Guilt and giving: A process model of empathy and efficacy

Basil, Debra Z.; Ridgway, Nancy M.; Basil, Michael D.

doi:10.1002/mar.20200

Cited by 277 publications

(283 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

254

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…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

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

show abstract

“…There are acknowledgments in the literature that students often feel guilt regarding the economic gaps they observe in service-learning efforts (Jones & Abes, 2004). In fact, guilt is quite a common marketing strategy that charity organizations use to garner support (Basil, Ridgway, & Basil, 2008). At the same time, the relationship between guilt, individuals sense of personal responsibility, and pro-social responses are murky (Basil, Ridgway, & Basil, 2006).…”

Section: A Controversial Resource: Moneymentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognizing the complexity of service-learning and community engagement efforts: Facilitator standpoints from International Baccalaureate Organization secondary schools in Kenya, Ethiopia, and South Africa

Lillo

2017

Jnl of Research in Internatl Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Schools are increasingly tasked with the cultivation of global citizenship in their students. This is especially the case in international schools and in International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO) contexts, as both institutions tend to stress ideals of global-mindedness and engaged participation in communities. Rhetoric hailing servicelearning pedagogies abounds in these settings, and yet educators and students that try to organize community engagement efforts often face a host of challenges. This disconnect, between rhetoric and practice, is one that teachers and institutions alike seem interested in narrowing. Accordingly, this study focuses on pragmatic elements that can support and promote community engagement efforts.This study is based on six months of fieldwork in three international IBO high schools that were recognized in the African region for their developed service-learning

show abstract

“…52 Therefore, it should come as no surprise that a large number of Americans fall into this category of investors. We posit that these constraints on behavior infl uence investing goals through response effi cacy 53 and investor inertia. 54 First, this segment likely perceives a low response effi cacythat is, a low probability that investing goals will solve their social or economic problems.…”

Section: Unconcerneds: Low Importance On Economic and Social Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not everybody wants to save the world

Kashyap

Iyer

2009

J Financ Serv Mark

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A consumer lens is used to examine investing behavior in this study. The study focuses on the importance given by investors to their economic and social investing goals (SIG). This approach redirects managerial attention from the investment to the investor and investing goals . The study fi nds that differences in environmental attitude, social investing effi cacy, materialism, religiosity and protected values can explain disparities in investing goals. The fi ndings suggest a segmentation approach based on differences in antecedent effects and economic and SIG.

show abstract

Guilt and giving: A process model of empathy and efficacy

Cited by 277 publications

References 46 publications

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

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

Recognizing the complexity of service-learning and community engagement efforts: Facilitator standpoints from International Baccalaureate Organization secondary schools in Kenya, Ethiopia, and South Africa

Not everybody wants to save the world

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About