Moral emotions represent a key element of our human moral apparatus, influencing the link between moral standards and moral behavior This chapter reviews current theory and research on moral emotions We first focus on a triad of negatively valenced “self-conscious” emotions—shame, guilt, and embarrassment As in previous decades, much research remains focused on shame and guilt We review current thinking on the distinction between shame and guilt, and the relative advantages and disadvantages of these two moral emotions Several new areas of research are highlighted: research on the domain-specific phenomenon of body shame, styles of coping with shame, psychobiological aspects of shame, the link between childhood abuse and later proneness to shame, and the phenomena of vicarious or “collective” experiences of shame and guilt In recent years, the concept of moral emotions has been expanded to include several positive emotions—elevation, gratitude, and the sometimes morally relevant experience o

/pdf/moral-emotions-and-moral-behavior-2meddxsdcw.pdf

Moral emotions and moral behavior

Research and theory on the role of emotion and regulation in morality have received considerable attention in the last decade. Much relevant work has concerned the role of moral emotions in moral behavior. Research on differences between embarrassment, guilt, and shame and their relations to moral behavior is reviewed, as is research on the association of these emotions with negative emotionality and regulation. Recent issues concerning the role of such empathy-related responses as sympathy and personal distress to prosocial and antisocial behavior are discussed, as is the relation of empathy-related responding to situational and dispositional emotionality and regulation. The development and socialization of guilt, shame, and empathy also are discussed briefly. In addition, the role of nonmoral emotions (e.g. anger and sadness), including moods and dispositional differences in negative emotionality and its regulation, in morally relevant behavior, is reviewed.

Emotion, regulation, and moral development.

In his Preface the author' says that he started out to review all the more important theories upon the topics ordinarily discussed under human motivation but soon found himself more and more limited to the presentation of his own point of view. This very well characterizes the book. It is a very personal product. It is an outline with some defense of the author's own thinking about instincts and appetites and sentiments and how they function in human behavior. And as the author draws so heavily upon James and McDougall, especially the latter, the book may well be looked upon as a sort of sequel to their efforts. There is a thought-provoking distinction presented between instinct and appetite. An instinct is said to be aroused always by something in the external situation; and, correspondingly, an appetite is said to be aroused by sensations from within the body itself. This places, of course, a heavy emphasis upon the cognitive factor in all instinctive behaviors; and the author prefers to use the cognitive factor, especially the knowledge of that end-experience which will satisfy, as a means of differentiating one instinct from another. In this there is a recognized difference from McDougall who placed more emphasis for differentiation upon the emotional accompaniment. The list of instincts arrived at by this procedure is much like that of McDougall, although the author is forced by his criteria to present the possibility of food-seeking and sex and sleep operating both in the manner of an appetite and also as an instinct. The Shand-McDougall concept of sentiment is taken over and used in the explanation of moral motivation. There is the development within each personality of a sentiment for some moral principle. But this sentiment is not a very powerful motivating factor. It is reinforced by social pressures and by religion, which is treated as an effort of finite man to live in harmony with the infinite reality. Those whose psychological thinking is largely in terms of McDougall will doubtless find this volume a very satisfying expansion; but those who are at all inclined to support their psychological thinking by reference to experimental studies will not be so well pleased. The James-Lange theory, for example, is discussed without mention of the many experimental studies which it has provoked. Theoretical sources appear in general to be preferred to experimental investigations.

Human MotivationThe Mind in Action: A Study of Motives and Values. A. Campbell Garnett

Un nouvel instrument mesurant la detresse provenant des situations interpersonnelles, le «inventory of Interpersonal Problems» (IIP), est decrit dans ses proprietes psychometriques et dans ses applications cliniques, en particulier dans l'evaluation des effets de la psychotherapie

Inventory of interpersonal problems: psychometric properties and clinical applications.

To formulate a parsimonious tool to assess empathy, we used factor analysis on a combination of self-report measures to examine consensus and developed a brief self-report measure of this common factor. The Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ) represents empathy as a primarily emotional process. In 3 studies, the TEQ demonstrated strong convergent validity, correlating positively with behavioral measures of social decoding, self-report measures of empathy, and negatively with a measure of Autism symptomatology. Moreover, it exhibited good internal consistency and high test-retest reliability. The TEQ is a brief, reliable, and valid instrument for the assessment of empathy.

/pdf/the-toronto-empathy-questionnaire-scale-development-and-3xdquisj4z.pdf

The Toronto Empathy Questionnaire: Scale development and initial validation of a factor-analytic solution to multiple empathy measures

Guilt, fear, submission, and empathy in depression

We describe the development of a new measure to assess guilt related to concern about harming others. The two versions of the Interpersonal Guilt Questionnaire, a 45-item and 67-item version, include theoretically-based and clinically relevant categories of guilt: survivor guilt, separation/disloyalty guilt, omnipotent responsibility guilt, and self-hate guilt. Preliminary reliability and validity studies for both versions are presented, based on clinical and nonclinical samples of subjects. Subscales on both versions show good internal consistency; however, the second version, which expanded on the first, is more psychometrically sound overall. Both versions demonstrated predicted correlations with previously published measures of guilt and related affects, such as shame and depression, and with attributional style. Differences between clinical and nonclinical samples are reported and the relevance of survivor guilt and shame to psychopathology is noted.

/pdf/interpersonal-guilt-the-development-of-a-new-measure-59mmo6i0w6.pdf

Interpersonal Guilt: The Development of a New Measure

Recent research has focused on the positive consequences of guilt as opposed to shame. The present studies investigated the relationship between interpersonal guilt related to the fear of harming others, shame, and various measures of psychological distress and symptoms. The Interpersonal Guilt Questionnaire, The Guilt Inventory, the Test of Self-Conscious Affect, the Brief Symptom Inventory, the Beck Depression Inventory, and the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory were administered to samples of college students. These results suggest that interpersonal guilt, when elevated and linked to pathogenic beliefs, may also be associated with psychological problems and indicate that there may be a down side to guilt.

Interpersonal guilt, shame, and psychological problems

Shame, guilt, and depression in men and women in recovery from addiction

Men and women in recovery from addiction were compared on levels of depression, guilt, and shame. The measurement of guilt included subscales of Survivor Guilt, Separation Guilt, Omnipotent Responsibility Guilt, Trait Guilt, State Guilt, and Adaptive Guilt. The sample included 75 men and 33 women in treatment in a residential treatment community. It was found that women were significantly higher than men in depression. The recovering subjects were compared to nonaddicted subjects and established norms, and it was found that the recovering people were higher on depression, shame, and the subscales of maladaptive guilt. Both men and women in recovery were significantly lower than norms in adaptive guilt.

Joseph Weiss

Papers

Guilt, fear, submission, and empathy in depression

Interpersonal Guilt: The Development of a New Measure

Interpersonal guilt, shame, and psychological problems

Shame, guilt, and depression in men and women in recovery from addiction

Guilt, Shame, and Depression in Clients in Recovery from Addiction