They apologised and nothing changed

The one that ends the discomfort. Said quickly, often before you've finished, sometimes with real feeling. Its purpose is to stop the conversation, and it works. Nothing follows it because nothing was meant to.

The one that's a plan. Slower, usually more specific, and it includes what they're going to do differently. You can tell it apart within a fortnight, because something is different.

Most people aren't cynically producing the first one. They mean it while they're saying it. Meaning it and changing it are separate, and only one of them is visible from the outside.

Watch for this one, because it turns the apology into the injury.

Once "I apologised" becomes a reason you're not allowed to raise it again, the apology is doing the opposite of repair — it's a receipt being produced to close the file. You end up in the position of seeming unwilling to let things go, when what you actually want is for the thing to stop.

It's small and it's boring. They bring it up before you do. They flag it when they nearly do it again. It's still true six weeks later when nobody's watching.

You're not looking for a better apology. You're looking for evidence, and evidence takes time — which is why "I don't know yet" is a completely reasonable answer to whether you've forgiven them.

Warmer

I know you're sorry, and I believed you. I'm not bringing it up to punish you. It's happened again, and I'd rather say that now than pretend I haven't noticed.

More direct

I don't need another apology. I need it to stop. What's going to be different this time?

Then the conversation isn't about the incident any more, it's about the pattern — and it's worth saying that plainly, because otherwise you'll be treated as though you're upset about the most recent one.

Honne keeps the thread across months, so you don't have to hold the whole history in your head to know whether this has happened before. Free to start, and nobody here is keeping a record.