IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eltjnl/v5y2012i2p93.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Apology Strategies of Iranian Undergraduate Students

Author

Listed:
  • Mohammad Dadkhah Tehrani
  • Omid Rezaei
  • Salman Dezhara
  • Reza Soltani Kafrani

Abstract

This study investigated the different primary and secondary strategies the Iranian EFL students use in different situations and the effect of gender on this. A questionnaire was developed based on Sugimoto’s (1995) to compare the apology strategies used by male and female students, only gender was examined as a variable. The results showed that the Statement of remorse was the strategy most frequently used by male and female respondents across the sample and female participants used this strategy more frequently than male participants. Moreover The four primary strategies used by the male respondents were accounts, compensation reparation, negative assessment of responsibility (30%, 20%, 15%, 15%, respectively), while those used by female respondents were compensation, Showing lack of intent to do harm, accounts, reparation (20%, 20%, 15%, 10%, respectively). Male respondents tended to use negative assessment of responsibility more than their females, counterparts (15% and 5%, respectively). Female respondents used the strategy of promise not to repeat offense in 10% of the situations, while their male counterparts did not use this strategy at all.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohammad Dadkhah Tehrani & Omid Rezaei & Salman Dezhara & Reza Soltani Kafrani, 2012. "Apology Strategies of Iranian Undergraduate Students," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 5(2), pages 1-93, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:5:y:2012:i:2:p:93
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/14566/9931
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/14566
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:5:y:2012:i:2:p:93. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.