ORIGINS OF SHAME AND GUILT
The family environment is one obvious domain to
examine when investigating the origins of shame- and guilt-prone styles (Ferguson & Stegge, 1995; Gilbert, 1998). Genes could play some (indeterminate) role in the susceptibility of shame- or guilt-prone thinking.
Parents also could model such moral emotions or behave in ways that repetitively induce feelings of shame or guilt (Tangney, 2002; Tangney & Dearing, 2002).
HARSH AND WARM PARENTING AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF SHAME AND GUILT
Although the family is the site for early socialization, how parents induce shame- or guilt-proneness in their children has been understudied (Hoglund &
Nicholas, 1995; Reimer, 1996). One hypothesis is that punitive and rejecting practices would result in feelings of intense shame in a child. Harsh parenting,
described by punitive practices of yelling, hitting, and spanking, may lead to feelings of helplessness on the part of the child, which may then lead to globalized feelings of shame. On the other hand, parental rejection, including excessive criticism and humiliation,
might cause individuals to adopt a shame-prone emotional style. Because these criticizing behaviors tend
to focus on the person and not the behavior (e.g., “I can’t believe how stupid you are”), they may increase shame- and decrease guilt-proneness. In contrast, warm and supportive behavior on behalf of the parents might encourage the child to feel appropriate
guilt about behavior but not globalize it to his or her entire self (Tangney, 2002).
In a study of 5- to 12-year-olds, Ferguson and Stegge (1995) found that children’s guilt was associated with parents’ reports of induction and parental anger in negative situations, whereas shame was associated with parental hostility and a lack of discipline. In one laboratory experiment, children’s shame reactions were correlated with negative maternal behavior (Alessandri & Lewis, 1996). In an earlier study using a nonmaltreated sample, Alessandri and Lewis (1993)
reported that parents’ negative comments were associated with children’s displays of shame, whereas parents’
positive evaluative statements were related to lower levels of shame. Using retrospective reports from female students, Gilbert, Allan, and Goss (1996) found that recalled put-downs and shaming by parents were associated with shame-proneness in adulthood.
Similarly, in a college sample, retrospective reports of parental emotional abusiveness,
but not physical abusiveness, were related to shameproneness, whereas neither was related to guiltproneness
(Hoglund & Nicholas, 1995).
SEXUAL ABUSE AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF SHAME AND GUILT
Shameful feelings may be one result of the secretive and hidden nature of sexual abuse (Deblinger &
Runyon, 2005 [this issue]). Whereas many clinical
and subjective reports of shame emerge from the sexual abuse literature, comparatively little empirical
work has been done (M. Lewis, 1998). In addition,
much does not take into account the self-behavior distinction (shame-guilt) originally theorized by H. B.
Lewis (1971) and subsequently found to be important when examining later maladjustment (Tangney &
Dearing, 2002).
In one study, Andrews (1995) used a measure of body shame and found a significant relation to reports of sexual and physical abuse in childhood. In addition to the relation between body shame and abuse, shame mediated the relationship between abuse and depression. There was, however, no measure of guilt-proneness. Another study, among victims
of crime, also showed a link between retrospective reports of sexual abuse and shame, defined as feeling shame about the crime (Andrews, Brewin, Rose, &
Kirk, 2000). However, because these studies were retrospective, they are subject to a number of concerns,
including memory bias and lack of external corroboration.
Feiring and colleagues have investigated the
impact of child sexual abuse experiences and feelings of shame surrounding the experience (Feiring &
Taska, 2005 [this issue]; Feiring, Taska,&Lewis, 1996, 2002). If sexually abused individuals in the study expressed pronounced feelings of shame about the abuse, they had poorer outcomes, such as higher levels of depression and posttraumatic stress disorder
(PTSD). The focus of these studies, however, was within group and restricted to feelings of shame about the sexual abuse experiences—not whether children who were sexually abused were more likely to develop a shame-prone style than individuals who were not abused.
MARITAL VIOLENCE AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF SHAME AND GUILT
The relationship between witnessing marital violence and different emotional styles has not been
studied specifically. There are, however, a number of possible mechanisms that might account for such a relationship. Similar to homes where there is harsh punitive parenting, homes where marital violence occurs may have consistently elevated levels of stress.
Family members, especially children, may be on edge, never certain when the next “blow-up” may occur.
These children might then make global attributions internalizing blame. This characterological selfblame may lead to higher shame-proneness and lower guilt-proneness (Andrews, 1995, 1998; Tangney et al., 1992).
The capacity to be alone is a key feature of maturity (Winnicott, 1965). According to Winnicott, the lack of this capacity indicates a lack of internal psychic repre-sentations that can be called upon to soothe and comfort, resulting in a subsequent dependence on external
others for validation of self. His theoretical notions are essential elements of object-relations literature. This
literature has focused on understanding how early experiences
with others are central to both the development of a sense of self (personhood or personality) and the ability to form satisfying relationships as adults.
Object-relations theorists focus on internal representations or objects that develop during childhood and
represent the internal image of an external object. Initially, a child’s sense of self is based on others’ responses
and perceptions. The infant or small child ideally develops in an environment in which the
mother or primary caregiver cares for and protects the vulnerable newborn. The infant is totally dependent on the mother for the satisfaction of needs. A sense of self, distinct from the mother, does not exist. For Winnicott there is no such thing as an infant, there is only the mother-infant couple in which the mother is attuned to the needs of the infant. The mother provides for the infant’s id (i.e., impulses or instinctual needs) in a way that the infant thinks he or she has met the need on his or her own. Thus the mother creates an illusionary omnipotence within the infant—a necessary step on the road to integration.
Gradually the infant becomes aware of a sense of “I am” (Winnicott, 1965, p. 33). This is not necessarily a conscious state but a gradual awareness of existing in the presence of another person, the other being a reliable mother or caretaker. This awareness of a sense of “I am” leads to the notion of “I am alone,” or distinct from this reliable mother. The child takes in psychically (introjects) the positive ego-supporting mother and with time is able to be alone without the mother’s presence. According to Winnicott, a person must first experience being alone in the presence of another person without an overwhelming sense of anxiety to develop the adult capacity to be alone. Being alone in the supportive presence of another person not only leads to positive introjects, but these introjects are the precursors of a positive sense of self. The internalized
sense of self, developed from the integration of a predominately positive self-image, allows for internal object
constancy. Object constancy requires the development of a permanent sense of significant others and
enables a person to call upon soothing, loving images in the absence of the loved person.
Winnicott (1953) further developed the internalization of the ego-supportive mother in his discussion of transitional objects and phenomena. The child who develops positive feelings about the self is able to use external objects to comfort the self. For example, the child’s blanket, a tune, or the stroking of the arm
(known in the psychoanalytic literature as a transitional phenomenon) can be used to recall the comfort of the mother when she is not there. These first “not-me possessions” or objects are imbued with a sense of vitality and warmth and are used to comfort, soothe, and reduce anxiety. As one matures, these self-soothing techniques or transitional phenomena are able to become more diffuse and more abstract because of these earlier positive experiences.
Marital violence, for instance, is related to more depression and anxiety in school-age children (Hughes & Luke, 1998; McCloskey et al., 1995). Harsh punitive parenting and low parental warmth predict adolescent delinquency (Loeber & Dishion, 1983;
McCord, 1997; Sampson & Laub, 1993; Simons, Wu, Johnson, & Conger, 1995), as does sexual abuse, especially among girls (Herrera
&McCloskey, 2003; Paolucci et al., 2001; Siegel &Williams, 2003).
Retrospective reports of parental emotional abusiveness, but not physical abusiveness, were related to shameproneness, whereas neither was related to guiltproneness (Hoglund & Nicholas, 1995).
In the past 20 years, the majority of research examining shame and guilt using the self- versus behavior distinction has focused on psychological adjustment.
Researchers have found that after controlling for guilt, shame tends to be highly related to a variety of psychopathology, including PTSD, obsessive- compulsiveness, psychoticism, anxiety, and depression (Andrews et al., 2000; Ferguson, Stegge, Eyre, Vollmer, & Ashbaker, 2000; Harder, Cutler, & Rockart, 1992; Quiles & Bybee, 1997;
Tangney et al., 1992).
Shame-proneness showed no association with criminal behavior but was linked to ensuing depression.
Guilt-proneness, on the other hand, showed little relation to depression but seemed to inhibit
engagement in criminal activities. Shame-proneness in early adolescence was associated
with symptoms of depression in late adolescence even when controlling for childhood symptoms of
depression. Although researchers have often found a concurrent relationship
between shame-proneness and depression (Tangney et al., 1992), very few studies have looked at this prospectively.
The Relation of Child Maltreatment to Shame and Guilt Among Adolescents: Psychological Routes to Depression and Delinquency
Jeffrey Stuewig, George Mason University, Laura A. McCloskey, University of Pennsylvania
CHILDMALTREATMENT,Vol. 10, No. 4,November 2005 324-336