Dimensionality and measurement invariance of the Other as Shamer Scale across diverse adolescent samples

Abstract

The current work investigates the psychometric properties of the complete and short versions of the Other as Shamer Scale, using three Portuguese adolescent samples presenting diverse severity degrees of behavioral problems. This instrument measures external shame, an important precursor and correlate of psychosocial functioning, but has only been tested with community samples. Results showed the acceptability of a three-factor solution for the complete version of the measure (i.e., inferior, emptiness, and how others react when they see me make mistakes). The short unifactorial measure was also acceptably fitted the data. Both measurement models were partially invariant across gender, with boys and girls presenting similar levels of shame. They were also partially invariant across boys presenting diverse degrees of behavioral problems, with community participants presenting the lowest levels of shame. Evidence was gathered in favor of the internal consistency and validity in relation to depressive, anxious and stress symptoms, self-criticism and self-reassurance, and experiential avoidance, for both versions of the instrument. This study adds to evidence of the Other as Shamer Scale being an appropriate evaluation tool, with diverse samples of adolescents, and providing the user with diverse assessment options to be chosen in accordance with varied research of therapeutic purposes.

A Validation Study of the Psychometric Properties of the Other As Shamer Scale–2

“…Shame experiences may perform differently on some items in external shame self-report measure, probably in part due to the presence of item bias (Dimitrov, 2010). This finding is in line with Vagos et al (2016), showing some differences on shame experiences may be located at item level. Summing up, the conceptualization of the external shame construct, as assessed with the OAS-2, seems to be partially similar for both gender groups.…”

“…There is also evidence that suggests gender differences with regard to shame, with women reporting higher levels of shame proneness (Benetti-McQuoid & Bursik, 2005;Galhardo, Cunha, Pinto-Gouveia, & Matos, 2013;Vagos, da Silva, Brazão, Rijo, & Gilbert, 2016). Also, as suggested by Mills, Arbeau, Lall, and De Jaeger (2010), girls showed more shame than boys between preschool age and school age.…”

“…This trend is also evident during adolescence (Roos, Hodges, & Salmivalli, 2014). Contradictorily, adolescent boys reported higher score on Emptiness factor of the Other As Shamer Scale (OAS) than girls (Vagos et al, 2016). Finally, a recent large meta-analysis reported no gender differences in shame experiences (Else-Quest, Higgins, Allison, & Morton, 2012), suggesting that blanket stereotypes about females' higher emotionality are probably erroneous.…”

The Efficacy of a Compassion-Focused Therapy–Based Intervention in Reducing Psychopathic Traits and Disruptive Behavior: A Clinical Case Study With a Juvenile Detainee

“…From a CFT perspective, antisocial behavior patterns and psychopathic traits are conceptualized as evolutionary rooted responses to deal with harsh rearing scenarios (Ribeiro da Silva et al, 2015). In detail, if the human brain is evolutionarily designed to survive and thrive in adverse environments, when individuals are raised in hostile psychosocial backgrounds, as are most juvenile detainees, their brains also become calibrated for such environments (Abram et al, 2015; Vagos, Ribeiro da Silva, Brazão, & Rijo, 2018; Vagos, Ribeiro da Silva, Brazão, Rijo, & Gilbert, 2016, 2017). Thus, these youth tend to present an overdeveloped threat system, which functions mostly according to survival principles (e.g., “better safe than sorry”), as well as central emotional dysfunctions (e.g., Garofalo, Neumann, & Velotti, 2018; Kosson, Vitacco, Swogger, & Steuerwald, 2016).…”

“…The high prevalence of the conduct disorder (CD) diagnosis among juvenile detainees is well established in the literature (Abram et al, 2015;Rijo et al, 2016). In addition, psychopathic traits (i.e., grandiose-manipulative [GM], callous-unemotional [CU], and impulsive-Irresponsible [II] traits) are more prevalent in detained youth than in normative youth (Andershed, Kerr, Stattin, & Levander, 2002;Ribeiro da Silva, Salekin, & Rijo, 2019).…”