More than enough guilt to go around: oedipal guilt, survival guilt, separation guilt

The concepts of oedipal guilt, survivor guilt, and separation guilt are examined using clinical material from a child case to demonstrate the intermingling of these constructs. A brief review of their evolution in the psychoanalytic literature reveals a frequent conflation of the terms guilt and fear, the former at times standing in for both meanings. The fear/guilt distinction and the subsequent differentiation of guilt into oedipal, survivor, and separation guilt have implications for how analysts understand and interpret particular kinds of clinical material. Two sets of adult clinical data are next presented: the first illustrates a shift from interpreting a patient's fear of retribution for forbidden desires to interpreting guilt over pursuing those desires. The second vignette illustrates a common dynamic in which a patient's fear/anxiety regarding the ability to lead an independent life defends against deeper feelings of guilt over this same desire. This latter dynamic can play an important role in negative therapeutic reactions and interminable analyses. Developmental research suggests that toward the end of the first year of life, infants' capacity to attribute independent mental states and intentionality to self and others allows for the rudimentary experience of guilt.     

Differentiating shame from guilt

How does shame differ from guilt? Empirical psychology has recently offered distinct and seemingly incompatible answers to this question. This article brings together four prominent answers into a cohesive whole. These are that (a) shame differs from guilt in being a social emotion; (b) shame, in contrast to guilt, affects the whole self; (c) shame is linked with ideals, whereas guilt concerns prohibitions and (d) shame is oriented towards the self, guilt towards others. After presenting the relevant empirical evidence, we defend specific interpretations of each of these answers and argue that they are related to four different dimensions of the emotions. This not only allows us to overcome the conclusion that the above criteria are either unrelated or conflicting with one another, it also allows us to tell apart what is constitutive from what is typical of them.     

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.     

Torture and judgments of guilt

Although torture can establish guilt through confession, how are judgments of guilt made when tortured suspects do not confess? We suggest that perceived guilt is based inappropriately upon how much pain suspects appear to suffer during torture. Two psychological theories provide competing predictions about the link between pain and perceived blame: cognitive dissonance, which links pain to blame, and moral typecasting, which links pain to innocence. We hypothesized that dissonance might characterize the relationship between torture and blame for those close to the torture, while moral typecasting might characterize this relationship for those more distant from it. Accordingly, this experiment placed participants into one of two different roles in which people may be exposed to torture. Participants in the proximal role of prison staffer saw suffering torture victims as relatively more guilty, while participants in the relatively distant role of a radio listener saw suffering victims as more innocent.     

Reflections on hidden existential guilt

Abstract

Most personal, social and environmental stress results from our estrangement from nature's wise unconditional love within and about us. A new integrated ecology training program uniquely addresses this great challenge to the psychological community. Counseling students in natural areas over a thirty year period has produced ninety‐seven unique nature‐connecting activities that renew over forty‐nine inherent sensory fulfillments. These ecopsychology activities reduce our estrangement, its pain and adverse effects. Natural inborn feelings of love and understanding express themselves. They catalyze responsible relationships that fill the emotional voids which fuel our destructive habits, dependencies and abandonment feelings. They give natural areas added value as rejuvenators of our biological and spiritual integrity.     

Remarks in praise of guilt

This article is an elaboration and extension of an earlier article concerned with guilt and morality in the modern age. The focus is on two general issues arising from what was presented there. First, there is an attempt to explicate the conception of human agency underlying the emphasis on individual responsibility in the original essay. Second, there is a critical examination of the moral relativism position so common in the contemporary world. Both the shrinking conception of human agency and responsibility and the growing acceptance of moral relativism are strongly criticized, and it is concluded that a rationally-based morality must be defended against those many persons today for whom ‘anything goes’ in the realm of human behavior.     

Interpersonal correlates of the guilt inventory

The interpersonal correlates of the Guilt Inventory (Kugler & Jones, 1992), which yields scores for state guilt, trait guilt, and moral standards, were assessed. Data collection addressed three issues including the relationships among Guilt Inventory scores and measures of: (a) interpersonal emotions and traits (e.g., shyness, self-consciousness, anger, etc.); (b) the social support network; and (c) ratings of trait guilt, moral standards, and relevant adjectives by friends and family members. Results indicated that trait and state guilt scores were significantly related to various interpersonal measures, most particularly, depression, anxiety, shyness, and loneliness, but only modestly related to satisfaction with social support. Moral standards were generally unrelated to these variables. Others tended to rate participants higher on trait guilt negatively (e.g., higher on contemptuous, angry, guilty, etc.), and participants higher on moral standards in socially acceptable terms (e.g., higher on prompt, self-reliant, moral, and religious). Results are interpreted in view of the frequently cited distinction between social and nonsocial emotions.     

Assessing guilt toward the former spouse

Divorce is often accompanied by feelings of guilt toward the former spouse. So far, no scale has been available to measure such feelings. For this purpose, the authors developed the Guilt in Separation Scale (GiSS). Content validity was assured by using experts and lay experts to generate and select items. Exploratory analyses were run on samples of 214 divorced individuals and confirmatory analyses on 458 individuals who were in the process of divorcing. Evidence was provided for the reliability and construct validity of the GiSS. The internal consistency was high (α = .91), as were the 6-month and 12-month test-retest reliabilities (r = .72 and r = .76, respectively). The GiSS was related to shame, regret, compassion, locus of cause of the separation, unfaithfulness, and psychological functioning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).