A Comparison of the Social-Adaptive Perspective and Functionalist Perspective on Guilt and Shame

Abstract

Within the field of guilt and shame two competing perspectives have been advanced. The first, the social-adaptive perspective, proposes that guilt is an inherently adaptive emotion and shame is an inherently maladaptive emotion. Thus, those interested in moral character development and psychopathology should work to increase an individual’s guilt-proneness and decrease an individual’s shame-proneness. The functionalist perspective, in contrast, argues that both guilt and shame can serve a person adaptively or maladaptively—depending on the situational appropriateness, duration, intensity, and so forth. This paper reviews the research conducted supporting both positions; critiques some issues with the most widely used guilt- and shame-proneness measure in the social-adaptive research (the TOSCA) and discusses the differences in results found when assessing guilt and shame at the state versus trait level. The conclusion drawn is that although there is broad support for the functionalist perspective across a wide variety of state and trait guilt/shame studies, the functionalist perspective does not yet have the wealth of data supporting it that has been generated by the social-adaptive perspective using the TOSCA. Thus, before a dominant perspective can be identified, researchers need to (1) do more research assessing how the social-adaptive perspective compares to the functionalist perspective at the state level and (2) do more trait research within the functionalist perspective to compare functionalist guilt- and shame-proneness measures with the TOSCA.

Explorations in Reported Moral Behaviors, Values, and Moral Emotions in Four Countries

“…In the study of guilt and shame, there is a lot of confusion and controversy (see, e.g., the reviews by Silfver-Kuhalampi et al, 2013 and Dempsey, 2017 ). In this study, we used Tangney’s approach and her measure ( Tangney and Dearing, 2002 ), in which guilt is seen as negative evaluation of one’s actions and reparative behavior as its criterion is stressed.…”

“…Therefore, it is important to remember that the TOSCA measures mainly a form of shame that focuses on self-image and a sense of self-esteem and to a lesser extent to the public and social aspects of shame (a distinction that has been pointed out by many researchers, for example Gausel and Leach, 2011 ). Shame measured by the TOSCA has been found to relate to poor self-regulation ( Woien et al, 2003 ) and depression ( Dempsey, 2017 ).…”

Self-Forgiveness Among Incarcerated Individuals in Ghana: Relations With Shame- and Guilt-Proneness

“…Shame often involves negative, self-denigrating evaluation of the global self after wrongdoing, though shame can also be a response to negative self-evaluation from reflecting on oneself relative to an ideal or standard. Guilt refers to negative evaluation of one’s behavior (Dempsey, 2017). Most research on shame and guilt has focused on samples from general and university populations, although some studies of people who have offended exist.…”

Using bodily postures in the treatment of anorexia nervosa: Effects of power posing on interoception and affective states

“…Therefore, it is possible that suddenly feeling powerful through bottom‐up processing may not have matched the individuals' overall self‐perception of being powerful. If there is a mismatch between felt power and perceived power, theoretical models suggest that this discrepancy may lead to feelings of shame (Dempsey, 2017; Troop & Redshaw, 2012). The secondary emotion of shame may have led to an attentional shift toward the outside (Goss & Allan, 2009).…”