kb, thanks for reading and responding. I appreciate it. #2 is problematic - but I'm not sure it should be tossed out. You're right that a) we don't really know the effect on the other person and would be making a possibly false assumption. For that reason, it should be said tentatively. Maybe instead of You suggest that if I show an awareness of the other person's feelings, I might also be opening myself up to this response: "if you figured out why it was such an injury, why did you do it?" Maybe, if the person is still totally and justifiably pissed, they might say that -- but I doubt it, because this is the apology for after the blow-up. This is the apology for when you finally have realized that maybe what you did was hurtful. By showing the impact of your crappy action, in my world, the other person really feels understood. Take just now, for example: I just returned from a two-week trip and my current spousal unit is trying to connect with me, so he invites me downstairs to watch an inning of the ball game and promises to hold my hand. When I join him, he's eating, and then he jumps up to find out some info on the computer, then he answers some email. The inning ends and he's still on the computer, so I remind him that he invited me down to watch the game. He makes a bunch of "I'm sorry but this and I'm sorry but that." Now, if he had just said, "Oh shit - I got distracted. You must feel ignored or misled." I'd go, "yeah, that's it exactly" and I'd believe his apology and we'd sort it out from there. The conversation is a connecting one, not a disconnecting one. Do you see what I'm getting at? #2 is problematic mostly because it's so damn hard to put yourself in the other person's shoes and imagine how your own behaviour made them feel. To imagine yourself as hurtful (especially when you see yourself as helpful and heroic) is very very difficult. But because it is hard and almost impossible to do is no reason for me to leave it out as a possible step. OK - have at me."When I behaved like that, you must have felt completely misunderstood, falsely accused, and disconnected from me."
maybe something more tentative like, "I guess you felt . . . Is that it."
Here's a guess: I read "Acknowledge the effect on the other person" as "acknowledge the effect to that person" whereas you might mean "acknowledge the effect to better apologize." From my perspective, "acknowledge the effect on the other person" is Step Zero: apology begins with empathy and without an attempt to put yourself in their shoes, you aren't really going to internalize your crimes. We're imperfect, however, and the process is going to be a lot smoother if you attempt to figure out where you fucked up and then give them the opportunity to fill you in without your preconceived plan of attack getting in the way. Had you written "acknowledge the effect on the other person (but keep it to yourself until your apology is accepted)" I'd agree 100%. By saying "I'm sorry for ignoring you, it didn't occur to me that you might not want me checking my email while we hang out" you're also saying "I'm sorry for checking my email while we hang out" and very specifically not saying "I'm sorry for not holding your hand while we hang out" which may, in fact, be a far more important apology to make. Putting yourself in the other person's shoes is perhaps the most important social skill you can learn. Emotional intelligence has a much stronger correlation with success and happiness than intellectual intelligence does. Most people use The Golden Rule as a platitude to explain karma; few people use it forensically.