Study One The discovery leads to the current study of how participants perceive an apology containing a hashtag within a social media context. The goal of the present study is to see if the way people apologize influences how other people feel about the apology. Specifically, if people view a sincere apology (compared to an insincere apology or no apology), then they will more strongly agree that the apology showed an acknowledgement of wrongfulness and more strongly agree that the apology is sincere, with people ironically finding no apology more likely to acknowledge wrongfulness and more sincere than an insincere apology.

Results: A chi-square test was used for the manipulation check (#SorrySorrySorry, #SorryNotSorry, #WhatsDoneIsDone) as the independent variable to determine if participants PERCEPTIONS OF TWITTER APOLOGIES 8 remembered which hashtag they saw at the end of the post. The results indicated a significant effect c 2 (4) = 112.38, p < .001. In the sincere condition most participants remembered #SorrySorrySorry (84.3%); in the insincere condition most participants remembered #SorryNotSorry (70.6%); in the no apology condition participants remembered #WhatsDoneIsDone (64.7%) the most. Participants were able to identify the correct hashtag. The chi-square test showed that participants did pay attention to the hashtag manipulation at the end of the apology post. The dependent variables were measured by a One-Way ANOVA test. Part II Question 1 on Charlie's apology acknowledging the behavior was wrong was the first dependent variable measured. A One-Way ANOVA showed that there was a significant result, F(2, 150) = 3.74, p = .026. A Tukey post-hoc test was statistically significant indicating that participants thought the apology showed acknowledgment of the wrongful behavior in the sincere condition (M = 4.49, SD = .83) more than in the insincere condition (M = 4.02, SD = .93). The sincere condition (M = 4.49, SD = .83) and no apology condition (M = 4.29, SD = .86) did not differ from each other; also the insincere (M = 4.02, SD = .93) and no apology condition (M = 4.29, SD = .86) showed no significant difference. This analysis supports the prediction that participants viewing a sincere apology versus an insincere apology will more likely agree that the apology showed an acknowledgment of wrong behavior. A One-Way ANOVA test was conducted on Question 7 from Part II to see if participants found the apology sincere. It showed that there was a significant effect for sincerity F(2, 150) = 36.28, p < .001. A Tukey post-hoc test was statistically significant indicating that participants in the sincere condition (M = 4.75, SD =.72) agreed with the sincerity of the apology statement more than in the insincere condition (M = 3.29, SD = 1.03) and no apology condition (M = 3.82, PERCEPTIONS OF TWITTER APOLOGIES 9 SD = .84). All three conditions differed from each other. The prediction that participants will agree more with an apology that expressed sincerity was supported. Participants determining more sincerity in the no apology condition compared to the insincere apology condition was also supported.

6 QUESTIONS:

Which of the following are dependent variables for study 2?

(Check all that apply):

A. The results of the study

B. The participants' ratings of Charlie's acknowledgment of wrongdoing

C. The participant's ratings of the sincerity of Charlie's apology

D. Gender

E. Whether the participant believes someone should have to wear a mask

F. Type of apology (type of hashtag)

G. The Twitter account

H. The selfie

What is one of the main hypotheses for study two?

Complete the hypothesis statement below based on the predictions made in the second study (read carefully):

Subjects in the Sincere Hashtag condition will score Charlie [ Select ONE ] ["lower", "the same", "higher"] on the DVs than subjects in the [ Select ONE ] ["No likes", "Sincere Hashtag", "Less likes", "More likes", "Insincere Hashtag"] condition.

What is one of the main hypotheses for study two?

Complete the hypothesis statement below based on the predictions made in the second study (read carefully):

Subjects in the [ Select ONE ] ["No likes", "Less likes", "More likes"] condition will score Charlie lower on the DVs than subjects in the [ Select ONE ] ["Sincere Hashtag", "More likes", "Less likes", "No likes", "Insincere Hashtag"] condition.

What is one of the main hypotheses for study two?

Complete the hypothesis statement below based on the predictions made in the second study (read carefully):

Subjects in the [ Select ONE ] ["Insincere Hashtag", "Sincere Hashtag", "No Hashtag"] with [ Select ONE ] ["Less Likes", "No Likes", "More Likes"] condition will score highest on the DVs, while subjects in the [ Select ONE ] ["Insincere Hashtag", "Sincere Hashtag", "No Hashtag"] with [ Select ONE ] ["More Likes", "Less Likes", "No Likes"] condition will score lowest on the DVs.

Subjects in the [ Select ONE ] ["Sincere Hashtag", "Insincere Hashtag", "No Hashtag"] with Less Likes and Insincere Hashtag with [ Select ONE ] ["Less Likes", "No Likes", "More Likes"] condition will score in the middle for the DVs.

What were the main effects findings of study 2?

(Select all that apply)

A. The Sincere and Insincere Hashtag conditions were scored the same on the DVs.

B. The Lots of Likes condition scored higher on the DVs than the Few Likes condition.

C. The Sincere Hashtag condition scored higher on the DVs than the Insincere Hashtag condition.

D. The Insincere Hashtag condition scored higher on the DVs than the Sincere Hashtag condition.

E. The Few Likes condition scored higher on the DVs than the Lots of Likes condition.

F. The Lots of Likes and Few Likes conditions were scored the same on the DVs.

Which of the following correctly summarizes the interaction effect of study 2?

(Select all that apply)

A. An interaction occurred for both DVs in the study in the direction that the study predicted.

B. An interaction occurred for only one of the DVs in the study.

C. No interaction occurred for any of the DVs in the study.

D. An interaction occurred for both DVs in the study, but in the opposite direction that the study predicted.