A Multidimensional Approach to the Relationship Between Individualism-Collectivism and Guilt and Shame
Isaac F. Young,Pooya Razavi,Taya R. Cohen,Qian Yang,Miquel Alabernia-Segura,Daniel Sullivan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000689
IF: 5.564
2019-01-01
Emotion
Abstract:Guilt and shame proneness are commonly thought to be associated with culture, yet research on this relationship is fragmented and often inconsistent. In a comprehensive review of the existing social scientific literature, we demonstrate that no consistent relationship between guilt and shame, on the one hand, and individualism and collectivism, on the other, has yet been established. To move this research area forward, we apply a new two-dimensional, quaternary perspective to both guilt/shame and cultural orientation. Specifically, both evaluative and behavioral dimensions of guilt and shame are considered using the Guilt and Shame Proneness scale (GASP; Cohen, Wolf, Panter, & Insko, 2011), as well as the degree of hierarchy (i.e., horizontality-verticality) in individuals’ cultural orientation (Triandis & Gelfand, 1998). A study of individuals from five countries (US, India, China, Iran, and Spain; total N = 1,466) confirmed our hypotheses that individuals culturally socialized to be more interpersonally oriented (i.e., horizontal collectivism) are more motivated to engage in reparative action following transgressions, whereas those culturally socialized to be more attuned to power, status, and competition (i.e., vertical individualism) are more likely to withdraw from threatening interpersonal situations, and that these relationships are stronger than corresponding relationships with guilt- and shame-related evaluations. In addition to supporting these hypotheses, our data also provide the first cross-cultural evidence regarding the invariance of the GASP.