Friday, January 18, 2019

Psychology of Shame




Shame is a pervasive self-evaluative emotional state. People display shame in a slumped body posture with their heads down, avoiding eye-contact. They may express the wish to die or disappear.

Psychologists contrast shame with guilt. In contrast to the shamed self, guilt usually refers to a negative evaluation of a behavioral act. If people agree that they are guilty then, they may apologize for a specific act. In some cases, the person receives forgiveness. 


Shame involves an intense sense of self-awareness in a cultural setting of honor. An example of shame is often seen in victims of rape. Rape is an act that violates the self in an intensely intimate way. The rape-shame experience can be particularly intense in cultures where young women are expected to be virgins until they marry. In cultures of honor, shame regarding sex outside of marriage can extend to the family.

Parents can feel shame as a worsened degree of embarrassment when their children behave contrary to the rules of a culture. Likewise, children may feel shame when their parents behave in publicly unacceptable ways. 

People experience shame when they believe they are in violation of a highly valued cultural expectation. Some cultures place a high value on attractive clothes and bodies. Some cultures place a high value on certain behaviors, activities, or pursuits that are honored as ideals for men or women. For example, military service and participation in sports are highly valued in many cultures. 

Intense emotions can accompany shame including anxiety, depression, and anger. People who struggle with shame and related concerns may need psychotherapy or medical interventions to restore their ability to function adequately. Referrals can usually be obtained from physicians, clergy, and other healthcare providers.

Learn more about shame in the works of psychologist June  Price Tangney (see references).

Cite this article

Sutton, G. W. (2019, January 18). Psychology of shame. Psychology Concepts and Theories. Retrieved from https://suttonpsychology.blogspot.com/2019/01/psychology-of-shame.html


  
References to research on shame

Tangney, J.P. (2011) An interview related to a book about shame.

Tangney, J. P. (1990). Assessing individual differences in proneness to shame and guilt: Development of the Self-Conscious Affect and Attribution Inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 102-111.

Tangney, J. P., Miller, R. S., Flicker, L., & Barlow, D. H. (1996). Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1256-1269.




Geoffrey W. Sutton, PhD is Emeritus Professor of Psychology. He retired from a clinical practice and was credentialed in clinical neuropsychology and psychopharmacology. His website is  www.suttong.com

 

See Geoffrey Sutton’s books on   AMAZON       or  GOOGLE STORE

Follow on    FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton    

   TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton    


You can read many published articles at no charge:

  Academia   Geoff W Sutton     ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton 

 

Dr. Sutton’s posts are for educational purposes only. See a licensed mental health provider for diagnoses, treatment, and consultation.




Friday, November 16, 2018

Macbeth Effect

The Macbeth Effect is a finding that people engage in cleansing thoughts and even behavior when they experience a threat to their sense of moral purity. The authors, Chen Bo- Zhong and Katie Liljenquist, reported results in a 2006 article in Science titled, "Washing Away Your Sins: Threatened Morality and Physical Cleansing."



The Macbeth Effect was challenged in a 2018 article by Siev, Zuckerman, and Siev. Their meta-analysis did not support a strong effect. They suggested their may be an effect under certain conditions.


The effect was named Macbeth based on a work by Shakespear (link to a summary of Macbeth).

Reference

Siev, J., Zuckerman, S., Sieve, J.J. (2018). The relationship between immorality and cleansing: A meta-analysis of the Macbeth effect. Social Psychology, 49, 303-309. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000349

Zhong, C-B. & Liljenquist, K. (2006). Washing away your sins: Threatened morality and physical cleansing. Science, 313, 1451-1452.


My ad
Buy Creating Surveys on AMAZON available in multiple countries















Connections

My Page    www.suttong.com

My Books  
 AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE

FACEBOOK  
 Geoff W. Sutton

TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

LinkedIN Geoffrey Sutton  PhD

Publications (many free downloads)
     
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)
     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)





Friday, October 12, 2018

Altruism






In common language, we think of altruism as self-less actions that benefit others. In psychology, the concept of altruism has been studied for decades. 


Not surprisingly, researchers have looked at the benefits to the person acting altruistically as if such benefits might undermine the concept of altruism.

One scientist who is known for extensive study of altruism is Batson. Batson was skeptical of the concept of altruism but his experimental work changed his mind. Following is his definition (Batson, 2010).


By altruism I mean a motivational state with the ultimate goal of increasing
another's welfare. Altruism is juxtaposed to egoism, a motivational
state with the ultimate goal of increasing one's own welfare. I use the term
ultimate here to refer to means-end relations, not to a metaphysical first or
final cause. An ultimate goal is an end in itself. In contrast, an instrumental
goal is a stepping stone on the way to reaching an ultimate goal. If a barrier to
reaching an instrumental goal arises, then alternative routes to the ultimate
goal will be sought. Should the ultimate goal be reached while bypassing the
instrumental goal, the motivational force will disappear. If a goal is ultimate,
it cannot be bypassed in this way (Lewin, 1938). Both instrumental and ultimate
goals should be distinguished from unintended consequences, results of
an action—foreseen or unforeseen—that are not the goal of the action. Each
ultimate goal defines a distinct goal-directed motive. Hence, altruism and
egoism are distinct motives, even though they can co-occur (p. 16).

 Not all scholars agree with Batson. There is a problem of understanding human motivation thus, some have focused on helping behavior. A value of Batson's approach is the focus on motivation and the psychological understanding of goal-directed behavior. I appreciate his understanding of self-benefits, which may be due to unintended consequences or even the possibility that altruism and egoism may both be present.

Finally, I should point out that altruism research overlaps with studies of generosity. You will see online sources where generosity and altruism are synonyms (e.g., Oxford, 2018).

Read more about generosity and altruism in Chapter 3 of Living Well 10 BIG IDEAS of FAITH and a MEANINGFUL LIFE available on AMAZON.

















Creating Surveys

Create better surveys for work and school



DOWNLOAD today AMAZON





Reference


Batson, C. D. (2010). Empathy-induced altruistic motivation. In Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior: The better angels of our nature. (pp. 15–34). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12061-001 



Connections



My Page    www.suttong.com


My Books  
 AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE


FACEBOOK  
 Geoff W. Sutton

TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

LinkedIN Geoffrey Sutton  PhD

Publications (many free downloads)
     
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)
     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)