Journal article
Shame and Guilt, Misconceptions and Controversies: A Critical Review of the Literature
Traumatology (Tallahassee, Fla.), v 14(3), pp 91-102
01 Sep 2008
Abstract
The literature on shame and guilt is very heterogeneous. Researchers and theorists in the field have used a number of definitions, approaches, and measurement methods, rendering futile any attempt at a comparative analysis. The article reviews the relevant literature and summarizes the different approaches to shame and guilt while highlighting relevant conceptual issues. The literature review is followed by a thorough delineation of the two constructs. Affective, cognitive, and phenomenological definitions are discussed for a fuller understanding of the phenomena. The cognitive attributional theory is discussed and is also used to explain the process of elicitation. The delineation of shame and guilt is followed by a comprehensive discussion of parsimony. In addition to drawing attention to the current multiplicity of definitions in the literature, the article intends to serve as a more unified framework for future studies of shame and guilt.
Metrics
5 Record Views
67 citations in Scopus
Details
- Title
- Shame and Guilt, Misconceptions and Controversies: A Critical Review of the Literature
- Creators
- Alon Blum - Aarhus UniversitySandra L Bloom - Health Management and Policy
- Publication Details
- Traumatology (Tallahassee, Fla.), v 14(3), pp 91-102
- Publisher
- Sage Publications
- Number of pages
- 12
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Language
- English
- Academic Unit
- Health Management and Policy
- Scopus ID
- 2-s2.0-49849084890
- Other Identifier
- 991021944098604721