Skip to main content
Log in

Revisiting Guilt, Shame, and Remorse

  • Research in Progress
  • Published:
Psychological Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We explored the observed similarity/dissimilarity among guilt, shame, and remorse (GSR) by conducting an empirical study in three phases—(i) generation of scenarios, (ii) development of illustrations and determination of item (scenario) equivalence, and (iii) rating of GSR induced by the scenarios. Ten young adults wrote their life experiences of guilt, shame and remorse, respectively, yielding a total of 34 scenarios. The scenarios were presented to 138 participants, and they were instructed to reflect upon the emotion (GSR) that best suited the scenarios. Principal component analysis indicated that the same scenario induced guilt as well as shame or remorse depending on the valence. Scenarios with positive factor load assessed guilt, whereas shame and remorse had negative factor load. Following an iterative process, the scenarios were converted into illustrations where each scenario was depicted in a storyboard comprising a set of three illustrations. Generalized procrustes analysis was performed to assess item equivalence between the narrations and the corresponding storyboards. Fourteen participants first rated the narratives and then the storyboards after a gap of 24 h. The findings suggest no significant difference between the illustrated scenarios and the narrative, thus leading to 13 scenarios. Multidimensional scaling suggests that the perception of shame and remorse overlaps and this is distinct from guilt.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of Data and Material

The data and illustrations are available with the authors.

References

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All the three authors made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work. The second and third authors were responsible for data acquisition, while the first author performed analysis and interpretation. The first author drafted the work, and all the three authors revised it critically for important intellectual content. The authors approve this version to be published and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Braj Bhushan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics Approval

Approval was obtained from the ethics committee of IIT Kanpur. The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent to Participate

The participants signed a written consent form before undergoing the study.

Consent for Publication

The authors agree with the content and give explicit consent to submit this manuscript for publication.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bhushan, B., Basu, S. & Dutta, S. Revisiting Guilt, Shame, and Remorse. Psychol Stud 65, 247–260 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-020-00561-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-020-00561-z

Keywords

Navigation