Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
1 Psychology 307: Cultural Psychology Lecture 12
2
2 Personality, Group Processes, Relationships, Interpersonal Attraction, and Love 2. How does culture influence: (a) ingroup-outgroup relations and (b) conformity to social norms? 1. Do trait theories adequately describe personality in non-Western cultures? (continued)
3
3 By the end of today’s class, you should be able to: 1. describe indigenous personality dimensions identified in the Philippines. 2. summarize the findings of research using emic measures to assess the validity of the five factor model in other cultures.
4
4 3. describe how individualism-collectivism (IC) influences day-to-day interactions and attitudes toward ingroup and outgroup members. 4. discuss the relationship between IC and conformity.
5
5 ●In contrast to McCrae and Terracciano (2005), other researchers have administered indigenously developed measures to participants in other cultures: Church et al. (1997): Developed an indigenous measure of personality in the Philippines. Do trait theories adequately describe personality in non- Western cultures? (continued)
6
6 The researchers: (b) reduced the list of trait adjectives by eliminating synonyms, physical descriptors, temporary states, and unfamiliar terms. (a) identified 6,900 trait adjectives in the Filipino language dictionary.
7
7 (c) administered the reduced list to participants using self-report questionnaires. (d) factor analyzed participants’ responses in order to identify groups of highly inter-correlated items.
8
8 They found 7 groups of inter-correlated items or dimensions underlying the trait adjectives. They labeled the dimensions: Gregariousness, Self- assurance, Concern for others vs. egotism, Conscientiousness, Intellect, Temperamentalness, and Negative valence The first 5 of these dimensions are highly correlated with E, N, A, C, and O, respectively:
9
9 Filipino Dimension ENACO Gregariousness.66**.03-.13**-.37**.10** Self-Assurance.31**-.58**.13**.24**.36** Concern for others vs. Egotism -.03-.17**.81**.56**.10** Conscientiousness-.35**-.20**.59**.77**-.01 Intellect.05-.26**.30**.32**.56** Correlations between Church et al.’s (1997) Filipino Dimensions of Personality and the Big 5 **p <.01
10
10 Temperamentalness: Reflects emotional reactivity. E.g., hot-headed and irritable vs. calm and understanding. Negative valence: Reflects social deviance. E.g., crazy and sadistic vs. normal and loving. However, the latter 2 dimensions are not correlated with the FFM dimensions. These may be “indigenous Philippine dimensions”:
11
11 ●Research using indigenous measures derived from other languages (e.g., Chinese, Spanish, Greek) suggests that there may be more than 5 dimensions underlying personality in other non-English speaking countries.
12
12 How does culture influence ingroup-outgroup relations? ● Ingroup: A group of people with whom one shares a sense of belonging or a feeling of common identity (i.e., “us”). ● Outgroup: A group of people with whom one perceives dissimilarity or a lack of familiarity (i.e., “them”).
13
13 ● Theorists believe that individualism leads people to develop relatively low levels of commitment towards ingroups and to view the ingroup-outgroup distinction as fluid. ● In contrast, collectivism leads people to develop relatively high levels of commitment towards ingroups and to view the ingroup-outgroup distinction as stable. ● Evidence that indicates that cultures promote distinct ingroup-outgroup relations:
14
14 ● Example: Wheeler, Reis, and Bond (1989) Recruited participants from the U.S. and China. Had participants complete the Rochester Interaction Record (RIR). The RIR requires that participants record details related to social interactions of 10 minutes or more. (a) Day-to-day interactions:
15
15 Sample Copy of a Rochester Interaction Record
16
16 Found that: (i) Chinese (mean = 3.43) had fewer social interactions per day than Americans (mean = 6.98). (ii) Chinese (mean = 29.2%) had a higher proportion of “group” interactions than Americans (mean = 16.7%). (iii) Chinese (e.g., mean same sex = 14.8) had fewer interaction partners than the Americans (e.g., mean same sex = 22.4).
17
17 (v) Chinese were more likely to describe their interactions as task-focused, whereas Americans were more likely to describe their interactions as recreational (e.g., “pastime”). (vi) Chinese reported higher levels of self- and other- disclosure in their interactions than Americans. (iv) the interactions of the Chinese (mean = 61 min) were of longer duration than the interactions of the Americans (mean = 53).
18
18 ● Example: Triandis, McCusker, and Hui (1990) Recruited participants from the U.S. and China. Had participants rate their “social distance” from 20 stimuli (e.g., their father, their closest friend). Had participants indicate how appropriate they believed subordinate, superordinate, and dissociative behaviours are when interacting with each stimulus: (b) Attitudes towards ingroup and outgroup members:
19
19 Relationship Between Subordinate Behaviour and Social Distance * PRC = People’s Republic of China *
20
20 Relationship Between Superordinate Behaviour and Social Distance * PRC = People’s Republic of China
21
21 * PRC = People’s Republic of China Relationship Between Dissociative Behaviour and Social Distance
22
22 How does culture influence conformity to social norms? ● For several decades, researchers have been interested in identifying the factors that lead people to conform to social norms. ● The most influential research examining these factors was conducted by Asch (1951):
23
23 Asch’s Line Judgment Task
24
24 Across several studies using this task, Asch found that American participants agreed with the group’s incorrect response (i.e., conformed) in 37% of trials.
25
25 Subsequent research demonstrated that conformity was greatest when: (a) the group was relatively large. (b) the group provided a unanimous incorrect response. (c) the participant admired, liked, or felt a sense cohesiveness or similarity among group members.
26
26 ● Bond and Smith (1996) conducted a meta-analysis of studies examining IC and conformity: ● Theorists believe that individualism promotes a resistance to conformity, whereas collectivism promotes a tendency toward conformity.
27
27 133 experiments were included in the meta-analysis: 97 were conducted in the U.S., 1 was conducted in Canada, the remaining were conducted outside of North America (e.g., Brazil, Fiji, Ghana, Hong Kong, Japan, Kuwait, Zimbabwe).
28
28 Examined: (b) changes in conformity across time in the U.S. (a) differences in conformity across individualistic cultures and collectivistic cultures.
29
29 Found: (b) a negative relation between date of publication and conformity in the U.S. studies. (a) a negative relation between individualism and conformity.
30
30 Personality, Group Processes, Relationships, Interpersonal Attraction, and Love 2. How does culture influence: (a) ingroup-outgroup relations and (b) conformity to social norms? 1. Do trait theories adequately describe personality in non-Western cultures? (continued)
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.