Embarrass Ability Scale (ES)

Abstract

The Embarrassability Scale (ES), originally developed by Modigliani in 1968, is a self-report psychological scale designed to measure an individual’s dispositional tendency to experience the emotion of embarrassability. This instrument presents respondents with 26 hypothetical social situations and assesses the intensity of the subjective feeling of awkwardness or discomfort they would anticipate experiencing. Later research and adaptations, notably by Thompson, have confirmed that the scale effectively captures two distinct factors: Personal Embarrassability (PE), where the individual is the source or target of the awkward event, and Vicarious Embarrassability (VE), which involves feeling embarrassment on behalf of others who are in an awkward situation.

Keywords

Embarrassment, Embarrassability, Social Anxiety, Self-Consciousness, Personal Embarrassability, Vicarious Embarrassability, Social Evaluation, Dispositional Trait.

Authors

Amadeo Modigliani (1968). Subsequent significant contributions to the scale’s structure and validation were made by R. S. Miller, Kelly and Jones, and Trevor Thompson.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the ES is to quantify stable individual differences in the tendency to experience the affective state of embarrassment across a variety of social contexts. It is fundamentally a measure of a personality trait, helping researchers categorize individuals based on their sensitivity to potentially awkward or face-threatening situations.

The scale is instrumental in social psychology research, particularly in studies investigating the relationship between embarrassability and constructs such as shyness, communication apprehension, and the management of social impressions. By distinguishing between personal and vicarious forms of embarrassment, the scale allows for a nuanced understanding of social sensitivity.

Construct

The ES measures the psychological construct of dispositional embarrassability, defined as a stable personality trait reflecting a person’s readiness to feel embarrassed. This construct is often viewed as closely related to social anxiety and self-consciousness, focusing specifically on reactions to perceived impropriety or social failure.

As confirmed through later factor analysis, the scale operationalizes two key dimensions: Personal Embarrassability (PE), which measures the emotional reaction when the respondent is directly involved in the embarrassing situation (e.g., tripping in public); and Vicarious Embarrassability (VE), which measures the emotional response when witnessing another person’s misfortune or social mishap (e.g., watching a performer fail). VE is hypothesized to be linked to empathy and perspective-taking.

Validity

Studies examining the ES have established strong evidence for its construct validity. The scale demonstrates significant convergent validity, showing positive correlations with measures of shyness, neuroticism, and public self-consciousness, as documented by researchers like Miller (1995) and Edelmann & McCusker (1986). This indicates that the ES is measuring the intended domain of social sensitivity and discomfort.

Furthermore, the scale’s ability to differentiate between Personal Embarrassability (PE) and Vicarious Embarrassability (VE) components supports its factorial validity, suggesting that these are distinct, though related, dimensions of the overall embarrassability trait. Research by Kelly and Jones (1997) focused extensively on validating the factor structure and its relationship to various personality correlates.

Reliability

The Embarrassability Scale has generally demonstrated acceptable to good internal consistency across various studies utilizing the instrument. While specific coefficients vary by study population, research often reports Cronbach’s alpha values indicating high reliability for the total scale score, as well as for the derived PE and VE subscales.

Furthermore, the dispositional nature of the trait measured suggests good temporal stability, or test-retest reliability, making the ES a suitable measure for assessing stable individual differences in social emotional reactivity.

Factor Analysis

Initial factor analytic studies of the ES sometimes suggested a single dimension; however, subsequent research, particularly the work of Kelly and Jones (1997) and Thompson (2014), strongly supports a robust two-factor structure. This structure separates the items into two distinct, yet correlated, factors: Personal Embarrassability (PE) and Vicarious Embarrassability (VE).

The PE factor captures situations where the respondent is actively involved in the embarrassing incident or is the focus of social attention. The VE factor, conversely, groups items relating to observing others experience awkwardness or shame. This distinction is crucial for understanding the differential personality correlates associated with active versus empathetic emotional responses to social mishaps.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report psychological scale measuring dispositional trait.

Format: 26 hypothetical scenarios rated on a 5-point Likert scale.

Language Available: English (Original); translations used in cross-cultural research (e.g., Singelis et al., 1999).

Population Group: General population, primarily used with university students in academic research.

Age Group: Adolescents and Adults.

Population Details: Used extensively in Western and cross-cultural samples to study social behavior and personality correlates.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate how strongly embarrassed they would feel in each scenario using the following 5-point scale:

1. I would not feel the least embarrassed: not awkward or uncomfortable at all.
2. I would feel slightly embarrassed.
3. I would feel fairly embarrassed: somewhat self-conscious, and rather awkward and uncomfortable.
4. I would feel quite embarrassed.
5. I would feel strongly embarrassed: extremely self-conscious, awkward and uncomfortable.

Keywords

Personality assessment, Social emotion, Self-presentation, Social discomfort, Trait measurement, Vicarious experience, Dispositional embarrassability.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Original author, Modigliani, 1968)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A

Correspondence Address: N/A

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale was originally published in 1968 by Amadeo Modigliani. Given its status as an established instrument in academic social psychology, the scale is widely available and typically used without fee for non-commercial research purposes. The full instrument and scoring details are frequently reproduced in dissertations and academic papers.

The original PDF content of the instrument, as referenced in the source material, can be found here:

• http://www.psychology.uct.ac.za/sites/default/files/image_tool/images/117/Nicolina.van%20der%20Merwe.pdf
• http://ira.lib.polyu.edu.hk/bitstream/10397/3254/2/b21167849_ir.pdf

Reference’s

• Cupach, W. R., Huggins, J., Long, L. W., & Metts, S. (2002) Perceptions of impropriety; the role of embarrassability and perceiver sex. Paper presented at Western States Communication Association, Long Beach, CA.

• Edelmann, R. J., & McCusker, G. (1986). Introversion, neuroticism, empathy, and embarrassability. Personality and Individual Differences, 7, 133–140.

• Kelly, K. (1994). The structure and personality correlates of the Embarrassability Scale. Paper Presented at the Conference of the Society of Southeastern Social Psychologists, Winston-Salem, NC.

• Kelly, K. M., & Jones, W. H. (1997). Assessment of dispositional embarrassability. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping: An International Journal, 10, 307–333.

• Miller, R. S. (1987) The nature of embarrassability; Correlates and sex differences. Unpublished Manuscript, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas.

• Miller, R. S. (1987). The nature of embarrassability: Correlates and sex differences. Unpublished manuscript.

• Miller, R. S. (1995). On the nature of embarrassability: Shyness, social evaluation, and social skill. Journal of Personality, 63, 315-339.

• Modigliani, A. (1968). Embarrassment and embarrassability. Sociometry, 31: 313-326.

• Singelis, T.M., Bond, M., Sharkey, W., & Lai, C. (1999). Unpackaging Culture’s Influence on Self-Esteem and Embarrassability: The Role of Self-Construals. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30: 315-341.

• Thompson, Trevor. (2014). Personal and Vicarious Embarrassability Common and Unique Personality Correlates. Journal of Individual Differences, 35: 22-29.

• Withers, L. A., & Vernon, L. L. (2006). To err is human: Embarrassment, attachment, and communication apprehension. Personality and individual differences, 40, 99-110.

Items of the Embarrass ability Scale (ES)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. Suppose you were just beginning a talk in front of a class.
2. Suppose you slipped and fell on a wet floor in a public place‚ dr‎opping a bag of groceries.
3. Suppose you were a dinner guest‚ and the guest seated next to you spilled his plate on his lap while trying to cut his meat.
4. Suppose someone stopped you on the street by asking you something‚ and he turned out to be quite drunk and incoherent.
5. Suppose a group of friends were singing “Happy Birthday” to you.
6. Suppose you discovered you were the only person at a particular social occasion without a dress (or coat and tie –i.e. you are informally dressed).
7. Suppose you were watching an amateur show and one of the performers was trying to do a comedy act‚ but was unable to make anyone laugh.
8. Suppose you were calling up a person you had just met for the first time in order to ask him or her for a date.
9. Suppose you were muttering aloud to yourself in an apparently empty room and discovered that someone else was present.
10. Suppose you walked into a bathroom at someone else’s house and discovered it was occupied by a member of the opposite sex.
11. Suppose you were watching a play from the audience when it suddenly became clear that one of the actors had forgotten her lines‚ causing the play to come to a standstill.
12. Suppose you are unable to stop coughing while listening to a lecture.
13. Suppose you were being lavishly complimented on your pleasant personality by your companion on your first date.
14. Suppose you were in a class and you noticed that the teacher had completely neglected to zip his fly.
15. Suppose you entered an apparently empty classroom‚ turned on the lights‚ and surprised a couple making out.
16. Suppose you were talking to a stranger who stuttered badly due to a speech impediment.
17. Suppose your mother had come to visit you and was accompanying you to all your classes.
18. Suppose you were a dinner guest and could not eat the main course because you were allergic to it.
19. Suppose you were alone in an elevator with a professor who had just given you a bad test grade.
20. Suppose a shabbily dressed man accosted you on the street and asked you for a handout.
21. Suppose you were walking into a room full of people you did not know and were being introduced to the whole group.
22. Suppose you tripped and fell while entering a bus full of people.
23. Suppose you were opening some presents while the people who bought them for you were sitting around watching.
24. Suppose you asked someone on crutches if he had suffered a skiing accident and he blushed and replied that‚ no‚ he was crippled by polio when he was a child.
25. Suppose you had forgotten an appointment with a professor‚ and remembered it as you met him in the hall the next day.
26. Suppose you were talking in a small group that included a blind student‚ when someone next to him unthinkingly made a remark about someone being “blind as a bat.”