(PS7-C51) Exploring Differences in Shame Proneness Among Asian Immigrant and Non-immigrant Undergraduates and Its Effect on Psychopathology and Well-being

Distress among immigrants is known to be prevalent due to challenges such as adjusting to a new culture and increasing xenophobia. However, cultural factors, such as socialization practices, are not taken into consideration when examining well-being among immigrants. Collective cultures, particularly relating to Asian populations, are known to utilize shame to detract pursuit of individualistic desires and maintain an interdependent, cohesive society. Moreover, unlike individualistic, western populations, Asian populations are more prone to experiencing shame which is shown to be associated with higher depression and anxiety symptoms and may be more deliberating to well-being. However, exposure and resulting acculturation to western cultures and values may have impacted cultural socialization practices over time. The current study explores shame proneness among immigrant and non-immigrant Asian students and its impact on depression and anxiety symptoms as well as flourishing, assessed through evaluative well-being. We predicted that immigrants would display higher shame proneness than non-immigrants. We further hypothesized that shame proneness would mediate the relationship between immigration status and clinical outcomes.

Data collected from Asian undergraduate students at a public university through an online survey (n=675, 63% nonimmigrant, 80% female) were analyzed for this study. Students were first asked to complete the Test of Self-Conscious Affect (TOSCA-3) to evaluate guilt and shame proneness. Students then completed the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21) to measure depression symptoms, anxious arousal and chronic tension and the Flourishing Scale (FS) to assess evaluative well-being.

Independent samples t-tests were conducted to evaluate differences in guilt and shame proneness among immigrants and non-immigrants. Shame proneness among immigrants was significantly lower than non-immigrants (d=-.244, p=.002). There was no significant difference in guilt proneness between the groups (d=-.118, p=.139). Immigrants reported higher levels of anxious arousal (d=.159, p=.047) and lower levels of flourishing (d=-.174, p=.029) than non-immigrants, but no significant differences in depression or chronic tension symptoms.

            In contrast to our hypothesis, results indicated that within an undergraduate sample, Asian immigrants may be less shame prone than non-immigrant Asians, though the effect size was notably small. Further research is necessary to understand whether external factors contribute to higher shame proneness amongst non-immigrant Asians or if the TOSCA-3 Scale doesn’t accurately measure shame proneness for foreign populations. Although we found higher anxiety and lower flourishing among Asian immigrants, the differences were small and shame proneness was not supported as a mediator of these outcomes. We speculate that factors such as pressures to acculturate, language barriers, financial costs of studying internationally should be considered in future research as potential contributors to higher levels of anxiety and decreased levels of flourishing among Asian immigrant students.