Available via license: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Diversity in Unity: Perspectives from Psychology and Behavioral Sciences – Ariyanto et al. (Eds)
© 2018 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-1-138-62665-2
565
The role of the shame (isin) moral value in Javanese culture and its
impact on personality traits, and shame and guilt emotions of the
young Javanese generation
G.S. Prayitno, H.S.S. Sukirna & C. Amelda
Faculty of Psychology, University of Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
ABSTRACT: Shame and guilt are moral emotions that motivate ethical social behaviour
and encourage normal abiding behaviours. Considering the fundamental Javanese values
involved in the concept of isin (shame), that the Javanese tend to have a high degree of the
five traits that make up a personality: openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion,
agreeableness, and neuroticism. This study aimed to explore the relationship between the
personality trait, and shame and guilt emotions. The study’s participants were 165 university
students whose parents were Javanese and who had been raised and lived in Yogyakarta and
its surroundings, an area which is central to their culture. The NEO Five-Factor Inventory
(NEO-FFI) was used to capture the personality profile, and the Guilt And Shame Proneness
(GASP) Scale was used to measure the shame and guilt proneness action tendency. The result
of this study showed that the conscientiousness trait merely correlated with the emotion of
guilt, neuroticism only correlated with the emotion of shame, whereas agreeableness cor-
related with both shame and guilt emotions. Furthermore, the results also revealed that the
response shown by the Javanese people when they felt guilt was mostly reparative behaviour.
Only people with high agreeableness and extraversion traits showed withdrawal behaviour.
1 INTRODUCTION
Shame (or isin, as it is known in Javanese culture) and guilt are moral emotions that encour-
age people to act in accordance with accepted moral standards, and are critical for deterring
unethical and antisocial behaviour (Tangney, 1995; Tangney etal., 2011). Some experts do not
distinguish shame from guilt since both are feeling of distress that arise in response to per-
sonal transgressions or norm violations (Tangney & Dearing, 2002; Wolf etal., 2010). Both
are considered as self-conscious emotions evoked by self-reflection and self-evaluation, aid
in self-regulation (Tangney, 2003; Tracy & Robins, 2007), and emerged as feedback to non-
compliance or deviation to social norms (Ausubel, 1955; Leary & Tangney, 2003; Strongman,
2003; Tangney etal., 2005). Some researchers believe that they are two different emotions.
Emotions are rooted in one’s cultural experience. Su (2010) argued that culture has a
profound influence on people’s behaviour. Collective communities, such as Asian and
Indonesian, are considered to have a shame-based culture, whereas individualistic communi-
ties have a guilt-based culture; Asian people live in collectivistic cultures in which the people’s
behaviour is more regulated by shame rather than guilt (Su, 2010). In most Western commu-
nities that are characterised by individualistic culture, people’s behaviour is controlled more
by the emotion of guilt.
People who feel ashamed after any transgression or norm violation feel more distressed
compared to those who feel guilty. It was because those who feel shame will focus more on
themselves as a person, whereas those who feel guilty, will focus more on specific behav-
iour that is incompatible to social norms (Tangney, 1991; Tangney etal., 1992; Tangney &
Dearing, 2002). Shame has a detrimental, destructive effect on one’s self (Tangney, 1991) as
well as self-esteem (Ausubel, 1955).
566
In Javanese culture, shame has been the main moral emotion imposed to control behaviour.
Those who violate or behave inconsistently to Javanese values or norms are considered as ‘ora
njawani’ (non-Javanese) or ‘durung njawani’ (not Javanese yet) (Endraswara, 2010). Most of
all, a mature Javanese personality is reflected in one’s understanding of isin (Suseno, 1993).
Sumantri and Suharmono (2007) and Su’udy (2009) observed that there has been a shift
towards individualistic characteristics or orientation in many communities in Indonesia.
Shame seems to lose its power to regulate and encourage moral behaviour. This can be
reflected, for example, in the increasing prevalence of corruption or extra marital pregnan-
cies and abortion (Takariawan, 2012). Empirical studies regarding the tendency to feel shame
or guilt among Javanese youth may reveal the existence of the assumed shift in or weakened
‘shame culture’.
Shame and guilt emotions are also influenced by personality (Diener & Larsen, in
Strongman, 2003), and can be expressed as an individual’s tendency to show a consistent pat-
tern of thought, feeling, and action, which differentiate one individual from another (McCrae &
Costa, 2006). Costa and Widiger (2002) emphasise five traits of a personality: openness
to experience (O), conscientiousness (C), extraversion (E), agreeableness (A), and neuroti-
cism (N). Based on the ‘Big Five Factor’ model of a personality, Hutapea (2012) found that
Javanese male teachers showed high (A) and (C), moderate (E), (O), and low (N). However,
no study could be found on the relationship between personality and moral emotion with
regard to the Indonesian community. A study involving 332students (Caucasians, African-
Americans, Latinos and Asians) found that the traits (A), (C), and (E) had a positive correla-
tion to shame and guilt (Nan, 2007). (O) showed a positive correlation only to guilt, whereas
(N) showed no correlation to neither shame nor guilt emotion. This finding was inconsistent
with the results of the studies of Abe (2004) and Wright etal. (1989) that showed (N) has
a positive correlation to both shame and guilt emotions. This current study will explore the
correlation between the personality traits in the five-factor model, and the moral emotions of
shame and guilt emotions among the young Javanese generation.
2 METHODS
A Participants
This study involved 165members of the young Javanese generation, namely those aged 18 to
24 who had Javanese parents and had lived in Central Java (Surakarta or the Special Region
of Yogyakarta) since childhood. At the age of 18, it was assumed that the participants had
reached the higher stage of Kohlberg’s moral development (Kohlberg in Rathus, 2012). They
were recruited using the incidental sampling technique.
B Instruments
1. The NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) is a personality inventory developed by
McCrae and Costa based on the ‘Big Five’ theory of personality. NEO-FFI measures (N),
(E), (O), (C), and (A). It consists of 60 items and each trait was measured by a 12-item
combination of favourable and unfavourable statements regarding each trait. The par-
ticipants rated the degree to which each statement described themselves on a four-point
scale: 4= Very suitable; 3= Suitable; 2= Not suitable; 1= Very unsuitable. The items
validity for (O) trait=0.38–0.526; (C) trait = 0.453–0.702; (E) trait=0.267–0.691; (A)
trait=0.291–0.675; and (N) trait=0.291–0.717. The usage of NEO-FFI in this study was
enabled by using the licence granted to Sherly Saragih Turnip.
2. The Guilt And Shame Proneness (GASP) Scale is an instrument that was developed by
Cohen etal. (2011) to measure individual differences in experiencing shame and guilt emo-
tions following a transgression or norm violation. It consists of four sub-scales: 1) Guilt-
Negative Behaviour Evaluation (Guilt-NBE) for feelings of regret or a feeling that you
have committed bad behaviour; 2) Guilt-Repair for assessing an attitude or willingness to
567
correct mistakes; 3) Shame-Negative Self-Evaluation (Shame-NSE) to measure the feeling
of shame, indicated by feeling small, helpless and feeling like a bad person; 4) Shame-
Withdrawal for the response of shame, indicated by withdrawal, avoidance or escaping
the situation. Each subscale consists of four items (scenarios). The 16scenarios are to
be rated on a seven-point Likert-like scale ranging from 1 for ‘Impossible’ to 7 for ‘Very
possible’. GASP has a high reliability (0.779). Each subscale also has high item validity
(Guilt-NBE=0.683–0.712, Guilt-Repair= 0.645–0.70, Shame-NSE =0.634–0.704, and
Shame-Withdrawal=0.648–0.71).
c Data analysis
Descriptive statistics, frequency, mean, and median, were used to describe personality traits
and the moral emotions of shame and guilt. Pearson’s product moment technique was used
to obtain information about the correlation between each personality trait (OCEAN) and
shame or guilt proneness. Statistical analysis was conducted with SPSS for Windows 16.0.
3 RESULTS
Almost one third of the participants show high (O), (C), (E), and (N), but an almost equal
percentage of the participants had high and low (A). The trait of agreeableness was not dis-
tinctively high compared to (O), (C), (E), and (N) (see Table1).
Regarding moral emotions, the highest score was found in the Guilt-Repair scale, whereas
the lowest score was found in the Shame-Withdrawal scale. This showed that violation of
norms tended to elicit guilt among Javanese students followed by a behavioural tendency
to repair: make a correction, extend apology and regret, and to ask for forgiveness for their
wrongdoings. There was a very slight tendency that transgression-elicited shame would be
followed by withdrawal (see Table2).
Results regarding the correlation between personality traits and moral emotions (see
Table3) showed that:
a. There was a significant positive relationship between (O) and Guilt-Repair. The higher
trait of (O) an individual has, the higher the likelihood that violation of the norm will
elicit a Guilt-Repair response.
Table1. Percentage of personality traits of the participants (N=165).
Percentages
Personality trait Low High
Openness to experience 29.7 70.3
Conscientiousness 31.5 68.5
Extraversion 33.3 66.7
Agreeableness 48.5 51.5
Neuroticism 30.3 69.7
Table 2. Moral emotional-behavioural response to
transgressions.
Moral response Mean score
Guilt-NBE 5.62
Guilt-Repair 5.85
Shame-NSE 5.45
Shame-Withdrawal 3.73
568
b. A positive relationship between (C) and guilt existed. Those with (C) were likely to show
two types of response: Guilt-NBE and/or repairing their mistakes (Guilt-Repair).
c. There was a positive relationship between (E) and guilt. The higher the trait of (E), the
higher the tendency to elicit a Guilt-Repair response.
d. (E) has a strong negative correlation to shame. Individuals with a high (E) trait were very
unlikely to show withdrawal behaviour as a response to the elicited shame emotion.
e. (A) has a positive relationship with both shame and guilt. Individuals with an (A) trait
showed a high tendency to respond to guilt with Guilt-NBE, or made a correction to
their mistakes (Guilt-Repair), and/or also responded to the elicited shame with negative
self-evaluation (Shame-NSE), but showed a very slight tendency to respond with Shame-
Withdrawal.
f. There were positive relationships between (N) and both shame responses of negative self-
evaluation (Shame-NSE), and withdrawal (Shame-Withdrawal). Individuals with high (N)
responded to the elicited emotion of shame with negative self-evaluation, such as “I am a
bad person” and/or tended to avoid, escape or to show withdrawal behaviour.
Overall, more personality traits were positively related to the emotion of guilt rather than
to the emotion of shame. The response of reparation (Guilt-Repair) showed a significant
relationship with the four personality traits of (O), (E), (A), and (N), whereas Shame-With-
drawal had a significant relationship only with three personality traits. Shame-Withdrawal
action had a negative relationship with (E), and (A), and a positive relationship with (N).
This means that an individual with (E) and/or (A) tended not to make withdrawal responses
to personal transgressions or norm violations, whereas an individual with (N) tended to make
withdrawal responses. Shame-NSE followed by a withdrawal response was only revealed by
individuals with (N).
4 DISCUSSION
Javanese students tend to be high in the four traits of personality namely (O), (C), (E), and
(N). However, the percentages of participants who were high and low in (A) were almost
equal. Contrary to Hutapea’s (2012) findings that Javanese teachers had dominant traits of
(A), there was almost an equal number of Javanese students who had high or low traits of
(A); this means that (A) is less dominant among Javanese students. As for (N), in this study
Javanese students were found to have a level of this trait, whereas Hutapea (2012) found
this trait was low in the same population. These different findings may be explained by the
different characteristics of the participants. Hutapea’s study involved 26–40 years old par-
ticipants, whereas this study involved younger participant with age ranges between 18 and 24
years old. Individuals from different cohorts experienced different cultural atmospheres and
may have had different approaches to behaviour, relationships and parenting style. Moreover,
participants in this study were university students who have been exposed to individualistic
cultural norms and values (through higher education), which may well be different from the
Javanese culture in which they were raised. Higher academic or education tradition demands
Table3. Correlation between NEO-FFI and GASP.
Personality trait Guilt-NBE Guilt-Repair Shame-NSE Shame-Withdrawal
Openness to experience 0.088 0.239** 0.012 −0.072
Conscientiousness 0.195*0.15*0.070 0.059
Extraversion 0.032 0.13*−0.036 −0.274**
Agreeableness 0.27** 0.289** 0.156*−0.183**
Neuroticism 0.019 −0.105 0.16*0.29**
*significant at the level 0.05; **significant at the level 0.01.
569
the students to exercise assertiveness, be more open to new or different ideas and be critical to
ideas or scientific concepts. This higher education culture may put lower/less importance on
trait (A). In higher education, there is also a high chance of long term interaction or exposure
to non-Javanese culture (non-local students) that influence the development of original (and
distinctive) Javanese personality traits.
Contrary to Nan’s (2007) findings in the US, Javanese students who showed high (C)
tended to feel guilty after committing transgression and this emotion would be followed by
repair tendencies, rather than feeling shame and thinking of people’s negative evaluation of
themselves. Nan’s (2007) findings showed that conscientiousness was a predictor for both
shame and guilt. This study yielded similar findings to Wright etal. (1989) in that the trait
(N) had a positive correlation with Shame-NSE and Shame-Withdrawal. For Javanese stu-
dents, the higher the (N) trait they had, the higher their tendency to feel shame and respond
to the elicited shame by focusing on negative self-evaluation and/or withdrawal behaviours.
The finding that the trait (O) had correlation with Guilt-Repair, corroborated the finding of
Nan’s (2007) study. The high trait of (O) may facilitate the process of learning to also respond
to transgression with guilt, and not only with shame as learned in the Javanese family envi-
ronment. The trait (E) was related to the tendency of responding with repair behaviour when
one’s feel guilty, which is inconsistent to Nan’s (2007) findings. A Javanese individual needs
to have high (E) in order to maintain harmonious interpersonal relationships between mem-
bers of a community. Javanese tend to show repair behaviour, restore, or regain harmonious
relationships to community members who might be in conflict or experience communication
or relationship breakdowns after a transgression.
5 CONCLUSION
Personality traits of the young Javanese generation, specifically university students, were
shown to have a relationship with shame and guilt emotions. The results of this study indi-
cated a tendency among Javanese to elicit both guilt and shame self-evaluations. However,
they tended to show Guilt-Repair rather than Shame-Withdrawal after commitment to any
transgression. Therefore, do these results indicate that isin, as a Javanese moral value, is not
strong enough to encourage shame emotion as expected in a collective society which is cat-
egorised as having a shame-based culture, or has there been a shift in the cultural way of
responding emotionally and/or regulating behaviour among Javanese youth? This condition
implies that an extensive study is needed to obtain a stronger conclusion as to whether there
is a shift of moral emotion in the young Javanese generation, in which their behaviour is more
controlled by guilt than by shame.
REFERENCES
Abe, J.A. (2004). Shame, guilt and personality judgement. Journal of Research in Personality, 38(2),
85–104.
Ausubel, D.P. (1955). Relationship between shame and guilt in the socializing processes. Psychological
Review, 62(5), 378–390.
Cohen, T.R., Wolf, S.T., Panter, A.T. & Insko, C.A. (2011). Introducing the GASP Scale: A new measure
of guilt and shame proneness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(5), 947–966.
Costa, P.T. & Widiger, T.A. (2002). Personality disorder and the five factor model of personality.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Endraswara, S. (2010). Falsafah hidup Jawa (Javanese Philosophy of Life). Yogyakarta, Indonesia:
Cakrawala.
Hutapea, B. (2012). Sifat-kepribadian dan dukungan organisasi sebagai prediktor komitmen organisasi
guru pria di sekolah dasar (Personality and organizational support as predictor of male teacher organi-
zational commitment at elementary school). Makara Seri Sosial Humaniora, 16(2), 101–115.
Leary, M.R. & Tangney, J.P. (2003). Handbook of self and identity. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
570
McCrae, R.M. & Costa, P.T. (2006). Personality in adulthood: A five factor theory perspective. New York,
NY: The Guilford Press.
Mulder, N. (1996). Pribadi dan masyarakat di Jawa (Individual and society in Java). Jakarta, Indonesia:
Pustaka Sinar Harapan.
Nan, L.M. (2007). Moral guilt and shame: an investigation of their associations with personality, values,
spirituality and religiosity. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois.
Rathus, S.A. (2012). Psychology concepts and connections (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage
Learning.
Strongman, K.T. (2003). The psychology of emotion: From everyday life to theory. Chichester, UK: John
Wiley and Sons.
Su, C. (2010). A cross-cultural study on the experience and self-regulation of shame and guilt. Toronto,
Canada: York University.
Sumantri, S. & Suharmono. (2007). Kajian proposisi hubungan antara dimensi budaya nasional dengan
motivasi dalam suatu organisasi usaha (The propotition study of relationship between national culture
dimension and motivation in a business organization) (Doctoral thesis, Fakultas Psikologi Univesitas
Padjajaran and Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Diponegoro).
Suseno, F.M. (1983). Etika Jawa: sebuah analisa falsafi tentang kebijaksanaan hidup Jawa (Javanese eth-
ics: A philosophy analysis of Javanese wisdom of life). Jakarta, Indonesia: PT. Gramedia
Su’udy, R. (2009). Conflict management styles of Americans and Indonesians: Exploring the effects of
gender and collectivism/individualism (Doctoral thesis, University of Kansas).
Takariawan, C. (2012, Juli 18). Banyak Pacar, Banyak Aborsi (Many Partners, Many Abortions).
Kompasiana. Retrieved from http://www.kompasiana.com/pakcah/banyak-pacar-banyakaborsi_
55125cc7a33311ed56ba8498.
Tangney, J.P. (1991). Moral affect: The good, the bad, and the ugly. American Psychological Association,
61(4), 598–607.
Tangney, J.P. (1995). Shame and guilt in interpersonal relationship. In J.P. Tangney & K.W Fischer.
(Eds). Self-conscious emotions: the psychology of shame, guilt. embaressment and pride (pp. 114–142).
New York, NY, The Guilford Press.
Tangney, J.P. (2003). Self-relevant emotions. In M.R. Leary & J.P. Tangney (Eds). Handbook of self and
identity, (pp. 384–400). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Tangney, J.P., & Dearing, R.L. (2002). Shame and guilt. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Tangney, J.P., Mashek, D., & Stuewig, J. (2005). Shame, guilt, and embarrassment: Will the real emotion
please stand up? Psychological Inquiry, 16(1), 44–48.
Tangney, J., P., Stuewig, J., Mashek, D., & Hastings, M. (2011). Assessing Jail Inmates’ Proneness To
Shame and Guilt: Feeling Bad About the Behavior or the Self? Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol.
38, 710–734.
Tangney, J.P., Wagner, P., Fletcher, C. & Gramzow, R. (1992). Shamed into anger? The relation of shame
and guilt to anger and self-reported aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(4),
669–675.
Tracy, J.L., Robins, R.W. & Tangney, J.P. (2007). The self-conscious emotions: Theory and research. New
York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Wolf, S.T., Cohen, T.R., Panter, A.T. & Insko, C.A. (2010). Shame proneness and guilt proneness:
Toward the further understanding of reactions to public and private transgressions. Self and Iden-
tity, 9(4), 337–362.
Wright, F., O’Leary, J. & Balkin, J. (1989). Shame, guilt, narcissism, and depression: Correlates and sex
differences. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 6(2), 217–230.
