Guilt Signals a Crisis of Rejection: Two Types of Individual Differences Related to Social Rejection Have Dissimilar Effects on Guilt and Compensatory Behavior

Abstract

We investigated whether feelings of guilt, which signal crises in interpersonal relationships (Baumeister, Stillwell, & Heatherton, 1994), are differently evoked by two types of individual differences in social rejection: rejection detection capability (Kawamoto, Nittono, & Ura, 2015) and rejection sensitivity (Downey & Feldman, 1996). Using the hypothetical scenario method, we found that in situations with a potential risk of being rejected as a consequence of causing another person harm (i.e., harm‐present condition), participants with higher rejection detection capability felt more guilt and engaged in more compensatory behavior towards the victims. In addition, guilt mediated the relationship between rejection detection capability and compensatory behavior. Conversely, in situations with no potential risk of being rejected (i.e., harm‐absent condition), participants with higher rejection sensitivity felt more guilt but did not engage in much compensatory behavior. These results suggest that individual differences in social rejection foster different responses to specific threats.

Exploring social exclusion: Where we are and where We're going

“…There are various other negative outcomes that excluded individuals typically experience. For example, excluded individuals also experience negative emotions such as anger, sadness, humiliation, and shame (Chow et al., 2008; Furukawa et al., 2019; Hales et al., 2021; Westermann et al., 2015; Williams, 2009), with the former being linked to interpersonal aggression post‐exclusion, even toward people unrelated to the initial event (Ren et al., 2018). From a cognitive perspective, exclusion can provoke a sense of uncertainty (Güzel & Şahin, 2018), a sense that life is meaningless (Stillman et al., 2009) and even cause one to question their own perceived humanity (Bastian & Haslam, 2010).…”

The Cultural Variance Model of Organizational Shame and its Implications on Health and Well‐Being1

“…In shame, the global self is devalued (Tangney, Wagner, Hill‐Barlow, Marschall, & Gramzow, 1996), prompting fundamental changes to the self. This is opposed to a related emotion, guilt, that focuses on the specific violative action and not the self (Furukawa, Nakashima, & Morinaga, 2019; Lickel, Kushlev, Savalei, Matta, & Schmader, 2014). Given shame's varied and less‐studied effects on behavior, a detailed understanding of shame in the organizational setting can immensely benefit individuals and organizations.…”