Shame-Proneness Predicts Social Psychopathology: Considering the Sociometer Theory of Shame

Introduction: The classic act-person model of shame-proneness defined shame as originating from negative self-appraisals following wrongful actions, conferring broad vulnerability to psychopathology. However, recent developments postulate that shame may originate from real or imagined social evaluation (sociometer view of shame). If so, shame might leave one vulnerable to psychosocial stressors and may manifest in social anxiety specifically, even after accounting for general negative affect. We investigated how shame-proneness predicted concurrent symptoms and prospective responses to interpersonal stressors (social anxiety, feeling evaluated, and other symptoms) over five weeks in a sample including individuals at clinical and subclinical levels of emotional symptoms. Method: We oversampled for individuals meeting criteria for anxiety and depressive disorders based on clinical interviews (n = 58) and also included those not meeting diagnostic criteria (n = 101) to ensure a broad range of symptoms (total N = 159). Participants completed baseline measures of shame- and guilt-proneness, trait negative affect (NA), and symptoms of social anxiety, depression, and generalized anxiety disorders followed by symptom diaries for 5 weeks following their worst psychosocial stressors (1,923 diaries). Results: As expected, even after controlling for NA and guilt-proneness, shame-proneness uniquely predicted concurrent social anxiety (∆R2 = 8%) and prospectively predicted experiences of social evaluation. Shame-proneness demonstrated weaker links to depression, and no unique links to general anxiety and worry. Discussion: Shame-proneness functioned in a manner predicted by sociometer theory, demonstrating specificity for social evaluative symptoms and concerns. Results have implication both for shame theory and clinical practice with shame-prone individuals.

Evaluating sociometer theory in children’s everyday lives: Inclusion, but not exclusion by peers at school is related to within-day change in self-esteem

Sociometer theory proposes that a person’s self-esteem is a permanent monitor of perceived social inclusion and exclusion in a given situation. Despite this within-person perspective, respective research in children’s everyday lives is lacking. In three intensive longitudinal studies, we examined whether children’s self-esteem was associated with social inclusion and exclusion by peers at school. Based on sociometer theory, we expected social inclusion to positively predict self-esteem and social exclusion to negatively predict self-esteem on within- and between-person levels. Children aged 9–12 years reported state self-esteem twice per day (morning and evening) and social inclusion and exclusion once per day for two (Study 1) and four weeks (Studies 2–3). Consistently across studies, we found that social inclusion positively predicted evening self-esteem on within- and between-person levels. By contrast, social exclusion was not associated with evening self-esteem on the within-person level. On the between-person level, social exclusion was negatively linked to evening self-esteem only in Study 1. Multilevel latent change score models revealed that children’s self-esteem changed from mornings (before school) to evenings (after school) depending on their perceived daily social inclusion, but not exclusion. The findings are discussed in light of sociometer theory and the bad-is-stronger-than-good phenomenon.

Voice Quality and Ostracism

To move beyond the current emphasis on voice level or quantity in voice research, it is important to consider the effects of making suggestions that others view as poor quality. Guided by sociometer theory, we propose that voice quality affects workplace ostracism: The coworker may see the employee who makes bad suggestions as incompetent, which results in the employee being ostracized. The employee’s ostracism experience matters because it may not only result in the employee’s self-perception of poor voice quality but may also lead the employee to rate the coworker’s suggestions more harshly. In a field study over 6 weeks (294 employee-coworker dyads) and two vignette experiments (401 subjects), we found support for this sociometer view of voice quality. Thus, this study makes an important contribution to voice research by highlighting the quality dimension of voice. Employees who hope to effect change through their voice should monitor whether the quality of their suggestions will be judged favorably or unfavorably by their coworkers to avoid being ostracized.

Evaluating Sociometer Theory in Children’s Everyday Lives: Inclusion, but not Exclusion by Peers at School is Related to Within-Day Change in Self-Esteem

Sociometer theory proposes that a person’s self-esteem is a permanent monitor of perceived social inclusion and exclusion in a given situation. Despite this within-person perspective, respective research in children’s everyday lives is lacking. In three intensive longitudinal studies, we examined whether children’s self-esteem was associated with social inclusion and exclusion at school. Based on sociometer theory, we expected social inclusion to positively predict self-esteem and social exclusion to negatively predict self-esteem on within- and between-person levels. Children aged 9-12 years reported state self-esteem twice per day (morning and evening) and social inclusion and exclusion once per day for two (Study 1) and four weeks (Studies 2-3). Consistently across studies, we found that social inclusion positively predicted evening self-esteem on within- and between-person levels. By contrast, social exclusion was not associated with evening self-esteem on the within-person level. On the between-person level, social exclusion was negatively linked to evening self-esteem only in Study 1. Multilevel latent change score models revealed that children’s self-esteem changed from mornings (before school) to evenings (after school) depending on their perceived daily social inclusion, but not exclusion. The findings are discussed in light of sociometer theory and the bad-is-stronger-than-good phenomenon.

Self-esteem development in middle childhood: Support for sociometer theory

Though it is well-established that self-esteem develops from childhood well into old age, little is known about the processes that influence this change, especially among young populations. This international, cross-sequential study examined the development of self-esteem in 1599 second-graders (Age MT1 = 7.99, SDT1 = 0.52 years; 52% male) in the Netherlands and Germany over three years. Multilevel models revealed that mean-level trends in self-esteem were stable across time among all demographic groups, but that males and students in the Netherlands consistently had higher self-esteem than females and students in Germany. Further analyses examining the role of social support in self-esteem development demonstrated that individuals with better peer and family social support tended to have higher levels of self-esteem and that within-person changes in social support were directly related to changes in self-esteem level, providing support for sociometer theory. These findings suggest that demographic factors as well as social support are important predictors of self-esteem as early as middle childhood.

People feel worse about their forgiveness when mismatches between forgiveness and amends create adaptation risks

Building on principles of evolutionary psychology and sociometer theory, we propose that people feel worse about the extent to which they have forgiven when their forgiveness level increases their risk of exploitation or their risk of spoiling a valuable relationship. We predicted that people would feel worse about their forgiveness level when they grant a high level of forgiveness to a perpetrator who has made weak (vs. strong) amends, thereby heightening their risk of exploitation (H1). We also predicted that people would feel worse about their forgiveness level when they grant a low (vs. high) level of forgiveness to a perpetrator who has made strong amends, thereby putting the value of their relationship with the perpetrator at risk (H2). We conducted a longitudinal study of transgressions occurring in romantic relationships and two experiments to test these ideas. H1 was supported in two of the three studies; H2 was supported in all three. A mini meta-analysis indicated that both effects were reliable across the program of research. These results suggest that feelings about one’s forgiveness level serve a functional purpose: Feeling bad about one’s forgiveness level signals that the current combination of amends and forgiveness levels may be causing an adaptation risk.