Collectivism v. Individualism: A Reconceptualisation of a Basic Concept in Cross-cultural Social Psychology

Triandis, Harry C.

doi:10.1007/978-1-349-08120-2_3

Cited by 517 publications

(438 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

398

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is general consensus in the literature to suggest that when people from different cultures interact, boundaries are created (Hofstede, 1980;Triandis, 1988). Boundaries are an inevitable consequence of cognitive categorization, a process through which individuals simplify complex stimuli into meaningful groups or categories (Abrams and Hogg, 1999).…”

Section: Attitudinal Outcomes Of Boundary Permeability: a Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, Hofstede's (1980) landmark study on cultural dimensions defined individualism as the emotional independence from "groups, organizations, or other collectivists" (p.221). Individualists tend to prioritize personal goals over the goals of the collective while collectivists tend to give priority to collective goals (Triandis et al, 1988). Collectivists are more likely to be driven by social norms, duties, and obligations, whereas the social behaviors of individualists are more likely to be driven by their own beliefs, values, and attitudes (Bontempo and Rivero, 1992).…”

Section: The Role Of Boundary Peremeabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although we acknowledge that the individualism-collectivism cultural construct may not be the sole measure of cultural differences, this construct has been used in a vast number of research in delineating individual-group behavior, outcome achievement and relationship importance (Earley and Gibson, 1998;Triandis, 1988Triandis, , 1995. For instance, culture has been found to be a significant moderator between antecedents and outcome variables.…”

Section: Hypothesis 3: Singaporeans Tend To Form Workgroups With Lessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Unlocking the mindsets of Government Affairs Managers

Barron

2010

Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to explore the cultural dimensions of corporate political activity (CPA). Design/methodology/approach -The study uses a qualitative research design. Data collected from interviews conducted with the Brussels-based Government Affairs Managers of French and British firms are analysed to examine the impact of national culture on their objectives and preferred political strategies. Findings -The findings suggest possible relationships between the cultural dimensions elaborated by Hofstede and the different components of corporate political action: uncertainty avoidance can help explain managers' objectives when becoming politically active; the long-term vs short-term dimension can account for their general approaches to political activity; their level of participation in the political process can be explained by the individualism vs collectivism dimension; and their choices of specific lobbying tactics and techniques can be explained in terms of power distance. Practical implications -As firms increasingly interact with foreign rivals when seeking to influence policy outcomes, knowing that corporate political strategies are in part culturally grounded can help Government Affairs Managers to anticipate, respond to and act on the strategies pursued by firms socialised in other national cultures. Originality/value -While previous mainstream research into CPA is based largely on universal theories, the primary contribution of the paper is to introduce national culture as a variable to explain cross-country differences in the types and processes of firms' political activities.

show abstract

Section: Attitudinal Outcomes Of Boundary Permeability: a Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Role Of Boundary Peremeabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hypothesis 3: Singaporeans Tend To Form Workgroups With Lessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Unlocking the mindsets of Government Affairs Managers

Barron

2010

Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the 1980s, researchers, especially Hofstede (1980;Hofstede and Bond 1984;see also Hofstede 1991) in the field of cross-cultural psychology began developing measures of individualism-collectivism and using these measures to collect data from diverse cultures (see also Triandis 1988Triandis , 1990Triandis , 1995. In his seminal empirical study of IBM workers in different countries, Hofstede (1980;see also Hofstede and Hofstede 2004) reported that American workers in their work setting were significantly more individualistic on his measure than were Japanese workers.…”

Section: Collectivism-indivisualismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Collectivism, on the other hand, grants priority to group identity over individual identity, shared in-group beliefs over unique individual beliefs, and cooperation with in-group members over maximizing individual outcomes (see Gudykunst et al 1996). Triandis (1988) states that members of individualist cultures are characterized by hedonism and self-seeking attitudes, suggesting weak bonds to society. Hence, we argue that collectivist cultures should be more effective in fostering social controls or constraints against deviant behavior while also fostering conformity among members of society.…”

Section: Collectivism-indivisualismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bond to Society, Collectivism, and Conformity: A Comparative Study of Japanese and American College Students

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An argument is developed that the purported collectivism in Japanese society generates stronger social bonds in Japan than in the more individualistic United States, which might then explain the lower level of deviance often found in Japan. We test this using survey data from samples of Japanese and American college students on measures of deviance and social bonds. Results indicate that Japanese students engage in significantly less deviance than Americans, and

show abstract

Individualism versus collectivism or versus authoritarianism?

Gelfand

Triandis

Chan

1996

Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although there has been progress in the definition, antecedents, and consequences of individualism and collectivism, there are some fundamental issues that need to be resolved. This study examined two such issues: the dimensionality of individualism and collectivism, and the relationship of these constructs to authoritarianism. Thirty‐eight American undergraduates judged the similarity among 15 concepts that have previously been shown to be reflective of elements of individualism, collectivism, and authoritarianism. Multidimensional scaling revealed two dimensions: individualism versus authoritarianism and active collectivism versus withdrawal from group involvement. Unlike the conception by Hofstede (1980) that individualism and collectivism are opposites, these results strongly suggest they are orthogonal. Furthermore, authoritarianism was construed as the opposite of individualism. Implications of these findings for future research are discussed.

show abstract

Collectivism v. Individualism: A Reconceptualisation of a Basic Concept in Cross-cultural Social Psychology

Cited by 517 publications

References 47 publications

Unlocking the mindsets of Government Affairs Managers

Unlocking the mindsets of Government Affairs Managers

Bond to Society, Collectivism, and Conformity: A Comparative Study of Japanese and American College Students

Individualism versus collectivism or versus authoritarianism?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About