CALiO Search

Individual Differences in Emotion Regulation, Childhood Trauma and Proneness to Shame and Guilt in Adolescence

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Szentágotai-Tătar , A., & Miu, A. C.
dc.date.accessioned 2016-11-30T17:07:10Z
dc.date.available 2016-11-30T17:07:10Z
dc.date.issued 2016
dc.identifier.citation Szentágotai-Tătar , A., & Miu, A. C. (2016). Individual Differences in Emotion Regulation, Childhood Trauma and Proneness to Shame and Guilt in Adolescence. PloS One, E 11(11), e0167299. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167299 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0167299&type=printable
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/11212/3065
dc.description.abstract Dispositional shame and guilt have been associated with psychopathology and an increasing number of studies have traced this relation back to adolescence. This developmental period is thought to be characterized by maturational changes in emotion regulation, which also play an important role in vulnerability to psychopathology, but little is known about the links between emotion regulation and dispositional shame and guilt. The current study investigated the relations between individual differences in the habitual use of a wide range of emotion regulation strategies and proneness to shame and guilt in a large sample of adolescents (N = 706), aged 13 to 17 years. History of childhood trauma was also assessed. Our results showed that emotion regulation independently explained about 20% of the variance of shame-proneness and guilt-proneness. Higher use of maladaptive (e.g., Self-Blaming, Catastrophizing) and lower use of adaptive (e.g., Refocus on Planning, Positive Reappraisal) emotion regulation strategies were positively associated with shame-proneness. In contrast, lower use of maladaptive (e.g., Catastrophizing, Blaming Others) and higher use of adaptive (e.g., Refocus on Planning, Positive Reappraisal) emotion regulation strategies were associated with guilt-proneness, independent of the influence of childhood trauma, which also explained a relatively minor portion of guilt-proneness. Although there were age differences (i.e., rumination was used more by older adolescents, and the influence of emotion regulation on depression and anxiety symptoms increased with age) and sex differences (i.e., girls reported higher use of Putting into Perspective and Other Blaming compared to boys) in emotion regulation, age and sex were not significantly associated with proneness to shame and guilt. The positive relations with maladaptive emotion regulation underscores the dysfunctional nature of shame-proneness. Future studies could use longitudinal measures to establish that emotion regulation drives dispositional shame and guilt, and also investigate whether emotion regulation optimization is able to normalize proneness to shame and guilt and reduce risk for psychopathology. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher PLoS One en_US
dc.subject emotion regulation en_US
dc.subject child abuse en_US
dc.subject shame en_US
dc.subject guilt en_US
dc.subject childhood trauma en_US
dc.subject adolescents en_US
dc.subject Romania en_US
dc.subject International Resources en_US
dc.title Individual Differences in Emotion Regulation, Childhood Trauma and Proneness to Shame and Guilt in Adolescence en_US
dc.type Article en_US


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search


Browse

My Account