A revision of Hofstede’s individualism-collectivism dimension

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide an updated and authoritative measure of individualism vs collectivism (IDV-COLL) as a dimension of national culture. Design/methodology/approach Rather than focus solely on Hofstede’s classic work, the authors review the main nation-level studies of IDV-COLL and related constructs to identify the salient cultural differences between rich societies and developing nations. The authors conceptualize and operationalize IDV-COLL on the basis of those differences and propose a new national IDV-COLL index, using new data from large probabilistic samples: 52,974 respondents from 56 countries, adequately representing the national cultures of all inhabited continents. Findings The proposed index is a new, valid measure of IDV-COLL as it is strongly correlated with previous measures of closely associated constructs. As a predictor of important cultural differences that can be expected to be associated with IDV-COLL, it performs better (yields higher correlations) than any known measure of IDV-COLL or a related construct. Research limitations/implications An important facet of IDV-COLL – in-group favoritism vs out-group neglect or exclusionism – does not transpire convincingly from the authors’ operationalization of IDV-COLL. The study relies on self-construals. Respondents are unlikely to construe their selves in terms of such concepts. Practical implications The new IDV-COLL measure can be used as a reliable, up-to-date national index in studies that compare the cultures of rich and developing nations. The new IDV-COLL scale, consisting of only seven items, can be easily used in future studies. Originality/value This is the first IDV-COLL measure based on the communalities of previous studies in this domain and derived from large probabilistic samples that approach national representativeness. The superior predictive properties of the authors’ new measure with respect to extraneous variables are another important strength and contribution.

Chaos, danger, and maternal parenting in families: Links with adolescent adjustment in low‐ and middle‐income countries

“…Participants included 511 families from an ongoing longitudinal study with data at annual study years 5, 6, and 7 (age range at study year 5:11 to 15 years, M = 12.91, SD = 0.76; 53% girls) from urban areas in LMICs in the Parenting Across Cultures project. The countries were selected because they spanned several dimensions known to be important to family processes and youth development: average levels of and variability in individualist – collectivist orientations (Minkov et al, ); religiosity and predominant religions (Johnson & Grim, ); and family policies (e.g. systems for protecting minors; family planning and birth control; see e.g.…”

Invariance of the Sexual Double Standard Scale: A Cross-Cultural Study

“…If we consider the case of Spain and Colombia, Hofstede [15] already stated that Colombia is a country with a low level of individualism. More recent evidence, provided by a study in 56 countries, shows that Spain is a more individualistic country than Colombia [16]. In this study, each country was distributed into a continuous dimension of individualism and collectivism, according to the scores they had obtained in that dimension.…”

The Role of Job Crafting on the Promotion of Flow and Wellbeing

“…Individuals with high levels of social well-being have positive perceptions about the functioning of society, feel part of a community and contribute to its development (Machado & Bandeira, 2015). The relationships revealed in this study can be understood by observing that, in a collectivist culture such as Brazil (Minkov et al, 2017), employees who perceive having higher levels of social support at work may experience a greater number of positive work experiences, rely on peer support in different situations and perceive their lives as successful.…”