Behaviour Intervention for Maladaptive Apology Behaviours

Behaviour Intervention for Maladaptive Parental Apologies 1
Educating Non-Apologetic Parents to Prevent Learned
Behaviours:
A Behavioural Intervention Program Proposal
Kaylah M. M. Crompton
Griffith University, Gold Coast
3018 PSY: Behavioural Change Analysis
Lan Nguyen
March 22, 2023
Word Count: 2766

This proposal will focus on changing non-apologetic behaviours. Giving individuals
and groups the skills to apologise and forgive can reduce conflict and stress, particularly
within a familial environment. Non-apologising behaviours can be destructive to
relationships, and the recipient’s mental health, affecting all aspects of their life: work,
school, friends, behaviour, and performance.
Non-apologetic behaviours are characterized by a refusal or reluctance to apologize,
take responsibility, or express remorse for one's actions, even when it is warranted or
expected. These behaviours can manifest in various ways. These actions can lead to collapse
of interpersonal relationships. It can create distance due to perceived lack of authenticity,
diminished self-esteem, reluctance to express needs or boundaries, avoidance of conflict,
perception of weakness or submissiveness, accumulation of resentment, emotional
disconnection, communication barriers. Genuine apologies can foster understanding,
empathy, and forgiveness, contributing to healthier and more fulfilling relationships (Duan, S.
et al, 2022).
These attributes collectively contribute to a pattern of non-apologizing, where
individuals (and groups) consistently resist or avoid apologizing for their actions, even when
it may be warranted or expected. It's important to address these behaviours and encourage
accountability, empathy, and open communication to foster healthier relationships and
personal growth (Wallace, M. 2021).
Family conflict strategies can prevent diminishment of children's performance in life -
and in return, break the cycle of maladaptive apologetic behaviours that are learned in home
environments. One of the biggest impacts on families healthy functioning is communication
skills. Changing non-apologetic behaviours can lead to the resolution and prevention of
collapsing relationships, especially in a society with such as high divorce and single parent

rate. When a parent believes that apologizing is unnecessary or inconsequential, disregarding
the importance of taking responsibility for their actions and repairing relationships, the child
not only suffer consequences of their parents’ actions, but learn behaviours. Such behaviours
are prevalent in families, schools, workplace, and public society (McNab, L. 2008).
Being on the receiving side of a maladaptive apologetic relationship can lead to
trauma and emotional struggles; unresolved relationship conflicts and resentment; negative
relationship dynamics; Decreased self-worth and self-esteem; Uncertainty of what is right
and wrong and what deserves negative consequences or fosters an apology; A hindered
ability to forgive, leading to prolonged feelings of anger, resentment, or bitterness; and Trust
Issues, making trust in further relationships difficult. But most importantly, it leads to
diminished mental health. We can see this effect with the increase of earlier diagnosis of
mental disorders in children (Peggy Koutsos et al., 2008).
Since 2021, the school aged mental health crisis has been referred to as what will become a
‘trans-generational disaster” if we are unable to address it (Binagwaho, A. & Senga J., 2021).
In Victoria in 2021, mental well-being coordinators were trialled in schools, which increased
permanently to twenty-six in 2023 (Victoria Department of Health, 2021). The Australian
Psychological Society even submitted to the Australian Federal Budget that they include
urgent funding for specialist youth mental health hubs (Australian Psychological Society,
2023).
Influential Analysis
Whilst some individuals are biologically predisposed to characterisations that may
encourage non-apologetic behaviours, such as personality traits, brain function and emotional

processing and genetic factors, it is important to note that biology does not determine
behaviour in isolation.
Withholding of an apology can be contributed to by several psychological traits such
as lack of self-awareness; defence mechanisms; ego protection; Fear of negative
consequences; Lack of empathy; Cognitive biases, such as lack of self-awareness, self-
serving bias or confirmation bias and learned behaviour. Multiple factors can interact and
influence an individual's decision to withhold an apology. Understanding these psychological
factors can help facilitate self-reflection, promote empathy, and encourage a greater
willingness to apologize and take responsibility for one's actions. This includes sociocultural
influences (Martinez-Vaquero, L., et al, 2015).
Research has identified eight core behavioural attributes to non-apologetic
behaviours, which are each individually studied thorough but not approached together to
identify collapse in apologetic behaviours. These include denial, deflection, minimization or
trivialisation, justification, avoidance, lack of empathy, repeating the behaviour and
dismissiveness (Ciocca, G., 2020). Some personality traits that can lead to this behaviour
include Stubbornness, Defensiveness, Ego-driven behaviour. But most importantly, lack of
skills, understanding and empathy can cause individuals to be non-apologetic. the complexity
of overlooking the stigma that is built around apologising is difficult without the right
education and resources. This is why we want to offer access to this program.
Understanding cultural expectations surrounding apologies can promote cross-cultural
understanding and effective communication. In some cultures, maintaining harmony and
saving face are highly valued. Admitting fault or apologizing openly may be seen as a threat
to one's reputation or social standing. Cultures with a significant power distance, where
hierarchical relationships and respect for authority are emphasized, may discourage

subordinates or individuals of lower status from expecting apologies from those in positions
of power. This dynamic can contribute to non-apologetic behaviours within. Cultures that
prioritize collectivism and interdependence may place greater emphasis on group cohesion
and maintaining relationships. Apologizing openly can be seen as disruptive to group
harmony or a potential source of embarrassment. Communication styles, such as indirectness
or avoidance of confrontation, can also contribute to non-apologizing behaviours
(Management Today, 2014).
Non-apologetic behaviour in the political environment refers to actions or attitudes
displayed by political leaders, parties, or institutions where they refuse to apologize or take
responsibility for their actions, policies, or decisions. This program views similar impacts by
parents to children. They may refuse to apologize for incorrect rules and punishment, abuse,
or unethical behaviour, thereby undermining trust in the hierarchy parental system. These
figures may dismiss valid criticism, deny allegations, or shift blame onto others without
acknowledging their own role or expressing remorse. Non-apologetic behaviour can be
exhibited when parents ignore or dismiss child concerns or feedback. They may avoid
acknowledging the need for reforms or downplay the severity of the problems faced by their
children. Non-apologetic behaviour can contribute to polarization and divisiveness within the
home. When leaders refuse to apologize for inflammatory or divisive rhetoric, they may
perpetuate a culture of hostility, hinder constructive dialogue, and deepen divisions.
Openness, transparency, and a willingness to apologize can help rebuild trust and foster a
healthier political environment.
According to the COM-B model (Michie S, Atkins L, West R, 2014), non-apologetic
behaviour is a behaviour whose intervention has a target behaviour change to individuals
being able to apologise correctly according to the applied behavioural science successful

apology. In principle, it is possible that with the right skills, maladaptive apologetic
behaviour can be changed. Psychological diagnoses such as autism, borderline personality
disorder and PTSD may challenge the success of behaviour change.
There is sufficient opportunity to change this behaviour, as it can be identified at
home, school, work and in relationships, as well as through government bodies (welfare,
social work etc.), Which is why we have developed the below framework. Individuals with
psychological disorders may identify that they themselves are struggling and should be
encouraged to engage in the program.
Reach
The proposed intervention will engage parents of children (aged 5+) struggling with
mental health, early mental health diagnosis, challenging behaviours (at school or home),
relationship issues (with parents, siblings or friends), challenging family dynamics (divorce)
or other willing parents who believe they can benefit from the program. It is a requirement of
the program that the child/ren from participating families are to attend. Participants will be
made aware of the program via Services Australia, existing members of the organisation,
licensed psychologists and counsellors, churches and more channels. If a child is facing
behavioural issues at school, administration is expected by Education Australia to
recommend attending this program. More government behavioural resources such as
CYMHS, PCYC, Kids Helpline, should refer the individuals to the program. Low socio-
economic, single parents of multiple children as the least likely to attend the program, due to
the high demand of their lifestyle. The commitment and travel may pose an issue. This is
partially why the children are required to attend the program. The organisation could offer
school transport or home transport, as well as a webinar series or school holiday session.

The program will begin with a set of demographic questions as well as behavioural
questions regarding apologetic behaviour at home, completed by the parent, child and a
bystander. This will be completed during a visit by a social worker to assist the child in
completing the questionnaire to ensure there is no social bias or external influence by the
parent. These measurements will determine the suitability for the program, if they aren’t
suitable, our staff will refer to more appropriate programs. As well as be used to compare to
the same questionnaire at the end of the program and to utilise as standardised measurements
for our future intakes. The demographic questions will take into consideration ethnicity,
disabilities, family size, socio-economic standing and more to identify any correlations to see
what generalised population we can assist.
Efficacy
The primary aim of this intervention is to offer parents and children the skills and
knowledge to apologise sincerely and with commitment to the apology. This should reduce
the number of a recurring conflict within the home and reduce the duration of any conflicts
within the home and increase in forgiveness and trust. This intervention intends both parties
to increase interpersonal skills, decrease family and social tension. More trust, increased self-
esteem, increased accountability, less behavioural issues, improved mental health and an
increased ability to resolve conflict are secondary outcomes. These will be measured by a
questionnaire at one month, six months and twelve months after completion of the program
of both the parents and children (if required, an assistant for the child will be provided so
there is no bias). It is intended that this program will begin to see benefits upon completion,
but with practice of the skills, will see maximised potential at one year.
Adoption

This intervention aims to be adopted by community not-for-profit companies that support
both parents and children, a particular example is Triple-P Parenting (University of
Queensland, 2023), but can be extended to broader organisations that focus on child mental
health, such as PCYC, CYMHS (The COPMI National Initiative, 2023), BCYF (Barwon
Child, Youth and Family; 2023) and more. These companies are supported and funded by the
Australian Government, allowing access and advertisement through welfare to some of the
targeted participants, as well as federal endorsement to advertise and recruit through public
systems (hospitals, schools, prisons and more).
These companies all promote healthy family habits, relationships and focus on both
parties’ mental health, but prioritise younger generation to prevent continued maladaptive
behaviours. This intervention compliments their existing programs, ensuring compatibility.
Furthermore, these companies would benefit from adopting this intervention as its
observability will be measured at the end, allowing room for modifiability, or reversibility
with no out-of-pocket expenses due to government funding, and minimal initiation cost.
However, the time required is a commitment of one day a week after school for two hours for
both the parent and child, for a total of seven weeks, which the organisation may see as a
challenge, but they can offer an accelerated course over seven days during the school
holidays.
Implementation
This framework aims to promote sincere apologies and resolve conflicts in families
and individuals. Objectives include reducing long-lasting conflicts and increasing trust at
home, fostering forgiveness and self-esteem, improving behavioural performance, and
enhancing mental health and wellbeing. The program does not address regular conflicts

within families and is not licensed therapy. It should identify signs for referral to therapy or
appropriate authorities in cases of abuse or child safety concerns.
This intervention can be adapted to incorporate all sixteen domains of the Behaviour
change techniques taxonomy (Michie, S., et al; 2013). This proposal will focus on the most
vital to the program. This program refers to correct apologetic behaviour as ‘the target
communicator behaviour’ and forgiveness as ‘the target receiver behaviour’.
Parents will be required to attend the program with their children. The program will
require a free community space for one evening over seven weeks, with two separate areas,
that can keep child and parent programs confidential from each other. It will require a
professional in social work/science, or similar, to develop both the diaries and toolboxes.
Each group will need one qualified facilitator as well as the child program using a volunteer
buddy system, alike ‘The Rainbow House’ (Deirdre Mavor, 2018).
In the group setting, persuasion will be used to compare the difference in quality of
life for the current generation and future generations with the healthy versus non-healthy
behaviour. This group setting will allow group therapy, which may not be affordable to these
individuals. Environmental restructuring could also be applied to the recipient group as they
will be taught to construct boundaries around actions that they think are right and wrong,
prompting an apology from their parents.
The program will provide interactive sessions that outlines pros and cons of engaging
and not-engaging in these behaviours, from a mental, physical, social, and economical
perspective (personal, work and school environment). Goals will be set throughout the
program, beginning in the initial session, which will plan for a better home environment and
relationship, this will be revisited weekly, to review how participants achieved these goals or

tried skills, successfully or not. The success of the program will be measured with a final goal
review.
Participants in the program receive a problem-solving toolbox with age-appropriate
tools of self-awareness, measurements of conflicts, and act (Jongsma, A. E., Peterson, L. M.,
& McInnis, W. P; 2014). Weekly diaries facilitate self-regulation and teach apologies.
Repetition and substitution techniques are used for skill increase. Antecedents and
government resources encourage desired behaviour are included.
Everything in the toolbox will focus on shaping knowledge, breaking down the
malignant behaviours and steps on how to overcome these. The parent's toolbox includes
information on behaviours' impact on the antecedents of their behaviour not only to their life
– but to their child’s life, generational influences, and comparison of engaging versus not
engaging. It offers reattribution and validation for understanding one's behaviour.
The program helps parents reframe their beliefs on apology and conflict, breaking
generational cycles. A certificate of completion is awarded at the end. There are various
programs that can support the potential success of this intervention, both state and national
wide, online and in-person. There are various successful programs for divorce, grief,
emotional regulation, distress tolerance, positive parenting, youth mental health, and more.
However, there hasn’t been a program that has attempted to rectify the maladaptive
apologising behaviours that are increasingly consuming our societies, families and parents of
generations to come.
Maintenance

Long-term impacts for the participants of this program can be not only better
emotional regulation, self-acceptance, reduced social and relationship tension, reduced
conflict and stress, better work ethic, better mental health and more, and these effects may be
seen for generations if trauma is prevented for the following generation. The more that
individuals engage in the apologetic behaviour during conflict, the better their skills will
become. It may be a case that the course is not long enough, and relapse may occur, as the
most successful programs are 52 sessions over a year. However, participants are welcome to
return if their conflicts resume. For maintenance, statistics and to simply remind participants
of the tools that they have access to, we will do a final survey at the end of the program,
another at three months, another at six months and another at a year. These will all be
completed as a home visit with a social worker to assist the child in completing the survey in
confidence and keeping their thoughts confidential from their parents. Similar programs, such
as DBT, CBT and ACT (Ruork, A. K., et al. 2022) as well as companies such as the Rainbow
House, BRAVE (University of Queensland, 2023), BlackDog Institute (BlackDog Institute,
2023) are able to function wholly from government funding and show positive results. If the
program shows successful results statistically, the adopting companies should have no
problem for long-term use, as they already have the financial support of the government and
it is not a resource-heavy program, it is very similar to the ones that they already use.
Conclusion
It's important to note that the decision to forgive or not forgive is highly personal and
influenced by various factors such as the nature of the offense, the level of harm caused, the
presence of remorse or restitution, and individual beliefs and values. While forgiveness is
often regarded as a positive and healing process, it is not an obligation, and individuals have
the right to determine whether forgiveness is appropriate or achievable in their circumstances.

References
Australian Psychological Society. (2023). Build, Support, Prepare: Investing in
Australia’s Future: Pre Budget Submission (23-24).
https://psychology.org.au/getmedia/20167248-602e-4031-9f41-51b5ecbb0644/aps-2023-24-
pre-budget-submission.pdf
Anonymous. (2014). Sorry seems to be the hardest word. Management Today, 52, 52–
52.
Binagwaho, A., Senga, J. (2021). Children and Adolescent Mental Health in a Time
of COVID-19: A Forgotten Priority. Ann Glob Health, 87(1), 57. DOI: 10.5334/aogh.3330
Ciocca, G., Rossi, R., Collazzoni, A., Gorea, F., Vallaj, B., Stratta, P., Longo, L., Limoncin,
E., Mollaioli, D., Gibertoni, D., Santarnecchi, E., Pacitti, F., Niolu, C., Siracusano, A.,
Jannini, E. A., & Di Lorenzo, G. (2020). The impact of attachment styles and defense
mechanisms on psychological distress in a non-clinical young adult sample: A path
analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 273, 384–390.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.05.014
COPMI: What Works. (2023). Research Gems: Professional Organisations [Fact
Sheet]. Children of Parents with a Mental Illness. https://www.copmi.net.au/professionals-
organisations/copmi-what-works/research-summaries-gems/
Department of Health. (2021). Victoria’s mental health and wellbeing workforce
strategy 2021–2024. (ISBN/ISSN 978-1-76096-662-1). Victoria State Government.
https://www.health.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-12/victorias-mh-wellbeing-workforce-
strategy-2021-24-pdf.pdf

Duan, S., Lawrence, A., Valmaggia, L., Moll, J., & Zahn, R. (2022). Maladaptive blame-
related action tendencies are associated with vulnerability to major depressive disorder.
Journal of Psychiatric Research, 145, 70–76.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2021.11.043
For parents and carers: CHQ: Mental Health Services. Children’s Health Queensland.
(2021, March 16). https://www.childrens.health.qld.gov.au/chq/our-services/mental-
health-services/parents-carers/
Jongsma, A. E., Peterson, L. M., & McInnis, W. P. (2023). Child psychotherapy homework
planner. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Koutsos, P., Wertheim, E. H., & Kornblum, J. (2008). Paths to interpersonal forgiveness: The
roles of personality, disposition to forgive and contextual factors in predicting
forgiveness following a specific offence. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(2),
337–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.08.011
Martinez-Vaquero, L. A., Han, T. A., Pereira, L. M., & Lenaerts, T. (2015). Apology and
forgiveness evolve to resolve failures in cooperative agreements. Scientific Reports,
5(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep10639
McNab, L. (2008). Proud to Be Apologising. Australian and Aotearoa New Zealand
Psychodrama Association Journal, (17), 10–17. https://search-informit-
org.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/doi/10.3316/informit.768193859590439
Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011). The behaviour change wheel: A new
method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions.
Implementation Science, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-42

Michie, S., Richardson, M., Johnston, M., Abraham, C., Francis, J., Hardeman, W., Eccles,
M. P., Cane, J., & Wood, C. E. (2013). The behavior change technique taxonomy (V1)
of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: Building an international consensus for the
reporting of behavior change interventions. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 46(1), 81–
95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-013-9486-6
Parent and family groups. BCYF. (2023, February 23). https://www.bcyf.org.au/bcyf-family-
services/parent-and-family-groups/
Ruork, A. K., Finkelstein, J., McLean, C. L., & Rizvi, S. L. (2022). Dialectical behavior
therapy and acceptance and commitment therapy: Areas of overlap and distinction.
Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 52(4), 281–292.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-022-09550-x
School of Psychology - University of Queensland. (2023).
https://brave4you.psy.uq.edu.au/teen-program
Support groups for teens and parents. Black Dog Institute. (2023, April 6).
https://www.blackdoginstitute.org.au/resources-support/support-groups/
The Triple P Evidence Base. (2023). Positive Parenting Program [Fact Sheet].
University of Queensland. https://pfsc-evidence.psy.uq.edu.au/

Behaviour Intervention for Maladaptive Apology Behaviours

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Behaviour Intervention for Maladaptive Apology Behaviours

Similar to Behaviour Intervention for Maladaptive Apology Behaviours (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Behaviour Intervention for Maladaptive Apology Behaviours