Anticipated Guilt as Motivation to Help Unknown Others

Lindsey, Lisa L. Massi; Yun, Kimo Ah; Hill, Jennifer B.

doi:10.1177/0093650207302789

Cited by 70 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Anticipated guilt refers to concerns about experiencing unpleasant feelings in the future (Baumeister et al 2007;Lindsey, 2005). The cognitive approach to anticipatory guilt has been confirmed in research studies investigating consumers' ethical decision making (Steenhaut and Kenhove 2006) and pro-social altruistic behavior (e.g., Lindsey 2005;Lindsey et al 2007). In this study, anticipated guilt is considered one's motivational belief toward being environmentally responsible and is defined as beliefs about experiencing negative feelings when one thinks about the current environment and current practices and policies pertaining to the environment (Osbaldiston and Sheldon 2003).…”

Section: Anticipated Guilt As a Moderatormentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spillover from past recycling to green apparel shopping behavior: the role of environmental concern and anticipated guilt

Kwon

2016

Fash Text

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores catalytic behavior in the context of pro-environmental behaviors by examining the occurrence of spillover that performing recycling behavior promotes the likelihood to engage in green apparel purchases. Additionally, this study incorporates a potential mediator and a moderator, environmental concern and anticipated guilt, respectively, in order to explain the nature of the spillover process. The results of online survey data confirm the development of spillover in consumer behavior that past recycling behavior does spill over into green apparel/fashion product purchase behaviors through one’s motivational belief toward the environment, environmental concern. However, anticipated guilt, a motivation factor, does not moderate spillover among pro-environmental behaviors, at least between past recycling behavior and green apparel shopping behaviors. Theoretically, this study contributes to and extends the literature on spillover in pro-environmental behaviors by testing spillover across distinctive pro-environmental behaviors. This study also provides lessons for fashion retail marketers and government agencies in learning the importance of the social and ethical aspects of consumers’ green practices, beyond price/quality-based choices. Limitations and future research directions are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Anticipated Guilt As a Moderatormentioning

confidence: 97%

“…While guilt primarily corresponds to an emotion, anticipated guilt represents cognition as it often is conceived as a motivational belief (e.g., Lindsey 2005;Lindsey et al 2007). Anticipated guilt refers to concerns about experiencing unpleasant feelings in the future (Baumeister et al 2007;Lindsey, 2005).…”

Section: Anticipated Guilt As a Moderatormentioning

confidence: 99%

Spillover from past recycling to green apparel shopping behavior: the role of environmental concern and anticipated guilt

Kwon

2016

Fash Text

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, feelings of guilt motivate a person to confess, apologize, and atone for their past miscues, rather than deny culpability or displace blame onto others (Lewis 1971;Tangney & Dearing 2002;Tangney et al 1996). As a result of these prosocial qualities, feeling guilty has been shown to lead to higher levels of helping (Cunningham, Steinberg, & Grev 1980;Freedman, Wallington, & Bless 1967;Konecni 1972;Lindsey, Yun & Hill 2007)-similar to levels of helping driven by positive mood, albeit with differing motivation (Cunningham, Steinberg, & Grev 1980). Likewise, guilt has been associated with increased intentions to donate resources to those in need (Basil, Ridgway & Basil 2008) and to cooperate in social bargaining games (de Hooge, Zeelenberg, & Breugelmans 2007;Ketelaar & Au 2003).…”

Section: Guilt and Shamementioning

confidence: 99%

Guilt by Design: Structuring Organizations to Elicit Guilt as an Affective Reaction to Failure

Bohns

Flynn

2013

Organization Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we outline a model of how organizations can effectively shape employees' affective reactions to failure. We do not suggest that organizations eliminate the experience of negative affect following performance failures-instead, we propose that they encourage a more constructive form of negative affect (guilt) instead of a destructive one (shame). We argue that guilt responses prompt employees to take corrective action in response to mistakes, while shame responses are likely to elicit more detrimental effects of negative affect. Further, we suggest that organizations can play a role in influencing employees' discrete emotional reactions to the benefit of both employees and the organization. We describe the necessary antecedents for encouraging guilt responses without simultaneously eliciting shame. Essentially, employees are more likely to experience guilt (but not shame) if they feel they had control over a specific negative event and the event resulted in a negative outcome for others. Given these necessary preconditions, we identify a set of organizational characteristics-autonomy, specificity of performance feedback, and outcome interdependence-that can be modified to make the experience of guilt more likely than that of shame in the workplace. The ethical and practical limits of shaping employees' emotional experiences within a negative affective domain are also addressed. Published in Organization Science AbstractIn this article, we outline a model of how organizations can effectively shape employees' affective reactions to failure. We do not suggest that organizations eliminate the experience of negative affect following performance failures-instead, we propose that they encourage a more constructive form of negative affect (guilt) instead of a destructive one (shame). We argue that guilt responses prompt employees to take corrective action in response to mistakes, while shame responses are likely to elicit more detrimental effects of negative affect. Further, we suggest that organizations can play a role in influencing employees' discrete emotional reactions to the benefit of both employees and the organization. We describe the necessary antecedents for encouraging guilt responses without simultaneously eliciting shame. Essentially, employees are more likely to experience guilt (but not shame) if they feel they had control over a specific negative event and the event resulted in a negative outcome for others. Given these necessary preconditions, we identify a set of organizational characteristics-autonomy, specificity of performance feedback, and outcome interdependence-that can be modified to make the experience of guilt more likely than that of shame in the workplace. The ethical and practical limits of shaping employees' emotional experiences within a negative affective domain are also addressed.

show abstract

“…While not surprising, that emphasis has probably contributed to a dearth in the development of theoretical frameworks that predict the ways in which individuals establish and act on perceptions of risk to others or to nonhuman elements in their environments. Individuals do make distinctions between self and other when assessing risk (Weinstein, 1989;Klein & Weinstein, 1997), and scholars have begun to explore the influence of other factors, among them "moral" emotions such as guilt and deeply held values, on behavioral reactions to others who are at risk (see, for example, Kollmus & Agyeman, 2002;O'Keefe, 2000;Massi Lindsey et al, 2007). This "impersonal" risk dimension has become increasingly important as societies struggle with the need to protect threatened ecosystems, maintain public health, or try to mitigate the impacts associated with climate change.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Linking Risk Messages to Information Seeking and Processing

Griffin

Dunwoody

Yang

2013

Annals of the International Communication Association

104

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In an effort to better understand the ways in which risk messages can indirectly affect risk-related behaviors, this review explores the links between such messages and information seeking and processing. The narrative first offers a brief look at the literature that shores up salient concepts, then moves to a model of Risk Information Seeking and Processing (RISP), constructed by Griffin, Dunwoody, and Neuwirth (1999), which seeks to organize those factors into a coherent framework. The RISP model, thus, serves as a crossroads for selected concepts synthesized from Eagly and Chaiken's (1993) Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM) of information processing, Ajzen's (1988) Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), and other bodies of research in communication and risk perception. Of particular interest is the extent to which the model can accommodate reactions to both personal risks and risks to persons and objects other than oneself. This last NOT THE PUBLISHED VERSION; this is the author's final, peer-reviewed manuscript. The published version may be accessed by following the link in the citation at the bottom of the page. 2 domain is particularly important to the development of policy in arenas such as public health and climate change. This review explores the theoretical underpinnings of the RISP model, then summarizes a decade of studies that have examined a subset of RISP variables most closely related to information seeking and processing: channel beliefs, perceived information gathering capacity, and two motivation variables, information sufficiency and informational subjective norms. Finally, the authors explore the research potential of both the model and of efforts to track the role of information in risk perceptions and behavior change.

show abstract

Anticipated Guilt as Motivation to Help Unknown Others

Cited by 70 publications

References 44 publications

Spillover from past recycling to green apparel shopping behavior: the role of environmental concern and anticipated guilt

Spillover from past recycling to green apparel shopping behavior: the role of environmental concern and anticipated guilt

Guilt by Design: Structuring Organizations to Elicit Guilt as an Affective Reaction to Failure

Linking Risk Messages to Information Seeking and Processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About