Available via license: CC BY
Content may be subject to copyright.
Hiramatsuetal. BMC Res Notes (2020) 13:200
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-020-05027-z
RESEARCH NOTE
Development oftheJapanese version
oftheOther As Shamer Scale using item
response theory
Yoichi Hiramatsu1,2,3*, Kenichi Asano2,4, Yasuhiro Kotera5, Toshihiko Sensui6, Ayumu Endo7, Eiji Shimizu1,8,
Jaskaran Basran9,10 and Ken Goss11
Abstract
Objective: External shame reflects a person’s anxiety that he or she might be rejected by others. The Other as
Shamer Scale (OAS) is a scale for assessing external shame. The Japanese version of the OAS was developed, and its
reliability and validity were examined using Item Response Theory (IRT).
Results: A survey was conducted with university students (N = 199). Exploratory factor analysis of the results indi‑
cated a significantly high factor loading on the first factor, which was identical to the original version of the scale as
well as high internal consistency. Moreover, the results confirmed that each item had adequate discrimination and
information levels, suggesting that external shame could be discriminated against with high accuracy for a wide
range of relatively low and relatively high external shame groups. These results suggest that the OAS could be used to
screen external shame as a stress factor and to assess intervention effects.
Keywords: Shame, External shame, Item response theory
© The Author(s) 2020. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and
the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material
in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material
is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the
permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creat iveco
mmons .org/licen ses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creat iveco mmons .org/publi cdoma in/
zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Introduction
Shame can be a social event (e.g., being judged and
shamed in the eyes of others) or a private feeling linked
to our judgments of our feelings, ability to fantasize, and
characteristics. Shame can guide behavior, influence feel-
ings about ourselves, and shape our sense of self-identity
and feelings about our social acceptability and desirabil-
ity [1–3].
Correlations have been found between shame and
many psychiatric symptoms, such as borderline person-
ality disorders [4], eating disorders [5, 6], anxiety [7],
depression [3, 8, 9], and paranoia [10], among others.
erefore, shame is an essential factor related to mental
health.
According to Gilbert [11], two types of shame exist.
One is “Internal shame,” which is related to the internal
dynamics of the self and how the self judges and feels
about itself [11]. Internal shame relates to the tendency
to attend to negative aspects of the self and to maintain
global self-judgments of the self as bad, inferior, and
flawed [1–3]. e other type is “external shame,” which is
associated with the following tendencies: being worried
that others would see the self as uninteresting or boring
and, thus, the self would be rejected or excluded from
valuable relationships [11]. External shame has been
defined as shame that arises primarily from the process
of being shamed by others, which is the source of this
type of shame [1, 11].
External shame is caused by the consciousness of oth-
ers, that is, the concept that the self is negatively evalu-
ated by others, which is correlated with depression [12],
one’s body image related to eating disorders [6], and
one’s self-image related to social anxiety disorders [13].
Open Access
BMC Research Notes
*Correspondence: Hfcjf228@ybb.ne.jp
1 Research Center for Child Mental Development, Chiba University
Graduate School of Medicine, 1‑8‑1 Inohana, Chuo‑ku, Chiba 260‑8670,
Japan
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
Page 2 of 5
Hiramatsuetal. BMC Res Notes (2020) 13:200
However, in Japan, no standardized scales exist to meas-
ure external shame.
Moreover, the suggestion has been made that most
stress response scales in Japan were developed based on
classical test theory [14]. Classical test theory has a sig-
nificant problem that survey results are highly affected
by the characteristics and quality of the sample because
statistics are defined based on the population [14]. Item
response theory (IRT) is a paradigm for solving this prob-
lem. Different from the reliability coefficient that pre-
viously assessed the mean accuracy of an entire scale,
IRT measurement accuracy is expressed as a function
of characteristic values on a continuous scale that indi-
cates latent traits (θ) and a point at which a measurement
value with high accuracy is indicated about the entire
test as well as being based on each item. erefore, the
appropriateness of each item can be judged from the
perspective of the measurement purpose of the test [15].
Moreover, the practical utility of the scale can be exam-
ined from diverse perspectives.
Based on this information, this study aims to explore
the development of the Japanese version of the OAS to
assess trait shame—especially external shame. e reli-
ability and validity of the OAS were also examined, and
its measurement accuracy was examined using the IRT.
Main text
Participants
Responses were collected from university students
(N = 205). Most of the students were majoring in psy-
chology, and some were majoring in another course of
study. Data on 199 participants were used for the analysis
after excluding six participants who did not respond to all
or a part of the questions. Among the 199 participants,
130 (65%) were women, and two had an unknown gen-
der. e age range of the participants was 18 to 36years
(M = 19.68; SD = 1.62).
Measures
Japanese version ofOther As Shamer Scale (OAS)
OAS is a self-report instrument composed of 18 items
that assess external shame Goss etal. [16]. Respondents
were asked to indicate the frequency of their feelings and
experiences related to each item on a five-point scale
ranging from 0 (Never) to 4 (Almost Always).
After receiving approval of the original authors, two
experts, including the author, translated the original
version of the scale into Japanese. Two native English
speakers from Crimson Interactive Japan Co., Ltd. con-
ducted the back translation, and the translated sen-
tences were compared with the original English, which
indicated differences in the meaning of certain items.
erefore, the Japanese translation was revised, and the
back-translation was repeated, which confirmed no dif-
ferences in the meaning between the original and the
translated versions of the scale. e English version of
the scale resulting from the back translation was sent
to the two original authors, one of whom pointed out
differences in the meaning of specific items. After sev-
eral discussions with the authors, the Japanese version
of the scale was revised according to the advice of the
original authors, who indicated sufficient consistency
of the scale. Finally, the Japanese version of the OAS
was developed.
Japanese version ofBeck Depression Inventory‑II (BDI‑II)
Construct validity of the Japanese version of the OAS
was examined based on the correlation with depressive
tendencies using the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-
II) developed by Beck etal. [17]. e Japanese version
of BDI-II was developed by Kojima etal. [18] and dem-
onstrates a high degree of validity and reliability as an
assessment scale of depression.
As previously described, previous studies have repeat-
edly demonstrated correlations between the OAS and
depressive symptoms. Allan et al. [19] examined corre-
lations between external shame and depressive tenden-
cies based on correlations between OAS and the Beck
Depression Inventory (BDI), which indicated a high
positive correlation (r = 0.58 to 0.73). is study was also
expected to demonstrate a correlation between OAS and
BDI-II, similar to Allan etal. [19].
Procedures
A survey was conducted at three universities in Japan
during December 2019. Participants for the present study
were university students taking a psychology course.
Because the survey was conducted in a psychology class-
room, some students were majoring in other subjects.
e survey conducted anonymously for ethical reasons.
Written explanations were provided in advance to par-
ticipants to describe the purpose of the survey, the pro-
tection of their personal information, and the voluntary
nature of their participation. Participants’ response to the
survey was regarded as their consent for participation.
is study was conducted after obtaining the approval of
the ethics committee of Chiba University (No. 3441).
Data analysis was conducted using SPSS Statistics 26.
e Graded Response Model (GRM), which is applica-
ble to multi-item tests, was employed in the IRT analy-
sis because OAS uses a five-point scale. EasyEstGRM
[20] was used for the calculation. We used D = − 1.7
as the scale factor for calculating the discrimination
parameters.
Page 3 of 5
Hiramatsuetal. BMC Res Notes (2020) 13:200
Results
First, confirmatory factor analysis was conducted
using the principal factor method, which indicates
that the contribution of the first factor was 52.86%
(eigenvalue = 9.72), the second factor was 6.78%
(eigenvalue = 1.22), and the third factor was 5.73% (eigen-
value = 1.03). ese results confirmed that that scale had
a one-factor structure based on the high contribution
ratio of the first factor and the differences in eigenvalues.
Moreover, as a measure of reliability, Cronbach’s α, which
was 0.942, indicated a significantly high internal consist-
ency that was identical to the original version of the scale.
Next, the construct validity of the scale was examined
through a correlation analysis between OAS and BDI-
II, which indicated a high positive correlation (r = 0.57,
p < 0.001) similar to Allan etal. [19].
When conducting the IRT analysis, point-biserial cor-
relation coefficients were calculated, and a one-factor
factor analysis was conducted using polychoric correla-
tion coefficients. e results indicated a range of point-
biserial correlation coefficients from 0.53 to 0.84, which
suggests a strong positive correlation. Moreover, the
results of the one-factor factor analysis using polychoric
correlation coefficients indicated that the eigenvalue of
the first factor was 10.53, of the second factor was 1.26,
and of the third factor was 1.06. e differences in the
eigenvalues suggested a one-factor structure for the scale.
Table1 provides the results of calculating the discrimi-
nation and difficulty parameters of each item using GRM.
Figure1 shows the category response curve of each item,
and Fig.2 shows the test information curve of the entire
scale. e mean discrimination parameter is observed to
be 1.3 (0.70–2.0) with no extreme dispersion, although
Item 4 (0.70) and Item 11 (0.73) had relatively low values
compared with the other items. ese results indicated
that each item had middle or very high discrimination.
e difficulty parameters did not show a significant devi-
ation; b1: − 0.52 to − 0.3.3, b2: 0.73 to − 1.6, b3: 2.1 to
− 0.65, and b4: 3.0 to 0.71. Moreover, only b1 of Item 11
was relatively high, at − 3.3, suggesting a strong tendency
to respond when the item was applicable.
e test information curve expresses a trapezoid shape
confirming that the amount of information was rela-
tively high for the range of latent trait values from − 1.8
(error = 0.29) to 2.4 (error = 0.28), shifting toward the
X-axis in a positive direction. e maximum value of
the test information was 27.6 (error = 0.19), which was
achieved when the latent trait value was 1.1.
Discussion
e results of the IRT analysis that examined the
measurement accuracy of the scale indicated that the
discrimination parameter of each item was included
in the range from 0.70 to 2.0, or no extreme dispersion.
However, Item 4 (0.70) and Item 11 (0.73) had relatively
low values compared with the other items. According to
the discrimination parameter criteria of Baker [21], Items
4 and 11 could be included in the “middle level,” and the
other items could be included in “high” or “very high”
levels. erefore, the discrimination ability of the scale
was considered to have reached a sufficiently adequate
level. In the original version of the scale, the contribution
of Item 11 was also relatively low. Additionally, the dif-
ficulty parameters of Items 4 and 11 shifted toward the
X-axis in a negative direction relative to the other items,
suggesting that the participants tended to score high on
these items. Item 4 consisted of the statement, “I feel
insecure about other’s opinions of me,” which was dif-
ferent from the other items because this item does not
inquire into others’ negative evaluations. Although Item
4 is related to external shame, it might include a broader
meaning of the word shame. Arimitsu [22] suggested that
the functions of the sense of guilt and shame between
Japanese and European or American people reflected no
fundamental differences. In contrast, Matsui et al. [23]
suggested that Japanese junior and senior high school
students had a higher “sense of shame about conformity
with others,” that is, concern about being different from
others, relative to Turkish junior and senior high school
Table 1 Item parameters using the graded response
model
Item Item parameters
A B1 B2 B3 B4
Item1 1.60 − 1.68 − 0.49 0.53 1.54
Item2 1.51 − 1.38 − 0.17 0.98 1.68
Item3 0.96 − 1.12 0.67 2.02 3.00
Item4 0.70 − 2.64 − 1.67 − 0.65 0.71
Item5 1.95 − 1.24 − 0.01 0.94 1.56
Item6 2.07 − 0.85 0.30 1.02 1.64
Item7 1.41 − 1.38 − 0.13 0.98 1.66
Item8 1.49 − 1.26 − 0.12 0.76 1.39
Item9 1.00 − 0.52 0.93 2.05 2.46
Item10 0.94 − 0.80 0.40 1.19 2.08
Item11 0.73 − 3.25 − 1.61 − 0.05 1.60
Item12 1.44 − 0.65 0.52 1.33 2.12
Item13 1.23 − 0.60 0.47 1.26 2.12
Item14 1.21 − 1.04 0.13 0.98 1.80
Item15 1.58 − 0.81 0.15 0.86 1.58
Item16 1.09 − 0.57 0.73 1.60 2.31
Item17 1.13 − 1.17 − 0.21 0.73 1.72
Item18 1.33 − 0.55 0.37 0.98 1.71
Page 4 of 5
Hiramatsuetal. BMC Res Notes (2020) 13:200
students. Cultural differences might have affected the
responses to Item 4.
Conclusions
is study indicated that each item of the Japanese ver-
sion of the OAS has appropriate discrimination ability
and information and could discriminate at high accuracy
external shame in the range from relatively low to moder-
ately high. erefore, using this scale as a screening test
of external shame is possible, as is examining the effects
of interventions for depression, among other disorders.
Limitations
A limitation of the present study is that the test–retest
reliability was not investigated. One suggestion is that
future studies should examine the test–retest reliability
of the scale to confirm its stability. Additionally, the con-
struct validity of the scale was not sufficiently examined
in this study.
In this study, we conducted a survey with a relatively
small number of students at three universities. A larger,
randomized survey is required in future studies. In addi-
tion, only the gender, age, and major of a participant were
obtained; collecting background information such as eco-
nomic status in greater detail is necessary. e results of
this study should be interpreted with caution considering
the lack of information on participants’ economic status.
Previous studies indicated correlations between exter-
nal shame and depression, as well as various factors that
aggravate mental health, such as “anger.” Future research
should investigate whether the same correlations can be
observed in the Japanese version of the OAS.
Abbreviations
OAS: Other as Shamer Scale; IRT: Item response theory; BDI‑II: Beck depression
inventory‑II; GRM: Graded response model.
Acknowledgements
The back‑translation of the Japanese version of the OAS was provided by
Crimson Interactive Japan Co. Editorial support included statistical writing
provided by TEXT. We would like to thank Editage (http://www.edita ge.com)
for English language editing.
Authors’ contributions
YH designed and managed the study, performed the statistical analyses,
and drafted the manuscript. KA supervised the overall implementation of
the study. ES supervised the ethics approval and consent to participate. YK
supported the translation of the OAS. JB and KG checked the back‑translation
Fig. 1 Category response curve of each item
Fig. 2 Test information curve of all items
Page 5 of 5
Hiramatsuetal. BMC Res Notes (2020) 13:200
of the scale and confirmed the consistency of the scale. KA, TS, and AE con‑
ducted the survey. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP19K14412. The
funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analyses, decision
to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Availability of data and materials
The datasets generated or analyzed during the current study are available
from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The study was approved by the ethics committee at the Chiba University
Graduate School of Medicine (Reference Number: 3441). Written explanations
were provided to participants in advance on each item related to informed
consent, which describes the purpose of the survey, protection of their
personal information, and the voluntary nature of participation. Participants’
response to the survey was regarded as giving consent for participation.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Author details
1 Research Center for Child Mental Development, Chiba University Gradu‑
ate School of Medicine, 1‑8‑1 Inohana, Chuo‑ku, Chiba 260‑8670, Japan.
2 The Japanese Centre for Compassionate Mind Reserch and Training, Tokyo,
Japan. 3 Komachi Clinical Psychology Office, 2‑11‑1, Minamisaiwai, Nisi‑ku,
Yokohama‑MSBldg, Yokohama, Kanagawa 220‑0005, Japan. 4 Department
of Psychological Counseling, Faculty of psychology, Mejiro University, 4‑31‑1
Nakaochiai, Shinjyuku‑ku, Tokyo 161‑0032, Japan. 5 Human Sciences Research
Centre, University of Darby, Kedleston Road, Derby DE22 1GB, UK. 6 Depart‑
ment of Psychology, Faculty of Human Studies, Saitamagakuen University,
1510, Kizoro, Kawaguchi, Saitama 333‑0831, Japan. 7 Department of Psychol‑
ogy, Faculty of Letters, Komazawa University, 1‑23‑1, Komazawa, Setagaya‑ku,
Tokyo 154‑8525, Japan. 8 Department of Cognitive Behavioral Physiology,
Graduate School of Medicine, 1‑8‑1 Inohana, Chuo‑ku, Chiba 260‑8670, Japan.
9 Centre for Compassion Research and Training,College of Health and Social
Care Research Centre, University of Derby, Derby DE22 1GB, UK. 10 The
Compassionate Mind Foundation, Office 29, Riverside Chambers, Full Street,
Derby DE1 3AF, UK. 11 Coventry & Warwickshire Partnership Trust, Coventry
Eating Disorder Service, Swanswell Point, Stoney Stanton Road, Coventry CV1
4FS, UK.
Received: 13 February 2020 Accepted: 17 March 2020
References
1. Gilbert P. What is shame? some core issues and controversies. In: Gilbert
P, Andrews B, editors. Shame: Interpersonal behaviour, psychopathology
and culture. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998. p. 3–36.
2. Tangney J, Dearing R. Shame and guilt. New York: Guilford Press; 2002.
3. Matos M, Pinto‑Gouveia J. Shame as a traumatic memory. Clin Psychol
Psychother. 2010;17(4):299–312.
4. Rüsch N, Lieb K, Göttler I, Hermann C, Schramm E, Richter H, Jacob GA,
Corrigan PW, Bohus M. Shame and implicit self‑concept in women with
borderline personality disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164:500–8.
5. Frank E. S: shame and guilt in eating disorders. Am J Orthopsychiatry.
1991;61(2):303–6.
6. Duarte C, Pinto‑gouveia J. The impact of early shame memories in binge
eating disorder: the mediator effect of current body image shame and
cognitive fusion. Psychiatry Res. 2017;258(June):511–7.
7. Tangney J, Wagner P, Gramzow R. Proneness to shame, proneness to guilt
and psychopathology. J Abnorm Psychol. 1992;101(3):469–78.
8. Alexander B, Brewin C, Vearnals S, Wolff G, Leff J. An investiga‑
tion of shame and guilt in a depressed sample. Br J Med Psychol.
1999;72:323–39.
9. Cheung M, Gilbert P, Irons C. An exploration of shame, social rank and
rumination in relation to depression. Pers Individ Differ. 2004;36:1143–53.
10. Pinto‑Gouveia J, Matos M, Castilho P, Xavier A. Differences between
depression and paranoia: the role of emotional memories, shame and
subordination. Clin Psychol Psychother. 2014;21(1):49–61.
11. Gilbert P. Evolution, social roles and the differences in shame and guilt.
Soc Res. 2003;70(4):1205–30.
12. Matos M, Pinto‑Gouveia J. Shamed by a parent or by others: the role
of attachment in shame memories relation to depression. Int J Psychol
Psychol Ther. 2014;14(2):217–44.
13. Matos M, Pinto‑Gouveia J, Gilbert P. The effect of shame and shame
memories on paranoid ideation and social anxiety. Clin Psychol Psy‑
chother. 2013;20(4):334–49.
14. Tanaka K. An analysis of the stress reaction scale for workers by
utilizing item response theory. Dep Bull Pap Osakakeizaidaigaku.
2012;63(3):137–50.
15. Sakai W. Noguchi, H: comparison of tests of mental health for student
counseling: formation of a common measure. Jpn J Educ Psychol.
2015;63:111–20.
16. Goss K, Gilbert P, Allan S. Pergamon an exploration of shame measure‑I:
the Other as Shamer scale. J Pers. 1994;17(5):713–7.
17. Beck AT, Steer RA, Brown G. K: The Beck Depression Inventory. 2nd ed. San
Antonio: The Psychological Corporation; 1996.
18. Kojima M, Furukawa TA, Takahashi H, Kawai M, Nagaya T, Tokudome S.
Cross‑cultural validation of the Beck Depression Inventory‑II in Japan.
Psychiatry Res. 2002;110(3):291–9.
19. Allan S, Gilbert P, Goss K. An exploration of shame measures: II. Psychopa‑
thology. Pers Individ Differ. 1994;17:719–22.
20. Kumagai R. Development of IRT analysis programs for beginners: EasyEs‑
timation series. Jpn J Res Test. 2009;5:107–18.
21. Baker F. The basics of Item Response Theory. ERIC clearinghouse on
assessment and evaluation. College Park: University of Maryland College
Park; 2001.
22. Arimitsu K. The relationship of guilt and shame to mental health. Jpn J
Health Psychol. 2001;14:24–31.
23. Matsui H, Nakamura M, Horiuchi K, Ishii T. Shame, a cross cultural
and intergenerational study. J Kawamura Gakuen Womans Univ.
2007;18(1):109–22.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in pub‑
lished maps and institutional affiliations.
