Study Guide: Selfhood in Cultural Psychology

Selfhood in Cultural Psychology

What is a Self?

  • Fundamental philosophical questions

    • Example question: Is there a self?

  • Pragmatic issues based on internalized values among members of the same society

  • Stability and dynamics of the self

    • Is the self stable or dynamic?

    • Distinction between private versus public perceptions of the self

  • Domains of activity associated with the self

  • The concept of an authentic or true self

  • Definition by Kirmayer and Ban (2013):

    • The self is described as the "narrative center of gravity" and the locus of intentionality and experience.

    • It also serves as the locus of agency.

Who Am I? (1)

  • TWENTY-STATEMENTS TEST (Heine, 2019)

    • Task: Complete the questionnaire by writing 20 statements that best describe who you are.

    • Examples:

Who Am I? (2)

  • Data representation (Figure 6.3):

    • Comparison of self-perception between American and Kenyan undergraduates.

    • Study shows vast differences in how Americans and Kenyans perceive personal characteristics and social identity.

    • Source: Adapted from Ma & Schoeneman, 1997.

Values

  • What are values?

    • Definition: Values are beliefs infused with feelings.

    • They represent desirable goals and the modes of conduct that promote these goals.

    • Values transcend specific actions and situations.

    • Serve as standards for guiding the selection or evaluation of behavior, people, and events.

    • Values are ordered by importance relative to one another.

    • Source: Ryder, 2017.

Psychological Systems of Values

  • Levels of study:

    • Cultural level: How cultural contexts differ in terms of value systems.

    • Individual level: How individuals within a culture differ in personal value systems.

    • Source: Ryder, 2017.

Implicit Theories on the Nature of the Self

  • Types of implicit theories of the self:

    • Incremental theory of self: Belief that abilities and traits can change or improve over time.

    • Entity theory of self: Belief that abilities and traits are largely fixed, representing innate features of the self.

    • Source: Heine, 2019.

Responses to Failure

  • People with incremental theories:

    • Focus on efforts and strategies used to overcome failures.

  • People with entity theories:

    • Blame their innate lack of ability for failure.

  • Cultural differences:

    • Incremental theories are characteristic of individuals from cultures with an interdependent sense of self (e.g., Asian cultures).

    • Entity theories are commonly found in cultures with an independent sense of self (e.g., North Americans).

    • Source: Heine, 2019.

Models of Self-Construal in Cultural Psychology

  • Hofstede’s cultural dimensions (individualism/collectivism + 5)

    • If you do cross-continental marketing, you gotta be aware of each cultures’ susceptibility to different marketing strategies

    • Goal to be an effective communicator of ideas

  • Markus and Kitayama's independence/interdependence model

    • Some poeple see themselves as interpependant, and others see themselves as being independent

  • Gelfand’s dimensions of tightness/looseness

    • Tied to control by systems of power

    • Rules, room for deviation from these rules

  • Eco-cultural framings of selfhood (herding vs. farming vs. industrial economies)

  • Types of selves: egocentric, sociocentric, ecocentric (cosmocentric)

    • Egocentric - yourself

    • Sociocentric - yourself in relation to others

    • Ecocentric - yourself in relation to environment

    • Cosomocentric - yourself in relation to something larger than yourself

  • Perspectives on non-self/no stable self (e.g., Buddhist views)

  • Dimensions of relational mobility.

Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions

  • Originated in a 1980 paper focused on organizational psychology.

  • How to deal with transnational collaboration in marleting.

    • Knowing different cultures’ values allows you to communicate with them more effectively

  • Based on shared values among members of the same society.

  • Current model includes:

    • Individualism-collectivism

    • Power distance

    • Femininity-Masculinity

    • Uncertainty Avoidance

      • How well people deal with chaotic or uncertain situations

    • Short-term vs. long-term orientation.

    • Indulgence vs. restraint.

Cultural Dimension Statistics (Figure 6.4)

  • Comparative measures across several countries (e.g., China, Japan, Russia, USA) regarding:

    • Uncertainty avoidance

    • Long term orientation

    • Indulgence levels.

    • Source: Hofstede's website.

Markus & Kitayama: Independence vs. Interdependence

  • 1991 paper "Cultural variations in self-concept" introduces two types of self-construal:

    • Independent self

    • Interdependent self.

Independent Self Characteristics

  • Derives identity from inner attributes.

  • Distinct from relationships and stable across various situations.

  • Self-contained and coherent with fluidity between ingroups and outgroups.

  • Easier formation and dissolution of relationships, with lesser impact on self-identity.

  • People willing to form new connections and maintain larger social networks.

  • Less distress when relationships fade over time.

  • More fluid ingroup-outgroup boundaries.

Interdependent Self Characteristics

  • Identity defined by social relationships and roles.

  • Flexible across various situations and roles.

  • Not separate from others and context, with clear ingroup-outgroup distinctions.

  • Ingroup-outgroup distinctions determine obligations.

  • Entry into an ingroup is challenging, and losing status to an outgroup is rare.

  • Stable ingroup-outgroup boundaries.

Independence/Interdependence Interplay

  • Examination of conditions under which one can exhibit both independence and interdependence.

    • Example: Individualistic values may prime a stronger independent self-construal.

    • Individualistic cultures often offer more opportunities for independent selves.

Neural Correlates

  • Exploration of self- vs. other-oriented networks.

    • Source: Ryder, 2019; Scalabrini, Xu & Northoff, 2020.

Varieties of Interdependence

  • Eco-cultural view identifies four varieties of interdependence (Kitayama et al., 2022):

    • Self-effacing interdependence/conflict avoidance (East Asia).

    • Self-asserting interdependence for group protection (Middle East/North Africa).

    • Expressive interdependence for promoting interpersonal resonance (Latin America).

    • Argumentative interdependence for conflict resolution (South Asia).

Four Varieties of Interdependence

  • A visual representation details knowledge of social and ecological conditions, dominant types of interdependence, and associated psychological profiles in different cultural zones:

    • East Asia: Rice farming, characterized by self-effacing interdependence.

    • Arab cultural zone: Nomadic lifestyles, associated with self-assertive interdependence.

    • Latin America: Diverse ethnic and linguistic profiles lead to expressive interdependence.

    • South Asia: Historical trade hubs exhibit argumentative interdependence.

Psychological Profiles

  • Associated cognitive styles, emotional expressions, and self-relevant motivations vary by cultural zone (Kitayama et al., 2022).

Deconstructed Independence & Interdependence

  • Results of large-scale surveys (3,000 students in 16 nations; 7,000 adults in 55 cultural groups and 33 nations).

  • The need to nuance the dichotomy of independence vs. interdependence with an understanding of:

    • Seven bipolar dimensions.

    • Recognition of mixed independent/interdependent self-construal in Western and non-Western regions.

Cultural Binary Issues: Global Cultures and Diversity

  • Acknowledgment of feelings of being miscomprehended within one’s culture can criticize traditional cross-cultural psychology paradigms.

    • Example: Critique regarding the simplistic categorization of cultures as Western and Eastern thus rendering cultures such as Latin American as invisible

    • Reference from Krys et al., 2022.

Independent Self-Construal and Cultural Groups

  • Data revealing varying averages of independent self-construal across cultural groups plotted against Hofstede’s measure of individualism, highlighting:

    • Latin American societies as fostering independence despite collectivistic tendencies.

    • Specific country examples provided along a ranking of cultural groups.

    • Source: Krys et al., 2022.

Tightness-Looseness

  • Definition: Explains the strength of social norms and the tolerance of deviant behavior:

    • Tight cultures: Stronger, clear rules leading to less variation permitted in behavior.

    • Loose cultures: Weaker, vague rules allowing more permissive norms.

  • Findings from a 33-nation study:

    • Tight nations often correlate with higher population density, resource scarcity, disasters, territorial threats, and disease burden, thereby necessitating strong norms for coordination.

    • Tighter nations show institutional characteristics that tend toward autocracy, restricted media, more laws, harsher punishments, and greater religiosity.

    • Source: Gelfand et al., 2011.

COVID-19 Context

  • Hypothesis linking collective threats to the need for coordination suggests tighter cultures exhibit stricter adherence to social norms, resulting in fewer COVID-19 deaths.

    • Consideration of additional contributing factors such as under-reporting, vaccination mandates, and wealth inequalities.

    • Source: Gelfand et al., 2021.

Distal Ecological and Historical Factors and Societal Processes

  • Examination of the interaction of ecological and historical factors with proximal circumstances:

    • Factors include population density, history of conflict, natural disasters, resource scarcity, and human disease, influencing socio-political institutions (government, media, education, legal, religion).

  • Further implications on societal norms and tolerance of deviant behavior, leading to different adaptations in self-regulation, self-guides, epistemic needs, and self-monitoring abilities as depicted in a systems model by Gelfand et al., 2011.

Relational Mobility

  • The concept of relational mobility illustrates distinctions across cultures based on the fluidity of social relationships:

    • Increased fluidity promotes cooperation, partner choice, social exchange, and changing norms.

    • Cited research reference: Thomson et al., 2018.

Relational Mobility Statistics

  • Comparative data indicates relational mobility is lower in societies with traditional, settled, interdependent subsistence styles versus those with more mobile herding styles.

Figures of Relational Mobility and Subsistence Styles

  • Graphical illustrations differentiate relational mobility and historical threats across various countries and cultural contexts, highlighting correlations with types of subsistence practices.

  • Source for subsequent figures: Thomson et al., 2018, PNAS.