Who wants to wash away their sins? Guilt and shame proneness and behavioral moral cleansing endorsement: a pilot study

In our pilot cross-sectional study, we aimed to explore the associations between guilt and shame proneness and moral cleansing endorsement. Our sample consisted of 484 adults (73.3% females), aged 18 and 53 (M=24.09, SD=7.32). We used a novel approach to explore moral cleansing mechanisms, i.e., a two-item scale assessing behavioral cleansing endorsement (one's agreement with the idea that people must "wash away" their immoral acts by acting in ethical ways that would "clean" their moral debt). In addition to the significant associations that we found between moral cleansing endorsement and the guilt and shame proneness dimensions (i.e., negative behavior evaluation, repair action tendencies, negative self-evaluation, and withdrawal action tendencies), results also suggested that moral cleansing endorsement was significantly predicted by overall guilt and shame proneness. More specifically, we found that higher levels of guilt and shame proneness might account for higher moral cleansing endorsement levels. We also found important associations with participants' age: our findings suggested that the higher the age, the higher the endorsement for moral actions aimed to "clean" immoral deeds. Results are discussed in relation to cultural-related factors.

Self-Conscious Affect Is Modulated by Rapid Eye Movement Sleep but Not by Targeted Memory Reactivation–A Pilot Study

The neurophysiological properties of rapid eye movement sleep (REMS) are believed to tune down stressor-related emotional responses. While prior experimental findings are controversial, evidence suggests that affective habituation is hindered if REMS is fragmented. To elucidate the topic, we evoked self-conscious negative affect in the participants (N = 32) by exposing them to their own out-of-tune singing in the evening. Affective response to the stressor was measured with skin conductance response and subjectively reported embarrassment. To address possible inter-individual variance toward the stressor, we measured the shame-proneness of participants with an established questionnaire. The stressor was paired with a sound cue to pilot a targeted memory reactivation (TMR) protocol during the subsequent night's sleep. The sample was divided into three conditions: control (no TMR), TMR during slow-wave sleep, and TMR during REMS. We found that pre- to post-sleep change in affective response was not influenced by TMR. However, REMS percentage was associated negatively with overnight skin conductance response habituation, especially in those individuals whose REMS was fragmented. Moreover, shame-proneness interacted with REM fragmentation such that the higher the shame-proneness, the more the affective habituation was dependent on non-fragmented REMS. In summary, the potential of REMS in affective processing may depend on the quality of REMS as well as on individual vulnerability toward the stressor type.

Shame-Proneness Predicts Social Psychopathology: Considering the Sociometer Theory of Shame

Introduction: The classic act-person model of shame-proneness defined shame as originating from negative self-appraisals following wrongful actions, conferring broad vulnerability to psychopathology. However, recent developments postulate that shame may originate from real or imagined social evaluation (sociometer view of shame). If so, shame might leave one vulnerable to psychosocial stressors and may manifest in social anxiety specifically, even after accounting for general negative affect. We investigated how shame-proneness predicted concurrent symptoms and prospective responses to interpersonal stressors (social anxiety, feeling evaluated, and other symptoms) over five weeks in a sample including individuals at clinical and subclinical levels of emotional symptoms. Method: We oversampled for individuals meeting criteria for anxiety and depressive disorders based on clinical interviews (n = 58) and also included those not meeting diagnostic criteria (n = 101) to ensure a broad range of symptoms (total N = 159). Participants completed baseline measures of shame- and guilt-proneness, trait negative affect (NA), and symptoms of social anxiety, depression, and generalized anxiety disorders followed by symptom diaries for 5 weeks following their worst psychosocial stressors (1,923 diaries). Results: As expected, even after controlling for NA and guilt-proneness, shame-proneness uniquely predicted concurrent social anxiety (∆R2 = 8%) and prospectively predicted experiences of social evaluation. Shame-proneness demonstrated weaker links to depression, and no unique links to general anxiety and worry. Discussion: Shame-proneness functioned in a manner predicted by sociometer theory, demonstrating specificity for social evaluative symptoms and concerns. Results have implication both for shame theory and clinical practice with shame-prone individuals.

Approaching Honor and Shame with Humility: Limitations to Our Current Understanding

Although honor and shame have been popular missiological themes in the last decade, there are several limitations associated with the concepts that occur in both the missiological literature and the secular anthropological, sociological, and psychological literature. The first set of limitations concerns the meaning of honor and shame. Their definitions vary greatly from author to author. Some authors consider honor and shame to be emotions internal to the individual and others consider them as a measure of one’s social status, something external to the individual. Similarly, there is often no distinction made between shame and shame proneness. Their relationship with other self-conscious emotions (guilt, embarrassment, and pride) is not clear. Often the distinction between vicarious and individual shame and honor is blurred. The second set of limitations concerns our lack of understanding of how honor and shame relate to culture. Since shame dynamics exist in every culture, it is not clear what is meant by a “shame culture.” Modern conceptions of culture tend to view culture as a phenomenon that is due to psychological processes within individuals, rather than external to the individual. Characteristics of cultures are described by positions on dimensions. Shame cultures are often defined as those which are more collectivistic (vs. individualistic). However, many definitions of honor and shame indicate that the dimension of cultural tightness (or uncertainty avoidance) may be just as relevant for understanding shame dynamics, and the cultural dimension of power distance may also be relevant. In light of these limitations, missiologists need to approach the concepts of honor and shame with humility.

Shame as a Predictor of the Guilt of Sexual Offenders in the Correctional Institutions

Studies of shame and guilt have focused more on normal populations and cultural and religious contexts. The study of this topic for a group of subjects who commit crimes is still limited, especially sexual crimes as actions that are considered socially embarrassing. This study focused on examining the relationship of shame with guilt on inmates of sexual crimes (N = 143) who are carrying out sentences in correctional institutions. Shame and guilt are measured using the Guilt and Shame Proneness (GASP) Scale developed by Cohen et al. This study found a significant positive association so that shame can be a predictor of guilt. This study has implications for the importance of correctional institutions providing treatment to increase shame for prisoners of sexual crimes, thereby preventing the re-offense of their crimes.

Is shame-proneness the missing link between social norms, policymaking and productive entrepreneurship?

PurposeThe purpose of the paper is to establish the need to study the shame-proneness trait of entrepreneurs – what is it and why is it important to study.Design/methodology/approachIn this conceptual paper, the authors argue that shame-proneness is an important understudied trait of entrepreneurs and put up a case for further research. The authors argue that shame-proneness moderates the effect of social acceptability on opportunity exploitation decisions. The authors also argue that productive entrepreneurship can be promoted and unproductive entrepreneurship can be prevented through policy intervention, and the level of intervention can be determined by knowing the shame-proneness level of entrepreneurs.FindingsThe key argument is the following: an entrepreneur is homo economicus and homo sociologicus, i.e. she is driven both by rational economic value consideration and by the prevalent social norms, which influence opportunity exploitation decisions. Since shame enforces compliance with social norms, it is vital to study entrepreneurs' shame-proneness to understand entrepreneurial founding across different regions. Knowing the level of shame-proneness of entrepreneurs in a given region would help the government devise effective interventions to promote productive entrepreneurship and deter unproductive or destructive entrepreneurship.Originality/valueThis paper is an original creation of the authors.

Athlete Experiences of Shame and Guilt: Initial Psychometric Properties of the Athletic Perceptions of Performance Scale Within Junior Elite Cricketers

Guilt and shame are self-conscious emotions with implications for mental health, social and occupational functioning, and the effectiveness of sports practice. To date, the assessment and role of athlete-specific guilt and shame has been under-researched. Reporting data from 174 junior elite cricketers (M = 17.34 years; females n = 85), the present study utilized exploratory factor analysis in validating the Athletic Perceptions of Performance Scale (APPS), assessing three distinct and statistically reliable factors: athletic shame-proneness, guilt-proneness, and no-concern. Conditional process analysis indicated that APPS shame-proneness mediated the relationship between general and athlete-specific distress (p < 0.01), with this pathway non-contingent on sex or past 12-month help-seeking for mental health concerns (p's > 0.05). While APPS domains of guilt-proneness and no-concern were not significant mediators, they exhibited correlations in the expected direction with indices of psychological distress and well-being. The APPS may assist coaches and support staff identify players who may benefit from targeted interventions to reduce the likelihood of experiencing shame-prone states.

Shame on me for needing you: A multistudy examination of links between receiving interpersonal emotion regulation and experiencing shame

Recent theory and research have drawn attention to interpersonal dimensions of emotion regulation. Yet, few empirical investigations of the outcomes of interpersonal emotion regulation have been conducted. We propose that one negative affective outcome of received interpersonal emotion regulation of conceptual and practical interest is shame. In the present series of studies, participants from six, disparate samples were asked to report on experiences of receiving interpersonal emotion regulation using autobiographical recall and ecological sampling paradigms (total analyzed n = 1868; total analyzed k = 2515 instances of receiving interpersonal emotion regulation). We sought to quantify the frequency and distinctiveness of shame as an outcome of receiving interpersonal emotion regulation. We used an exploratory-confirmatory approach to identify robust and generalizable correlates of shame. We considered individual (e.g., trait external shame-proneness), situational (e.g., desire for regulation), relational (e.g., perceived closeness with the provider) and interaction-specific (e.g., perceptions of provider hostility) variables. Our results indicate that it is not uncommon for people to experience receiving interpersonal emotion regulation as shame-inducing, and these perceptions are distinct from their evaluations of the overall effectiveness of the interaction. The most robust correlates of shame across studies and samples were interaction-specific ratings of responsiveness and hostility, which were negatively and positively correlated with shame, respectively. We discuss the conceptual, methodological, and practical implications of these findings for studying interpersonal emotion regulation and shame.

Competitive Anxiety, and Guilt and Shame Proneness From Perspective Type D and Non-type D Football Players

The precompetitive, competitive, and postcompetitive mental states of athletes are currently not sufficiently researched. Long-term exposure to stressors contributes to the formation of mental blocks and leads to various health problems. One of the factors that can explain the variability of athletes' reactions to stress is their personality. This study is the first to examine competitive anxiety, and guilt and shame proneness in the context of the reaction of football players to distress in sports. The study consists of 112 male football players aged 16–24 (21.00 ± 1.90) who were divided into type D and non-type D football players according to scoring on the Denollet Scale (DS14). Football players also filled out the Sport Anxiety Scale (SAS-2) and the Guilt and Shame Proneness Scale (GASP). The taxonomic approach was conducted to test and to examine differences in stressor intensity as a function of type D personality. A correlation, multivariate analysis of variance, and regression analysis were performed in the study. We found that type D football players were more afraid of failures in sports (worry), felt more often autonomous excitement concentrated in the stomach and muscles (somatic anxiety), and showed more frequent concentration disruption than did non-type D football players. We also found that although type D football players were more likely to rate their behavior as negative and inappropriate, they showed a much greater effort to correct it than did non-type D football players. Negative affectivity and social inhibition of type D football players were positively correlated with competitive anxiety. In addition, we noted lower levels of somatic anxiety and lower concentration disruption for football players who used escape strategies to manage stress. The shame proneness subscale monitoring negative self-evaluation was also closely related to the concentration disruption of football players. We found that the examination of athletes by type D personality is necessary due to the fact that negative affectivity and social inhibition are significant predictors of competitive anxiety of football players, which explains their worries at 24.0%, somatic anxiety at 8.2%, and concentration disruption at 10.6%.