Register or Submit a manuscript.
Quick Link
OBM Integrative and Complementary Medicine

(ISSN 2573-4393)

OBM Integrative and Complementary Medicine is an international peer-reviewed Open Access journal published quarterly online by LIDSEN Publishing Inc. It covers all evidence-based scientific studies on integrative, alternative and complementary approaches to improving health and wellness.

Topics contain but are not limited to:

  • Acupuncture
  • Acupressure
  • Acupotomy
  • Bioelectromagnetics applications
  • Pharmacological and biological treatments including their efficacy and safety
  • Diet, nutrition and lifestyle changes
  • Herbal medicine
  • Homeopathy
  • Manual healing methods (e.g., massage, physical therapy)
  • Kinesiology
  • Mind/body interventions
  • Preventive medicine
  • Research in integrative medicine
  • Education in integrative medicine
  • Related policies

The journal publishes a variety of article types: Original Research, Review, Communication, Opinion, Comment, Conference Report, Technical Note, Book Review, etc.

There is no restriction on paper length, provided that the text is concise and comprehensive. Authors should present their results in as much detail as possible, as reviewers are encouraged to emphasize scientific rigor and reproducibility.

Publication Speed (median values for papers published in 2024): Submission to First Decision: 6.8 weeks; Submission to Acceptance: 14.3 weeks; Acceptance to Publication: 6 days (1-2 days of FREE language polishing included)

Current Issue: 2025  Archive: 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016
Open Access Perspective

Atimiaphobia: A Phenomenological Account of the Fear of Losing Honor or Being Labeled Shameless due to the Sexual Values Assigned to Femininity

Waqar Husain *

  1. Department of Humanities, COMSATS University Islamabad, Park Road, Islamabad, Pakistan

* Correspondence: Waqar Husain

Academic Editor: Marianna Mazza

Received: May 30, 2025 | Accepted: September 04, 2025 | Published: September 10, 2025

OBM Integrative and Complementary Medicine 2025, Volume 10, Issue 3, doi:10.21926/obm.icm.2503037

Recommended citation: Husain W. Atimiaphobia: A Phenomenological Account of the Fear of Losing Honor or Being Labeled Shameless due to the Sexual Values Assigned to Femininity. OBM Integrative and Complementary Medicine 2025; 10(3): 037; doi:10.21926/obm.icm.2503037.

© 2025 by the authors. This is an open access article distributed under the conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is correctly cited.

Abstract

Honor and shame function as moral currencies in many collectivistic cultures, shaping individual behavior, gender roles, and psychosocial well-being. This paper introduces Atimiaphobia—a newly proposed specific phobia defined as the intense and persistent fear of losing honor (particularly for men) or being labeled as shameless (particularly for women). Rooted in patriarchal, collectivist, and honor-based cultures, atimiaphobia manifests through intrusive thoughts, hypervigilance, emotional turmoil, and compulsive conformity to social norms. While distinct from social anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and avoidant personality disorder, atimiaphobia is shaped by cultural imperatives surrounding moral reputation and familial dignity. Its recognition as a discrete mental disorder is warranted based on its phenomenological, cognitive-behavioral, and sociocultural distinctiveness. Integrating this condition into clinical taxonomies may enhance culturally competent diagnosis, intervention, and support.

Keywords

Atimiaphobia; fear; honor; shame; femininity; sexual values; gender; culture

1. Introduction

Honor and shame are two of the most potent social regulators in human history, shaping individual behaviors, interpersonal dynamics, and institutional structures across diverse civilizations [1,2]. While all societies maintain certain moral expectations and behavioral norms, honor-based cultures are particularly distinctive in how they embed the concepts of dignity, respect, and social reputation into the very fabric of communal life [3,4]. In such societies—prevalent in many parts of Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America—the individual's identity is inextricably linked to the honor of the family and the community [5,6,7]. The consequences of violating honor norms, even inadvertently, can be emotionally, socially, and sometimes physically catastrophic [8,9].

Despite a growing recognition of how cultural values influence mental health, mainstream diagnostic systems such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [10] and the International Classification of Diseases for Mortality and Morbidity Statistics [11] have yet to adequately account for psychological conditions that emerge from honor and shame dynamics. A critical oversight in this domain is the absence of diagnostic categories capturing the chronic and disproportionate fear of dishonor—especially as it relates to culturally specific values of moral reputation and sexual propriety. This paper introduces a novel psychological construct: Atimiaphobia, defined as the intense and persistent fear of losing honor (especially among men) or of being labeled as shameless (especially among women), typically in the context of sexual or moral expectations.

The term Atimiaphobia is derived from the Greek atimia (ἀτιμία), meaning "dishonor" or "loss of civil rights", and phobos (φόβος), meaning "fear". This neologism captures a phenomenological experience that is both culturally constructed and clinically significant. Atimiaphobia is not merely a heightened sensitivity to criticism or a general form of social anxiety. It is, instead, a culturally influenced psychopathological dimension built on internalized cultural norms around sexual virtue and obligations to family and society. The effects of atimiaphobia are clearly defined in contexts when people perceive that their moral image is threatened, thinking usually in terms of sexuality, modesty, and gender role conformity.

The psychological burden of honor is not distributed evenly across gender contingencies [12,13,14,15,16]. In many collectivistic, honor-based societies, men are expected to protect the family's honor, exhibiting strength, dominance, and protection. Women are expected to preserve familial virtue [17]. Their behavior, primarily the sexual behavior, reflects the moral fiber of the family unit [18,19,20,21,22]. Failure of these gendered expectations (whether in actual behaviors or suspected) will likely lead to shame, ostracism, and sometimes violence, including homicide, to protect honor in "honor" killings [23,24,25,26,27].

The emergence of atimiaphobia as a proposed diagnostic category addresses a critical lacuna in the intersection of cultural psychology and psychopathology. It draws attention to the mental health implications of living under continuous pressure to conform to rigid codes of honor, and the fear that any intentional or accidental breach could result in moral condemnation or irreversible loss of social standing. The psychological symptoms of atimiaphobia, as this paper will detail, involve cognitive rumination, physiological arousal, avoidance behaviors, and emotional turmoil. These symptoms are not only distressing but also functionally impairing, affecting individuals' capacity to engage in education, employment, romantic relationships, and social life.

This paper argues for the formal recognition of atimiaphobia as a culturally bound specific phobia. By framing this condition within the broader context of honor cultures, shame societies, and gendered moral expectations, it contributes to the growing discourse on culturally sensitive diagnosis in global mental health. The following sections will offer a comprehensive phenomenological description of atimiaphobia, distinguish it from similar disorders such as social anxiety disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder, and propose clinically relevant symptomatology based on current evidence from cultural, clinical, and social psychology.

2. Theoretical Framework

The conceptualization of atimiaphobia is best understood at the intersection of cultural psychology, social constructivism, gender theory, and clinical psychopathology. This framework situates the phobia within the broader epistemological landscape that recognizes the variability of human psychological experience as mediated by sociocultural systems of meaning, especially those centered around honor, shame, and moral virtue. While mainstream Western psychology has traditionally universalized psychopathological constructs, the emergence of culturally bound syndromes underscores the necessity of contextualized theorizing in mental health research [28,29,30].

2.1 Honor and Shame as Cultural Schemas

At the heart of atimiaphobia lies the culturally entrenched honor–shame schema—a socially embedded moral framework that defines personal identity and social value not through intrinsic attributes but through relational standing and collective moral expectations [31]. In contrast to individualistic cultures, which emphasize personal autonomy and self-actualization, collectivistic societies prioritize group harmony, interdependence, and social reputation as core dimensions of the self [32,33,34]. A person’s self-efficacy and personal autonomy are commonly compromised in these cultures [35]. Within such socio-cultural ecologies, the worth of an individual is evaluated primarily through the lens of honor and the avoidance of shame, both of which function as culturally scripted affective regulators of behavior and identity [36].

2.1.1 The Cultural Logic of Honor

Honor functions as a reputational currency, especially in collectivistic and patriarchal societies where moral status is fragile, public, and contingent upon gender [37]. It is not a private possession but a communal asset that can be enhanced, lost, or violated through individual behavior [38]. A man's honor may be associated with his ability to assert control, demonstrate bravery, or uphold family prestige. In contrast, a woman's honor is often bound to sexual propriety, obedience, and modesty [17,39,40]. Honor is, therefore, deeply gendered and symbolically situated, demanding continual performance and vigilance [41].

The maintenance of honor involves the constant monitoring of behavior not only by others but also by the self [12,42]. This pervasive moral surveillance is internalized early in life and becomes a core aspect of self-schema. The cultural model of honor is emotionally intense and chronically activated, especially in situations involving social evaluation or threats to reputation [12]. In such contexts, even minor deviations from accepted conduct can generate acute affective responses—such as shame, guilt, humiliation, or fear of ostracism—that function as immediate moral alarms [41]. This emotional calibration, while adaptive in maintaining group cohesion, can become maladaptive when hyperactivated or distorted [31].

2.1.2 Shame as a Regulatory Emotion and Social Threat

Shame occupies a central role in honor-based cultures as the punitive emotional counterpart to honor. It is a moral emotion that signals a failure to meet communal standards and elicits a painful awareness of the self as socially devalued [43]. While guilt is typically associated with specific actions and reparative motivation, shame is experienced as a global devaluation of the self and often leads to withdrawal, concealment, or self-condemnation [44,45,46,47]. In honor cultures, shame is not merely personal but transpersonal: the shame of one family member can taint the reputation of the entire lineage [48,49].

The power of shame in these settings derives from its social consequences [50]. To be labeled shameless or dishonorable is not just to suffer a psychological blow but to face real-world threats—ranging from gossip and exclusion to violence and social annihilation [51]. The potential for such outcomes transforms shame from an occasional emotion into a chronic anticipatory state, especially for individuals whose social roles are already precarious due to age, gender, or marginal status [52,53]. Over time, this results in a psychological condition wherein individuals develop a heightened fear of public scrutiny, anger, moral failure, and symbolic contamination [54,55]—a condition clinically encapsulated by atimiaphobia.

2.1.3 Cognitive Schemas and Cultural Scripts

The psychological mechanism underlying atimiaphobia can be understood through schema theory, particularly the concept of culturally constructed cognitive-emotional schemas [56,57]. A schema is a mental framework that organizes and interprets information, particularly social and moral stimuli [58]. In honor cultures, individuals develop schemas that are hyper-attuned to cues of disapproval, disrespect, or dishonor. These schemas shape attention, memory, and interpretation in ways that amplify threat perception and reinforce avoidance behaviors [59]. These cultural scripts often become embodied and internalized at the level of automatic affective responses and sensorimotor tendencies. Shame-related postures such as lowered gaze, hunched shoulders, or physical retreat become habitual, reinforcing a bodily memory of moral vulnerability [60,61,62]. The result is a self-concept marked by hypervigilance, self-silencing, and an exaggerated sense of moral vulnerability.

2.1.4 Phobic Intensification of Cultural Emotions

While fear of dishonor and shame serves as a normative function in honor-based societies, the pathological intensification of these emotions marks the transition from culturally sanctioned emotionality to clinical symptomatology [55,63,64,65,66]. Honor concerns can produce emotionally potent reactions that are disproportionate, persistent, and resistant to rational reassurances [67,68,69]. In the case of atimiaphobia, the fear of moral violation becomes generalized to symbolic threats, hypothetical scenarios, or internal desires—manifesting as intrusive thoughts, compulsive monitoring, avoidance of social exposure, and somatic distress. This transformation mirrors the process by which normal anxiety becomes a phobia, characterized by irrational, excessive fear, behavioral avoidance, and marked psychosocial impairment [10]. Furthermore, atimiaphobia does not merely exist within the psychological domain; it is co-produced by structural and discursive forces that sustain the honor-shame schema. Educational systems, religious sermons, popular media, and legal frameworks often perpetuate narratives that stigmatize non-conformity and valorize gendered moral obedience. In this way, the fear of dishonor becomes both a personal affliction and a cultural artifact—situated at the nexus of psyche and society.

2.2 Gender Socialization and Moral Surveillance

The development and internalization of atimiaphobia are deeply intertwined with culturally prescribed gender roles and the moral surveillance mechanisms and adaptive preferences that enforce them [70,71,72]. In honor-based, collectivistic societies, gender is not merely a biological distinction but a moralized category, imbued with expectations that are socially constructed, symbolically coded, and perpetuated through a complex web of familial, religious, educational, and media institutions [12,73,74,75,76]. Gender socialization in such contexts becomes the primary medium through which women and men come to internalize honor norms and calibrate their self-worth accordingly.

2.2.1 Moral Socialization in Early Development

From early childhood, individuals in honor-centric cultures are subjected to moral conditioning that is disproportionately structured around their gender identity [77,78,79]. Social learning theory suggests that behaviors and beliefs are acquired through observation, modeling, and reinforcement [80]. In households governed by collectivistic morality, children witness and absorb how honor is preserved, negotiated, or violated [77,78,79]. Girls are typically taught to embody modesty, restraint, and submissiveness. At the same time, boys are instructed to demonstrate control, strength, and guardianship over family honor—primarily through regulating the behavior of female kin. Parents, especially mothers, often function as primary agents of moral transmission [81,82,83]. In honor cultures, parenting styles are characterized by high moral demandingness and conditional warmth [84,85]. Boys and girls are not only differentially parented. Still, they are also evaluated using distinct moral criteria: the former for their ability to uphold family pride, and the latter for their ability to avoid shame [86,87,88]. This dichotomy forms the psychological foundation of atimiaphobia, whereby individuals begin to associate their sense of self, safety, and social acceptance with the moral perceptions of others.

2.2.2 Gendered Honor Scripts and Self-Surveillance

Gendered honor scripts help in explaining how cultural mandates around morality become internalized and enacted [37,38]. Honor scripts are culturally specific behavioral blueprints that dictate how individuals of different genders should behave to maintain honor or avoid shame [75]. These scripts are often rigid, totalizing, and rooted in patriarchal ideologies that equate a woman’s body with family dignity and a man’s behavior with familial status [89]. A woman’s autonomy, especially regarding sexual and social behavior, becomes a domain of intense regulation, both by others and by the self [90]. The notion of panopticism—where individuals internalize external surveillance and become their own monitors—profoundly applies here [91]. The omnipresent threat of dishonor fosters an internalized gaze through which individuals continuously scrutinize their own thoughts, actions, and even desires. This moral hypervigilance aligns closely with the phenomenology of phobic disorders, as the perceived possibility of moral failure induces disproportionate fear, anticipatory anxiety, and behavioral avoidance. For women, this might mean withdrawing from public life, self-censoring speech, or adopting exaggerated modesty. For men, this may involve strategies aimed at preemptively defending against any imputation of weakness or shame, such as emotional repression, heightened aggression, or hypermasculinity.

2.2.3 The Double Bind of Gender Expectations

Perhaps the most psychologically damaging feature of honor cultures is the gendered double-bind, where the moral risks of any potential action are infinite [75,89]. For example, a woman who pursues education, professional success, or sexual agency may be called “shameless,” while a woman who is concerned with honor could be sacrificing her life and agency and is at the limits of personal fulfillment. Similarly, while a man who fails to exert control over his household may be "dishonorable,” enforcing patriarchal control over a household may lead to inner conflict and social degradation in more egalitarian contexts. This dynamic allows for increased psychological confusion, distress, and anticipatory stress. For individuals susceptible to atimiaphobia, these experiences may not raise situational worry but instead may become a consistent, intrusive fear of not living up to gendered moral codes. Such individuals can feel entirely immobilized by the impossibility of achieving moral success, resulting in emotional paralysis, identity confusion, and maladaptive perfectionism. The internal conflict between personal authenticity and imposed moral identity becomes a profound source of suffering, warranting clinical recognition.

2.2.4 Shame, Gender, and Moral Emotion

A key emotional mechanism underpinning atimiaphobia is shame—a self-conscious, moral emotion that is deeply social in nature [92]. While guilt pertains to wrongdoing, shame is about being wrong in the eyes of others [93]. Women, in particular, are socialized to experience shame as a chronic emotional disposition, especially when it comes to appearance, sexuality, and obedience [94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101]. Men, on the other hand, may experience shame as failure to protect, provide, or exert moral control [102]. These gendered shame scripts map directly onto the phenomenological structure of atimiaphobia, with women fearing the label of being shameless and men fearing the label of being dishonored. As moral shame becomes a habitual emotional posture, it erodes the individual’s psychological resilience, increases vulnerability to internalizing disorders, and fuels obsessive preoccupations with public perception. This not only impairs psychosocial functioning but also creates a cognitive-emotional environment conducive to the development of phobia-level fear responses.

2.2.5 Feminist and Decolonial Insights

Feminist scholars have long argued that the construction of gender in honor cultures serves as a tool of social control [12]. The fear of dishonor is not merely an individual pathology but a political condition—produced and sustained by patriarchal arrangements that use moral discourse to regulate female bodies and masculinize male identities [103]. Recognizing atimiaphobia as a distinct psychological phenomenon therefore serves a dual purpose: it allows for individualized clinical attention while also highlighting the need for structural and cultural transformation. It invites clinicians to be culturally literate and ethically sensitive, recognizing how gendered socialization practices shape not only the content but also the intensity of mental suffering.

2.3 Cultural Reflections of Atimiaphobia

In honor–shame societies, individuals constantly monitor their own behavior to avoid actions that may be interpreted as dishonorable [104,105]. A young woman may decline a prestigious scholarship abroad if her family fears that living independently would be perceived as immodest. At the same time, another may hesitate to apply for similar opportunities because of anticipated gossip [106,107,108]. Girls can be scolded for laughing loudly in public, reprimanded for wearing brightly colored or modern clothing, or even teased by peers for minor deviations such as choosing non-traditional attire [109,110,111,112,113,114]. Women may withdraw from public speaking in classrooms, compulsively check their clothing or speech before leaving home, or avoid answering phone calls and responding to male colleagues in public spaces to prevent accusations of being “too open” [115,116]. They may also lower their gaze in public transport, refrain from laughing in mixed gatherings, or self-censor their social media presence to avoid pictures or posts that might harm their family's reputation [117,118,119,120]. Expressions of autonomy, such as showing interest in selecting their own marriage partner or attending mixed-gender gatherings, are often framed as shameless, leading to social ostracism or forced withdrawal from education [121,122,123,124,125]. Men, too, face the burden of honor: some may refuse jobs considered beneath the family’s status to prevent gossip, feel shame if unable to defend their family in public disputes, or suffer when ridiculed for failing to secure stable employment [12,76]. A brother may forbid his sister from extracurricular activities at school to signal his control, while a son might feel dishonored if mocked by peers, recalling past humiliations [126]. Even subtle acts, such as greeting a female neighbor, lowering one’s voice in mixed gatherings, or refusing to retaliate in street altercations, can be magnified into reputational threats [127]. In weddings or community events, men may exaggerate toughness in disputes to display authority, while women may wear dull-colored clothing and keep their gaze lowered to embody modesty. Across these scenarios, the communal gaze transforms everyday choices—education, employment, dress, speech, gestures, or even silence—into high-stakes arenas where honor must be defended and shame avoided at all costs.

3. Phenomenology of Atimiaphobia

Atimiaphobia is most accurately understood through a phenomenological lens as a pervasive and embodied experience of moral dread—an existential apprehension centered on the potential for social disgrace, familial dishonor, and reputational collapse. This condition is more than just "normal" social anxiety or shame-based on culture; it is a remnant fear structure that can affect perception, change self-awareness, and constrain action. The phenomenology of atimiaphobia is based on hyperconscious moral surveillance, an extraordinary perception of transgressions of social propriety, and what we presume the expected effects of social depravity would have on our place in the family and in our community.

3.1 Anticipatory Moral Anxiety

Atimiaphobia is fundamentally characterized by a continuous anticipatory anxiety not of the dangers of danger, but of some moral infractions—whether these infractions are real, imagined, or taken symbolically. The fear is broad, future-negotiated, and not very containable, presenting as intrusive wondering, affectivity, and compulsiveness. Takers characterize the ongoing nature of fear of doing something or saying something that could, even in the worst manifestations of its possible consequences, be seen as dishonorable. They will often preface statements with a disclaimer, but they know that they have not done anything unscrupulous. Everyday decisions about what to wear, tone of voice, career decisions, and family decisions are mental elaborations on respectability, modesty, and social consensus and expectation.

This anxiety, with its anticipatory structure, takes atimiaphobia out of the category of more adaptive forms of social caution. Whereas normative individuals may experience situational discomfort when confronted with the threat of social judgment, the atimiaphobic ego is riddled with the fear of moral judgment and often rehearses imagined scenarios in which they are rebuked, spatially ejected, or even publicly disgraced. This incessant mental preoccupation can lead to debilitating levels of anxiety, debilitating experiences or responses, poor social engagement, and a poor quality of life.

3.2 Intersubjective Embodiment of Fear

Emotions are not simply internal occurrences, but intersubjective and embodied experiences that shape a way of being-in-the-world, as a phenomenological account would posit. In atimiaphobia, experiencing the fear of dishonor in an embodiment of shame is not a thought any more than the tightness in one's chest, or discomfort in their stomach, or the jumpiness, or sweating that accompany socialization. The body registers, somatically, as a site of moral reconnaissance; thus, the discomfort may represent moral abhorrence, shame, or condemnation, depending on the circumstances. The embodiment of potential dishonor truly emerges in contexts where collectivism and honor are salient, with the expression of emotion often being characterized by an embodied expression rather than a verbal cue. Then, individuals also orient to the uncanny (or 'everyday banal') aspects of others, processing moral judgment from expressions and gestures, regardless of their neutrality, potency, use, or meaning in another circumstance. The realization of honor produces a heightened sense of awareness of one’s entire subjectivity as it projects into the imaginings of an observing community, where one has the potential to become an object of appraisal, rather than the acting subject. The sense of self dis-differentiated in objection renders the notion of authenticity elusive, as behavior in such circumstances is measured not from conviction, but anticipated reception.

3.3 Moral Injury and Ontological Insecurity

In addition to fear, atimiaphobia is often associated with deep moral injury and ontological insecurity. A person may begin to feel a chronic sense of being a moment away from moral failure, even when they are acting in accordance with community meeting behavior. This produces a tension between the desire for self-expression and the demand to conform, resulting in a ruptured sense of self. What emerges is anxiety, but more so a moral existential vulnerability—an ongoing fear that an individual's worth, identity, and belonging are always at risk. It is not uncommon for this constellation to build off earlier experiences of social humiliation, public punishment, or familial shame, which become narrative frames around which the experience of fear of dishonor consolidates. These memories are generally not historical and clearly recollected, but they are quickly presented in vividness and affect, returning in flashbacks, dreams, or as parleyed themes within one's self-talk. Importantly, these memories are not static representations; they are effectively re-experienced, affirming the phobic structure and contributing to a worldview oriented on threat, vigilance, and moral precariousness.

3.4 Intrusiveness and Functional Impairment

Functionally, atimiaphobia disrupts multiple aspects of psychosocial functioning. It can lead to avoidance of social situations, reluctance to speak in public, withdrawal from peer groups, avoidance of expressing opinions, and a tendency to narrow down decisions. In extreme cases, individuals may hesitate to pursue education, work, or intimate relationships completely, believing that this presents the risk of someone noticing or being perceptive to a moral judgment of dishonor. The narrowing of life choices results in an almost static form of social paralysis where self-silence and self-effacement become a strategy in managing dishonor. Atimiaphobia can also occur alongside other psychopathological symptoms such as depression, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, or somatoform disorders in a sociocultural context where emotional expression and mental health concerns are stigmatized and discouraged. The phobia becomes a silent yet formidable structuring force that organizes the person's entire psychosocial orientation and delineates what is thinkable, sayable, and doable in the moral geography of their cultural world.

3.5 Distinguishing Pathology from Cultural Normativity

A critical component in the phenomenological diagnosis of atimiaphobia is differentiating between pathological fear and culturally normative effects. In honor-based societies, there exists a certain amount of shame-consciousness and moral vigilance, which is expected and socially considered a positive social quality. Atimiaphobia is predicated upon intrusive fear, ongoing and compulsive fear, and impairment in functioning above and beyond denial of an atimiaphobic reaction. The emotions are socially constructed; with this knowledge, the etiquette of diagnosticians is to develop a framework that accommodates socially normative moral emotions and for the more extreme pathological exaggerations in people's experience. Atimiaphobia operates at the intersection of cultural meaning and clinical import. It is a type of anxiety that is moral, but becomes maladaptive at the extreme, compulsive, and through psychosocial loss. Phenomenologically, it is a fear that is not only generated from a world in which moral failure is a certainty, but also a world where moral failure is not only a possibility.

4. Differential Diagnosis

Atimiaphobia shares symptomatic characteristics with numerous reliable mental disorders, but it is a unique psychopathological type in particular because of its cultural ties, moral significance, and phenomenological quality. Accurate differential diagnosis is essential for both conceptual clarity and appropriate clinical management. Here we briefly define the differences in atimiaphobia vis-à-vis related disorders, particularly social anxiety disorder (social phobia), obsessive-compulsive disorder, and avoidant personality disorder.

4.1 Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD)

Social anxiety disorder is perhaps the most superficially similar condition to atimiaphobia, as both involve intense fear of negative evaluation and social scrutiny. However, the underlying motives and triggers differ significantly. SAD is generally characterized by a pervasive fear of being judged, embarrassed, or humiliated in social or performance situations, often linked to self-perceptions of inadequacy, awkwardness, or incompetence [10]. These fears are typically egocentric and stem from vulnerabilities in self-concept. In contrast, atimiaphobia is not about personal performance. It is more about the potential violation of communal moral expectations, especially those rooted in honor, modesty, and sexual propriety. The individual's concern is less about appearing foolish or incompetent and more about being perceived as dishonorable, immodest, or morally deviant. Thus, while SAD is rooted in general social apprehensiveness, atimiaphobia is anchored in culturally encoded moral scripts. Moreover, SAD tends to be cross-culturally stable in its core symptomatology. In contrast, atimiaphobia is culturally contingent, flourishing specifically in honor-based and collectivistic societies where reputation is interdependent and highly regulated.

4.2 Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD)

Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder is characterized by intrusive, unwanted thoughts (obsessions) and repetitive behaviors or mental acts (compulsions) aimed at reducing distress or preventing a feared outcome [10]. While OCD can present with moral or religious content—such as scrupulosity—the obsessions are often idiosyncratic, irrational, or disconnected from culturally shared beliefs. For example, a person with OCD may fear that failing to count to a specific number will cause harm to a loved one, even though this belief lacks communal validation. By contrast, atimiaphobia does not stem from irrational or arbitrary associations. The fears associated with this condition—such as being seen as shameless, dishonorable, or morally lax—are often culturally validated, even if pathologically exaggerated. The behaviors used to prevent dishonor, such as self-surveillance, ritualized modesty, or avoidance of social spaces, are not perceived as senseless by the individual or their cultural milieu. They are seen as prudent, even virtuous, within the moral grammar of society. In this sense, the compulsions of atimiaphobia are culturally rational, even if they are clinically maladaptive. This distinction is critical for culturally sensitive diagnosis and treatment.

4.3 Avoidant Personality Disorder (AvPD)

Avoidant Personality Disorder involves chronic social inhibition, feelings of inadequacy, and hypersensitivity to negative evaluation, often emerging in early adulthood and persisting across contexts [10]. Individuals with AvPD tend to view themselves as socially inept, personally unappealing, or inferior to others, leading to a pattern of avoidance in intimate, occupational, or social relationships. Atimiaphobia, however, is not rooted in an internal sense of inadequacy or inferiority. Instead, it arises from an externalized moral schema in which the individual's worth is defined relationally, through the lens of communal honor and shame. Individuals with atimiaphobia may, in fact, possess high self-regard or competence, but still experience intense dread about being seen as dishonorable or immodest. The avoidance behaviors associated with atimiaphobia—such as refusing to speak publicly, hesitating to participate in mixed-gender gatherings, or declining leadership roles—are not motivated by self-devaluation, but by a fear of inadvertently violating moral norms that would bring dishonor to oneself and one’s family. Furthermore, while AvPD tends to be ego-syntonic (the individual accepts the personality traits as part of the self), atimiaphobia often involves ego-dystonic distress—the sufferer does not see themselves as inherently inadequate but somewhat constrained by social expectations that they may resent yet feel unable to defy. This external orientation toward fear distinguishes atimiaphobia as a culture-bound and morally situated phenomenon rather than a global personality dysfunction.

4.4 Related Conditions: PTSD and Depressive Disorders

In some cases, atimiaphobia may coexist or be confused with trauma-related conditions, particularly when the fear of dishonor emerges following a stigmatizing event such as public humiliation, sexual assault, or social ostracization. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) should be considered when flashbacks, hypervigilance, and emotional numbing are prominent. However, unlike PTSD, atimiaphobia may develop in the absence of a specific traumatic event, instead of arising from cumulative cultural conditioning and anticipatory fear.

Similarly, depressive disorders may co-occur due to the social withdrawal, low mood, and self-reproach that chronic moral fear entails. Yet, depression is characterized by a pervasive adverse effect and lack of motivation. In contrast, atimiaphobia typically presents as highly motivated avoidance structured around specific cultural goals: maintaining honor and avoiding disgrace.

5. Clinical Features and Symptomatology

Atimiaphobia, conceptualized as a culturally contingent specific phobia, is defined as the intense and persistent fear of losing honor (particularly for men) or being labeled shameless (particularly for women) due to the sexual values assigned to femininity. It presents with a multidimensional symptom profile involving cognitive, emotional, behavioral, and physiological domains. The condition is marked by a disproportionate, persistent, and culturally contextualized fear that significantly impairs social functioning, psychosocial well-being, and identity coherence.

5.1 Cognitive Symptoms

Cognitively, atimiaphobia is characterized by chronic and intrusive thought patterns centered around moral surveillance and reputational anxiety. Individual's experience:

  • Intrusive thoughts about being perceived as shameless: Recurrent, distressing cognitions related to imagined scenarios where one is labeled as morally loose, immodest, or dishonorable. These thoughts are typically ego-dystonic yet culturally reinforced.
  • Obsessive preoccupation with public opinion: A dominant cognitive schema in which one’s self-worth is filtered through the lens of communal perception. The individual becomes hypersensitive to social feedback, rumors, and symbolic gestures such as disapproving glances or social silence.
  • Moral hypervigilance: Persistent cognitive scanning of the environment for cues of disapproval, judgment, or moral breach. This includes rumination over past behavior and anticipatory anxiety regarding future social interactions.
  • Fear of violating cultural expectations: The internalized belief that any deviation from culturally prescribed roles—especially concerning gender, sexuality, and propriety—will result in irrevocable social degradation for oneself and one's family. This results in cognitive rigidity and catastrophizing of minor infractions.

5.2 Emotional Symptoms

The emotional terrain of atimiaphobia is marked by heightened affective distress that emerges in morally evaluative or potentially stigmatizing situations. Key emotional symptoms include:

  • Intense anxiety in contexts threatening reputation: This includes formal or informal social gatherings, public speaking, mixed-gender interactions, or scenarios that challenge traditional role expectations. The anxiety is context-dependent yet pervasive.
  • Emotional paralysis or dread when facing moral scrutiny: Individuals may experience an overwhelming sense of dread when subjected to direct or indirect moral commentary, leading to affective shutdown or dissociation.
  • Feelings of helplessness and internalized shame: Shame is not merely a reactive emotion but a persistent affective state shaped by internalized cultural narratives. Unlike guilt, which is behavior-focused, shame in atimiaphobia is identity-focused—"I am bad" rather than "I did something bad".

5.3 Behavioral Symptoms

Behaviorally, atimiaphobia manifests as a rigid adherence to socially prescribed conduct and avoidance of any behavior perceived as reputationally risky. Individuals typically engage in:

  • Avoidance of socially risky behaviors: This includes declining leadership roles by women, avoiding co-educational settings, minimizing social media presence, and refraining from expressive behavior that might attract scrutiny or misinterpretation.
  • Excessive conformity and moral policing of self: Individuals may engage in ritualized modesty, exaggerated humility, or overcompensation to prevent perceived moral transgressions. This behavior can resemble compulsions in OCD, but is contextually congruent with cultural norms.
  • Compulsive reassurance-seeking: Frequent seeking of approval from family members, elders, or religious figures to confirm that one’s behavior remains within the bounds of honor and acceptability. This may evolve into a dependency pattern.
  • Withdrawal from community engagement: In severe cases, individuals disengage from public or communal life to avoid perceived exposure to moral risk. This behavior not only isolates the individual but may paradoxically draw more attention and suspicion in tightly knit societies.

5.4 Physiological Symptoms

Somatic complaints may be common among individuals with atimiaphobia, particularly during or in anticipation of morally evaluative situations. This physiological symptomatology may include:

  • Somatic arousal: Classic autonomic symptoms such as heart palpitations, hyperventilation, nausea, dry mouth, and sweating, particularly when facing situations that pose reputational risks.
  • Muscle tension and restlessness: Chronic psychomotor agitation, including fidgeting, clenched jaws, or inability to sit still, reflecting underlying hyperarousal and vigilance.
  • Psychosomatic symptoms linked to perceived dishonor: In cultures where somatic expression of psychological distress is normative, individuals may report vague physical symptoms such as headaches, stomachaches, or chronic fatigue, which often intensify after events interpreted as shaming or humiliating.

6. Implications

The identification of atimiaphobia as a separate clinical diagnosis has implications for diagnosis and treatment, especially in culturally diverse populations in which honor-shame systems are deeply rooted in psychosocial functioning. Including culturally relevant fears into the psychiatric vocabulary allows clinicians to distinguish better pathological anxiety disorders that disrupt daily functioning and psychosocial well-being from normative cultural paradigms of functional conformity.

6.1 Diagnostic Considerations

Atimiaphobia, while sharing symptomatic overlaps with several established psychiatric disorders, represents a distinct psychopathological profile due to its cultural specificity, moral salience, and externalized fear orientation. Unlike social anxiety disorder, which is primarily egocentric and centered on fears of personal inadequacy, embarrassment, or incompetence, atimiaphobia is anchored in culturally encoded moral expectations where the primary concern is dishonor, immodesty, or moral deviance. Similarly, although obsessive-compulsive disorder can present with moral or religious obsessions, these are often idiosyncratic, irrational, and disconnected from communal validation. In contrast, the fears in atimiaphobia—such as being labeled shameless—are culturally sanctioned and perceived as socially rational, even if clinically maladaptive. Avoidant personality disorder also differs in that its behaviors of avoiding do so within the context of self-perceived inferiority and inadequacy, whereas individuals with atimiaphobia may have an intact self-regard yet are intensely afraid of transgressing the World Honor norms; additionally, atimiaphobia is usually ego-dystonic in nature, resulting in distress, yet is not experienced as part of one's self, unlike the ego-syntonic qualities seen in avoidant personality disorder. Often co-morbid conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder and depressive disorders may occur, however, they are distinct: whereas atimiaphobia may occur without specific trauma (as opposed to post-traumatic stress disorder), it is not characterized by general negative affect or loss of motivation (as with depression), but by deliberately motivated, avoidant behavioral response systems aimed at being honorable and avoiding shame. These distinctions highlight that atimiaphobia is a culturally specific phobia, culture-bound, and should be recognized and treated respectfully.

The acknowledgment of atimiaphobia emphasizes the need for culturally sensitive diagnostic criteria that go beyond listing symptoms- a qualitative interpretation framework sensitized to sociocultural context is what is needed. Diagnostic processes ought to include culturally relevant assessment measures in consideration of severity, duration, and functional disability related to fear of honor and shame in relation to culturally appropriate behaviors. If atimiaphobia is ignored, it could result in the misdiagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder or social anxiety disorder. Furthermore, considering the variation of honor codes in multicultural sectors, clinicians must be mindful of the intersectionality of identity factors like gender manipulation, class, and religiosity that can shape the ways this phobia is expressed and experienced. Conducting ethnographic interviews, narrative-based assessments, etc., could allow clinicians to further situate symptoms in patients' lived cultural realities.

6.2 Clinical and Public Health Implications

The formal recognition of atimiaphobia encourages a paradigm shift toward integrating culture into psychiatric nosology and treatment. Mental health services in multicultural societies should incorporate training on honor-shame dynamics to prevent cultural misdiagnosis and improve engagement with affected populations. Furthermore, public health campaigns aimed at destigmatizing mental illness in honor-bound communities can leverage culturally resonant messages that validate psychological suffering without undermining cultural identity.

6.3 Research Implications

The conceptualization of atimiaphobia opens new avenues for cross-cultural psychiatry and psychology. Future research should focus on the epidemiology and prevalence of atimiaphobia across honor-based and non-honor-based societies, thereby clarifying its culture-bound versus universal features. Longitudinal studies could investigate the developmental trajectories of honor-related fears and their interaction with gender roles, family dynamics, and religious values. Moreover, psychometric research is needed to develop and validate culturally sensitive diagnostic scales that capture the multidimensional nature of atimiaphobia, including cognitive, emotional, behavioral, and somatic components. At the theoretical level, its study may refine broader models of anxiety by highlighting the role of moral and reputational threat as a distinct etiological pathway.

6.4 Policy Implications

Atimiaphobia also carries implications for policymaking in both mental health and broader social governance. In honor-based societies, legal and policy frameworks must address the psychosocial harm caused by rigid moral surveillance, stigmatization, and honor-related sanctions. Policies could involve educational reforms to promote thinking through and reflecting on different honor–shame codes, culturally-specific mental health awareness programs for schools, workplaces, and community organizations, and culturally appropriate training modules integrated into employee assistance programs/immigrants and refugee services that can help workers and services understand their own honor-related psychological vulnerabilities and support and guide culturally marginalized individuals to mental health care with equity. When combined with foreign and immigrant policy, institutionalization of cultural competence in policy has the potential to provide increased protection of psychosocial health while safeguarding cultural leeway.

6.5 Implications for Practice and Training

Clinical practice needs to change to face the issues created by atimiaphobia with culturally sound therapeutic methods. Adaptations of therapeutic methods may be required to address validated cultural fears without pathologizing their cultural identity. Therapists should also adopt family-based, community-centered ways of intervening since honor is rarely experienced as an individual's issue, but as a community issue. Clinicians in training need to learn about honor-shame systems, gendered expectations, and their clinical manifestations, so they can avoid misdiagnosing clients and co-construct a therapeutic alliance. Collaboration with religious leaders, educators, and community elders will help enhance the efficacy of interventions, particularly in contexts where there is a perceived distrust in biomedical understandings of psychiatry.

6.6 Global Mental Health and Human Rights Implications

It is worth underlining that atimiaphobia illustrates the intersections between mental health and human rights. In systems where violations of honor can lead to shunning, forced marriages, or harm resulting from the honor-based violence, atimiaphobia draws attention to the psychological precursors that may lead to structural harm. An advocacy approach using human rights frameworks needs to consider the honor-based psychosocial vulnerabilities, and as such develop the atimiaphobia narrative not exclusively as a clinical issue but as furthering a wider action against ways of cultural practice which endanger psychosocial wellbeing.

7. Conclusion

Atimiaphobia marks an essential progression in culturally informed accounts of fear-based psychopathology, shedding light on a complex area of social suffering uniquely shaped by distinct honor-shame considerations. This idea represents the necessity to consider cultural schemas such as honor and shame in diagnostic classifications, a prerequisite for clinical validity and cultural competence for mental health practice. Atimiaphobia pushes clinicians and researchers to rethink current biomedical frameworks and focus on the ways that collective values and moral vigilance influence not only symptomology, but also help-seeking, treatment engagement, and recovery. In addition, acknowledging Atimiaphobia also offers a new way to discuss the pluralism of mental health and encourages integrated frameworks that consider cultural diversity while upholding scientific integrity. This means working collaboratively with psychologists, anthropologists, sociologists, and cultural scholars to improve assessments, develop culturally compatible interventions, and practice public mental health strategies informed by honor-based social realities.

Future research must establish the empirical validity of the construct through epidemiological studies, psychometric testing of diagnostic criteria, and clinical trials of culturally adapted treatment modalities. Further research on gender differences, intersectional identities, and cross-cultural differences will enhance understanding of this phenomenon and, hence, be helpful to global mental health projects.

Atimiaphobia not only adds depth to the fear-anxiety spectrum, but it also serves as a reminder of the importance of culturally informed psychiatry. It is a paradigm shift in recognizing atimiaphobia in scholarly and clinical contexts, which increases awareness and lessens the stigma surrounding culturally mediated fears, ultimately contributing to humane, equitable, and dignified mental health care for people of all backgrounds.

Author Contributions

The author did all the research work for this study.

Funding

The study was not funded by any source.

Competing Interests

The author has no conflict of interest with the publishing journal.

Data Availability Statement

There is no data associated with this paper.

References

  1. Crook Z. Honor, shame, and social status revisited. J Biblic Lit. 2009; 128: 591-611. doi: 10.2307/25610205. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  2. Stewart C. Honor and shame. Int Encycl Soc Behav Sci. 2015; 11: 181-184. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  3. Günsoy C, Okten IO, Demaske A. Rude or just blunt? Honor, dignity, and spontaneous trait inferences from potentially offensive behaviors. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2024; 113: 104617. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2024.104617. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  4. Lopez HN, Bock JE, Brown R, Cross SE. Beyond the dichotomy: Creation and validation of a continuous statewide index of US honor culture. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2024. doi: 10.1177/01461672241255494. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  5. Günsoy C, Joo M, Cross SE, Uskul AK, Gul P, Wasti SA, et al. The influence of honor threats on goal delay and goal derailment: A comparison of Turkey, Southern US, and Northern US. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2020; 88: 103974. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2020.103974. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  6. Vignoles VL, Kirchner-Häusler A, Uskul AK, Cross SE, Rodriguez-Bailón R, Bossom IR, et al. Are mediterranean societies “Cultures of Honor?”: Prevalence and implications of a cultural logic of honor across three world regions. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2024. doi: 10.1177/01461672241295500. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  7. Husain W, Nasir T, Husain MA, Ijaz F. The perception of feminism and the inclination for empowerment among educated Muslim women from Pakistan. Middle East J Islam Stud Cult. 2024; 4: 11-19. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  8. Husain W, Ijaz F, Husain MA, Ammar A, Trabelsi K, Jahrami H. The quality of psychosocial health and psychosocial illness among women with and without shelter homes: A cross-sectional study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2024; 24: 1368. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11823-1. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  9. Husain W, Husain MA, Ijaz F. The sufferings of abuse, depression, and anxiety among female domestic workers: Clinical interviews with 250 housemaids from Pakistan. Int J Psychiatr Res. 2022; 4: 17-21. doi: 10.33545/26648962.2022.v4.i2a.50. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  10. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association; 2013. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  11. World Health Organization. International classification of diseases for mortality and morbidity statistics (11th Revision) [Internet]. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2018. Available from: https://icd.who.int/browse11/l-m/en.
  12. Rodriguez Mosquera PM. On the importance of family, morality, masculine, and feminine honor for theory and research. Soc Pers Psychol Compass. 2016; 10: 431-442. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12262. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  13. Mosquera PM. In the name of honor: On virtue, reputation and violence. Group Process Intergr Relat. 2013; 16: 271-278. doi: 10.1177/1368430212472590. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  14. Crowder MK, Kemmelmeier M. New insights on cultural patterns of suicide in the United States: The role of honor culture. Cross Cult Res. 2017; 51: 521-548. doi: 10.1177/1069397117712192. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  15. Ashokkumar A, Swann Jr WB. Restoring honor by slapping or disowning the daughter. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2023; 49: 823-836. doi: 10.1177/01461672221079106. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  16. Husain W, Usman U. Cultural impact on Islamic matrimonial beliefs: A comparison between Pakistan and Qatar. El Harakah. 2022; 24: 221-237. doi: 10.18860/eh.v24i2.17721. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  17. Cross SE, Uskul AK, Gerçek-Swing B, Sunbay Z, Alözkan C, Günsoy C, et al. Cultural prototypes and dimensions of honor. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2014; 40: 232-249. doi: 10.1177/0146167213510323. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  18. Baron B. Women, honour, and the state: Evidence from Egypt. Middle East Stud. 2006; 42: 1-20. doi: 10.1080/00263200500399512. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  19. Lewis M. Women, family, and sexuality. In: A companion to late medieval and early modern Augsburg. Leiden: Brill; 2020. pp. 294-315. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  20. Kogacioglu D. The tradition effect: Framing honor crimes in Turkey. Differences. 2004; 15: 119-151. doi: 10.1215/10407391-15-2-118. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  21. George A. Reinventing honorable masculinity: Discourses from a working-class Indian community. Men Masculinities. 2006; 9: 35-52. doi: 10.1177/1097184x04270379. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  22. Husain W, Qureshi Z. Preferences in marital sexual practices and the role of pornography. Sexologies. 2016; 25: e35-e41. doi: 10.1016/j.sexol.2016.01.005. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  23. Stenger M, Jones LC. Honor Killings. In: The Encyclopedia of Women and Crime. 2019. pp. 1-2. doi: 10.1002/9781118929803.ewac0281. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  24. Jain S. Domestic Violence* in South Asian Context: The Horror of Honor Killing in the United Kingdom. 2023. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4630130. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  25. Heydari A, Teymoori A, Trappes R. Honor killing as a dark side of modernity: Prevalence, common discourses, and a critical view. Soc Sci Inf. 2021; 60: 86-106. doi: 10.1177/0539018421994777. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  26. Ahmed S. The honor killing of Qandeel Baloch. In: Women's journey to empowerment in the 21st century: A transnational feminist analysis of women's lives in modern times. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2019. pp. 135-146. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  27. Dayan H. Female honor killing: The role of low socio-economic status and rapid modernization. J Interpers Violence. 2021; 36: NP10393-NP10410. doi: 10.1177/0886260519872984. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  28. Husain W, Ijaz F, Husain MA, Zulfiqar M, Khalique J. Simplifying the understanding and measurement of mental disorders thru a comprehensive framework of psychosocial health. OBM Integr Complement Med. 2024; 9: 011. doi: 10.21926/obm.icm.2401011. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  29. Husain W. Components of psychosocial health. Health Educ. 2022; 122: 387-401. doi: 10.1108/he-05-2021-0084. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  30. Husain W. The Quranic perspective on psychopathology and psychotherapy: A comprehensive guide for psychotherapists of Islamic world. Int J Islam Psychol. 2024; 7: 29-57. [Google scholar]
  31. Christianson M, Teiler Å, Eriksson C. “A woman’s honor tumbles down on all of us in the family, but a man’s honor is only his”: Young women’s experiences of patriarchal chastity norms. Int J Qual Stud Health Well Being. 2021; 16: 1862480. doi: 10.1080/17482631.2020.1862480. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  32. Triandis H. Collectivism v. individualism: A reconceptualisation of a basic concept in cross-cultural social psychology. In: Cross-cultural studies of personality, attitudes and cognition. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK; 1988. pp. 60-95. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  33. Aslani S, Ramirez-Marin J, Brett J, Yao J, Semnani-Azad Z, Zhang ZX, et al. Dignity, face, and honor cultures: A study of negotiation strategy and outcomes in three cultures. J Organ Behav. 2016; 37: 1178-1201. doi: 10.1002/job.2095. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  34. Cross SE, Uskul AK, Gerçek-Swing B, Alözkan C, Ataca B. Confrontation versus withdrawal: Cultural differences in responses to threats to honor. Group Process Intergr Relat. 2013; 16: 345-362. doi: 10.1177/1368430212461962. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  35. Husain W, Kamal A, Ijaz F, Husain MA, Trabelsi K, Ammar A, et al. Redefining social intelligence through self-efficacy and personal autonomy: Development and validation of the efficient social intelligence scale. J Hum Behav Soc Environ. 2025. doi: 10.1080/10911359.2025.2454265. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  36. Triandis HC. Individualism-collectivism and personality. J Pers. 2001; 69: 907-924. doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.696169. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  37. Uskul AK, Cross SE. Socio-ecological roots of cultures of honor. Curr Opin Psychol. 2020; 32: 177-180. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  38. Uskul AK, Cross SE. The social and cultural psychology of honour: What have we learned from researching honour in Turkey? Eur Rev Soc Psychol. 2019; 30: 39-73. doi: 10.1080/10463283.2018.1542903. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  39. D’Lima T, Solotaroff JL, Pande RP. For the sake of family and tradition: Honour killings in India and Pakistan. Antyajaa. 2020; 5: 22-39. doi: 10.1177/2455632719880852. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  40. Lopez-Zafra E, Rodríguez-Espartal N, Ramos-Alvarez MM. Women’s and men’s role in culture of honor endorsement within families. Eur J Womens Stud. 2020; 27: 72-88. doi: 10.1177/1350506818824369. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  41. Leung AK, Cohen D. Within-and between-culture variation: Individual differences and the cultural logics of honor, face, and dignity cultures. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011; 100: 507-526. doi: 10.1037/a0022151. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  42. Olsthoorn P. Honor as a motive for making sacrifices. J Mil Ethics. 2005; 4: 183-197. doi: 10.1080/15027570500230262. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  43. Barrett NF. A confucian theory of shame. Sophia. 2015; 54: 143-163. doi: 10.1007/s11841-014-0426-0. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  44. Furukawa E, Tangney J, Higashibara F. Cross-cultural continuities and discontinuities in shame, guilt, and pride: A study of children residing in Japan, Korea and the USA. Self Identity. 2012; 11: 90-113. doi: 10.1080/15298868.2010.512748. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  45. Berkovski YS. A Hobbesian theory of shame. South J Philos. 2015; 53: 125-150. doi: 10.1111/sjp.12101. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  46. Sznycer D, Schniter E, Tooby J, Cosmides L. Regulatory adaptations for delivering information: The case of confession. Evol Hum Behav. 2015; 36: 44-51. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2014.08.008. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  47. Robertson TE, Sznycer D, Delton AW, Tooby J, Cosmides L. The true trigger of shame: Social devaluation is sufficient, wrongdoing is unnecessary. Evol Hum Behav. 2018; 39: 566-573. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.05.010. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  48. Yakeley J. Shame, culture and mental health. Nord J Psychiatry. 2018; 72: S20-S22. doi: 10.1080/08039488.2018.1525641. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  49. Steppat M, Sun Y, Krause M. Punishing Transgression in Honor Culture and Face Culture. Peter Lang Group AG; 2023. doi: 10.3726/b21159. [Google scholar]
  50. Brown B. Shame resilience theory: A grounded theory study on women and shame. Fam Soc. 2006; 87: 43-52. doi: 10.1606/1044-3894.3483. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  51. Fromson PM. Evoking shame and guilt: A comparison of two theories. Psychol Rep. 2006; 98: 99-105. doi: 10.2466/pr0.98.1.99-105. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  52. De Hooge IE, Zeelenberg M, Breugelmans SM. Restore and protect motivations following shame. Cogn Emot. 2010; 24: 111-127. doi: 10.1080/02699930802584466. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  53. Tangney JP. Perfectionism and the self-conscious emotions: Shame, guilt, embarrassment, and pride. In: Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2004. pp. 199-215. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  54. Dearing RL, Tangney JPE, Sweezy M. Shame in the therapy hour. Am J Psychother. 2011; 65: 393-394. doi: 10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2011.65.4.393. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  55. Treeby MS, Prado C, Rice SM, Crowe SF. Shame, guilt, and facial emotion processing: Initial evidence for a positive relationship between guilt-proneness and facial emotion recognition ability. Cogn Emot. 2016; 30: 1504-1511. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2015.1072497. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  56. McVee MB, Dunsmore K, Gavelek JR. Schema theory revisited. Rev Educ Res. 2005; 75: 531-566. doi: 10.3102/00346543075004531. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  57. Leahy RL. Emotional schemas. Cogn Behav Pract. 2022; 29: 575-580. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpra.2022.02.004. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  58. Rumelhart DE. Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In: Theoretical issues in reading comprehension. Routledge; 2017. pp. 33-58. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  59. Boutyline A, Soter LK. Cultural schemas: What they are, how to find them, and what to do once you’ve caught one. Am Sociol Rev. 2021; 86: 728-758. doi: 10.1177/00031224211024525. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  60. Landers M, Sznycer D. The evolution of shame and its display. Evol Hum Sci. 2022; 4: e45. doi: 10.1017/ehs.2022.43. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  61. Halmesvaara O, Harjunen VJ, Aulbach MB, Ravaja N. How bodily expressions of emotion after norm violation influence perceivers’ moral judgments and prevent social exclusion: A socio-functional approach to nonverbal shame display. PloS One. 2020; 15: e0232298. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232298. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  62. Dickerson SS, Gruenewald TL, Kemeny ME. When the social self is threatened: Shame, physiology, and health. J Pers. 2004; 72: 1191-1216. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00295.x. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  63. Zhu R, Xu Z, Tang H, Liu J, Wang H, An Y, et al. The effect of shame on anger at others: Awareness of the emotion-causing events matters. Cogn Emot. 2019; 33: 696-708. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2018.1489782. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  64. Fergus TA, Valentiner DP, McGrath PB, Jencius S. Shame-and guilt-proneness: Relationships with anxiety disorder symptoms in a clinical sample. J Anxiety Disord. 2010; 24: 811-815. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2010.06.002. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  65. Corrigan P. How stigma interferes with mental health care. Am Psychol. 2004; 59: 614-625. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.59.7.614. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  66. Rodriguez Mosquera PM, Fischer AH, Manstead AS, Zaalberg R. Attack, disapproval, or withdrawal? The role of honour in anger and shame responses to being insulted. Cogn Emot. 2008; 22: 1471-1498. doi: 10.1080/02699930701822272. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  67. Orth U, Robins RW, Soto CJ. Tracking the trajectory of shame, guilt, and pride across the life span. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2010; 99: 1061-1071. doi: 10.1037/a0021342. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  68. IJzerman H, van Dijk WW, Gallucci M. A bumpy train ride: A field experiment on insult, honor, and emotional reactions. Emotion. 2007; 7: 869-875. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.7.4.869. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  69. Günsoy C, Cross SE, Castillo VA, Uskul AK, Wasti SA, Salter PS, et al. Goal derailment and goal persistence in response to honor threats. J Cross Cult Psychol. 2023; 54: 365-384. doi: 10.1177/00220221221137749. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  70. Khader SJ. Adaptive preferences and procedural autonomy. J Hum Dev Capab. 2009; 10: 169-187. doi: 10.1080/19452820902940851. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  71. Teschl M, Comim F. Adaptive preferences and capabilities: Some preliminary conceptual explorations. Rev Soc Econ. 2005; 63: 229-247. doi: 10.1080/00346760500130374. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  72. Aller ÁM, Montes-Álvarez P, Postigo Á, González-Nuevo C, García-Fernández J, Cuesta M, et al. Masculinidad y feminidad: Una visión multidimensional. Ann Psychol. 2022; 38: 347-354. doi: 10.6018/analesps.481821. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  73. Buiten D, Naidoo K. Laying claim to a name: Towards a sociology of “Gender-Based Violence”. S Afr Rev Sociol. 2020; 51: 61-68. doi: 10.1080/21528586.2020.1813194. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  74. Granada A. Wstyd i honor jako wyznaczniki dobrego zachowania. Kult Społ. 2006; 50: 199-211. doi: 10.35757/KiS.2006.50.1-2.9. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  75. Cihangir S. Gender specific honor codes and cultural change. Group Process Intergr Relat. 2013; 16: 319-333. doi: 10.1177/1368430212463453. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  76. Weidman AJ. Beyond honor and shame: Performing gender in the Mediterranean. Anthropol Q. 2003; 76: 519-530. doi: 10.1353/anq.2003.0047. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  77. Rakoczy H, Schmidt MF. The early ontogeny of social norms. Child Dev Perspect. 2013; 7: 17-21. doi: 10.1111/cdep.12010. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  78. Schmidt MF, Butler LP, Heinz J, Tomasello M. Young children see a single action and infer a social norm: Promiscuous normativity in 3-year-olds. Psychol Sci. 2016; 27: 1360-1370. doi: 10.1177/0956797616661182. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  79. Schmidt MF, Tomasello M. Young children enforce social norms. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2012; 21: 232-236. doi: 10.1177/0963721412448659. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  80. Akers RL, Jennings WG. Social learning theory. In: The handbook of criminological theory. Wiley; 2015. pp. 230-240. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  81. Husain W, Shams K, Behram A, Tahir R, Rafique S. Paternal and maternal love for married and unmarried sons and daughters. Fam Relationsh Soc. 2025; 14: 250-267. doi: 10.1332/204674321x16895779405910. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  82. Husain W. Women are the better halves: Gender-based variations in virtues and character strengths. J Hum Values. 2022; 28: 103-114. doi: 10.1177/09716858211039984. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  83. Taris TW, Semin GR. Passing on the Faith: How mother-child communication influences transmission of moral values. J Moral Educ. 1997; 26: 211-221. doi: 10.1080/0305724970260208. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  84. Deater-Deckard K, Lansford JE, Malone PS, Alampay LP, Sorbring E, Bacchini D, et al. The association between parental warmth and control in thirteen cultural groups. J Fam Psychol. 2011; 25: 790-794. doi: 10.1037/a0025120. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  85. Miller JG, Wice M, Goyal N. Culture, parenting practices, and moral development. In: The Oxford handbook of parenting and moral development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2019. pp. 147-161. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  86. Barcellos SH, Carvalho L, Lleras-Muney A. Child gender and parental investments in India: Are boys and girls treated differently? 2010. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1604233. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  87. Brown CS, Tam M. Parenting girls and boys. In: Handbook of parenting. Routledge; 2019. pp. 258-287. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  88. Conrade G, Ho R. Differential parenting styles for fathers and mothers. Aust J Psychol. 2001; 53: 29-35. doi: 10.1080/00049530108255119. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  89. Mosquera PM. Masculine and feminine honor codes. Int J Soc Psychol. 2011; 26: 63-72. doi: 10.1174/021347411794078499. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  90. Husain W, Ijaz F, Husain MA, Ammar A, Trabelsi K, Jahrami H. Development and validation of the Women Autonomy Scale for measuring psychosocial freedom from conventional gender roles. BMC Psychol. 2025; 13: 88. doi: 10.1186/s40359-025-02393-w. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  91. Foucault M. Panopticism (1977). In: Crime and Media. Routledge; 2019. pp. 493-505. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  92. Sánchez AM. Social shame vs. private shame: A real dichotomy? PhaenEx. 2013; 8: 28-58. doi: 10.22329/p.v8i1.3903. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  93. Scheff TJ. Shame in self and society. Symb Interact. 2003; 26: 239-262. doi: 10.1525/si.2003.26.2.239. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  94. Husain W, Malik MN. The gender-specific dynamics of charismaphobia in relation to body-esteem and self-esteem: Implications for cosmetic and psycho-dermatology. J Skin Stem Cell. 2024; 11: e145103. doi: 10.5812/jssc-145103. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  95. Husain W. Charismaphobia: Diagnosis and measurement of the psychodermatological symptoms. J Skin Stem Cell. 2023; 10: e137387. doi: 10.5812/jssc-137387. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  96. Husain W, Zahid N, Jehanzeb A, Mehmood M. The psychodermatological role of cosmetic dermatologists and beauticians in addressing charismaphobia and related mental disorders. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2022; 21: 1712-1720. doi: 10.1111/jocd.14317. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  97. Husain W, Aziz N. The levels of body esteem among veiled and unveiled women. FWU J Soc Sci. 2014; 8: 46-49. [Google scholar]
  98. Husain W, Ahmed N, Fatima RE. The actual and the desired verbal and non-verbal sexually assertive communication between married couples from a collectivistic Muslim culture. Fam J. 2023. doi: 10.1177/10664807231157033. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  99. Husain W, Kiran A, Qasim U, Gul S, Iftikhar J. Measuring sexual intelligence for evaluating sexual health. Psychol Rep. 2024; 127: 2608-2630. doi: 10.1177/00332941231152388. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  100. Husain W, Inam A, Wasif S, Zaman S. Emotional intelligence: Emotional expression and emotional regulation for intrinsic and extrinsic emotional satisfaction. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2022; 15: 3901-3913. doi: 10.2147/prbm.S396469. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  101. Husain W, Faheem A, Zaheer A. Love, sex, respect, and physical attractiveness in marital satisfaction and remarriage: A comparison between monogamous and polygynous marriages. Interpersona. 2024; 18: 174-188. doi: 10.5964/ijpr.11759. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  102. Norberg C. Male and female shame: A corpus-based study of emotion. Corpora. 2012; 7: 159-185. doi: 10.3366/cor.2012.0025. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  103. Dougé-Prosper M. Patriarchy and male dominance. Int Encycl Anthropol. 2018. doi: 10.1002/9781118924396.wbiea2145. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  104. Giordano C. Viduržemio garbės samprata ir tai, kas už jos. Socialinis reputacijos valdymas viešojoje srityje. Sociol Mintis Veiksmas. 2005; 15: 40-55. doi: 10.15388/SocMintVei.2005.1.5983. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  105. Giordano C. Mediterranean honor and beyond. The social management of reputation in the public sphere. Sociologija Mintis ir veiksmas. 2005; 15: 40-55. doi: 10.15388/SocMintVei.2005.1.5983. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  106. James-Hawkins L, Qutteina Y, Yount KM. The patriarchal bargain in a context of rapid changes to normative gender roles: Young Arab women’s role conflict in Qatar. Sex Roles. 2017; 77: 155-168. doi: 10.1007/s11199-016-0708-9. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  107. Wu J, Balliet D, Van Lange PAM. When does gossip promote generosity? Indirect reciprocity under the shadow of the future. Soc Psychol Pers Sci. 2015; 6: 923-930. doi: 10.1177/1948550615595272. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  108. Davis CV. Im/possible lives: Gender, class, self-fashioning, and affinal solidarity in modern South Asia. Soc Identities. 2009; 15: 243-272. doi: 10.1080/13504630902778701. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  109. Yu C, Zuo X, Blum RW, Tolman DL, Kågesten A, Mmari K, et al. Marching to a different drummer: A cross-cultural comparison of young adolescents who challenge gender norms. J Adolesc Health. 2017; 61: S48-S54. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.07.005. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  110. Basu S, Zuo X, Lou C, Acharya R, Lundgren R. Learning to be gendered: Gender socialization in early adolescence among urban poor in Delhi, India, and Shanghai, China. J Adolesc Health. 2017; 61: S24-S29. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.03.012. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  111. Joseph AM. Bound by tradition: Women's identity and cultural expectations in Anita Nair’s Ladies Coupé, Alice Walker’s the color purple, and Amy Tan’s the joy luck club. Int J Sci Res Eng Manag. 2025; 9. doi: 10.55041/ijsrem45737. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  112. Khurshid A, Shah P. Claiming modernity through clothing: Gender and education in Pakistani Muslim and Indian Hindu communities. Gend Educ. 2019; 31: 189-204. doi: 10.1080/09540253.2017.1302077. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  113. Abeyasekera AL, Marecek J. Embodied shame and gendered demeanours in young women in Sri Lanka. Fem Psychol. 2019; 29: 157-176. doi: 10.1177/0959353518803976. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  114. SHAIKH K. Intimate Critique: Toward a Feminism from Within. Fem Stud. 2022; 48: 369-394. doi: 10.1353/fem.2022.0032. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  115. Baker-Pitts C. Still dangerous: Women and public speaking. Psychoanal Perspect. 2014; 11: 294-305. doi: 10.1080/1551806x.2014.938954. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  116. Mills S. Gender and performance anxiety at academic conferences. In: Speaking out: The female voice in public contexts. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK; 2006. pp. 61-80. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  117. Mishra S, Basu S. Family honor, cultural norms and social networking: Strategic choices in the visual self-presentation of young Indian Muslim women. Cyberpsychology. 2014; 8: 3. doi: 10.5817/cp2014-2-3. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  118. Waltorp K. Keeping cool, staying virtuous: Social media and the composite habitus of young Muslim women in Copenhagen. MedieKultur. 2015; 31: 49-67. doi: 10.7146/mediekultur.v31i58.19373. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  119. Buchanan S, Husain Z. The social media use of Muslim women in the Arabian Peninsula: Insights into self-protective information behaviours. J Doc. 2022; 78: 817-834. doi: 10.1108/jd-07-2021-0136. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  120. Pearce KE, Vitak J. Performing honor online: The affordances of social media for surveillance and impression management in an honor culture. New Media Soc. 2016; 18: 2595-2612. doi: 10.1177/1461444815600279. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  121. Sulaiman AN. Women’s Right to Choose Spouses: A Socio-Legal Study in Rural Islamic Communities. Int J Law Dyn Rev. 2023; 1: 113-121. doi: 10.62039/ijldr.v1i2.81. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  122. Ramanaik S, Collumbien M, Prakash R, Howard-Merrill L, Thalinja R, Javalkar P, et al. Education, poverty and" purity" in the context of adolescent girls' secondary school retention and dropout: A qualitative study from Karnataka, southern India. PLoS One. 2018; 13: e0202470. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202470. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  123. C G, Prabha RV. Shackles of Societal Perception against Female Autonomy in Kamala Markandeya’s Nectar in a Sieve. ShodhKosh. 2024; 5: 1549-1554. doi: 10.29121/shodhkosh.v5.i1.2024.4392. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  124. Still C. Spoiled brides and the fear of education: Honour and social mobility among Dalits in South India. Mod Asian Stud. 2011; 45: 1119-1146. doi: 10.1017/s0026749x10000144. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  125. Nanda P, Das P, Datta N. Education, sexuality, and marriageability: Overlapping tropes in the lives of adolescent girls in Haryana, India. J Adolesc Health. 2022; 70: S28-S35. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2021.10.018. [CrossRef] [Google scholar] [PubMed]
  126. Jennings JL, Murphy CM. Male–male dimensions of male–female battering: A new look at domestic violence. Psychol Men Masculinity. 2000; 1: 21-29. doi: 10.1037/1524-9220.1.1.21. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
  127. Jones N. “It’s not where you live, it’s how you live”: How young women negotiate conflict and violence in the inner city. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci. 2004; 595: 49-62. doi: 10.1177/0002716204267394. [CrossRef] [Google scholar]
Newsletter
Download PDF Download Full-Text XML Download Citation
0 0
Newsletter  

TOP