Revisiting Shame and Guilt Cultures: A Forty‐Year Pilgrimage

Creighton, Millie

doi:10.1525/eth.1990.18.3.02a00030

Cited by 176 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Shame allows the group to excuse the failure (Mesquita & Karasawa, 2004). Shame pertains to self-ought comparisons (self's fulfillment of standards and norms one ought to meet) whereas pride is more concerned with self-chosen standards and self-ideal comparisons (self's fulfillment of self-selected ideals) (Creighton, 1990;Wang, 2005). Not surprisingly, shame is more emphasized and is more accepted by Asians than by Westerners (Creighton, 1990).…”

Section: Focus On Disengaging Versus Engaging Emotionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of Emotion Regulation in Cultural Context

Trommsdorff

Rothbaum

2008

Regulating Emotions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Focus On Disengaging Versus Engaging Emotionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of Emotion Regulation in Cultural Context

Trommsdorff

Rothbaum

2008

Regulating Emotions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…13 (Parish, 1991), 14 (Creighton, 1990;Crystal, Parrott, Okazaki & Watanabe, 2001;Lebra, 1983;Miyake & Yamazaki, 1995), 15 Korean (Yang & Rosenblatt, 2001), 16 (Wolf, 1972), 17 (Spiro, 1996), 18 (Mulder, 1996;Sharp & Hanks, 1978), 19 (Lambrecht, 1932), 20 (Rosaldo, 1983), 21 (Dentan, 1979), 22 (Bolyanatz, 1994;Epstein, 1992;Fajans, 1983) (Strathern, 1977), 23 (Myers, 1979) (Tonkinson, 1978, 24 (Sachdev, 1990), 25 (Levy, 1973), 26 (Gregor, 1977), 27 (Kennedy, 1978), 28 (Merrill, 1988), 29 (Nash, 1970), 30 (Simmons, 1960) guilt is often less dependent on considerations of public exposure than shame, the difference in the frequency of guilt-like events merely reflects differences in the methods used in California and Bengkulu -perhaps Californian participants included many cases of guilt-like events because they could easily report on private experience, whereas the Bengkulu data, derived from spontaneous discussions, may have been biased against experiences that did not involve a public component. Although I cannot rule out this possibility, it is striking that guilt-like events never occur in the Bengkulu corpus, and this despite the fact that I was considered a close friend, confidant, and/or member of the immediate family by at least 13 key informants.…”

Section: Inspection Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although such research persisted for some time (e.g., Creighton, 1990;Fajans, 1983;Lebra, 1983), with the fading of the culture-and-personality paradigm in anthropology, the topic gradually fell out of favor. Over the last two decades psychologists have refocused the spotlight on shame, making important strides in understanding this emotion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shame in Two Cultures: Implications for Evolutionary Approaches

Fessler¹

2004

J Cogn Cult

191

177

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cross-cultural comparisons can a) illuminate the manner in which cultures differentially highlight, ignore, and group various facets of emotional experience, and b) shed light on our evolved species-typical emotional architecture. In many societies, concern with shame is one of the principal factors regulating social behavior. Three studies conducted in Bengkulu (Indonesia) and California explored the nature and experience of shame in two disparate cultures. Study 1, perceived term use frequency, indicated that shame is more prominent in Bengkulu, a collectivistic culture, than in California, an individualistic culture. Study 2, comparing naturally occurring shame events (Bengkulu) with reports thereof (California), revealed that shame is associated with guilt-like accounts in California but not in Bengkulu, and subordinance events in Bengkulu but not in California; published reports suggest that the latter pattern is prominent worldwide. Study 3 mapped the semantic domain of shame using a synonym task; again, guilt was prominent in California, subordinance in Bengkulu. Because shame is overshadowed by guilt in individualistic cultures, and because these cultures downplay aversive emotions associated with subordinance, a fuller understanding of shame is best arrived at through the study of collectivistic cultures such as Bengkulu. After reviewing evolutionary theories on the origins and functions of shame, I evaluate these perspectives in light of facets of this emotion evident in Bengkulu and elsewhere. The available data are consistent with the proposition that shame evolved from a rank-related emotion and, while motivating prestige competition, cooperation, and conformity, nevertheless continues to play this role in contemporary humans.

show abstract

“…Wentzel (1978) assumes that one of the reasons caregivers Wnd the decision to institutionalize their elders so diYcult is that it makes the caregivers think of their own death.It is not surprising therefore that many empirical studies, mentioned above, found that caregivers of the aging frequently feel guilt and shame. Generally, guilt and shame function as mechanisms of social control (Creighton 1988) and are largely connected to the norms and expectations of society. People feel these emotions when the society in which they live or feel part of makes them believe that they have violated its norms and expectations.…”

Section: Guilt and Shame: Conceptualization And Association With Geromentioning

confidence: 99%

A possible innovative association between the concept of inter-generational ambivalence and the emotions of guilt and shame in care-giving

Rappoport

Lowenstein

2007

Eur J Ageing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present article suggests a tentative new theoretical association between the concept of intergenerational ambivalence and the emotions of guilt and shame in care-giving. The article bases the above suggestion on the paradigm of intergenerational ambivalence as well as on existential and psychological emotion theories dealing with guilt and shame. In certain typical care-giving situations (e.g., leading to institutionalization of the elderly) feelings of guilt can mirror personal-subjective ambivalence (micro level ambivalence) while feelings of shame can mirror institutional-structural ambivalence (macro level ambivalence). The article exempliWes this idea, using an empirical study, which was conducted in Israel (1995), about guilt emotions of care-givers in the Kibbutz versus the city, concerning the institutionalization of an elderly parent. In order to support this innovative concept in the gerontological literature, more updated empirical proof is yet needed. Conclusions and implications of the association between guilt, shame and intergenerational ambivalence are discussed, from theoretical and practical perspectives.

show abstract

Revisiting Shame and Guilt Cultures: A Forty‐Year Pilgrimage

Cited by 176 publications

References 14 publications

Development of Emotion Regulation in Cultural Context

Development of Emotion Regulation in Cultural Context

Shame in Two Cultures: Implications for Evolutionary Approaches

A possible innovative association between the concept of inter-generational ambivalence and the emotions of guilt and shame in care-giving

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About