Journal of Abnormal Psychology Shame Regulation in Personality
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Abnormal Psychology Shame Regulation in Personality Pathology Michelle Schoenleber and Howard Berenbaum Online First Publication, September 5, 2011. doi: 10.1037/a0025281 CITATION Schoenleber, M., & Berenbaum, H. (2011, September 5). Shame Regulation in Personality Pathology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0025281 Journal of Abnormal Psychology © 2011 American Psychological Association 2011, Vol. ●●, No. ●, 000–000 0021-843X/11/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0025281 Shame Regulation in Personality Pathology Michelle Schoenleber and Howard Berenbaum University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Drawing on extant work on shame and emotion regulation, this article proposes that three broad forms of maladaptive shame regulation strategies are fundamental in much of personality pathology: Prevention (e.g., dependence, fantasy), used preemptively, lessens potential for shame; Escape (e.g., social with- drawal, misdirection) reduces current or imminent shame; Aggression, used after shame begins, refocuses shame into anger directed at the self (e.g., physical self-harm) or others (e.g., verbal aggression). This article focuses on the contributions of shame regulation to the development and maintenance of personality pathology, highlighting how various maladaptive shame regulation strategies may lead to personality pathology symptoms, associated features, and dimensions. Consideration is also given to the possible shame-related constructs necessitating emotion regulation (e.g., shame aversion and proneness) and the points in the emotion process when regulation can occur. Keywords: shame, emotion regulation, personality disorders, personality pathology Nearly one-tenth of individuals in the general population and diminished ability to effectively use emotion regulation strategies nearly one third of clinical samples have at least one personality to avoid and/or alleviate shame plays an important role in the disorder (PD; Trull, Jahng, Tomko, Wood, & Sher, 2010; Zim- development and maintenance of some personality pathology, merman, Rothschild, & Chelminski, 2005). PDs are thought to be which would therefore make maladaptive shame regulation strat- particularly difficult to treat and can complicate the treatment of egy use an important treatment target. other disorders (e.g., Piper & Joyce, 2001; Dolan-Sewell, Krueger, & Shea, 2001), making personality pathology all the more impor- Emotion Regulation tant to address in clinical settings. To address personality pathol- ogy appropriately, it is important to have a sufficient understand- Emotion regulation includes any conscious or unconscious at- ing of why it develops. In this article, we propose that maladaptive tempt to influence when emotions arise, which ones they are, their shame regulation is at the core of many pathological personality duration, and/or the elements of those emotions—their subjective features. experience, behavioral expression, and/or physiological impact Both emotion regulation and shame have previously been im- (see Gross & Thompson, 2007). Like the popular Process Model of plicated as important factors in personality pathology. For exam- emotion regulation (Gross & Thompson, 2007), our organization ple, borderline personality disorder (BPD) involves affective in- of the shame regulation strategies takes the timing of strategy use stability (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2000), which into consideration, distinguishing between forms that occur well in some suggest is indicative of emotion dysregulation (e.g., Gratz, advance of shame elicitation and those that occur later in the Rosenthal, Tull, Lejeuz, & Gunderson, 2006). With regards to emotion process, when shame is imminent or ongoing. shame, for example, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV (DSM–IV; APA, 2000) indicates that those Shame and Shame-Related Constructs with avoidant personality disorder (APD) have pervasive fears of rejection and view themselves as inferior, both suggestive of Shame involves the subjective experience of the self as defective shame. Surprisingly, the relationship between personality pathol- (Lewis, 1971). It can be elicited in a variety of public or private ogy and shame regulation has not been thoroughly discussed. The situations, whenever flaws become apparent to the self (e.g., goal herein is to generate testable hypotheses regarding the role of Tangney, Miller, Flicker, & Barlow, 1996). Behaviorally, shame is shame regulation in personality pathology. We propose that the often expressed by downcast eye-gaze, head tilting down or to the side, covering the face with the hand, and/or postural changes to make the body appear smaller (e.g., Keltner & Buswell, 1996). Although several emotions (e.g., fear) are undoubtedly relevant to personality pathology, we believe that shame is particularly im- Michelle Schoenleber and Howard Berenbaum, Department of Psychol- portant. Negative self-beliefs that might trigger shame onset are ogy, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. likely to be highly distressing, as evidenced by their prominent role We thank Tom Oltmanns and Edelyn Verona for their helpful comments on a previous draft. in depression theories (e.g., Beck, 1963). Moreover, as previously Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Michelle suggested by others (e.g., Whelton & Greenberg, 2005), we be- Schoenleber, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana- lieve that the shame sometimes engendered by awareness of neg- Champaign, 603 East Daniel Street, Champaign, IL 61820. E-mail: ative self-beliefs is possibly even more important than the beliefs [email protected] themselves in the generation of psychological ill-health. We be- 1 2 SCHOENLEBER AND BERENBAUM lieve that little else could be more upsetting than the shame created contributes to maladaptive shame regulation at any point in the when perceiving oneself to be a “bad” person. Whereas other emotion process. When shame is elicited or forecasted, individuals emotions are elicited primarily based on situation-specific factors for whom shame is particularly aversive may feel more motivated (e.g., guilt elicited by attributing blame to oneself for a specific to use strategies to reduce shame or its likelihood. Therefore, we behavior in a specific situation, regardless of how one perceives hypothesize that many individuals with personality pathology have oneself typically behaving), shame results from attributing infor- elevated shame aversion, contributing to pervasive maladaptive mation about a specific situation to characterological defects. shame regulation. Therefore, shame triggers are unique in that they are carried around by individuals, constantly threatening to cause distress. Forms of Shame Regulation Thus, like personality pathology itself, shame and/or the threat of shame may be pervasive across time and situation. The literature on shame suggests three broad forms of shame The shame literature provides some preliminary support for our regulation. A depiction of these forms and their respective strate- assertion that, compared with other emotions, shame is especially gies is shown in Figure 1. Behavioral shame responses include detrimental. In existing correlational and quasi-experimental stud- preemptive avoidance of and escape from perceived shame trig- ies, shame has repeatedly been associated with a variety of psy- gers (Lindsay-Hartz, De Rivera, & Mascolo, 1995). Thus, we chological problems (e.g., Tangney & Dearing, 2002; Thompson distinguish between strategies that are used to completely circum- & Berenbaum, 2006), and there is little evidence that shame serves vent situations that might elicit shame (Prevention) and those that an adaptive function (see de Hooge, Breugelmans, & Zeelenberg, allow for disengagement from situations in which shame is im- 2008). By contrast, other emotions—even unpleasant emotions— pending or already elicited (Escape). can be adaptive. For instance, guilt that arises from a bad decision/ Our final form of shame regulation-Aggression—is based on behavior leads to apologizing or reparations, which are adaptive long-standing theory that shame is associated with anger/ responses resulting in good interpersonal functioning (de Hooge, aggression, referred to as “shame-rage” (Lewis, 1971). Angry Zeelenberg, & Breugelmans, 2007). self-loathing in response to perceived defects can be expressed in Because of its distressing and maladaptive nature, we expect self-directed aggression (e.g., self-injury; Brown, Linehan, Com- most individuals to try to down-regulate shame. We propose that tois, Murray, & Chapman, 2009). Moreover, hostile acts against individual differences in shame forecasting, shame-proneness, and others are thought to occur when shame becomes so overwhelming shame aversion are associated with preferences for using certain that the person refocuses self-hate onto others and reacts accord- forms of shame regulation, with the inappropriate use of shame ingly (e.g., Lewis, 1971). Similar to Escape, Aggression shame regulation then leading to the development and/or maintenance of regulation occurs after shame elicitation. Unlike Escape, however, personality pathology. Aggression shame regulation reflects attempts to actively deal with Shame forecasting. In order to use shame regulation strate- shame-eliciting situations, rather than disengaging. gies before shame is elicited, people must first anticipate shame. Predicting how situations will make one feel if