内疚和羞耻是两种相似的、负性的、高度社会化的情绪，在人类的正常和病理行为中十分常见。尽管二者由于相似而很容易被混淆，但已有研究仍发现它们在很多方面存在差异，尤其是其社会功能以及导致社会功能差异的众多认知因素。然而，已有的研究在理论和方法上还存在有待完善的地方。本研究尝试采用社会信息加工模型（SIP）来探讨易内疚和易羞耻高中生在社会功能和社会认知等方面的差异。本研究以366名高中生为被试，首先采用《青少年自我意识情感问卷》将高中生划分为内疚组、羞耻组和一般组；然后分两次集体施测《假设内疚-羞耻情境SIP问卷》，该问卷在多次访谈和预测的基础上编制而成，包括两种情境：恶意贬损情境和泄漏秘密情境。运用ANOVA和 MANOVA检验内疚组、羞耻组和一般组高中生在两个假设情境中的SIP差异；采用回归分析考察内疚感和羞耻感两种情绪对SIP的影响。主要研究结果如下，在假设内疚-羞耻情境中：1易羞耻和易内疚高中生在SIP中存在情绪性质的差异。易羞耻者更易产生指向内部的生气。2易内疚高中生更关注人际关系和他人感受，进行行为归因，选择弥补过失的目标，对直接和间接弥补策略进行积极的认知评价和行为选择，对逃避策略进行消极的认知评价和行为选择。易羞耻高中生则相反。3易内疚高中生比一般高中生更易进行自我偏向的情境表征，行为归因，关注他人感受和人际关系，选择弥补过失的目标，对直接和间接弥补策略进行积极的认知评价和行为选择，对逃避策略进行消极的认知评价和行为选择。4易羞耻高中生比一般高中生更易体察到受害人的初始情绪，认为对方会全面否定自己，但更易认为自己受伤，选择保全自我的目标，直接弥补策略的频率更低；做出逃避行为后，自我情绪改观预期更好，选择频率更高。5内疚组和羞耻组、内疚组和一般组SIP模式整体差异显著，羞耻组与一般组整体差异不显著。6组别与性别两个因素对高中生的SIP没有交互作用，但在恶意贬损情境中，三组高中生在最佳选择、暴露预期、逃避策略的执行效能感和间接弥补策略的长期关系预期上存在交互作用；在泄漏秘密情境中，三组在最佳选择、直接弥补策略的自我情绪改观预期和执行效能感，以及间接弥补策略的原谅预期上差异显著或边缘显著。7内疚和羞耻两种情绪的性质都能正向预测目标选择和直接弥补策略，其中内疚的预测性更强；个体越羞耻越易做出逃避行为，越内疚越易做出直接和间接弥补行为。

Both guilt and shame are similar negative high socializational emotions, which always appear and are confused in human’s normal and pathological behaviors. However, many researchers have found that there are lots of differences between them, especially in social functions and their cognitive reasons. But past empirical researches still have a lot of deficiencies, the present study attempted to use Social-Information-Processing (SIP) to investigate the characteristics of guilt-prone and shame-prone high school students.A normative high school student sample of 366 students participated in this study. Assessment included the Test of Self-Conscious Affect for Adolescents (TOSCA-A) that was used to divide students into three groups (guilt-prone, shame-prone and average) and self-reports of several elements of SIP in hypothetical guilt-shame situation: Hypothetical malicious derogatory situation and hypothetical disclosing others’ secret situation. ANOVA and MANOVA were employed to explore the SIP differences among above three groups. Regression analysis was used to explore the effects of guilt and shame feeling on students’ SIP.The results showed that in hypothetical guilt-shame situations:1 Guilt-prone and shame-prone high school students have emotional differences in SIP. Shame-prone students tend to produce inward anger.2 Guilt-prone students tend to pay attention to personal relationship and others’ feeling, choose behavioral attribution and mistake-compensating goal, evaluate and choose behavior positively to direct and indirect compensating strategies, negatively to escaping strategy. Meanwhile, Shame-prone students’ reaction is on the opposite.3 Comparing to average group, guilt-prone students tend to do their own situation represention, pay attention to personal relationship and others’ feelings, choose behavioral attribution and mistake-compensating goal, evaluate and choose behavior positively to direct and indirect compensating strategies, negatively to escaping strategy.4 Comparing to average group, shame-prone students tend to experience the victim’s original feeling, consider that the victim will think him badly, at the same time, he do be the victim, choose the goal of protecting his own benefit. The frequency of direct compensation is low. After escaping, the anticipation of his emotional change is better, the frequency of escaping strategy is higher than average.5 There are significant differences between guilt-prone and shame-prone, guilt-prone and average students on SIP patterns.6 Group and gender have no interaction on students’ SIP. However, the three groups interact on the best choice, explosive expectation, executive efficacy of escaping strategy, long relationship anticipation of indirect compensating strategy in the hypothetical malicious derogatory situation; the three groups interact on the best choice，the anticipation of his emotional change and executive efficacy of direct compensating strategy, forgiving anticipation of indirect strategy in hypothetical disclosing others’ secret situation.7 Both guilt and shame feeling anticipate goal choosing and direct compensating strategy, the power of guilt’s anticipation is stronger. The higher of shame feeling score, the student escapes from the situation easier; the higher of guilt feeling score, the student compensates directly from the situation easier.