The role of attribution styles in self-conscious emotions of shame and guilt for elementary school's students

Introduction Until recently, the self-conscious emotions have been poorly studied. Few studies on their meanings, how they are developed, and how individual differences arise have been conducted (Lewis, 2011). Self-conscious evaluative emotions have important roles in children’s motivation, social competence, and adjustment (Lewis & Sullivan, 2005). Shame and guilt are two self-conscious emotions that are necessary from childhood to be considered. Shame is the product of the self-evaluation of its actions in regard to standards, rules, goals and a global attribution. This emotion is a consequence of a failure when someone accepts the responsibility for failure and there is a global focus on the self. Shame can occur in response to either failed moral actions or poor achievements (Lewis, 1992). Guilt/regret also occurs in response to accepting personal responsibility for a failure, but it is not as intensely negative as shame, because, with guilt, the focus of attention is on the individual’s specific actions that resulted in the failure. Because the focus of attention in guilt is on specific behaviors, individuals can get rid of this emotion through reparative action. Rectification of the failure and prevention of a future reoccurrence are the two possible corrective paths that individuals can choose. Thus, guilt is not the self-destroying emotion that shame is (Cole, Barrett, & Zahn-Waxler, 1992). Because not only the common people but also some experts and theorists equated the two terms interchangeably (Damon, 1988; Eisenberg, 1986 & Harris, 1989), one of the challenges facing researchers in distinguishing the difference and similarities of these two emotions, is to identify the precedents and outcomes of shame and guilt. Few studies have examined the antecedents of these two emotions. The emotions of shame and guilt are deductive because adults and older children ascribe success or failure to cause with certain properties or dimensions (Lewis & Sullivan, 2005). Examining the role of attribution styles in self-conscious emotions of shame and guilt for elementary schools’ students may provide a clearer picture of the processes that underlie these emotions. Research Questions The present study tried to answer the following questions: 1- Which negative aspects of attribution-styles can be explained regarding selfconscious emotion of shame?
2- Which positive aspects of attribution-styles can be explained regarding selfconscious emotion of shame?
3- Which negative aspects of attribution-styles can be explained regarding selfconscious emotion of guilt?
4- Which positive aspects of attribution-styles can be explained regarding selfconscious emotion of guilt?
Method The participations were 565 students of elementary school, students of the fourth, fifth and sixth grades of Galedar (284 girls and 281 boys) who were selected by multistage cluster sampling. They were asked to complete TOSCA-C and CASQ– R scales, respectively. The validity and reliability of these scales were attested. The data were analyzed using stepwise regression technique.
Results The results showed that dimensions of internal, stable and global negative attribution style directly and dimension of stable positive attribution style indirectly can predict the shame. Furthermore, dimensions of stable and global negative style indirectly and dimension of stable positive style directly can predict the guilt.
Discussion The results showed that the three dimensions of negative stable, negative internal and negative overall can change the shame’s explanation. These findings are consistent with the theoretical concepts provided by Lewis (1992) about a shame. The results showed that positive stable dimension changes can be reversed the shame’s prediction. To explain these findings it can be said that negative stable dimension causes shame (Tracy & Robins, 2004) but the positive stable dimension includes individual success in future situations. With this interpretation the reverse relationship between positive stable and shame can be explained. On the role of negative attribution style in guilt, the results showed that two dimensions of negative stable and negative overall are negatively explaining the variance of guilt. In expressing the negative role the negative stable dimension has for guilt it should be noted that for guilt, the attribution of failures, is more temporary (Buss, 1980). But in the negative stable, causes of failure are attributable to factors that remain constant over time. The relationship between the three dimensions of positive attribution style and emotion guilt, the results showed that positive stable can directly modify the guilt’s prediction. The study recommended practical suggestions to parents and teachers in the light of conclusions for the students’ education.