Shame Management through Reintegration

By E. Ahmed, N. Harris, J. Braithwaite, V. Braithwaite. 2001

327 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/389b850233ed0c7f83703088f11602d727abfd6f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Addressing Bullying in Schools (2004, background): “Some schools have applied the ideas of restorative justice in a preventative way through a Responsible Citizens Program which encourages students to develop relationships with their peers that are characterized by respect and consideration (Ahmed et al., 2001) Students have been helped through role ”
The `Chicken and Egg' of Subjective and Social Factors in Desistance from Crime (2008, background): “He argues that, whereas the first type of shame will encourage desistance, the latter will lead to defiance and further recidivism from outcast subcultures (see especially Ahmed et al. 2001 for the application of this theory to desistance).”
An Experiment Testing the Relative Effectiveness of Encouraging Voter Participation by Inducing Feelings of Pride or Shame (2010, background): “Reintegrative shaming is defined as ‘‘communicating disapproval of an act with respect’’ (Ahmed et al. 2001, p. 39).”
Emotional Dynamics in Restorative Conferences (2004, background): “This is all the more important given the dangers that are apparent if those shame feelings are not managed constructively (Tangney, 1991; Nathanson, 1992; Retzinger and Scheff, 1996; Ahmed et al., 2001).”
Emotions and Crime over the Life Course: A Neo‐Meadian Perspective on Criminal Continuity and Change1 (2007, background): “16 We agree with Braithwaite’s basic premise that if offenders’ early rule breaking had been met with shaming that was reintegrative, the costly spiral of negative outcomes, alienation, and further offending need not have ensued (see also Ahmed et al. 2001).”
What Have We Learned from Five Decades of Neutralization Research? (2005, background): “In contrast, attributions that connote expectations of change for the better in the wrongdoer... and avoid labeling individuals as possessing global personality deficits have been associated with positive outcomes (e.g., pro-social behavior, empathy, self-esteem)" (Ahmed et al. 2001, p. 258).”
Forgiveness, Shaming, Shame and Bullying (2005, background): “According to the shame management approach (see Ahmed et al., 2001), individuals who acknowledge shame and accept personal responsibility will refrain from further wrongdoing because they have considered the harmful consequences and made amends to avoid them in the future.”