Honor and harmed social-image. Muslims' anger and shame about the cartoon controversy

Two studies examined anger and shame, and their associated appraisals and behavioral intentions, in response to harm to an in-group's social-image. In Study 1, 37 British Muslims (18 men, 19 women) reported incidents in which they were devalued as Muslims. In Study 2, 108 British Muslims (57 females, 50 males, 1 undisclosed) were presented with objective evidence of their in-group's devaluation: the controversial cartoons about Prophet Muhammad The appraisal of harm to social-image predicted anger and shame (Studies 1 and 2), whereas the appraisal of offense only predicted anger (Study 2). Anger was a more empowering response than shame, as anger predicted willingness for public confrontation (Studies 1 & 2), institutional punishment (Study 2), and written disapproval (Study 2). In contrast, shame only predicted written disapproval (Study 2). Furthermore, independent of individual differences in identification as Muslim, a mediation model showed that individual differences in honor orientation predicted anger and shame via the appraisals (Study 2). Implications for theory and research are discussed.