Moral emotions represent a key element of our human moral apparatus, influencing the link between moral standards and moral behavior. This chapter reviews current theory and research on moral emotions. We first focus on a triad of negatively valenced "self-conscious" emotionsshame, guilt, and embarrassment. As in previous decades, much research remains focused on shame and guilt. We review current thinking on the distinction between shame and guilt, and the relative advantages and disadvantages of these two moral emotions. Several new areas of research are highlighted: research on the domain-specific phenomenon of body shame, styles of coping with shame, psychobiological aspects of shame, the link between childhood abuse and later proneness to shame, and the phenomena of vicarious or "collective" experiences of shame and guilt. In recent years, the concept of moral emotions has been expanded to include several positive emotions-elevation, gratitude, and the sometimes morally relevant experience of pride. Finally, we discuss briefly a morally relevant emotional process-other-oriented empathy. Keywordsshame; guilt; pride; elevation; gratitude OVERVIEWWhat confluence of factors foster a moral life lived to the benefit of self and others? This review summarizes current theory and research on moral emotions, offering a framework for thinking about the ways in which morally relevant emotions may moderate the link between moral standards and moral decisions, and ultimately moral behavior.Living a moral, constructive life is defined by a weighted sum of countless individual, morally relevant behaviors enacted day in and day out (plus an occasional particularly selfdefining moment). As imperfect human beings, however, our behavior does not always bear a one-to-one correspondence to our moral standards.Many potential explanations exist for the discrepancy between behavioral decisions (intentions) and actual behavior in both moral and nonmoral domains. Historically, much social psychological theory and research was devoted to understanding the imperfect link between intentions (e.g., moral decisions) and behavior. Field theory, the very foundation of social psychology, highlights the variability of individual behavior as a function of

The authors examined the association between psychopathy and identification of facial expressions of emotion. Previous research in this area is scant and has produced contradictory findings (Blair et. al., 2001, 2004; Glass & Newman, 2006; Kosson et al., 2002). One hundred and forty-five male jail inmates, rated using the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version participated in a facial affect recognition task. Participants were shown faces containing one of five emotions (happiness, sadness, fear, anger, or shame) displayed at one of two different levels of intensity of expression (100% or 60%). The authors predicted that psychopathy would be associated with decreased affect recognition, particularly for sad and fearful emotional expressions, and decreased recognition of less intense displays of facial affect. Results were largely consistent with expectations in that psychopathy was negatively correlated with overall facial recognition of affect, sad facial affect, and recognition of less intense displays of affect. An unexpected negative correlation with recognition of happy facial affect was also found. These results suggest that psychopathy may be associated with a general deficit in affect recognition.

Female jail inmates are especially in need of mental health services. Effective interventions for post-traumatic stress disorder and borderline personality disorder are needed in jail settings for both male and female inmates during incarceration and upon release.

The emotions shame and guilt may represent a critical stepping stone in the rehabilitation process. Often referred to as “moral” emotions owing to their presumed role in promoting altruistic behavior and inhibiting antisocial behaviors, shame and guilt provide potentially exciting points of intervention with offenders. In this article, we describe current psychological theory and research that underscores important differences between shame and guilt. We note parallels between psychologists’ conceptions of guilt and shame, and criminologists’ conceptions of reintegrative and disintegrative shaming. We summarize recent research investigating the implications of these moral emotions for criminal and risky behavior, with special emphasis on the handful of studies conducted with actual offenders. We conclude with a discussion of implications for treatment in criminal justice settings.

While adolescent substance use has been the focus of extensive research over the last few decades, Hispanic adolescent substance use has received only limited attention. Studies exploring predictors of Hispanic adolescent substance use have failed to adequately explore the contribution of the family on substance use. The present study examined the relative influence of family, school and peer influences, perceived student substance use, family substance use, and acculturation on a sample of Mexican-American early adolescents using structural equations modeling. The findings varied for males and females. Family functioning and family use directly influenced substance use for males. Family functioning influenced school and peer variables, however, these were unrelated to use. For females, family use and student use directly influenced substance use. Family functioning influenced family use and school and peer attachments. School and peer attachment predicted perceived student use. These findings suggest that family functioning has a primary role in Hispanic adolescent substance use.

Whites in community samples utilize mental health services at a much higher rate than African Americans (Kessler, et al., 2005). Is this also the case among those in jails? In this study of jail inmates (229 African American, 185 White) there were no race difference in the overall need for mental health treatment (63% of participants had significant symptoms on the Personality Assessment Inventory) but race differences in the level and types of symptoms were evident. Additionally, while Whites were more likely to report pre-incarceration treatment there were no differences in treatment seeking or access to mental health programs while in jail, implying that if barriers to treatment in the community were removed (cost/insurance, location/transportation, time) racial disparities in treatment utilization may be reduced.

No abstract

No abstract