1 Flashcards
According to anthropology there are 3 important factors:
1)every human community faces the same set of problems
2)for every problem there is a set number of solutions
3)every community/cultural group is capable of making use of all solutions, but they have preference for certain solutions
1)kluckhohn and strodtbeck’s (follows anthropology 3 principles)
Different communities/groups choose to focus on certain orientations
kluckholn and strodtbeck’s time orientation
Where in the chronological timeline do people focus on?
alternative orientations:
Past orientation (focusing on ancestors)
Ie shrines
present orientation (focusing on here and now)
future orientation (thinking more about investing in themselves for the future
kluckholn and strodtbeck: “Nature” orientation
(how it is meant to interact with the environment)
alternative orientations:
Subjugation to nature: accept fate, deal with natural forces as they exist
Harmony with nature: we are an extension of the environment, not possible for environment and body to be separate
Mastery over nature:land reclamation projects (creating new land/projects)
klockholn and strodtbeck’s “Human nature” orientation
what is the nature of humanity
alternative orientations:
Are humans inherently:
Good: history that humans are created by divine energy, therefore humans are inherently good
Evil:at birth people are born with sin/evil and we need to wash it away (liberating belief system for confucians)
If you get baptized, then you’re safe
“mixed” (not good or evil):
We have inherent goodness in us (babies don’t like harming), but there are also some natural neg behaviors
klockholns Relational orientation :
what is the nature of the relationships between people?
alternative orientations:
Collateral
Power sharing, well fare of the group over the needs of the self
Lineal
Hierarchy
Decisions made at top and they dictate the people at the lower end of hierarchy
Individualistic
Make decisions by themselves for themselves
Consultations with others is optional(no need to consider others opinions)
Hofstedes’ 5 value Dimensions
5 value dimensions: what are the different value dimensions in which we can divide up cultures
hoftstede power distance
whether people in a group particularly those who are at the bottom of society, accept and expect unequal distributions of power in society
Country with low power distance:
Low rates of corruption in gov
Equal distribution of wealth and income
Children given more autonomy
Ie:western european, english speaking
High power distance
Rampant corruption, political scandals common
Uneven distribution of wealth and income
Children taught to respect authority
Eastern european, southeast asian
hoftstede’s 2)uncertainty avoidance
Whether people in a group are comfortable with ambiguity and unstructured interactions
Low uncertainty avoidance:
Tolerate different opinions and viewpoints
Dislike rules and norms
Teachers may say i dont know
English speaking, nordic
High uncertainty avoidance:
Different opinions are dangerous
Emotional need for rules for calrity and structure
Teachers supposed to have all the answers
East asian, south american
hoftsede’s masculinity dimension
Whether men and women in a group have differentiated gender roles, referring to traditional gender roles(men should be more assertive and ambitious, women should be more modest and caring)
Feminine
Min gender role differentiation
Many women elected into politics
Sexualiy is not moral issue
Nordic country
Masculine
Max gender role differentiation
Few women elected into political
Sexuality is highly moralized
Eastern european, asian
4)individualism
Whether people are integrated into cohesive groups rather than a loose collection of individuals
Collectivism
Strong emphasis on maintaining harmony
Breaking rules leads to feelings of shame (negative self-evaluation )
Born into complex network of extended relationships
Central american
East asian
Individualism
Strong emphasis for speaking one’s mind
Breaking rules leads to feelings of guilt (want to make amends to other person)
Primary relationships involve immediate family
Many western countries
hoftstede’s indulgence
whether people in a group value or control gratification of one’s desires and value happiness
More restrained indulgence
Little concern for freedom of speech
Personal life seen through helplessness
Less likely to remember positive emotions
Ie: Ex-soviet countries
More indulgent
great importance placed on freedom of speech
People see personal life as controllable
More likely remember positive emotions
Ie:nordic, english speaking countries
what is the overlap between klockhold and strodtbecks and hoftstedes dimensions?
relatoinal orientation in klockholn is similar to hoftstedes individualism
self-schema
cognitive schema (knowledge structure) that contains beliefs about the self (also called self-construals)
2 ways people think about themselves:
1)independent self-construal
2)interdependent self-construal
Independent self-construal:
Red line differentiates the self from everyone else
Main separation is between self and others
Dotted line=Fluid shifting between in-group and out-group
Easy for people to go from ingroup to outgroup
Linked to individualism
interdependent self construal:
Red line is not between self and everyone else, instead it is a solid line differentiating between in group vs. outgroup
In group boundary is more difficult to penetrate (very difficult for outgroup member to become ingroup member)
When someone becomes ingroup member it is difficult for ingroup member to be outgroup
Linked to collectivism
Differences in Self descriptors between independent and interdependent:
independent self-construal
Abstract,global, stable attributes
Ie: i am easy going, fun-loving, and extraverted
Differences in Self descriptors between independent and interdependent:
Interdependent self-construal
Social categories, affiliations, social roles
Ie: i am a student at kyoto university, i am part of its kendo club
Differences in self consistency (ie with friends, coworkers, parents):
independent
Conformity seen negatively, immature
People who adapt to different situations seen as “fake”, not genuine
Differences in self-consistency (ie with friends, coworkers, parents):
Interdependent
Conformity seen positively, as mature
You are able to suppress own personal desires so that you can fit in with everyone else
Insistence on non-conformity seen as immature, stubborn
More ok with showing different sides with different people
Data on correlation between Self Concept Clarity scale and self-esteem
higher score on self concept clarity means more confusion with self concept
Negative correlation between self-concept clarity and self esteem for european Canadians
Negative correlation between self-concept clarity and self esteem for east asians from asia
They might experience self-distress without having a concept of self clarity, but it is less stressful for asian people compared to european
Entity theory of self
Independent self-construal
self=stable ,bound entity
Abilities are fixed, and reflect innate qualities
Affects how we deal with failure:
Blame innate lack of ability (i’m just not a good hurdler), withdraws from task(i’m never hurdling again)
Incremental theory of self
Interdependent self-construal
self=malleable, fluid
Abilities are malleable, and can be changed with effort
Affects on how we deal with failure
Blame their lack of effort(if only i had tried harder), result= try harder next time (more practice)
