Journal of affective disorders · 2023
Differential associations of rumination and cognitive flexibility with guilt and shame following potentially morally injurious events.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cenkner David P, Usman Hajra, Zalta Alyson K
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Guilt and shame are common moral emotions following potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs), which involve events that violate one's deeply held moral values. However, not all individuals will experience guilt and shame following PMIEs and the mechanisms by which PMIEs lead to guilt and shame are not well understood. This study set out to examine the role of event-related intrusive rumination, event-related deliberate rumination, cognitive flexibility, and their interactions, in predicting PMIE-related guilt and shame.
METHODS: A subsample of undergraduate participants exposed to an objective PMIE and endorsing a subjective PMIE (N = 323) completed self-report assessments.
RESULTS: Higher levels of event-related intrusive rumination and event-related deliberate rumination and lower levels of cognitive flexibility were associated with higher levels of PMIE-related shame. Only higher levels of event-related deliberate rumination were associated with greater PMIE-related guilt. Moreover, the predictors explained much greater variance in PMIE-related shame (R2Adj = 0.44) than PMIE-related guilt (R2Adj = 0.05). There was no significant interaction between event-related rumination and cognitive flexibility in predicting PMIE-related guilt or shame.
LIMITATIONS: This study was cross-sectional, the sample was mostly female, and all data was collected via self-report. Longitudinal studies are needed to explore these potential mechanistic processes.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that differential pathways may affect whether individuals experience guilt or shame following PMIEs. Rumination and cognitive flexibility may be valuable clinical targets for interventions aimed at addressing PMIE-related shame.
METHODS: A subsample of undergraduate participants exposed to an objective PMIE and endorsing a subjective PMIE (N = 323) completed self-report assessments.
RESULTS: Higher levels of event-related intrusive rumination and event-related deliberate rumination and lower levels of cognitive flexibility were associated with higher levels of PMIE-related shame. Only higher levels of event-related deliberate rumination were associated with greater PMIE-related guilt. Moreover, the predictors explained much greater variance in PMIE-related shame (R2Adj = 0.44) than PMIE-related guilt (R2Adj = 0.05). There was no significant interaction between event-related rumination and cognitive flexibility in predicting PMIE-related guilt or shame.
LIMITATIONS: This study was cross-sectional, the sample was mostly female, and all data was collected via self-report. Longitudinal studies are needed to explore these potential mechanistic processes.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that differential pathways may affect whether individuals experience guilt or shame following PMIEs. Rumination and cognitive flexibility may be valuable clinical targets for interventions aimed at addressing PMIE-related shame.