Moral sentiments and cooperation: Differential influences of shame and guilt

Hooge, Ilona E. de; Zeelenberg, Marcel; Breugelmans, Seger M.

doi:10.1080/02699930600980874

Cited by 271 publications

(237 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

213

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This main goal is evident in altruistic guilt and, to less extend, in deontological guilt, which has shown to be associated with feelings of shame. Although shame has been defined as a moral emotion (Frank, 1988;Ketelaar, 2004;Smith, 1759) very closely related to guilt, there is growing evidence that they are clearly distinguishable (Tangney, 1991;Tangney, 1996;De Hooge, Zeelenberg, & Breugelmans, 2007). Guilt and shame share some common characteristics, but might be distinguished on the basis of their public-private dimension, their action tendencies (hiding and escaping in shame, and confessing, apologizing or undoing the consequences of the behavior in guilt) and on their intensity (shame being described as more painful and intense) (Lewis, 1971;Tangney& Dearing, 2002;Tangney, Stuewig, & Mashek, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eliciting Guilty Feelings: A Preliminary Study Differentiating Deontological and Altruistic Guilt

Basile¹,

Mancini²

2011

PSYCH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Guilt has been identified as both an intrapsychic and an interpersonal emotion. The current study presents evidence of the existence of two senses of guilt, deontological and altruistic guilt, induced through different experimental paradigms. Deontological guilt evolves from having slighted moral authority or norms, while altruistic guilt arises from selfish behavior and the distress of others. We hypothesize that specific stimuli would evoke, separately, deontological guilt and altruistic/interpersonal guilt feelings. Two different procedures were used to test our hypothesis, adding two emotions as control conditions (i.e. anger and sadness). Results clearly indicate that two different guilt emotions can be evoked separately, by appropriate stimulation. Findings and possible clinical implications are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eliciting Guilty Feelings: A Preliminary Study Differentiating Deontological and Altruistic Guilt

Basile¹,

Mancini²

2011

PSYCH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Emotions were induced with the well-validated autobiographical recall procedure followed by a selfreport manipulation check (e.g. De Hooge, 2014;De Hooge et al, 2008;De Hooge, Zeelenberg, & Breugelmans, 2007;Ketelaar & Au, 2003;Nelissen, Dijker, & De Vries, 2007). Respondents in the Shame/Guilt condition were asked to thoroughly think about, and briefly write down on a note, a personal experience in which they felt very ashamed ("schaamte" in Dutch) / very guilty ("schuld" in Dutch).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The social side of shame: approach versus withdrawal

Hooge

Breugelmans

Wagemans

et al. 2018

Cognition and Emotion

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, people who are prone to feeling guilty after committing transgressions behave less aggressively when angered (Stuewig, Tangney, Heigel, Harty, & McCloskey, 2010;Tangney, Wagner, Hill-Barlow, Marschall, & Gramzow, 1996), are less likely to commit delinquent offenses as adolescents (Stuewig & McCloskey, 2005), and express more disapproval of lying in business negotiations (Cohen, 2010). Likewise, inducing people to feel guilty by having them recall past misdeeds causes them to behave more cooperatively in interpersonal interactions (de Hooge, Zeelenberg, & Breugelmans, 2007;Ketelaar & Au, 2003). Indeed, the biggest difference between individuals with antisocial personality disorder and well-adjusted individuals is the former's "inability to feel sympathy, shame, guilt, or other emotions that make the rest of us care about the fates of others and the things we do to hurt or help them" (Haidt & Kesebir, 2010, p. 804).…”

Section: Introducing the Gasp Scale: A New Measure Of Guilt And Shamementioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing the GASP scale: A new measure of guilt and shame proneness.

Cohen¹,

Wolf²,

Panter³

et al. 2011

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

521

660

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although scholars agree that moral emotions are critical for deterring unethical and antisocial behavior, there is disagreement about how two prototypical moral emotions-guilt and shameshould be defined, differentiated, and measured. We addressed these issues by developing a new assessment-the Guilt And Shame Proneness scale (GASP)-that measures individual differences in the propensity to experience guilt and shame across a range of personal transgressions. The GASP contains two guilt subscales that assess negative behavior-evaluations (NBEs) and repair action tendencies following private transgressions and two shame subscales that assess negative self-evaluations (NSEs) and withdrawal action tendencies following publically-exposed transgressions. Both guilt subscales were highly correlated with one another and negatively correlated with unethical decision making. Although both shame subscales were associated with relatively poor psychological functioning (e.g., neuroticism, personal distress, low self-esteem), they were only weakly correlated with one another and their relationships with unethical decision making diverged. Whereas shame-NSE constrained unethical decision making, shame-withdraw did not. Our findings suggest that differentiating the tendency to make negative self-evaluations following publically-exposed transgressions from the tendency to hide or withdraw from public is critically important for understanding and measuring dispositional shame proneness. The GASP's ability to distinguish these two classes of responses represents an important advantage of the scale over existing assessments. Although further validation research is required, the present studies are promising in that they suggest the GASP has the potential to be an important measurement tool for detecting individuals susceptible to corruption and unethical behavior.

show abstract

Moral sentiments and cooperation: Differential influences of shame and guilt

Cited by 271 publications

References 20 publications

Eliciting Guilty Feelings: A Preliminary Study Differentiating Deontological and Altruistic Guilt

Eliciting Guilty Feelings: A Preliminary Study Differentiating Deontological and Altruistic Guilt

The social side of shame: approach versus withdrawal

Introducing the GASP scale: A new measure of guilt and shame proneness.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About