This study compares the individual-level and sample-level predictive utility of a measure of the cultural logics of dignity, honor, and face. University students in 29 samples from 24 nations used a simple measure to rate their perceptions of the interpersonal cultural logic characterizing their local culture. The nomological net of these measures was then explored. Key dependent measures included three different facets of independent versus interdependent self-construal, relevant attitudes and values, reported handling of actual interpersonal conflicts, and responses to normative settings. Multilevel analyses revealed both individual- and sample-level effects but the dignity measure showed more individual-level effects, whereas sample-level effects were relatively more important with the face measure. The implications of this contrast are discussed.
Sex differences in aspects of independent versus interdependent self-construal and depressive symptoms were surveyed among 5,320 students from 24 nations. Men were found to perceive themselves as more self-contained whereas women perceived themselves as more connected to others. No significant sex differences were found on two further dimensions of self-construal, or on a measure of depressive symptoms. Multilevel modeling was used to test the ability of a series of predictors derived from a social identity perspective and from evolutionary theory to moderate sex differences. Contrary to most prior studies of personality, sex differences in self-construal were larger in samples from nations scoring lower on the Gender Gap Index, and the Human Development Index. Sex differences were also greater in nations with higher pathogen prevalence, higher self-reported religiosity, and in nations with high reported avoidance of settings with strong norms. The findings are discussed in terms of the interrelatedness of self-construals and the cultural contexts in which they are elicited and the distinctiveness of student samples.
El síndrome cultural individualismo-colectivismo ha sido muy utilizado en psicología para comparar los valores humanos, los cuales pueden estar centrados en uno mismo o en los demás. Se ha sugerido que hay muchos tipos diferentes de individualismo y colectivismo, por lo que se añaden los ejes de verticalidad y horizontalidad como principales matices que hacen que este síndrome varíe de una cultura a otra. El objetivo del presente estudio fue validar la escala de individualismo-colectivismo desarrollada por Triandis y Gelfand (1998) con sus respectivos ejes de horizontalidad y verticalidad. El instrumento ha sido útil en otros contextos culturales, por lo que resulta relevante su adaptación a la población mexicana para comparar con los resultados obtenidos en otras regiones. Asimismo, el instrumento presenta la ventaja de ser breve. Los resultados muestran que la escala tiene indicadores adecuados de validez de constructo, confiabilidad y relevancia, ya que permite comparaciones transculturales.
The relationship between dimensions of self-construal and reported mood states is examined among two samples of Mexican students. Scales focused on seven different aspects of self-construal were employed. Respondents favored predominantly individualistic ways of describing themselves, but also scored high on connection to others. These effects were particularly strong among respondents from Tijuana when compared with those from Mexico City. Depressive mood state was predicted by higher self-reported connection with others, commitment to others, receptiveness to influence and behavioral variability. High self-esteem was predicted by higher self-reported consistency, self-orientation, self-direction and expressiveness.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.