Assessment of shame and guilt in a psychiatric sample: a comparison of two measures

The relationship between measures of shame, guilt, and psychopathology was examined in a heterogeneous inpatient sample (n=82) using the Test of Self-Conscious Affect (TOSCA) and the Personal Feelings Questionnaire-2 (PFQ-2). It was predicted that both shame scales would correlate positively with measures of psychopathology. This hypothesis was supported in bivariate analyses, however, when partialed for each respective guilt scale, only the TOSCA maintained significant associations with measures of psychopathology. It was predicted that only the PFQ-2 guilt scale would correlate positively with measures of psychopathology, and this hypothesis was supported in both bivariate analyses and partial correlations, controlling for shame scores. These findings support previous work, suggesting that the TOSCA and PFQ-2 guilt scales assess different constructs of guilt. Methodological issues of shame and guilt assessment with psychiatric patients also are discussed.     

Two promising shame and guilt scales: a construct validity comparison

This study compared the validity of two promising measures of shame and guilt proneness: revisions of the Harder Personal Feelings Questionnaire (PFQ2; Harder & Lewis, 1987) and the Hoblitzelle Adapted Shame and Guilt Scale (ASGS; Hoblitzelle, 1982). Internal consistency, test-retest stability, factor structure, and construct validity with convergent and discriminant personality dimensions were examined for both scales. In addition to the shame and guilt measures, 63 (37 male, 26 female) mostly freshman college students completed a randomly ordered battery of personality scales theoretically relevant to shame and guilt proneness. Results support the reliability and shame/guilt factor structure of each scale. ASGS Shame correlations appeared marginally more valid with 11 external construct variables than PFQ2 Shame, whereas PFQ2 Guilt was clearly more valid than its corresponding ASGS subscale. New, potentially improved scales were constructed from the factor analyses and from item analyses. However, the resulting scales did not show improved validity.     

Empathy, guilt, and gender: a comparison of two measures of guilt

The relations of empathy with two measures of guilt were examined in a sample of 13- to 16-year-olds (N= 113). Empathy was measured using Davis's IRI and guilt by Tangney's TOSCA and Hoffman's semi-projective story completion method that includes two different scenarios, guilt over cheating and guilt over inaction. Empathy correlated more strongly with both measures of guilt than the two measures correlated with each other. For boys, cognitive perspective-taking was a stronger predictor for guilt than for girls. Hoffman's guilt over inaction was more strongly associated with empathy measures in girls than in boys, whereas for guilt over cheating the pattern was the opposite. The results indicate that boys and girls may emphasize different aspects of morality.     

Appraisal antecedents of shame and guilt: support for a theoretical model

Four studies used experimental and correlational methods to test predictions about the antecedents of shame and guilt derived from an appraisal-based model of self-conscious emotions (Tracy & Robins, 2004). Results were consistent with the predicted relations between appraisals (i.e., causal attributions) and emotions. Specifically, (a) internal attributions were positively related to both shame and guilt; (b) the chronic tendency to make external attributions was positively related to the tendency to experience shame; and (c) internal, stable, uncontrollable attributions for failure were positively related to shame, whereas internal, unstable, controllable attributions for failure were positively related to guilt. Emotions and attributions were assessed using a variety of methods, so converging results across studies indicate the robustness of the findings and provide support for the theoretical model.     

Introducing the GASP scale: a new measure of guilt and shame proneness

Although scholars agree that moral emotions are critical for deterring unethical and antisocial behavior, there is disagreement about how 2 prototypical moral emotions--guilt and shame--should be defined, differentiated, and measured. We addressed these issues by developing a new assessment--the Guilt and Shame Proneness scale (GASP)--that measures individual differences in the propensity to experience guilt and shame across a range of personal transgressions. The GASP contains 2 guilt subscales that assess negative behavior-evaluations and repair action tendencies following private transgressions and 2 shame subscales that assess negative self-evaluations (NSEs) and withdrawal action tendencies following publically exposed transgressions. Both guilt subscales were highly correlated with one another and negatively correlated with unethical decision making. Although both shame subscales were associated with relatively poor psychological functioning (e.g., neuroticism, personal distress, low self-esteem), they were only weakly correlated with one another, and their relationships with unethical decision making diverged. Whereas shame-NSE constrained unethical decision making, shame-withdraw did not. Our findings suggest that differentiating the tendency to make NSEs following publically exposed transgressions from the tendency to hide or withdraw from public view is critically important for understanding and measuring dispositional shame proneness. The GASP's ability to distinguish these 2 classes of responses represents an important advantage of the scale over existing assessments. Although further validation research is required, the present studies are promising in that they suggest the GASP has the potential to be an important measurement tool for detecting individuals susceptible to corruption and unethical behavior.     

Assessment of shame and guilt and their relationships to psychopathology.

Two studies are reported. First, we tested the previously validated Personal Feelings Questionnaire-2 (PFQ2; Harder & Zalma, 1990) shame and guilt measure and the Adapted Shame and Guilt Scale (ASGS; Hoblitzelle, 1982) Shame subscale against the newly introduced Self-Conscious Affect and Attribution Inventory (SCAAI; Tangney, 1990) for shame and guilt dispositions. Fifty-nine college undergraduates completed randomly ordered personality inventories reflecting constructs theoretically relevant to the presence of shame and guilt proneness. Correlations between the affect measures and personality variables showed evidence of validity for all shame scales. The PFQ2 Guilt subscale also demonstrated construct validity when partialled for shame, but the SCAAI did not. Second, we tested hypotheses regarding the relative importance of shame and guilt to various symptom types (Symptom Checklist-90-Revised; Derogatis, 1983) using 71 college undergraduates. Both emotions were approximately equally related to all major symptom clusters, but there was some evidence for differential patterns of relative importance for shame and guilt to different symptoms.     

Social cuing of guilt by anger and of shame by disgust

Scholars have proposed a conceptual structure for the self-critical moral emotions of guilt and shame and the other-critical emotions of anger and disgust. In this model, guilt is linked with anger and shame with disgust. This relationship may express itself in asymmetrical social cuing between emotions: In a social context, other people's angry facial expressions may communicate that the target should feel guilty, and other people's disgusted facial expressions may communicate that the target should feel ashamed. We conducted two experiments, one in the United Kingdom and the other in Spain, in which participants were shown pictures of faces expressing either anger or disgust. Participants rated the degree to which the faces would make them feel guilt or shame in a casual social encounter, and they answered questions about inferences concerning the emotional expressions. In both studies, angry expressions led to greater guilt and less shame than did disgusted expressions. This relationship was explained better by the type of norm violation inferred than by whether the violation was thought to involve the target's action or personality versus the target's character.     

Cain. The separation of shame and guilt exemplified in Genesis

Referring to Cain's fratricide, the authors investigate the origin of guilt. They assume that feelings of shame preceded feelings of guilt and that the former are the cause of the destructiveness and persistence of the latter.     

Attachment styles,shame, guilt,and collaborative problem-solving orientations

The present study explored relations among adult attachment styles, shame- and guilt-proneness, and several measures of relationship problem-solving attitudes and behaviors. Participants were 142 undergraduates (32 males, 110 females) who completed both categorical and continuous measures of adult attachment, as well as self-report measures of the other constructs under investigation. Most participants (93%) were currently involved in either exclusive or casual dating relationships at the time of the study. Controlling for respondents’dating status, results indicated that participants’attachment styles were significantly related to both shame-proneness and collaborative problem-solving, Preoccupied and fearful students were more shame-prone than were their secure and dismissive peers, and secure participants reported significantly higher collaboration scores relative to their fearful counterparts. As expected, shame and guilt scores were differentially related to collaborative problem-solving, and participants’attachment security significantly moderated observed shame-guilt correlations. Finally, respondents’guilt and shame scores partly mediated observed relations between adult attachment styles and collaborative problem-solving orientations.     

Signal identification: The comparison of two competitive theories

Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics - On each of a series of random trials, 10 observers had to identify which of two possible tones of different amplitude had been presented. Two theories...     

Nuestra culpa: collective guilt and shame as predictors of reparation for historical wrongdoing

Three studies examined the hypothesis that collective guilt and shame have different consequences for reparation. In 2 longitudinal studies, the ingroup was nonindigenous Chileans (Study 1: N = 124/120, lag = 8 weeks; Study 2: N = 247/137, lag = 6 months), and the outgroup was Chile's largest indigenous group, the Mapuche. In both studies, it was found that collective guilt predicted reparation attitudes longitudinally. Collective shame had only cross-sectional associations with reparation and no direct longitudinal effects. In Study 2, collective shame moderated the longitudinal effects of collective guilt such that the effects of guilt were stronger for low-shame respondents. In Study 3 (N = 193 nonindigenous Chileans), the cross-sectional relationships among guilt, shame, and reparation attitudes were replicated. The relationship between shame and reparation attitudes was mediated by a desire to improve the ingroup's reputation.     

Moral affect and cognitive processes: Differentiating shame from guilt among men and women

Men (n = 103) and women (n = 183) completed measures of shame, guilt, self-critical cognitions, and perfectionism in order to explore gender differences in cognitive processes associated with moral affect. Women reported significantly higher rates of shame and guilt than men. Separate factor analyses for gender indicated that for men, shame loaded with self-critical cognitions while guilt loaded with dimensions of perfectionism. For women, both shame and guilt loaded with self-critical cognitions, but only socially-prescribed perfectionism. Results suggest that a person's gender may need to be considered in evaluations of shame and guilt.     

The role of public exposure in moral and nonmoral shame and guilt

Although scholarly traditions assume that shame results more from the public exposure of a transgression or incompetence than guilt does, this distinction has little empirical support. Four studies, using either undergraduate participants' responses to hypothetical scenarios, their remembered experiences, or the coding of literary passages, reexamined this issue. Supporting traditional claims, public exposure of both moral (transgressions) and nonmoral (incompetence) experiences was associated more with shame than with guilt. Shame was also more strongly linked with nonmoral experiences of inferiority, suggesting 2 core features of shame: its links with public exposure and with negative self-evaluation. The distinctive features of guilt included remorse, self-blame, and the private feelings associated with a troubled conscience.     

Proneness to shame, proneness to guilt, and psychopathology.

The links between shame and guilt and psychopathology were examined. In 2 studies, 245 and 234 undergraduates completed the Self-Conscious Affect and Attribution Inventory, the Symptom Checklist 90, the Beck Depression Inventory, the State-Trait Anxiety Scale, and the Attributional Style Questionnaire. Results failed to support Lewis's (1971) notion that shame and guilt are differentially related to unique symptom clusters. Shame-proneness was strongly related to psychological maladjustment in general. Guilt-proneness was only moderately related to psychopathology; correlations were ascribable entirely to the shared variance between shame and guilt. Although clearly related to a depressogenic attributional style, shame accounted for substantial variance in depression, above and beyond attributional style.     

A study of the comparative structure of guilt and shame in a Chinese society.

On the basis of previous theoretical and empirical analyses of the comparative structures of guilt and shame, the authors hypothesized that antecedent condition (personal inadequacy vs. moral norm violation), audience presence, and personal responsibility attribution would distinguish shame from guilt. Although the subject population was Hong Kong Chinese, evidence from previous studies suggests that the comparative structures of guilt and shame are quite similar across cultures. The subjects were asked to recall either a guilt or a shame incident, and their responses were then coded into the predictor variables. The results of the study indicated that guilt was most likely to emerge when individuals had violated a moral norm and held themselves responsible for their conduct. In contrast, shame emerged more frequently when subjects felt personally inadequate than when they had violated moral norms. Moreover, when a guilt incident was reported, and audience was rarely mentioned, whereas subjects who reported a shame incident would generally feel personally responsible and often mentioned being looked at or evaluated. However, neither personal responsibility nor the presence of an audience seemed to be essential for a person to experience shame.     

How social connectedness affects guilt and shame: Mediation by hope and differentiation of self

We tested a mediation model of social connectedness and guilt and shame. Social connectedness was hypothesized to be related to greater hope and differentiation of self. Hope and differentiation of self, in turn, were expected to be related to less shame and more prosocial guilt. The results found that hope mediated the relationship between social connectedness and guilt, and differentiation of self mediated the relationship between social connectedness and shame. Alternative explanatory models were explored and taken into consideration in the interpretation of the results.     

Self-conscious emotions and depression: rumination explains why shame but not guilt is maladaptive

Feelings of shame and guilt are factors associated with depression. However, studies simultaneously investigating shame and guilt suggest that only shame has a strong unique effect, although it is not yet clear which psychological processes cause shame and not shame-free guilt to be related to depression. The authors hypothesized that shame, in contrast to guilt, elicits rumination, which then leads to depression. Therefore, in this study we investigated event-related shame and guilt, event-related rumination, and depression among 149 mothers and fathers following family breakup due to marital separation. Data were analyzed using latent variable modeling. The results confirm that shame but not guilt has a strong unique effect on depression. Moreover, the results show that the effect of shame is substantially mediated by rumination. The results are discussed against the background of self-discrepancies and self-esteem.