Collective guilt,moral outrage,and support for helping the poor: A matter of system versus in‐group responsibility framing

We examined how the framing of responsibility for reducing socio‐economic inequality affects individuals' emotional reactions towards the poor and the willingness to engage in prosocial actions. Attribution of responsibility to either the system (government and institutions), the less deprived in‐group, or the disadvantaged out‐group (poor) was measured (Study 1) and manipulated (Study 2). Consistent with our hypotheses, moral outrage was higher than collective guilt when system responsibility for inequalities was put forth, but collective guilt arose to reach the level of moral outrage when in‐group responsibility was emphasized. Moreover, distinguishing between collective guilt for action and for inaction, we found guilt for inaction more difficult and thus less likely to arise, unless responsibility was put on the in‐group. Collective emotions were also found to be negatively linked to system justification motivation illustrating the palliative function of legitimization processes. Finally, moral outrage predicted the willingness to act upon socio‐economic inequalities both when the system's and in‐group's responsibility was emphasized, whereas collective guilt for action (but not for inaction) predicted support for prosocial actions only when the in‐group's responsibility was engaged. These findings suggest that the specific group‐based emotions in response to poverty depend on whether the system or the in‐group is held responsible and differentially predict individuals' commitment to act.     

Investigating the relationship between past contraceptive behaviour,self‐efficacy,and anticipated shame and guilt in sexual contexts among Norwegian adolescents

What are the relationships between self‐efficacy when communicating to the partner about use of contraception, stopping undesired intercourse, and perceived self‐conscious emotions in sexual contexts? How does past contraceptive behaviour influence perceived self‐efficacy? These research questions were studied among 399 10th grade students with coital experience in the county Nordland in Norway. Two dimensions of perceived emotional responses were identified in a hypothetical situation related to communicating to the partner about use of contraception, namely Shame and Emotional intimacy. Two dimensions were also identified with regard to anticipated emotional responses in a hypothetical situation related to stopping undesired intercourse: Guilt and responsibility and Emotional intimacy. Most of the boys and girls reported that they would react with positive emotions in both hypothetical situations. Path models were constructed with the affective dimensions and self‐esteem as mediating variables between past contraceptive behaviour and contextual self‐efficacy. Past behaviour influenced communication self‐efficacy indirectly via Shame, and Shame had a direct effect upon self‐efficacy. Guilt and responsibility had a direct effect upon stop‐self‐efficacy. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.     

The superego, narcissism and Great Expectations

The author notes that the concepts of the superego and narcissism were linked at conception and that superego pathology may be seen as a determining factor in the formation of a narcissistic disorder; thus an examination of the superego can function as a 'biopsy', indicating the condition of the personality as a whole. Charles Dickens's novel Great Expectations is presented as a penetrating exploration of these themes and it is argued that in Pip, the central character, Dickens provides a perceptive study of the history of a narcissistic condition. Other key figures in the book are understood as superego representations and, as such, integral to the vicissitudes of Pip's development. In particular, the lawyer Jaggers is considered as an illustration of Bion's notion of the 'ego-destructive superego'. In the course of the paper, the author suggests that Great Expectations affirms the psychoanalytic understanding that emotional growth and some recovery from narcissistic difficulties necessarily take place alongside modification of the superego, allowing for responsible knowledge of the state of the object and the possibility of realistic reparation.     

The Development and Experience of Combat‐Related PTSD: A Demand for Neurofeedback as an Effective Form of Treatment

Veterans experience a considerable course of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and because of several psychosocial issues, traditional interventions and traditional intervention settings are ineffective for this population. A new cutting‐edge approach, known as neurofeedback, trains clients to control and manipulate their central nervous system and ameliorate physiological symptoms of stress disorders. The authors delineate how neurofeedback can be an effective and innovative intervention for PTSD experienced by the military population.     

Regulatory focus as a predictor of omission bias in moral judgment: Mediating role of anticipated regrets

Omission bias occurs when people are more reluctant to accept negative consequences caused by their actions than by their inaction. Recent research on omission bias in decision‐making has found evidence for individual differences, thus indicating that some people are more likely to show omission inclination than others. The present research aims to explore the role of regulatory focus as individual difference variables in omission bias. Moreover, we examine whether anticipated regret mediates the relationship between regulatory focus and moral judgement. Moral judgement tasks utilized include: (i) moral dilemma scenarios (Study 1); and (ii) ethical scenarios embracing apparent legal rule violations (Study 2). The results of both studies show that only prevention focus is significantly related to omission bias in moral judgement. Specifically, this relationship holds regardless of the nature of the ‘omission’ (whether they are deontological or utilitarian). In addition, anticipated regret/guilt for action was found to mediate the relationship between prevention focus and omission bias. Implications and limitations are discussed based on the results of the current study.     

SCHOLARS,AMATEURS, AND ARTISTS AS PARTNERS FOR THE FUTURE OF RELIGION AND SCIENCE

We recommend that the future of religion and science involve more partnerships between scholars, amateurs, and artists. This reimagines an underdeveloped aspect of the history of religion and science. Case studies of an undergraduate course examining religious ritual and technology, seminarians reflecting on memory and identity in light of Alzheimer's disease, environmentalists responding to their guilt and shame about climate change, and Chicagoans recognizing the presence of nature in the city show how these partnerships respect insights and experiences of our varied partners, identify and resolve community problems, and advance scholarship. Sourdough starter, a new metaphor, describes these collaborative, nourishing partnerships.     

A Preliminary Study for Exploring Different Sources of Guilt in a Sample of Veterans Who Sought Chaplaincy Services

Limited research has suggested that experiencing guilt may contribute to the risk of suicidal behavior in some veteran populations. Using data collected by chaplains, this study compared the frequency with which 94 veterans with a history of suicide ideation experienced guilt relative to 670 veterans without a history of ideation. We then compared main sources of guilt reported by ideators and nonideators. Ideators reported experiencing guilt significantly more often than nonideators. No differences were noted for the source of guilt among those who reported frequently experiencing this emotion. Ideators with an infrequent experience of guilt significantly more often named life and the military as the main source of this emotion. Clinicians should be mindful of the need to appropriately assess for and address guilt among veterans at increased risk of suicide. A variety of sources, not limited only to military experiences, may contribute to a veteran’s sense of guilt.     

The effect of the belief in free market ideology on redressing corporate injustice

Many people in the major Western economies (e.g., United States, UK, and Germany) subscribe to free market ideology (FMI), which claims that institutional oversight of the market is unnecessary for public reaction can force corporations to regulate their own behavior. The question then becomes how people's belief in FMI affects their reactions to corporate transgressions. Given its ingroup‐centered values, we hypothesized that FMI beliefs would bias reactions to corporate transgressions. We report results of a pilot study showing that FMI beliefs are predicted by selfishness, tradition, conformity, and lack of universalism. We then report three experiments, which showed that stronger FMI beliefs predict weaker demands to redress corporate injustices committed by ingroup (but not outgroup) corporations (Studies 1–3), especially when victims of corporate wrongdoings belong to an outgroup (rather than the ingroup; Study 3). The findings inform our conceptual understanding of FMI and give insights about its implications for market justice.     

Can psychoanalysis help us to understand the causes and prevention of violence?

As the most adequate theory of human personality yet created, including our propensity for irrational, self-defeating, and self-destructive behavior patterns, psychoanalysis is in a unique position to help us solve the most serious crisis that the human species has been confronted by at any point in its evolutionary history: the threat to its own survival that is caused by its own behavior, namely the compulsion to engage in violence on the largest scale that its technology makes possible, even when that causes the death of the self as well as of others. This continually expanding behavior pattern, which reduces even genocide to a minor footnote compared with the self-extinction of our whole species, is created not only by “apocalyptic” fundamentalism and terrorism (“suicide bombers”), but also by the increasing and only partially preventable proliferation of thermonuclear weapons to national rulers of questionable sanity, and the apparently unpreventable continuation of industrial/economic policies and practices that will, if not reversed, make our own small planet uninhabitable. What makes people place a higher value on the continuation of these behaviors than they place on their own physical survival (or that of their children)? That is the question to which this article proposes at least the beginnings of an answer: that when a person feels shamed and humiliated to a degree that threatens the survival of that fragile and vulnerable psychological construct called his “self” (or of the religious or cultural group with which his self has identified), he will eagerly sacrifice his body (and other peoples’) in the attempt to, as he sees it, save his soul, i.e. his self and his self-esteem. The question then becomes: what are the social and psychological determinants of overwhelming shame and humiliation, and how can we protect people from being exposed to those conditions, or at least enhance their ability to respond to them in ways that are life-preserving rather than life-destroying?     

Influence of social context on the relationship between guilt and prosocial behaviour

While some previous researchers have found that guilt encourages prosocial behaviour towards a victim at the expense of other people, others have found the opposite, that is, people allocate resources at the expense of themselves. The present research used a hypothetical scenario method to determine which of these patterns would be replicated in the collectivistic context of Japanese society. In addition, we separated the cause of feelings of guilt into having caused harm and being at fault, and examined in more detail the effect of guilt on prosocial behaviour. Our results show that, in line with the second set of previous researchers, participants who were induced to feel guilt for having caused harm were more likely to allocate their resources to their victim at the expense of themselves than were individuals in the no‐harm condition. This suggests that differences in social context influence the effect of guilt on prosocial behaviour in different ways.