期刊
SELF AND IDENTITY
卷 9, 期 4, 页码 337-362出版社
ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/15298860903106843
关键词
Guilt proneness; Morality; Self-conscious emotions; Shame proneness; Transgressions
In Study 1, participants completed five extant shame and guilt proneness inventories based on different theoretical conceptions of the difference between shame and guilt. Factor analyses revealed that despite very different theoretical distinctions, the shame proneness subscales loaded on one factor, and the guilt proneness subscales loaded on one factor. In Study 2, we altered scale items so that hypothetical transgressions were committed in either public or private, and likelihood response options were either typical of a oshame-prone responseo (negative self-evaluation; avoidance behavior) or a oguilt-prone responseo (negative behavior evaluation; approach behavior). Our findings indicate that shame and guilt proneness can be measured both by responses to transgressions (e.g., negative self-evaluation and avoidance responses vs. negative behavior evaluation and approach responses) and the situational context in which the transgression occurs (e.g., public vs. private). We provide recommendations regarding optimal measurement of shame and guilt proneness.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据