Recent theoretical and empirical work has facilitated the drawing of sharp conceptual distinctions between shame and guilt. A clear view of these distinctions has permitted development of a research literature aimed at evaluating the differential associations of shame and guilt with depressive symptoms. This study quantitatively summarized the magnitude of associations of shame and guilt with depressive symptoms. Two hundred forty-two effect sizes were obtained from 108 studies employing 22,411 participants. Shame showed significantly stronger associations with depressive symptoms (r = .43) than guilt (r = .28). However, the association of shame and depressive symptoms was statistically indistinguishable from the associations of 2 maladaptive variants of guilt and depressive symptoms (contextual-maladaptive guilt, involving exaggerated responsibility for uncontrollable events, r = .39; generalized guilt, involving "free-floating" guilt divorced from specific contexts, r = .42). Other factors also moderated the effects. External shame, which involves negative views of self as seen through the eyes of others, was associated with larger effect sizes (r = .56) than internal shame (r = .42), which involves negative views of self as seen through one's own eyes. Depressive symptom measures that invoked the term guilt yielded stronger associations between guilt and depressive symptoms (r = .33) than depressive symptom measures that did not (r = .21). Age, sex, and ethnicity (proportion of Whites to Asians) did not moderate the effects. Although these correlational data are ambiguous with respect to their causal interpretation, results suggest that shame should figure more prominently in understandings of the emotional underpinnings of depressive symptoms.

Shame, guilt, and depressive symptoms: a meta-analytic review.

The psychological construct of guilt and its measurement were investigated in a series of studies (N = 1,041). Data collection and analyses involved 3 broad issues: (a) the further development and validation of the Guilt Inventory, designed to measure trait guilt, state guilt, and moral standards; (b) comparisons involving extant measures of guilt, shame, moral standards, and other emotions for the purpose of exploring the distinctions between trait guilt and state guilt, affective guilt and moral standards, and guilt and other emotions including both shame and the full range of emotional traits; and (c) an exploration of the factor structure of the trait guilt scales. Results supported the validity and reliability of the Guilt Inventory and the validity of most of the other guilt measures. However, results also raised questions regarding commonly articulated distinctions between trait and state guilt, guilt and shame, and, for some measures, affective guilt and moral standards. Discussion focuses on issues of measurement and conceptualization. Guilt may be denned as the dysphoric feeling associated with the recognition that one has violated a personally relevant moral or social standard. In both popular and formal treatments, the concept of guilt is often invoked in descriptions and explanations of the dynamics between personality and normal, as well as deviant, behavior. However, relatively little empirical research has been directed toward guilt as a separate and dis

On conceptualizing and assessing guilt.

Conceptual and methodological issues in the assessment of shame and guilt.

The foundation of a communicator style construct is presented in this paper. The construct is stipulated to include communication variables which reflect the “way one verbally and paraverbally interacts to signal how literal meaning should be taken, interpreted, filtered, or understood.” Nine independent variables (dominant, dramatic, animated, open, contentious, relaxed, friendly, attentive, and impression leaving) and one dependent variable (communicator image) operationally define the construct.

Two independent samples, the first with 80 subjects and 102 items and the second with 1,086 subjects and 51 items, are analyzed in terms of (1) how the variables cluster, (2) what dimensionality is embedded in the structure of intercorrelations, and (3) which variables best predict communicator image. Potentially, the construct provides a context for other communication variables, relates to perceptual processes, and explains interpersonal consequents.

Foundation of a Communicator Style Construct.

The article describes the development and psychometric evaluation of the Trauma-Related Guilt Inventory (TRGI). An initial questionnaire was constructed from multiple sources of information. Three factor analytic studies were conducted to refine the TRGI and determine its factor structure, which consists of a Distress factor and three cognitive factors, Hindsight-Bias/Responsibility, Wrongdoing, and Lack of Justification. The TRGI has high internal consistency and adequate temporal stability. In validity studies with Vietnam veterans and battered women, TRGI scales and subscales were significantly correlated with other measures of guilt and with measures of posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, and other indexes ofadjustment. Findings support the conceptualization of trauma-related guilt as a multidimensional construct and highlight the role of cognitions in the experience of guilt and posttrauma psychopathology.

David C. Munz

Papers

State-trait measure of experiential guilt

Extraversion and reciprocation of interviewer disclosures.