and perceptions of public apologies. Overall, EJC residents reported greater concern about chemical hazard exposure than did residents with decreased risk. Furthermore, chemical exposure concerns facilitated public apology meaningfulness within the EJCs, but not in the decreased risk community.

Eliciting forgiveness.

When we commit transgressions, we need to be forgiven to restore our friendships and social standing. Two main ways we can elicit forgiveness is through asking for forgiveness after committing a transgression (i.e., retrospective elicitors) or before committing a transgression (i.e., prospective elicitors). Research on retrospective elicitors with adults and children indicates that apologizing or showing remorse elicits forgiveness from both victims and bystanders, and sheds light on the nuances of such elicitors and their functions. Far less is known about how adults and children respond to prospective elicitors of forgiveness, such as disclaimers (statements that prepare the listener for a transgression or a failure of character or performance, e.g., "I don't mean to be rude but…"), and how the functions and effectiveness of prospective elicitors compare to those of retrospective elicitors. Furthermore, much less is known about the additive effects of using both retrospective and prospective elicitors of forgiveness. A better understanding of how and when forgiveness is elicited in childhood and through adulthood promises to shed light on human sociality and cooperativeness. This article is categorized under: Cognitive Biology > Social Development Psychology > Emotion and Motivation Cognitive Biology > Cognitive Development.

Victim's Perspective of Forgiveness Seeking Behaviors After Transgressions.

Forgiveness seeking after a relational transgression is an important aspect of relational repair from an interpersonal perspective, although it has received much less attention than the process of granting forgiveness. This research focuses on the victim's perspective of the transgressor's behaviors and how they are related to forgiveness and offense characteristics. This paper proposes a multidimensional concept of seeking forgiveness that includes four dimensions: apologies, restorative action, relational caring behaviors, and diverting behaviors. A questionnaire for assessing these dimensions was developed and tested with a general population sample of 450 subjects. Participants recalled a specific offense and then answered a questionnaire about the perceived usefulness of different forgiveness-seeking behaviors, a forgiveness inventory, and several questions regarding the characteristics of the offense (severity, intentionality, and frequency). Our results support the four-factor structure of the questionnaire. As the perceived intentionality of the offense increases, behaviors that are directly related to the transgression, such as apologies and restorative actions, are experienced as less useful for forgiveness. The more hurtful the offense, the less useful the diverting behaviors are. Behavior such as apologies and restorative action are related to a lower (less) motivation for revenge, while all forgiveness-seeking behaviors are related to an increase in feelings of benevolence toward the offender.

What Is Wrong with Empirical-Legal Research into Victimhood? A Critical Analysis of the Ordered Apology and the Victim Impact Statement.

The central question in this article is whether an empirical-legal approach to victimhood and victim rights could offer a sufficient basis for proposals for reform of the legal system. In this article, we choose a normative-critical approach and raise some objections to the way in which part of such research is currently taking place, on the basis of two examples of research in this field, one dealing with compelled apologies as a remedy within civil law and the other with the victim impact statement within criminal law. In both cases, we argue, the strong focus on the measurable needs of victims can lead to a relatively instrumental view of the legal system. The legal system must then increasingly be tailored to the wishes and needs of victims. Within this legal-empirical, victim-oriented approach, there is little regard for the general normative principles of liberal democratic legal systems, in which an equal and respectful treatment of each human being as a free and responsible legal subject is a central value. We argue that results of empirical-legal research should not too easily or too quickly be translated into proposals for legal reform, but first become part of a hermeneutical discussion about norms and legal principles, specific to the normative character of law and legal science.

Compensation and reparations for victims and bystanders of the U.S. Public Health Service research studies in Tuskegee and Guatemala: Who do we owe what?

Using the infamous research studies in Tuskegee and Guatemala, the article examines the difference between victims and bystanders. The victims can include families, sexual partners, and children not just the participants. There are also the bystanders in the populations who are affected, even vaguely, decades after the initial studies took place. Differing reparations for victims and bystanders through lawsuits and historical acknowledgments has to be part of broader discussions of historical justice, and the weighing of the impact of racism and imperial research endeavors.

Social Dominance Orientation Predicts Opposition to Hierarchy-Attenuating Intergroup Apologies.

People who value social hierarchy may resist giving intergroup apologies because such apologies may attenuate the very hierarchies that these people value. We tested this claim across four studies (total N = 541) by examining associations between social dominance orientation (SDO)-a measure of preference for social hierarchy-and support for intergroup apologies. We found that higher SDO scores, and specifically the antiegalitarianism subdimension (social dominance orientation-egalitarianism [SDO-E]), predicted less apology support among U.S. residents in both domestic (Study 1) and international (Study 2) contexts. In Study 3, we found that the effect generalizes to an Australian cultural context. In Study 4, we demonstrated that the negative effect of SDO-E can extend to third-party contexts and is only observed when apologizing would be hierarchy attenuating. These studies show that the desire to maintain social hierarchies is an important driver of opposition to hierarchy-attenuating intergroup apologies.

The National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse - The Western Australian Response.

The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse estimated 60,000 people were sexually abused as children in Australian Institutions during the period it examined and recommended the Australian Government establish a single National Redress Scheme. The National Redress for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018(the NRS Act) commenced on 1 July 2018 enacting some, but not all, of the recommendations of the Royal Commission, including the implementation of the three elements of redress, the use of a matrix to determine monetary payments, and the provision of an internal review scheme. Redress under the NRS Act includes a "direct personal response by the institution", "counselling and psychological care" and "monetary payments". All States and Territories were required to respond to the NRS Act by referring relevant powers to the Commonwealth in order to facilitate the operation of the national scheme. In addition each jurisdiction enacted particular responses to the NRS having regard to the existing victims of crime legislation in each State or Territory. This article surveys the NRS Act and the approach adopted by Western Australia and the other sub-national jurisdictions in responding to the NRS Act.

Pedir desculpas: categorias e efeitos em três tipos de relacionamento interpessoal / To apologize: categories and effects on three types of interpersonal relationships / Pedir disculpas: categorías y efectos en tres tipos de relacionamiento interpersonal

Embora pedidos de desculpas sejam tratados como mecanismos de gerenciamento de impressão em psicologia, ainda se conhece pouco sobre a dinâmica de oferecê-las (e não somente de recebê-las) em diferentes tipos de relacionamento interpessoal. Cenários experimentais para pedir desculpas em três condições independentes (interagindo com um parente íntimo, amigo íntimo ou par romântico) foram respondidos por 239 participantes, seguidos por medidas de plausibilidade, responsabilidade e emoção, além da escala de Intimidade Social de Miller. Quatro categorias principais foram identificadas e testadas em suas associações com os relacionamentos. Desculpas a parentes revelaram-se de causalidade externa ou interna, a pares românticos revelaram-se internas ou de reparação, enquanto a amigos revelaram-se de desengajamento moral ou externas. Não foram encontradas diferenças nos julgamentos de responsabilidade, plausibilidade e emoção. Discute-se tanto o papel das desculpas para a prevenção de conflitos interpessoais quanto o impacto de variáveis situacionais e disposicionais nos processos de justificação social. (AU)

Despite the fact that apologies are seen as mechanisms of impression management in psychology, little is known about the dynamics of offering them (not only receiving) in different types of interpersonal relationships. Experimental apology scenarios in three independent conditions (interacting with a family member, a close friend, or a romantic partner) were responded by 239 participants, followed by measures of plausibility, responsibility and emotion, as well as Miller's Social Intimacy Scale. Four major categories were found and tested in their associations with the interpersonal relationships. Apologies to family members showed external or internal causes, while the ones offered to romantic partners involved internal causes or reparation, and the ones offered to friends involved moral disengagement or external causes. No differences were found in responsibility, plausibility, and emotion. The role of apology for preventing interpersonal conflicts and the impact of situational and dispositional variables on social justification processes are discussed. (AU)

Aunque el hecho de pedir disculpas sea tratado como un mecanismo de administración de impresiones en psicología, todavía se conoce poco sobre la dinámica de ofrecer las disculpas (y no sólo de recibirlas), en diferentes tipos de relacionamiento interpersonal. Escenarios experimentales para pedir disculpas, con tres condiciones independientes, (interactuando con pariente íntimo, amigo íntimo o una pareja) fueron respondidos por 239 participantes seguidos por medidas de plausibilidad, responsabilidad y emoción, así como la Escala de Intimidad Social de Miller. Cuatro categorías principales fueron identificadas y testadas con las asociaciones en los relacionamientos. Disculpas ofrecidas a familiares mostraron causas externas o internas, mientras las ofrecidas a la pareja mostraron causas internas o de reparación, y las ofrecidas a amigos mostraron desajuste moral o causas externas. No fueron encontradas diferencias en los juicios de responsabilidad, plausibilidad, y emoción. Se discute tanto el papel de las disculpas para la prevención de conflictos interpersonales, como el impacto de variables situacionales y dispuestas en procesos de justificación social. (AU)

The Development of Extraterritorial Apologies Laws and Its Enlightenment to Medical Dispute Settlement in Our Country / 中国医学伦理学

At present, 35 states and the District of Columbia have established apologies laws in America; in Australia, six states and two territories have enacted apologies law. Although various countries in the word still face many problems in the process of formulating apologies laws, its promotion in the settlement of medical disputes is very rapid. The paper point out three unique roles of apologies laws in medical dispute settlement, enlightening our country to take apology law of absolute immunity, sincerely face medical negligence and dig out the institutional roots by the disclosure of the truth of the accident, in order to avoid the recurrence of similar incidents, and finally achieve the purpose of improving the quality of hospital medical safety.

The Mandate of the Collective: Apology Representativeness Determines Perceived Sincerity and Forgiveness in Intergroup Contexts.

The sincerity of an apology is often critical for it to be viewed positively by victims. For collective apologies, we argue that sincerity takes on a particular meaning: It is a function of the apology's perceived representativeness for the offender group's will or sentiment. Consistent with this notion, when an apologetic (vs. nonapologetic) message was democratically chosen (Study 1) or explicitly endorsed by the majority of the offending outgroup (Study 2), it was considered more sincere and, through this, led to more forgiveness. Furthermore, while disagreement about an apology within the offender group reduced its perceived representativeness and sincerity, this was less so when the dissenters could be subtyped: when disagreement was correlated with an existing subgroup within the offending outgroup (Study 3) and in line with expectations for that subgroup (Study 4). This research shows that victim group members consider intragroup processes within the offending outgroup for attributions of sincerity.

When Saying Sorry May Not Help: The Impact of Apologies on Social Rejections.

If you have to socially reject someone, will it help to apologize? Social rejection is a painful emotional experience for targets, yet research has been silent on recommendations for rejectors. Across three sets of studies, apologies increased hurt feelings and the need to express forgiveness but did not increase feelings of forgiveness. The investigation of hurt feelings arising from a social rejection is challenging because previous research has shown that participants are reluctant to admit they felt hurt by the rejection. The present research addressed the self-report issue in two ways. First, participants rated how much social rejections would hurt someone's feelings as a function of whether an apology was included across various social rejection scenarios (Studies 1a-e). Second, aggressive behavior was measured in response to face-to-face social rejections that were manipulated to include or exclude apologies (Studies 2a-c). More specifically, Studies 1a-e (N = 1096) found that although individuals sometimes use apologies in social rejections, social rejections with apologies are associated with higher levels of explicit hurt feelings. Studies 2a-c (N = 355) manipulated the presence of an apology in face-to-face social rejections and found that social rejections with apologies cause more aggressive behavior. As in previous research, participants are reluctant to admit to feeling hurt. Finally, Study 3 (N = 426) found that in response to social rejections with apologies, individuals feel more compelled to express forgiveness despite not actually feeling more forgiveness. Implications for the role of language in social rejections are discussed.

Institutional apologies and socio-emotional climate in the South American context.

This study examined perceptions of institutional apologies related to past political violence and socio-emotional climate among victims and non-victims in Argentina (n = 518), Chile (n = 1,278), and Paraguay (n = 1,172) based on quasi-representative samples. The perceptions of apology as sincere and efficient in improving intergroup relations were associated with a positive socio-emotional climate across the three nations. Victims evaluated apologies more positively and perceived a more positive socio-emotional climate compared to non-victims in Paraguay and Argentina, whereas the opposite was true in Chile where the government opposed the victims' leftist political orientation. The evaluations of apologies also mediated the effects of exposure to violence on the perception of socio-emotional climate, but these effects were moderated by the context. Together, these findings suggest that apologies reinforce positive sociopolitical climate, and that, personal experience of victimization is an important factor determining these effects.

"Prefacing the Script" as an Ethical Response to State-Mandated Abortion Counseling.

BACKGROUND: Laws governing abortion provision are proliferating throughout the United States, yet little is known about how these laws affect providers. We investigated the experiences of abortion providers in North Carolina practicing under the 2011 Women's Right to Know Act, which mandates that women receive counseling with specific, state-prescribed information at least 24 hours prior to an abortion. We focus here on a subset of the data to examine one strategy by which providers worked to minimize moral conflicts generated by the counseling procedure. Drawing on Erving Goffman's work on language and social interaction, we highlight how providers communicated moral objections and layered meanings through a practice that we call prefacing the script. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 31 physicians, nurses, physician assistants, and clinic managers who provide abortion care in North Carolina. Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using an inductive, iterative analytic approach, which included reading for context, interpretive memo-writing, and focused coding. RESULTS: Roughly half of the participants (14/31) reported that they or the clinicians who performed the counseling in their institution routinely prefaced the counseling script with qualifiers, disclaimers, and apologies that clarified their relationship to the state-mandated content. We identified three performative functions of this practice: 1) enacting a frame shift from a medical to a legal interaction, 2) distancing the speaker from the authorial voice of the counseling script, and 3) creating emotional alignment. CONCLUSIONS: Prefacing state-mandated abortion counseling scripts constitutes a practical strategy providers use to balance the obligation to comply with state law with personal and professional responsibilities to provide tailored care, emotional support, and serve the patient's best interests. Our findings suggest that language constitutes a powerful resource for navigating and minimizing moral conflicts in healthcare.

Introduction: Forgiveness and Conflict.

The papers collected in this volume are a selection of papers that were presented - or scheduled to be presented - at a workshop entitled Forgiveness and Conflict, which took place from 8-10 September 2014, as part of the Mancept Workshops in Political Theory at the University of Manchester. Some of these contributions are now compiled in this volume. The selected papers draw from different philosophical traditions and conceptual frameworks, addressing many aspects of contemporary philosophical debates on the nature and normativity of forgiveness, including its political aspects. The result is a rich collection of essays which covers a wide variety of philosophical issues, displaying cutting edge scholarship in this area. This introduction provides a brief overview of some of the central themes discussed in the volume with a particular emphasis on their innovative aspects.

Predictors of Beliefs in Intergroup Forgiveness in a Chilean General Population Sample.

Original survey data from a Chilean sample (N = 1267) are used to study the socio-demographic and psychosocial determinants of belief in forgiveness attitudes in the context of measuring the impact of truth and reconciliation reports (NTRC, 1991) and Political Imprisonment and Torture (NPIC, 2004) commissions. A linear multiple regression analysis (R 2 = .15; F(8, 1269) = 14.65; p < .001; effect size f 2 = .18) revealed the positive effect of perceived apology sincerity (ß = 0.22; p < .001), emotions of anger (ß = -0.08; p < .05), and positive social climate (ß = 0.08; p < .05). People who believe in the victims' forgiveness feel less anger, have more positive perceptions of the sincerity and efficacy of the apologies, agree to a greater extent that the commission helped to find out the truth about what happened to the victims, and have a greater perception of the social climate as positive. The results show the importance of psychosocial and institutional variables in beliefs about forgiveness, and they suggest differences between interpersonal and intergroup forgiveness processes.

Actitudes hacia el pasado de violencia colectiva y actividades de justicia transicional en Uruguay / Attitudes towards past collective violence and transitional justice procedures in Uruguay / Atitudes em relação ao passado de violência coletiva e as atividades da justiça transicional no Uruguai / Attitudes envers le passé de la violence collective et activités de justice de transition en Uruguay

El Golpe de Estado del 27 de junio de 1973, bajo la presidencia de Juan María Bordaberry, instauró una dictadura cívicomilitar que se prolongó hasta el año 1985. El período de la dictadura militar en Uruguay, estuvo marcado por la prohibición de los partidos políticos, la ilegalización de los sindicatos y medios de prensa, así como la persecución, encarcelamiento y asesinato de opositores al régimen. Al igual que en otros países, con el retorno de la democracia, se han implementados medidas ancladas en la justicia transicional para documentar las violaciones perpetradas y enfrentar el pasado represivo. Este artículo explora en una muestra de población general (N = 712) el grado de conocimiento que la población uruguaya tiene sobre su pasado dictatorial y las emociones, niveles de compartir social y eficacia percibida ante las medidas transicionales implementadas para abordar el pasado traumático. De los resultados se extrae que un alto grado de información por parte de los participantes respecto al período dictatorial (1973-1985) coexiste con bajas frecuencias de compartir social, baja activación emocional, baja información sobre las medidas implementadas y baja percepción de eficacia. La población directamente afectada informa de un mayor impacto emocional y mayor compartir e inhibir social sobre ciertos aspectos del periodo represivo. Además, a mayor victimización más eficazmente se valoran las medidas procedimentales y menos eficaces las disculpas emitidas por el Presidente Mujica en relación al pasado dictatorial.

A Military Putsch in 27 June 1973, when JM Bordaberry was President, impose a civic-army dictatorship until the year 1985. This period in Uruguay was characterized by political parties and trade unions ban, as well as mass media control, imprisonment, persecution and execution of political dissidents. Transitional justice procedures were performed with democracy's return. This article analyzes in a general population sample (N = 712) the information about the dictatorial past, emotions, social sharing and perceived efficacy of transitional justice procedures. Results show that a high reported level of information by respect to the past coexist with a low level of social sharing, low emotional feelings by respect to the past and low information and low perceived efficacy of transitional justice procedures. Victims of the dictatorship or person affected by State terrorism report higher levels of social sharing, inhibition and emotional reactions by respect to the past. People affected by political repression also perceives higher efficacy of transitional justice procedures and show a more critical appraisal of President Mujica apologies by respect to the role of the State in the past repression.

O Golpe de Estado de 27 de junho de 1973, sob a presidência de Juan María Bordaberry instaurou uma ditatura civil-militar que se prolongou até o ano de 1985. O período da ditatura militar no Uruguai esteve marcado pela proibição dos partidos políticos, pela ilegalidade dos sindicatos e dos meios de comunicação de massa, assim como pela perseguição, encarceramento e assassinato dos opositores do regime. Como em outros países, o retorno da democracia foi acompanhado da implementação de medidas alicerçadas na justiça transicional, visando documentar as violações ocorridas e enfrentar o passado repressor. Este artigo analisa, em uma amostra de população geral (N = 712), o grau de conhecimento que a população uruguaia tem sobre seu passado ditatorial, a ativação de suas emoções, os níveis de compartilhamento social e a percepção da eficácia de medidas transicionais implementadas para lidar com o passado traumático. Dos resultados se depreende que alto grau de conhecimento dos participantes a respeito do período ditatorial (1973-1985) está correlacionado com baixas frequências de compartilhamento social, baixa ativação emocional, baixo grau de informação sobre as medidas implementadas e baixa percepção de eficácia. A população diretamente afetada relata maior impacto emocional e maior compartilhamento e inibição social em relação a certos aspectos do período repressor. Além disso, as vítimas da repressão política também percebem maior eficácia dos procedimentos de justiça transicional e fazem uma avaliação mais crítica de desculpas do presidente Mujica sobre o Estado ditatorial no passado.

Le coup d'Etat du 27 Juin 1973, sous la présidence de Juan María Bordaberry, établit une dictature civil-militaire qui a duré jusqu'à año1985. La période de la dictature militaire en Uruguay, a été marquée par l'interdiction des partis politiques, l'interdiction des syndicats et des médias, ainsi que la persécution, l'emprisonnement et assassinat des opposants au régime. Comme dans d'autres pays, avec le retour de la démocratie, ont a mis en œuvre des mesures ancrées dans la justice transitionnelle pour documenter les violations et affronter le passé répressif. Cet article explore dans un échantillon de la population générale (N = 712) le degré de connaissance, les émotions, les niveaux de partage social que la population uruguayenne a sur son passé dictatorial et l'efficacité perçue des mesures transitoires mises en œuvre pour régler le passé traumatique. Les résultats montrent que un degré élevé d'information des participants concernant la période dictatoriale (1973-1985) coexiste avec les basses fréquences de partage social, faible activation émotionnelle, faible informations sur les mesures mises en œuvre et avec une faible efficacité perçue des mesures de justice transitionnelle. La population directement touchée par la répression a rapporté un plus grand impact émotionnel et un plus grand partage et inhibition sociale sur la période répressive. En outre, les victimes perçoivent comme plus efficace les mesures de justice transitionnelle mais font une évaluation plus critique des excuses émises par le président Mujica en relation avec le passé dictatorial.