Rather, ecological variables are necessary to examine structural, contextual, and sociological effects on human behavior and disease development. Schwartz, 1994 b, p. 823 Many attempts have been made to define (e.g., Rohner, 1984) and then to measure culture. Given the classic definition of culture provided by Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1952), this mapping has usually been made by using values. The most widely known value mapping is the work of Hofstede (1980), whose four value dimensions of Individualism-Collectivism, Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, and Masculinity-Femininity are used as organizing and explanatory constructs in many disciplines. Tapping values salient to Chinese people, the Chinese Culture Connection (1987) has identified one additional dimension to the Hofstede four: Confucian Work Dynamism, or short-term versus long-term orientation (Hofstede, 1991). All five dimensions of culture-level values have provided the conceptual impetus for numerous cross-cultural studies. Several major cross-cultural projects have been conducted subsequent to Hofstede's (1980) groundbreaking work. With his theory-derived value survey, Schwartz (1994 a) has identified seven culture-level dimensions, namely, Conservatism, Intellectual Autonomy, Affective Autonomy, Hierarchy, Egalitarian Commitment, Mastery, and Harmony. Smith, Dugan, and Trompenaars (1996) have identified two reliable value dimensions at the cultural level from their analysis of managerial values: Egalitarian Commitment versus Conservatism, and Utilitarian Involvement versus Loyal Involvement. Smith and Bond (1998, Ch. 3) concluded that these different value surveys have produced convergent results, lending support to the validity of the cultural dimensions originally identified by Hofstede (1980). Recently, House and his associates (2003) have orchestrated a major project to identify cultural dimensions across 62 countries. A distinctive feature of this multicultural project is that values associated with leadership were measured concurrently with ideal and actual leadership behaviors. The House team has identified nine culture-level dimensions:

Two studies investigated how self-enhancement relates to interdependent and independent self-construals typical of collectivist and individualist cultures, respectively. Participants from three cultures were surveyed, two of them collectivist (Singaporean Chinese and Israeli Druze) and one individualist (Israeli Jews). Study 1 shows that the two collectivist cultures differ in their self-enhancement level among university students: Self-enhancement level among Singaporeans was weaker for academic self-enhancement and for other agentic traits. No cultural difference in self-enhancement of communal traits was found (N = 418). Study 2 replicated these results for high school students and evaluated the relations between self-construals, modesty, and self-enhancement. Regression analyses show that self-enhancement of agentic traits is predicted by independent self-construal and modesty (negatively), whereas self-enhancement of communal traits is predicted by interdependent self-construal (N = 362). The role of modesty norms in self-enhancement is discussed.

The purpose of the present study is to compare two alternative explanations for the low self-enhancement that characterizes collectivist cultures: (a) lack of a self-enhancement motive arising from the perceived centrality of others, and (b) cultural restrictions imposed on the self that are manifested by modesty requirements. The validity of the two explanations was investigated in two studies. Study 1 examined how self-enhancement is related to self-esteem and subjective well-being. Results from four samples showed that self-enhancement measures were significantly and positively related to self-esteem and to indices of well-being in collectivist cultures as well as independent ones, revealing the psychological benefits of self-enhancement in all tested cultures. Study 2 found that cultural differences in modesty, not the perceived centrality of others, best explains cultural differences in self-enhancement. Taken together, the results support the notion that cultural restrictions rather than the lack of a self-enhancement motive are responsible for the low self-enhancement found in certain collectivist cultures. Implications of these results for the conceptualization of the interdependent self were discussed.

Based on a deductive, culturally decentered approach, new items were generated to improve the reliability of the original Social Axioms Survey, which measures individuals’ general beliefs about the world. In Study 1, results from 11 countries support the original five-factor structure and achieve higher reliability for the axiom dimensions as measured by the new scale. Moreover, moderate but meaningful associations between axiom and Big-Five personality dimensions were found. Temporal change of social axioms at the culture level was examined and found to be moderate. In Study 2, additional new items were generated for social complexity and fate control, then assessed in Hong Kong and the United States. Reliability was further improved for both dimensions. Additionally, two subfactors of fate control were identified: fate determinism and fate alterability. Fate determinism, but not fate alterability, related positively to neuroticism. Other relationships between axiom and personality dimensions were similar to those reported in Study 1. The short forms of the axiom dimensions were generally reliable and correlated highly with the long forms. This research thus provides a stronger foundation for applying the construct of social axioms around the world.

The study investigated the relationship among self-enhancement, modesty, and vertical and horizontal collectivism-individualism. High school participants from three groups were surveyed: A Singaporean sample (n = 130), high on vertical collectivism; an Israeli kibbutz sample (n = 163), high on horizontal collectivism; and an urban individualist Israeli control sample (n = 144). Self-report of modesty was highest and selfenhancement was lowest among Singaporeans, whereas kibbutz and urban Israelis showed no differences on these measures. Path analyses revealed that modesty was positively related to vertical collectivism, which emphasizes group over self needs. Modesty was negatively related to horizontal individualism, which emphasizes development of a unique self-identity. Horizontal collectivism was not related to modesty or selfenhancement. Modesty was the strongest predictor of academic self-enhancement, other significant predictors being cultural origin and vertical individualism. Modesty was the strongest predictor of self-criticism and other significant predictors included cultural origin and vertical individualism and collectivism.