Novel Evidence for the Increasing Prevalence of Unique Names in China: A Reply to Ogihara

2023

F1000Res

Previous research has indicated that some aspects of Chinese culture became more individualistic. However, prior studies have suggested a decrease in individualism in other aspects of China. Thus, it was unclear whether China became more individualistic. Therefore, the current research investigated whether Chinese culture became more individualistic by examining historical changes in family structure. Specifically, I analyzed temporal shifts in the divorce rate and household size, which have been confirmed as valid representative indicators of individualism. Results showed that the divorce rate increased between 1978 and 2017 and household size decreased between 1953 and 2017, indicating a rise in individualism. Moreover, analyses suggested that the one-child policy was unlikely the sole and major factor in the decrease in household size. Additionally, the aggregated score of divorce rate and household size demonstrated a clear increase in individualism. Therefore, the present research provided further evidence of the rise in individualism in China.

Section: Decrease In Individualism In Chinamentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Increase In Individualism In Chinamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Chinese culture became more individualistic: Evidence from family structure, 1953-2017

2023

F1000Res

“…For example, revealing how people in Japan give names to babies enables comparisons with naming practices in other countries in the Sinosphere. Indeed, such a comparison shows substantial cultural differences and similarities in naming practices between Japan and China (e.g.,Ogihara, 2020b;Bao et al, 2021), which deepens our understanding of naming behaviors, languages, and cultures.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Further Explanations for Difficulties in Reading Recent Japanese Names Correctly

2022

Front. Educ.

A previous study analyzed the names of babies born in Japan between 2004 and 2018 and demonstrated that common writings have many variations in readings, which makes it difficult to choose the correct reading at first glance (Ogihara, 2021c). The study provides empirical evidence of the difficulties in reading recent Japanese names correctly. The current article answers three questions on Ogihara (2021c). Specifically, I explain 1) it is still difficult to read recent Japanese names correctly even if one tries to remember the most frequent readings of names 2) specific numbers of reading variations are not important, and 3) how we should deal with these difficulties. This new information would certainly help to further comprehend the difficulties in reading recent Japanese names correctly, which contributes to a better understanding of names and naming practices not only in Japan but also across the entire Sinosphere.

“… 1 I have conducted several studies on Han Chinese names, including one that confirms the increasing prevalence of unique names in China over 1920 to 2005 (Bao et al, 2021). 2 I also have carefully read the original article by Stojcic et al (2020), the correspondence by Ogihara, and the other two reviewers’ insightful comments on this correspondence. In general, I agree with the two points proposed by Ogihara as well as most of the other two reviewers’ opinions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethnic differences in names in China: A comparison between Chinese Mongolian and Han Chinese cultures in Inner Mongolia

2022

F1000Res

I propose two suggestions on Stojcic et al.’s (2020) Study 3, which examined ethnic differences in individualism between Chinese Mongolian and Han Chinese cultures in China. The authors analyzed the names of all residents in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region of China and found that the percentages of common names among Chinese Mongolians were smaller than those among Han Chinese. The authors concluded that Chinese Mongolians are more independent than Han Chinese. However, two questions remain unanswered. First, although the authors analyzed the names of people in all age groups together and did not analyze the names by birth year, how was the effect of time controlled? Second, although the authors treated name indices, which have been used as group-level indicators in previous research, as individual-level indicators, how did the authors confirm whether name indices can be used as individual-level indicators? Addressing these two questions would contribute to a better understanding of ethnic differences in individualism in China.