Abstract
This study compared the validity of two promising measures of shame and guilt proneness: revisions of the Harder Personal Feelings Questionnaire (PFQ2; Harder & Lewis, 1987) and the Hoblitzelle Adapted Shame and Guilt Scale (ASGS; Hoblitzelle, 1982). Internal consistency, test-retest stability, factor structure, and construct validity with convergent and discriminant personality dimensions were examined for both scales. In addition to the shame and guilt measures, 63 (37 male, 26 female) mostly freshman college students completed a randomly ordered battery of personality scales theoretically relevant to shame and guilt proneness. Results support the reliability and shame/guilt factor structure of each scale. ASGS Shame correlations appeared marginally more valid with 11 external construct variables than PFQ2 Shame, whereas PFQ2 Guilt was clearly more valid than its corresponding ASGS subscale. New, potentially improved scales were constructed from the factor analyses and from item analyses. However, the resulting scales did not show improved validity.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
