Guilt and Shame,Justice and Mercy

This essay argues that the criminal justice system in the United States is flawed because it focuses principally on punishment of illegal actions without considering offenders as persons in their entirety. It considers the role that constructive shame and mercy can play in addressing this flaw. The essay concludes by applying this argument to the case of shaming penalties within criminal justice.     

Maternal Guilt and Shame: The Role of Self-discrepancy and Fear of Negative Evaluation

Guilt and shame are emotions commonly associated with motherhood. Self-discrepancy theory proposes that guilt and shame result from perceived discrepancies between one’s actual and ideal selves. Fear of negative evaluation by others may enhance the effects of self-discrepancy especially for shame, which involves fear of others’ reproach. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationships between self discrepancy, guilt, shame, and fear of negative evaluation in a cross-sectional, self report study of mothers. Mothers of children five and under (N = 181) completed an on-line survey measuring guilt, shame, fear of negative evaluation, and maternal self-discrepancies. Guilt and shame were related to maternal self-discrepancy and fear of negative evaluation. In addition, fear of negative evaluation moderated the relationship between maternal self-discrepancy and shame such that mothers who greatly feared negative evaluation had a very strong relationship between these variables. Maternal self-discrepancy and shame were not related among mothers who had low fear of negative evaluation. The results are discussed in terms of the detrimental effects of internalizing idealized standards of perfect motherhood.     

Reappraising the Moral Nature of Emotions in Decision Making: The Case of Shame and Guilt

Emotions play a crucial role in moral behavior. The present paper does not contest this point but argues that qualifications of certain feelings such as shame and guilt as moral emotions should not exclusively be based on a proximal analysis of their function. A proximal analysis details how moral emotions produce moral behavior. Emotions are qualified as moral when they are elicited by concerns for others rather than the self and produce prosocial action tendencies. Although researchers have acknowledged that moral emotions may also have an ultimate function that details why it is in the individual interest that these moral effects occur, they have neglected to translate such ideas into testable hypotheses. Using guilt and shame as an example, we show how an analysis of ultimate functions accommodates recent findings, which contest the view that guilt is more moral than shame and provides new insights as to when and why moral emotions will produce moral effects.     

The Approach and Avoidance Function of Guilt and Shame Emotions: Comparing Reactions to Self-Caused and Other-Caused Wrongdoing

Although theory suggests that guilt motivates approach tendencies and shame motivates avoidance tendencies, research has not always supported these relationships. The present study examined the degree to which shame and guilt are uniquely predictive of avoidance and approach motives, respectively, for both self-caused and other-caused wrongdoings. Results revealed that shame and guilt are more highly correlated for self-caused compared to other-caused wrongdoings. This greater blending of shame and guilt in response to self-caused acts makes it somewhat more difficult to distinguish between different unique motivational correlates of these two emotions. However, in response to other-caused wrongdoings, shame uniquely predicted avoidance tendencies (distancing from the event), whereas guilt uniquely predicted approach tendencies (repairing the event). The implications for research on motivation, emotion, and social relations are discussed.

For Shame: Feminism,Breastfeeding Advocacy,and Maternal Guilt

In this paper, we provide a new framework for understanding infant‐feeding‐related maternal guilt and shame, placing these in the context of feminist theoretical and psychological accounts of the emotions of self‐assessment. Whereas breastfeeding advocacy has been critiqued for its perceived role in inducing maternal guilt, we argue that the emotion women often feel surrounding infant feeding may be better conceptualized as shame in its tendency to involve a negative self‐assessment—a failure to achieve an idealized notion of good motherhood. Further, we suggest, both formula‐feeding and breastfeeding mothers experience shame: the former report feeling that they fail to live up to ideals of womanhood and motherhood, and the latter transgress cultural expectations regarding feminine modesty. The problem, then, is the degree to which mothers are vulnerable to shame generally, regardless of infant feeding practices. As an emotion that is less adaptive and potentially more damaging than guilt, shame ought to be the focus of resistance for both feminists and breastfeeding advocates, who need to work in conjunction with women to oppose this shame by assisting them in constructing their own ideals of good motherhood that incorporate a sense of self‐concern.     

Shame and Guilt: The Psychology of Sacramental Confession

Abstract

Altered states challenge an individual's established construction of reality, the personalized mythology by which one operates. Sometimes those altered states offer a glimpse into aspects of being that the mythology is unable to embrace. Experiences of this nature may challenge the prevailing mythic structure. This confrontation between the established construction of reality and the view provided in the altered state may inspire a profound and wholesome shift in the person's sense of being, or it may lead to destabilizing conflicts with previously unquestioned belief systems and patterns of behavior. This article discusses the lure—and the dilemmas — of attempting to incorporate directly into one's life the raw creativity of a powerful and inspiring altered state, the challenges of reconciling such experiences with one's existing mythology, and it presents a framework for facilitating such a reconciliation.     

Toward Forgiveness: The Role of Shame,Guilt Anger,and Empathy

This research explored forgiving and its relationship to adaptive moral emotional processes: proneness to shame, guilt, anger, and empathic responsiveness. Gender differences associated with forgiving were analyzed. Participants were 138 graduate students in a large northeastern urban university. Results revealed that guilt‐proneness was positively related to Total Forgiveness, as were Empathetic Concern and Perspective Taking. A positive relationship between anger reduction and Overall Forgiveness was found. Guilt‐proneness, anger reduction, and detachment informed the process of forgiveness for women. For men, age, shame‐proneness, and pride in behavior informed the process of forgiveness. Implications and possible research are discussed.     

Small or Big in the Eyes of the Other: On the Developmental Psychopathology of Self-Conscious Emotions as Shame,Guilt, and Pride

The self-conscious emotions of guilt, shame, and pride typically occur when people evaluate their own self through the eyes of another person. This article will first of all discuss the nature and function of self-conscious emotions, and describe their developmental course in children and adolescents. Then, a number of variables are discussed that are thought to increase young people’s proneness to experience self-conscious emotions. Following this, the empirical evidence on the relationships between guilt, shame, and pride and various types of psychopathology in children and adolescents will be summarized. A model is presented to explain why these self-conscious emotions are associated with a diversity of psychopathological outcomes. Finally, recommendations for clinical practice are made in terms of assessment and interventions targeting the origins and sequelae of self-conscious emotions.     

Gender Role Stress in Relation to Shame,Guilt, and Externalization

This study explored how gender role stress variables are related to shame‐proneness, guilt‐proneness, and externalization. Undergraduates completed the Test of Self‐Conscious Affect and the Masculine or Feminine Gender Role Stress Scale, respectively. Canonical analyses revealed 3 significant roots for the male sample accounting for 50% of the total variance between gender role stress and self‐conscious emotions, and 1 significant root for the female sample accounting for 31% of the variance. The discussion examines the complex relationship between gender role ideals and the experience of shame, guilt, and the use of externalization as a defense against these painful affects.     

Parental Apologies,Empathy, Shame,Guilt, and Attachment: A Path Analysis

The authors investigated the complex relationships of parental attitudes toward apologies, empathy, shame, guilt, and the parent's attachment orientation. Survey responses were obtained from 327 parents. A path analysis of the developed model demonstrated a close model fit (root‐mean‐square error of approximation = .07; comparative fit index = .93; incremental fit index = .94; χ² = 30.71, p < .001), supporting previous research on apologies as beneficial to relationships. A parent's proclivity toward apologies, positively influenced by empathy and guilt and negatively influenced by shame‐withdraw behaviors, produced a more secure parent–child attachment.     

Moving Toward Self-Forgiveness: Removing Barriers Related to Shame,Guilt, and Regret

When people believe that they have hurt or offended someone, one potentially adaptive response would be to forgive the self. In an ideal process of self-forgiveness, an offender would accept an appropriate amount of responsibility, experience enough guilt to prompt reparative behaviors and improvements in character, and then release excess guilty feelings that no longer serve a useful function. In real life, however, this process often goes awry. Sometimes people avoid guilty feelings altogether, taking emotional shortcuts to repair their moods and self-images without accepting responsibility or repairing relational damage. Others go to the opposite extreme, getting caught up in negative feelings such as shame, excessive guilt, and regret about their offenses. This article briefly reviews research on these potentially problematic responses and suggests ways that each one could be addressed in interventions to facilitate self-forgiveness.     

Bound to Feel Bad About Oneself: Relations Between Attachment and the Self-conscious Emotions of Guilt and Shame in Children and Adolescents

Two cross-sectional studies were conducted to explore the relationship between attachment and the self-conscious emotions of guilt and shame in childhood. Study 1 was performed in non-clinical children aged 9–13 years (N = 688) who completed a single-item measure of attachment style and a vignette-based instrument for assessing guilt and shame. Results showed that children who classified themselves as insecurely attached displayed higher levels of shame and maladaptive types of guilt as compared to securely attached children. Study 2 was conducted in adolescents aged 12–18 years (N = 135), of whom the majority was referred to a clinical setting because of externalizing problems. Adolescents filled in a dimensional scale for measuring attachment quality to parents and peers and the above mentioned vignette-based instrument of guilt and shame. It was found that the clinical adolescents generally exhibited lower levels of self-conscious emotions as compared to non-clinical adolescents. Within this clinical group, communication to parents and peers was associated with higher levels of self-conscious emotions, and alienation was accompanied by higher levels of maladaptive forms of guilt and shame. Altogether, these results fit with the theory that attachment (in)security is involved in people’s proneness to experience self-conscious emotions.     

Shame, Guilt, Ego Development and the Five-Factor Model of Personality

Shame, guilt, and ego development are conceptually interrelated constructs, yet their empirical relations have not yet been examined. Further, these constructs have not yet been mapped onto the widely used Five-Factor Model. In Study 1, relations were examined between these three domains within a sample of Australian university students. Two types of guilt were distinguished, Empathic Guilt (associated with Agreeableness) and Anxious Guilt (associated with Neuroticism). The relationship between Shame and Ego Level was found to be curvilinear, with Shame greatest for persons at intermediate stages of ego development. In Study 2, relations between ego development and the Five-Factor Model were further examined. Across both studies, Ego Level was best predicted from Conscientiousness among men and from Openness among women. Relations between Ego Level, proneness to shame and guilt, and the five factors were typically modest, suggesting that these represent complementary approaches to the study of personality.     

Evolving Concepts of Evolution: The Case of Shame and Guilt

Evolutionary biologists often refer to a distinction between ultimate and proximate explanation. On the one hand, such a distinction points to important issues for social psychologists, especially in terms of what it means to say that people experience emotions such as guilt and shame. On the other hand, the value of the ultimate/proximate distinction depends on how it is understood because its application can be problematic. We illustrate the use and possible misuse of the distinction in terms of its application to the differentiation of the self‐conscious emotions guilt and shame.     

Shame Proneness,Guilt Proneness,Behavioral Self-Handicapping,and Skill Level: A Mediational Analysis

In this study, the relationship between shame proneness, guilt proneness, behavioral self-handicapping, and skill level was examined in elite youth soccer players (N = 589, M_age = 16.8, SD = 1.8). Mediation analyses showed that shame proneness had a positive direct relationship with self-handicapping and a weak negative indirect relationship with skill level. Guilt proneness was shown to have a negative direct relationship to self-handicapping and a positive weak indirect relationship to skill level. Shame proneness may, thus, stimulate behavioral self-handicapping, whereas guilt proneness may discourage behavioral self-handicapping in soccer players.