* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Jkjk
Survey
Document related concepts
In-group favoritism wikipedia , lookup
Team composition wikipedia , lookup
Group cohesiveness wikipedia , lookup
Interpersonal relationship wikipedia , lookup
Belongingness wikipedia , lookup
False consensus effect wikipedia , lookup
Self-categorization theory wikipedia , lookup
Personality test wikipedia , lookup
Solomon Asch wikipedia , lookup
Social tuning wikipedia , lookup
Impression formation wikipedia , lookup
Communication in small groups wikipedia , lookup
James M. Honeycutt wikipedia , lookup
Group dynamics wikipedia , lookup
Memory conformity wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Psychology 307: Cultural Psychology Lecture 12 1 Personality, Group Processes, Relationships, Interpersonal Attraction, and Love 1. Do trait theories adequately describe personality in non-Western cultures? (continued) 2. How does culture influence: (a) ingroup-outgroup relations and (b) conformity to social norms? 2 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. 3 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. 4 Do trait theories adequately describe personality in nonWestern cultures? (continued) ● 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. 5 The researchers: (a) identified 6,900 trait adjectives in the Filipino language dictionary. (b) reduced the list of trait adjectives by eliminating synonyms, physical descriptors, temporary states, and unfamiliar terms. 6 (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. 7 They found 7 groups of inter-correlated items or dimensions underlying the trait adjectives. They labeled the dimensions: Gregariousness, Selfassurance, 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: 8 Correlations between Church et al.’s (1997) Filipino Dimensions of Personality and the Big 5 Filipino Dimension E N A C O 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** **p < .01 9 However, the latter 2 dimensions are not correlated with the FFM dimensions. These may be “indigenous Philippine dimensions”: 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. 10 ● 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. 11 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”). 12 ● 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: 13 (a) Day-to-day interactions: ● 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. 14 Sample Copy of a Rochester Interaction Record 15 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). 16 (iv) the interactions of the Chinese (mean = 61 min) were of longer duration than the interactions of the Americans (mean = 53). (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 otherdisclosure in their interactions than Americans. 17 (b) Attitudes towards ingroup and outgroup members: ● 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: 18 Relationship Between Subordinate Behaviour and Social Distance * * PRC = People’s Republic of China 19 Relationship Between Superordinate Behaviour and Social Distance * PRC = People’s Republic of China 20 Relationship Between Dissociative Behaviour and Social Distance * PRC = People’s Republic of China 21 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): 22 Asch’s Line Judgment Task 23 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. 24 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. 25 ● Theorists believe that individualism promotes a resistance to conformity, whereas collectivism promotes a tendency toward conformity. ● Bond and Smith (1996) conducted a meta-analysis of studies examining IC and conformity: 26 133 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). 27 Examined: (a) differences in conformity across individualistic cultures and collectivistic cultures. (b) changes in conformity across time in the U.S. 28 Found: (a) a negative relation between individualism and conformity. (b) a negative relation between date of publication and conformity in the U.S. studies. 29 Personality, Group Processes, Relationships, Interpersonal Attraction, and Love 1. Do trait theories adequately describe personality in non-Western cultures? (continued) 2. How does culture influence: (a) ingroup-outgroup relations and (b) conformity to social norms? 30