The Shame and Guilt Scales of the Test of Self-Conscious Affect-Adolescent (TOSCA-A): Psychometric Properties for Responses from Children, and Measurement Invariance Across Children and Adolescents.

Shaun D. Watson,Rapson Gomez,Eleonora Gullone

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00635

Shaun D. Watson, Rapson Gomez + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00635

Copy DOI

Abstract

This study examined various psychometric properties of the items comprising the shame and guilt scales of the Test of Self-Conscious Affect-Adolescent (TOSCA-A) in a group children between 8 and 11 years of age. A total of 699 children (367 females and 332 males) completed these scales, and also measures of depression and empathy. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) provided support for an oblique two-factor model, with the originally proposed shame and guilt items comprising shame and guilt factors, respectively. There was good internal consistency reliability for the shame and guilt scales, with omega coefficient values of 0.77 and 0.81 for shame and guilt, respectively. Also, shame correlated with depression symptoms positively (0.34, p < 0.001) and had no relation with empathy (-0.07, ns). Guilt correlated with depression symptoms negatively (-0.28, p < 0.001), and with empathy positively (0.13. p < 0.05). Thus there was support for the convergent and discriminant validity of the shame and guilt factors. Multiple-group CFA comparing this group of children with a separate group of adolescents (320 females and 242 males), based on the chi-square difference test, supported full metric invariance, the intercept invariance of 17 of the 30 shame and guilt items, and higher latent mean scores among children for both shame and guilt. The non-equivalency for intercepts and mean scores were of small effect sizes. Comparisons based on the difference in root mean squared error of approximation values supported full measurement invariance and no group difference for latent mean scores. The findings in the current study support the use of the TOSCA-A in children and the valid comparison of scores between children and adolescents, thereby opening up the possibility of evaluating change in the TOSCA-A shame and guilt factors over these developmental age groups.

Highlights

The Tests of Self-Conscious Affect are a group of theoretically driven self-report measures designed to assess individual differences in six dimensions: proneness to shame, proneness to guilt, externalization of blame, detachment unconcern, pride in self, and pride in behavior
The responses for the Test of Self-Conscious Affect-Adolescent (TOSCA-A) are ordered categorical data that are generally examined using robust weighted least squares (WLSMV), this study used maximum likelihood with robust estimation (MLR χ2) to ascertain statistical fit since simulation studies have shown that maximum likelihood based methods can yield accurate parameter estimates for Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) models when the observed variables contain more than four response categories. (Beauducel and Herzberg, 2006; Rhemtulla et al, 2012)
The findings report for the relationships of shame and guilt with depression symptoms and empathy may have little substantive meaning

Summary

Introduction

The Tests of Self-Conscious Affect are a group of theoretically driven self-report measures designed to assess individual differences in six dimensions: proneness to shame, proneness to guilt, externalization of blame, detachment unconcern, pride in self (alpha-pride), and pride in behavior (beta-pride). Guilt involves a negative evaluation of a specific behavior or action, where the focus is on the wrongness of a particular controllable action Extending this model, Tangney (Tangney, 1991, 1993) has proposed that shame and guilt are associated with different cognitions, motivations, evaluations, feelings, and behaviors (Tangney, 1991, 1993; Tangney et al, 1992; Niedenthal et al, 1994; for reviews, see Tangney and Dearing, 2002; Tangney et al, 2007). For example there are theories of shame and guilt defined in terms of the types of situations that invoke these responses, often referred to as public-private distinctions (Wolf et al, 2010), where shame is viewed as resulting from the public exposure of transgressions, and guilt to private commission of moral transgressions (Ausubel, 1955; Smith et al, 2002)

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion