Cultural Differences

Question 1

What is culture?

Answer 1

A concept which originated in anthropology
Increasing impact on social sciences over the course of the 20th century
Kroeber - famously listed 161 definitions

Question 2

Anthropological definitions

Answer 2

“That complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, laws, customs and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society”
“The man-made part of the human environment”
Includes both physical artefacts and social systems

Question 3

Psychological definitions

Answer 3

“The totality of equivalent and complementary learned meanings maintained by a human population, or by identifiable segments of a population, and transmitted from one generation to the next
“The collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group […] of people from another - transmits over generations

Question 4

What does social systems / cultural groups refer too?

Answer 4

“The behaviour of multiple individuals within a culturally-organized population, including their patterns of interaction and networks of social relationships”
Might include nations, organisations, families, etc.
Social systems ‘have’ cultures - group of people sharing meanings
Cultures do not ‘have’ social systems
Cultures make behaviour comprehensible

Question 5

Why did Hofstede carry out an analysis?

Answer 5

There was research previously done in the US expecting it would represent the human rase - however, classic findings showed that this didn’t occur
Conformity was higher in the rest of the world vs US and Europe
Problem was explaining these differences - want to know why
Need a theory of how cultures differ
Attempt to create a construct cultural map of the world

Question 6

What is social loafing?

Answer 6

Working less hard when in groups than when in individuals - US do this, whereas Asia work more hard in groups

Question 7

What was Hofstedes project?

Answer 7

IBM (hermes) employee surveys: conducted 1967 and 1973. 116,000 respondents in 72 countries, questions about job satisfaction, perceptions of work, personal goals - wide variety of response formats
He conducted secondary analysis to look for dimensions of cultural variation

Question 8

Why did Hofstede carry out an ecological level of analysis?

Answer 8

Because cultures are just not oversized individuals - dimensions which make individuals differ might be different to the dimensions which make cultures differ

Question 9

What made Hofstede think cultures are not just oversized individuals?

Answer 9

Robinson’s paradox - findings at one level of analysis might be different at another
Correlation in US states between the more immigrants = higher literacy
However, within states, there was a negative correlation between the more immigrants and literacy - 2 variables which are correlated in different ways at different levels of analysis

Question 10

What is the ecological and reverse ecological fallacy?

Answer 10

Ecological fallacy is falsely extrapolating group-level findings to individual level of explanation
Reverse ecological fallacy is wrongly attributing properties of individuals to cultures

Question 11

What did Hofstede want to avoid?

Answer 11

The ecological and reverse ecological fallacy

Question 12

What was the methodological problem Hofstede avoided?

Answer 12

Acquiescence bias - people in different cultures use response scales in different ways - variation n acquiescence - in some cultures, people tend to agree more with everything
Solution: country mean agreement with all items, subtract or control in analyses

Question 13

What analysis did Hofstede do?

Answer 13

Analysis at the ecological level, using 40 countries. Each item was weighted by the country mean:
combination of averages within different occupations groups within IBM - corrected for acquiescence
Theoretically guided data exploration led to discovery of 4 dimensions of CC variation - expected to find 2 but found 4

Question 14

What was the first dimension Hofstede found?

Answer 14

Power distance - extent to which members of a society accept that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally
Survey items:
Employees afraid to disagree with managers
Subordinates perceive Bosses as autocratic or paternalistic (as opposed to democratic or consultative)
Subordinates would like Bosses to be autocratic, paternalistic or democratic (as opposed to consultative)
When seeing them as powerful = high power distance
Highest: Malaysia, Guatemala, Panama
Lowest: Austria, Israel, Denmark

Question 15

What was the second dimension Hofstede found?

Answer 15

Uncertainty avoidance
Degree to which the members of a society feel uncomfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity, which leads them to support beliefs promising certainty and to maintain institutions protecting conformity - if anxious, avoid it by conforming:
Company rules should not be broken—even when employee thinks in company’s best interest
% employees expecting to stay at least 5 years
How often feel nervous or tense at work (stress)
Highest: Greece, Portugal, Guatemala
Lowest: Singapore, Jamaica, Denmark

Question 16

What was the third dimension Hofstede found?

Answer 16

Individualism: A preference for a loosely knit social framework in society in which individuals are supposed to take care of themselves and their immediate families
Collectivism: A preference for a tightly knit social framework in which individuals can expect their relatives, clan or other in-group to look after them, in exchange for unquestioning loyalty
Assessed by items about work goals:
IDV: personal time, freedom, challenge
COL: training, physical conditions, use of skills
Highest: USA, Australia, Great Britain (richer)
Lowest: Guatemala, Ecuador, Panama (poorer)
Strong negative correlation with PD (r = -.68)
Enormous amount of subsequent research

Question 17

What was the fourth dimension Hofstede found?

Answer 17

Masculinity: A preference for achievement, heroism, assertiveness, and material success
Femininity: A preference for relationships, modesty, caring for the weak, and quality of life
Assessed by items about work goals:
MAS prefer: earnings, recognition, advancement, challenge
FEM prefer: relationship with manager, cooperation, live in desirable area, employment security
Highest: Japan, Austria, Venezuela
Lowest: Sweden, Norway, Netherlands

Question 18

What was the problem with masculinity?

Answer 18

Unfortunate choice of name by Hofstede
Masculinities and femininities differ across cultures!
a.k.a. toughness vs. tenderness
Reverse ecological fallacy - attributing individual properties to cultures
But has predictive value
e.g., fem spend more on international development - shows they want to help others
NB: Uncorrelated with IDV (r = .00)
FEM: focus on relationships, others, helping outgroup
COL: focus on in-groups, social position

Question 19

Why is masculinity uncorrelated with individualism?

Answer 19

Because femininity would want to help the outgroup, whereas collectivist cultures only focus on their own group

Question 20

Are these the big 4?

Answer 20

Hofstede’s dimensions of cultural variation found:
Power distance (PD)
Uncertainty avoidance (UA)
Individualism (vs. Collectivism) (IDV)
Masculinity (vs. Femininity) (MAS)
Provide 4D cultural ‘map of the world’
Guided much future research (esp. IDV)

Question 21

What was Schwartz 6 critiques of Hofstede?

Answer 21

Exhaustiveness of the value dimensions - the values only came from a list, might be other things which weren’t captured with the items

Adequacy of sample of nations - only used specific nations

Effects of sample type - IBM samples, but this is only active in some cultures, does IBM represent the whole culture

Historical change - these were carried out in 1960’s, cultures change

Culture-level vs. individual-level dimensions - didn’t look at an individual level, there might be differences here

Meaning equivalence of items - people may not have understoodd what they meant

Question 22

What was Schwartz value survey? 1990-now

Answer 22

Research into structure of values
Individual and cultural levels of analysis
List of 56 values rated for importance “as a guiding principle in my life”
Items derived from diverse sources - asked people what to include in there: Rokeach Values Survey, Chinese Culture Connection, social sciences and humanities, research collaborators

Initial study sampled teachers and students - teachers transmit lots of info to their students
Currently >80,000 participants in 82 countries

Question 23

What did Schwartz show within cultures?

Answer 23

Do items have similar meanings in each culture?
Separate within-culture smallest space analyses in each sample to check for similar structure:
Responses ipsatised within participants to control for acquiescent response bias - average score for each ppt across 56 items and subtracted this from score on each item
Therefore, analysis is of relative value endorsement - how much someone endorses value on average
Similar structure observed in most samples - found 10 segments of values which go together, which have subtypes under them

Question 24

What did Schwartz show between cultures?

Answer 24

40 of 56 values showed similar positions in structure within all cultures
Country means for ecological analysis
Standardisation to remove acquiescence
Ecological smallest space analysis shows circumplex model of seven value types - used 7 rather than 10
There are similarities in the structure
Found similarities in the structure: competitive hierarchical values like achievement, authority contrasted with harmony etc

Question 25

What did the comparisons of level show?

Answer 25

Within-cultures
Openness to change vs. conservation
Self-transcendence vs self-enhancement
Across-cultures
Autonomy vs. embeddedness
Harmony vs. mastery
Hierarchy vs. egalitarianism
NB differences in selected values

Question 26

What was the difference shown by Schwartz from the individual level vs cultural level?

Answer 26

Individual - power included social power and authority, which was contrasted with humble. if you have these, won’t be humble

Culture - these were all put together under hierarchy. If power was undistributed, have to have some humble people to accept the welt of others

Question 27

What did Schwartz find in comparison with Hofstede?

Answer 27

Some conceptual similarities
Correlations:
Individualism correlates with autonomy + egalitarianism versus negatively with power distance + embeddedness + hierarchy
Mastery correlated with masculinity - femininity
Harmony correlated with uncertainty avoidance

Question 28

What was the most recent study?

Answer 28

Minkov 2018: refinement of existing data, new samples from 56 nations, new items to measure Hofstedes dimensions and more. Bipolar format to account for acquiescence (choosing between 2 statements). between culture analysis only

Found individualism replicated = low power distance
Masculinity and uncertainty avoidance not replicated
New dimension of flexibility versus monumeentalism

Question 29

What are individualist vs collectivist traits?

Answer 29

Individualist - I prefer to mind my own life, will argue, I will arrive on time, I do favours only for favours

Collectivist - I am very religion, I would like to achieve fame, I am often late, I would like to be a boss

Question 30

What is monumentalism vs flexibility?

Answer 30

Monumentalism - having a status, positive sense of self, not willing to change: I have strong values guiding behaviour, I like to compete, I am always the same

Flexibility - have an adaptable view of self, more humble: I hate to compete, I can pretend, I rarely agree to help

Question 31

Is there a correlation between collectivism-individualism and monumentalism-flexibility?

Answer 31

Not really - small one
Individualist and collectivist cultures differ between north and south
Monumentalism-flex - differ between east and west

Question 32

What was the most replicated factor found?

Answer 32

Individalism-collectivism shown in lots of studies but there are lots of ways they differ

still not final consensus on the way they differ