Theories of Cultural Dimensions Emilie W. Gould RPI

Values vs. Perception Two sets of theory; two theoretical mechanisms to explain differences between cultures: Cultural Values Perception The first set comes from anthropology and sociology The second from psychology – the attempt of a Western social science to find universal mechanisms to explain variance

Cultural Values Based on some organizing principle: Universal Problems Spheres of Human Activity Structural Analysis Communication Styles Nonverbal vs. Verbal Preferences Work Dimensions

Some of the Best-Known Theories of Crosscultural Variability Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s Value Orientations Parson’s Pattern Variables Hall’s High-Low Context Cultures Hall’s Monochronic-Polychronic Cultures Witkin and Berry’s Loose | Tight Sociocultural Systems Condon and Yousef’s Spheres of Human Activity Victor’s LESCANT model Hofstede’s Dimensions

Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s Value Orientations Five existential beliefs influence individual choices: –Character of Human Nature (good, evil, mixed; changeable or given) –Relationship to Nature (mastery, harmony, mastered by) –Time (past, present, future orientation) –Human Action (doing, being, becoming) –Relationships to Others (individualism, lineality, collectivity) Foundational theory (Condon & Yousef, Trompenaars)

Parson’s Pattern Variables Social context structured by various dichotomies: –Affective | Affective neutrality (immediate/ delayed gratification) –Self | Collective (relationships to others) –Universalism | Particularism (mode of characterizing people and objects) –Diffuseness | Specificity (response to others -- focus on whole or parts) –Ascription | Achievement (human qualities) –Instrumental | Expressive (interactional goals) Theory developed for society as a whole

Hall’s High/Low Context Cultures Cultures vary in the importance of context for communication. –In high-context cultures, most of the information is contained in the context; the message is not explicit –In low-context cultures, meaning must be clearly spelled out in messages High-context cultures tend to be traditional and collectivist; low-context cultures are present or future-oriented and individualistic

Hall’s Monochronic/Polychronic Cultures Cultures are further divided by their use of time: Monochronic cultures: –Focus on one thing at a time –Reduce context by segmenting reality –Dislike interruption –Consider time as tangible (something to be saved, spent, etc.) –Like closure Polychronic cultures like the opposite

Witkin and Berry’s Loose | Tight Sociocultural Systems Degree of hierarchical structure in society determines levels of differentiation between people: –Role Diversity –Role Relatedness Expectations are reciprocal but differ according to whether they are: –imposed and received –proposed and interpreted

Condon & Yousef’s Spheres of Human Activity Expanded Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s five relationships  24 categories Much more descriptive but less valuable in terms of identifying regularities between cultures

Victor’s LESCANT Model Based on a structural analysis of society; what mechanisms have people established to control their environment –Language –Environment and technology –Social organization –Context –Authority –Nonverbal behavior –Time

Hofstede’s Work Dimensions Hofstede studied IBMers in 40 countries and found 4 universal sociocultural dimensions: Power Distance (degree that power in organizations is distributed unequally) Individualism | Collectivism Masculinity | Femininity (valuing things or relationships) Uncertainty Avoidance (lack of tolerance for change and ambiguity)

A Fifth “Hofstede Dimension” After writing Cultures and Organizations, Hofstede persuaded to define a fifth dimension: –Long/short term orientation (degree that the culture looks ahead) Concentrated in countries with a Confucian tradition of respect for elders, focus on the past, and allegiance to family (and state)

Gundykunst’s Model of Crosscultural Comparison Recognized that multiple dimensions of cultural variability Influence social cognitive processes But are mediated by various factors: –Situation | Affect | Social scripts (including schema | historical experience) To result in varying levels of understanding: –Description | Prediction | Explanation

Next Week Perception… and Social Categorization

Perceptual Models Depend on psychological explanations of attention to features of the physical and social environment

Perception How do people –Select –Categorize –Interpret information about the natural and social world around them? The “Onion” metaphor

Perception - Selection The first task in perception is separating an item of interest from its background… Selective exposure Selective attention Selective retention Consider a four-legged creature

Perception - Categorization In the second stage of perception, we begin to develop structured categories that help us identify the same phenomenon through time Perceptual object stored in the mind as a stable concept Internal visualization developed in association with memory (image) The creature acquires the identity of dog

Perception - Interpretation In the third stage, we attach meaning to our categories and begin “thinking about” them Thinking falls into embedded patterns Relationships are elaborated and higher-level meaning assigned to perceptions –Is the dog a good companion? –Is the dog good to eat?

Perception – Symbol Systems Intepretations may vary; different groups of people will think differently about the same object Development of complex symbol systems to record and communicate about the world Art, music, language, mathematics, cuisine “Spot” or Dinner

Stewart and Bennett’s Perceptual Model StructureProductProcess SensationSensory stimuliSensing Surface Perception Figure/ ground Objects Images Concepts Perceiving CognitionPatterns of thinkingThinking Complex symbol systems Language Visual Music Math Encoding/ symbolizing

Onion Metaphor To understand a problem, you sometimes have to work back from language > underlying perceptions “Figure and ground” are reciprocal –Our culture predisposes us to notice some things and not others –We cannot perceive things we have no language for Can learn to be more attentive to certain stimuli, give them names, and incorporate them into our personal and social systems

Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis Grammar and vocabulary of language constrain perception Different languages incline people to different world views –German (which puts verbs at the end of sentences) changes the culture’s action orientation –ASL (American Sign Language) inclines speakers to “physical”humor and puns –French (uses nominalizations) encourages abstract thinking and discussion of “ideas”

European Patterns of Reasoning Universalistic – deductive; power to know the truth given certain premises (France) Nominalistic/ hypothetical – emphasizes empiricism and induction (Anglo-American) Intuitional – stresses organic unity of the whole and its parts (German/ Slavic nationalism) Dialectical – systematic (like universalism) but focuses on naturally antagonistic forces found in “the world” (German Hegalian)