Shame and self-conscious emotions in Japan and Australia: Evidence for a third shame logic

IF 1 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Culture & Psychology Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI:10.1177/1354067X19851024
R. Thomas, R. Deighton, M. Mizuno, So Fujii
{"title":"Shame and self-conscious emotions in Japan and Australia: Evidence for a third shame logic","authors":"R. Thomas, R. Deighton, M. Mizuno, So Fujii","doi":"10.1177/1354067X19851024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Few studies have examined the more nuanced experiential facets of self-conscious emotion from a cross-cultural perspective. The present study’s aim was to investigate shame and embarrassment experiences in relation to shame logics (or appraisals), shame antecedents and intensity across cultures in Australia and Japan, drawing on Fessler’s Dual Logics Model of Shame (Fessler, 2004), and applying a new instrument (The Self-Conscious Emotion Questionnaire). There were 157 participants from two cultures, Japan (75) and Australia (82) who completed both paper-based and web-based questionnaires. Previous findings showing a higher experienced shame intensity found in Japan were corroborated across all shame and embarrassment logics. While the logic of ‘norm non-conformity’ was the strongest logic in both cultures, the logic of ‘status lowness’ was prominent in Japan but not Australia, and the novel logic of ‘broken positive assumptions about the self’ was prominent in both cultures. Shame in Japan appeared to be stronger with an introspective ‘eyes of self’ but explicitly described trigger, whereas in Australia, it was more publicly ‘eyes of other’ and implicitly induced counter to some expectations. Findings support the Self-Conscious Emotion Questionnaire as an instrument for exploring nuanced aspects of self-conscious emotion in cross-cultural research and lend support to a novel third logic of ‘broken positive assumptions about the self’ in both Australian and Japanese samples.","PeriodicalId":47241,"journal":{"name":"Culture & Psychology","volume":"26 1","pages":"622 - 638"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1354067X19851024","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture & Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X19851024","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Few studies have examined the more nuanced experiential facets of self-conscious emotion from a cross-cultural perspective. The present study’s aim was to investigate shame and embarrassment experiences in relation to shame logics (or appraisals), shame antecedents and intensity across cultures in Australia and Japan, drawing on Fessler’s Dual Logics Model of Shame (Fessler, 2004), and applying a new instrument (The Self-Conscious Emotion Questionnaire). There were 157 participants from two cultures, Japan (75) and Australia (82) who completed both paper-based and web-based questionnaires. Previous findings showing a higher experienced shame intensity found in Japan were corroborated across all shame and embarrassment logics. While the logic of ‘norm non-conformity’ was the strongest logic in both cultures, the logic of ‘status lowness’ was prominent in Japan but not Australia, and the novel logic of ‘broken positive assumptions about the self’ was prominent in both cultures. Shame in Japan appeared to be stronger with an introspective ‘eyes of self’ but explicitly described trigger, whereas in Australia, it was more publicly ‘eyes of other’ and implicitly induced counter to some expectations. Findings support the Self-Conscious Emotion Questionnaire as an instrument for exploring nuanced aspects of self-conscious emotion in cross-cultural research and lend support to a novel third logic of ‘broken positive assumptions about the self’ in both Australian and Japanese samples.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
日本和澳大利亚的羞耻感和自我意识:第三种羞耻感逻辑的证据
很少有研究从跨文化的角度审视自我意识情感的更细微的经验方面。本研究的目的是利用Fessler的羞耻双重逻辑模型(Fessler, 2004),并运用一种新的工具(自我意识情绪问卷),在澳大利亚和日本的不同文化中,调查羞耻和尴尬经历与羞耻逻辑(或评价)、羞耻前因和羞耻强度的关系。来自日本(75)和澳大利亚(82)两种文化的157名参与者完成了基于纸张和基于网络的问卷调查。之前的研究结果显示,日本人经历过的羞耻强度更高,这在所有羞耻和尴尬逻辑中都得到了证实。虽然“不符合规范”的逻辑在两种文化中都是最强的逻辑,但“地位低下”的逻辑在日本很突出,而在澳大利亚则不是,而“关于自我的积极假设被打破”的新逻辑在两种文化中都很突出。在日本,羞耻感似乎更强烈,有内省的“自我之眼”,但有明确描述的触发因素,而在澳大利亚,羞耻感更公开的是“他人之眼”,并隐含地引起与某些预期相反的反应。研究结果支持了自我意识情感问卷作为一种工具,在跨文化研究中探索自我意识情感的微妙方面,并支持了澳大利亚和日本样本中“关于自我的消极假设”的第三种新颖逻辑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Culture & Psychology
Culture & Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
18.80%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Culture & Psychology addresses the centrality of culture necessary for a basic understanding of the psychology of human beings: their identity, social conduct, intra- and intersubjective experiences, emotions and semiotic creativity. By drawing on diverse theoretical backgrounds, the editorial aim is to provide an international and interdisciplinary forum for scholarly investigations and discussions that will advance our basic knowledge of the self in its historical and cultural contexts. The orientation of the journal is towards formulating new conceptualizations of culture in psychology, together with theoretically relevant empirical investigations.
期刊最新文献
Moving up the stream beyond resistance to counter move The homeless mind in a mobile world: An autoethnographic approach on cognitive immobility in international migration Cultural and idiographic approach to the microgenesis of visual metaphors Exploring experiences of proculturation in international students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Identity and parent-child relationship representations of Nezha: From cultural narrative to case conceptualization
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1