4.1 Flashcards
Moral emotions influence the link between
moral standards and moral behavior
. According to Field theory (foundation if social psychology) the variability of individual behavior (in moral behaviour) is a function of
situational context; interpersonal negotiation, which can undermine the link between intention; and behavior and diffusion of responsibility, which can undermine one’s ability to act on deeply held beliefs
Theory of planned behavior offers a model of
integration of attitudes, norms and perceived control feeding into behavioral intentions und subsequent behavior
Moral standards represent
an individual’s knowledge and internalization of moral norms and conventions. Such standards are predicted by universal moral laws and by culturally specific proscriptions.
Moral emotions are defined as those
“that are linked to the interests or welfare either of society as a whole or at least of persons other than the judge or agent”. They provide the motivational force – power and energy- to do good and avoid doing bad.
Shame, guilt, embarrassment and pride are evoked by
self-reflection (implicit or explicit) and self-evaluation. The self is the object of these emotions.
Function of moral self-conscious emotions
provide immediate punishment or reinforcement of behavior. They function as an emotional moral barometer, providing immediate and salient feedback on social and moral acceptability. E.g. when we lie aversive feelings of guilt may occur. When we do a right thing, positive feelings of pride and self-approval ensue. Actual behavior is no necessary for the press of moral emotions to have an effect. People can anticipate likely emotional reactions when considering behavioral alternatives. Thus, self-conscious moral emotions can influence moral choice and behavior by providing feedback. Anticipatory emotional reactions are typically inferred based on theory (e.g. past experiences).
Emotion disposition is defined as
the propensity to experience that emotions across a range of situations; higher susceptibility for certain emotional experiences.
Differentiations between shame and guilt fall into three categories:
(a) a distinction based on types of eliciting events,
(b) a distinction based on the public versus private nature of the transgression, and
(c) a distinction based on the degree to which the person construes the emotion-eliciting event as a failure of self or behavior.
(a) a distinction based on types of eliciting events,
type of event has rather little to do with their distinction; both experienced in same situation by different people. Some researchers claim that shame is evoked by a broader range of situations including both moral and non-moral failures and transgressions, whereas guilt is more specifically linked to transgressions in the moral realm.
shame is a predominantly moral emotion, when moving beyond a narrow conceptualization of morality in terms of the ethic of autonomy (e.g. laws); shame may be more closely tied to violations of the ethics of community (e.g. social order) and divinity (e.g., actions that remind us of our animal nature).
(b) a distinction based on the public versus private nature of the transgression
Shame is viewed as the more “public” emotion arising from public exposure and disapproval of some shortcoming or transgression. Guilt, on the other hand, is conceived as a more “private” experience arising from self-generated pangs of conscience. Research has however failed to support this view
-But there appears to be differences in the nature of those interpersonal concerns. Difference in egocentric vs other-oriented concerns: when describing shame-inducing situations, respondents expressed more concern with others’ evaluations of the self. When describing guilt experiences, respondents were more concerned with their effect on others. Shame involves a focus on the self, whereas guilt relates to a specific behavior. Shame is often coupled with concern for others’ evaluations. Experience of guilt is rather focused on a negative behavior somewhat separate from the self; it focuses on a bad behavior rather than a bad self.
(c) a distinction based on the degree to which the person construes the emotion-eliciting event as a failure of self or behavior.
Shame involves a negative evaluation of the global self; guilt involves a negative evaluation of a specific behavior.
-Both shame and guilt are negative emotions and can cause intrapsychic pain. Shame is considered the more painful one because one’s core self is at stake. Feelings of shame are often accompanied by a sense of worthlessness and powerlessness and a feeling of being exposed; a kind of split in the self-functioning in which the self is both agent and object of observation and disapproval. Guilt is less painful because it only targets a specific behavior. Rather than needing to de- fend the exposed core of one’s identity, people in the throes of guilt are drawn to consider their behavior and its consequences.
Shame and guilt are not equally moral emotions
5 examples of areas in which these tendencies become clear
Guilt is seen as more adaptive, since it benefits an individual and their relationship, whilst shame entails hidden costs.
1) hiding vs. attending
2) other-oriented empathy vs. self-oriented distress
3) Constructive vs. destructive reactions to anger
4) Psychological symptoms
5) Linking moral emotions to risky, illegal and otherwise inadvisable behavior
1) hiding vs. attending
Shame and guilt have contrasting action tendencies. Shame triggers attempts to deny, hide, escape; elevated cortisol. Guilt corresponds with reparative actions like confession, apologies and undoing consequences of behavior. -> guilt promotes constructive proactive pursuits whilst shame promotes defensiveness, interpersonal separation and distance.
2) other-oriented empathy vs. self-oriented distress
Different relation to empathy.
-Guilt goes together with other-oriented empathy. Shame disrupts individuals’ ability to form empathic connections with others. -This is the case both at the level of emotion disposition and emotional state:
1-> guilt-proneness consistently correlates with measures of perspective-taking and empathic concern. Shame-proneness is negatively or negligibly correlated with other-oriented empathy and positively linked with the tendency to focus egocentrically on one’s own distress.
2-> Shame’s egocentric focus on the “bad self” derails the empathic process; individuals turn tightly inwards and are less able to focus cognitive and emotional resources on a harmed other. Guilt is specifically focused on the bad behavior, which in turn highlights the negative consequences experienced by others, thereby fostering an empathic response and motivating people to “right the wrong.”
3) Constructive vs. destructive reactions to anger
Link between shame and anger; feelings of shame often precede expressions of anger and hostility. Shame is also correlated with the propensity to blame factors beyond the self from one’s misfortune. Shame-prone individuals are more likely to engage in externalization od blame and expressing anger in destructive ways, including physical, verbal and self-directed aggression and ruminative unexpressed anger. Externalization of blame was found to mediate the relationship between shame-proneness and both verbal and physical aggression. Blaming others may help indivudlas regain some sense of control and superiority. Externalization of blame was found to mediate the relationship between shame-proneness and both verbal and physical aggression. Blaming others may help indivudlas regain some sense of control and superiority.
Guilt-proneness is associated with more constructive emotions, cognitions and behaviors. E.g. constructive intentions in the wake of wrongdoing. Less likely to engage in direct, indirect and displaced aggression when angered and report positive long-term consequences to anger.
