Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (12)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lickel, B.
Right arrow Articles by Ames, D. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Vicarious Shame and Guilt

Brian Lickel

University of Southern California, lickel{at}usc.edu

Toni Schmader

The University of Arizona

Mathew Curtis

University of Southern California

Marchelle Scarnier

The University of Arizona

Daniel R. Ames

Columbia University

Participants recalled instances when they felt vicariously ashamed or guilty for another’s wrongdoing and rated their appraisals of the event and resulting motivations. The study tested aspects of social association that uniquely predict vicarious shame and guilt. Results suggest that the experience of vicarious shame and vicarious guilt are distinguishable. Vicarious guilt was predicted by one’s perceived interdependence with the wrongdoer (e.g. high interpersonal interaction), an appraisal of control over the event, and a motivation to repair the other person’s wrongdoing. Vicarious shame was predicted by the relevance of the event to a shared social identity with the wrongdoer, an appraisal of self-image threat, and a motivation to distance from the event. Implications for intergroup behavior and emotion are discussed.

Key Words: guilt • interdependence • shame • social identity • stereotypes

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Vol. 8, No. 2, 145-157 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/1368430205051064
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
S. Zebel, B. Doosje, and R. Spears
How Perspective-Taking Helps and Hinders Group-Based Guilt as a Function of Group Identification
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, January 1, 2009; 12(1): 61 - 78.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
D. Abrams and M. A. Hogg
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 10 Years On: Development, Impact and Future Directions
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, October 1, 2008; 11(4): 419 - 424.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
S. Zebel, S. F. Pennekamp, M. van Zomeren, B. Doosje, G. A. van Kleef, M. L. W. Vliek, and J. van der Schalk
Vessels with Gold or Guilt: Emotional Reactions to Family Involvement Associated with Glorious or Gloomy Aspects of the Colonial Past
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, January 1, 2007; 10(1): 71 - 86.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
T. F. Denson, B. Lickel, M. Curtis, D. M. Stenstrom, and D. R. Ames
The Roles of Entitativity and Essentiality in Judgments of Collective Responsibility
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, January 1, 2006; 9(1): 43 - 61.
[Abstract] [PDF]