Chapter Thirteen: Culture, Self, and Identity
1
Chapter Thirteen: Culture, Self, and Identity Defining Self Self concept: cognitive representations of ones own self, that is, the ideas or images that one has about oneself and how and why one behaves -we create self as psychological construct to help understand ourselves and our world better -descriptive labels like “sociable” people apply to themselves imply that: 1. we have this attribute within us, just as we possess other attributes such as abilities, attitudes, perceived rights, or interests, 2. our past actions, feelings, or thoughts have lose connections with this attribute 3. our future plans, actions, feelings or thoughts will be controlled or guided by this attribute and can be predicted more or less accurately by it -concept of self rooted in contextualized beliefs about actions, thoughts, feelings, motives and plans Where Does the Self Concept Originate? Cultural practices: refer to discrete, observable, objective, and behavioral aspects of human activities in which people engage related to culture -parent-child sleeping arrangements are an example of a cultural practice -management of emotional expression is different in varying cultures -refers to the doing of culture cultural worldviews: belief systems about one’s culture. Cognitive generalizations about how ones culture is or should be, regardless of whether those generalized things are true or not. -humans are unique in that we have the cognitive ability to know that: 1. the self exists and is an intentional agent 2. that other selves exist and they are also intentional agents 3. that others make judgments about oneself as an intentional agent -also have long-term memory, hypothetical thinking about future -uniquely use symbols and verbal language create narratives of our lives and cultures -concept of self is critical to worldview because how one sees oneself in relation to the rest of the world is an integral part of ones culture -self concept aids in addressing needs for affiliation and uniqueness, explains importance of understanding values as guiding principles within a specific culture -self concept development deeply rooted in culture The Independent vs. Interdependent Self-Construal Theory -given that self concept is rooted in culture, and cultural worldviews differ across cultures, then concept of self must also differ across cultures. -differences in self concept emerge because different cultures ruled by different systems of rules of living and exist in different social and economic environments, and natural habitats. Markus & Kitayama (1991): used these ideas to describe two fundamentally different senses of self, contrasting western or individualistic construal of self as an independent, separate entity vs. a composite construal of self more common in non-western, collectivity cultures, in which the individual is viewed as inherently connected or interdependent with others and inseparable from a social context. -argued that in the US, standing out and asserting yourself is a virture “squeaky wheel gets the grease” -strong belief in separateness of individuals
2 -socialized to be unique, express ourselves, realize and actualize inner self, promote personal goals -when these are successfully carried out, self esteem rises independent construal of self: individuals focus on personal, internal attributes – individual ability, intelligence, personality traits, goals, or preferences – expressing them in public and verifying and confirming them in private through social comparison -in contrast to independent construal of self, authors suggested that among many nonwestern , collectivist cultures neither assume not value overt separateness -primary task is to fit in and maintain the interdependence among individuals -socialized to adjust themselves to an attendant relationship or a group to which they belong, to read one other’s minds, to be sympathetic, to occupy and play their assigned roles, and to engage in appropriate actions -self esteem of individuals in these cultures will be different, depends mainly on whether they can fit in and be part of a relevant ongoing relationship -individuals focus on their interdependent status with other people and strive to meet or even create duties, obligations, and social responsibilities. Interdependent construal of self: self is unbounded, flexible, and contingent on service. Most salient aspects of self defined by relationships, inseparable from certain social contexts -the nail that sticks up shall get pounded -authors used this self construal framework to explain many cross cultural differences in psychological processes, especially between US and Asian countries -argued that with independent construal of self, ones internal attributes such as abilities or personality traits are the most salient self-relevant information -internal attributes not most salient for interdependent construal of self, instead based more in social relationships or specific contexts (“me” in school) -study done: participants asked to write down as many of their characteristics as possible. Found that individuals with independent construal of self generate more abstract traits (I am sociable) than do those with an interdependent construal of self (I am usually sociable when I am with my friends) self in particular social relationship or context
An Empirical Assessment of the Independent vs. Interdependent Self Construal Theory Data -theory starts with idea that Asian cultures are collectivistic, and American culture is individualistic -when scoring is done using instruments to measure individualistic/collectivistic traits, researchers often do not find that Americans are more individualistic and Asians more collectivistic. -one study reported that 70% of Japanese were individualistic -another by Oyserman and colleagues was a meta analysis comparing data from 83 studies on these two dimensions. Comparing North Americans (Americans and Canadians) to other people from other countries and ethic groups within the U.S. -results showed that European Americans were in general more individualistic and less collectivistic than Chinese, Taiwanese, Indians, and Asian Americans -however, European Americans were not more individualistic than African Americans or Latinos, and not less collectivistic than Japanese or Koreans -given popularity of Self Construal theory, instruments to test the two self construal’s were developed -found no cultural difference in independent self construal between American and Japanese students, but Americans were found to be more interdependent than the Japanese -contradictory to the theory! Opposite findings than what was expected Li (2003): used ethnographic, qualitative, and quantitative methodologies to explore differences between AngloCanadians and mainland Chinese in their self-construal’s and self-other boundaries, also reported findings
3 contradictory to what theory predicts. -concluded that evidence for predicted cultural differences is weak, inconsistent, or non-existent -interestingly, some neuroscience research suggests that cultural differences in self construal may be real -fMRI studies have shown that the self is represented in specific brain area (ventral medial prefrontal cortex) for European Americans while significant others (ex. Mother) is represented elsewhere. Yet they also found that for Asians, self and mother are represented in the same brain region! -found that priming with western cues primes neural differentiation, wile priming with Chinese cues decreases differentiation Methodological Issues? -another issue: consider the degree to which previous findings showing country differences are associated with the research methodology used to test for those differences. -find that Asians have a hard time explaining themselves without specifying a relevant context. So, Asians should be comfortable specifying aspects of themselves once a context has been specified -Cousins (1989): 20 statements test to ask American and Japanese respondents to write down who they were in various social contexts. -instruction supposedly helped respondents picture a concrete social situation, including who was there and doing what. -data revealed that Asians actually generated more abstract internal attributes (I am hardworking, trustworthy) than did the Americans -Americans tended to qualify their statements (I am more or less sociable at work, I am sometimes optimistic at home) -Americans basically saying, this is how I am at work, but don’t assume this is the way I am everywhere -thus, previous differences were specific to the certain way in which the data was collected (ex. In a noncontextualized, general task) -Pen choice study: found that pen choice was related to incentive structures, rather than cultural self-construal. All participants had a preference for unique pen, but did so (or not) based on how people have learned to behave depending on rewards and incentives in the situation Going Beyond Independent and Interdependent Self-Construal’s -find that independent and interdependent self construal’s coexist simultaneously within individuals -self contained individualism: sharp line drawn between self and others -ensembled individualism: less of a divide between self and others, others are part of oneself -some researchers suggest that evolutionary pressures of natural selection have fostered two basic developmental approaches: 1. self definition 2. development of interpersonal relatedness -these two intertwined, development of a mature sense of self depends in part on the development of a mature self in the other Triandis (1989): proposed 3 types of self: 1. public 2. private 3. collective -coexisting -individualistic setting fosters more of a private self, whereas collectivist fosters public and collective. -individuals can clearly balance both the need to belong with the need to be different -no dichotomous view of self is sufficient, many factors coexisting in an individual
4 Culture, Self Esteem, and Self-Enhancement Self esteem: refers to the cognitive and affective evaluations we make about ourselves -concept of self is a cognitive generalization about who one believes one is and is an important part of one’s cultural worldviews, while self-esteem refers to how we evaluate ourselves within one cultural worldview. Self enhancement: refers to a collection of psychological processes by which we bolster our self esteem -popular theory about the origin of self esteem: terror management theory: suggests that because we have unique cognitive abilities, we are aware that we will die eventually and are terrified of that inevitable death -we create psychological phenomena as a buffer against terror of dying -fabricate and give meaning to our being in order to raise our human existence above nature so that meaning can be drawn from life -this meaning is not our physical nature nor does it actually exist as objective element -given this, cultural worldviews are also fabricated and given meaning by peoples minds -goal of cultural worldview is also to raise human existence about nature Is Self-Enhancement Universal or Culture-Specific? -Early studies on self-esteem indicated that individualistic cultures report higher self esteem than do collectivistic cultures -also find that collectivistic cultures did not self-enhance, but did engage in opposite tendency, to self-efface self effacement: refers to the tendency to downplay ones virtues. -find particularly Japanese more critical about themselves and more attuned to negative than positive selfevaluations, both in private and public settings. Better than average effect: found that American adults typically consider themselves to be more intelligent and more attractive -effect stronger for males than females -could be that we define self esteem differently than do people in collectivistic cultures -have certain types of self esteem -researchers suggest: highly collectivistic cultures promote the development of global self esteem (general selfliking , while at the same time challenging the development of another dimension of self-esteem, reflected in generalized competence -individualistic cultures have opposite tendency -as predicted, Chinese were lower in self-esteem but higher in self-liking than the Americans -findings support notion that self-esteem may have multiple facets, and that different cultural milieus either support or challenge the development of different facets -recent studies shown that in cultures thought not to have self-enhance directly and explicitly, members can enhance their selves through a process known as mutual self enhancement: self enhancement is achieved through the giving and receiving of compliments between partners in close relationships tactical self enhancement: enhancement can occur on different traits, explicitly or implicitly, or in different contexts. People in different cultures find different ways of self enhancing Culture and Identity Identity: refer to the way individuals understand themselves and are recognized by others. Personal identity: refers to the qualities and attributes that distinguish oneself from others Collective identities: refers to our recognition that we belong to social categories (occupation, religion, culture) Relational identities: refer to our qualities of ourselves in relation to others -Identities necessary, it seems there is a universal need for affiliation -relationships help us reproduce, ensures survival -studies show those accepted in groups have better physiological and psychological outcomes cultural, ethnic, and racial identities: refer to our recognizing that we belong to specific cultures, ethnicities, and races
5 -national identities -identity can also be described in spoken language ex. Anglophones, francophones, allophones Identity is Fluid -identity not fixated, fluid. -constructed in relation to who your with and where you are ex. American when talking to a person from another country, Californian when talking to a member of country -assumption that being American equals being “white” identity denial: sometimes one is not recognized as a member of a group to which he or she identifies -found Asian Americans have identity denial more frequently that other ethnic groups in the US, tend to demonstrate knowledge of American culture and participation in American practices more than other groups. Multicultural Identities -if culture is defined as a psychological construct, then multicultural identities suggest the existence of multiple psycho-cultural systems of representations in the minds of multicultural individuals -bicultural individuals have two cultural identities and can switch back and forth depending on context they are in (cultural frame switching) cultural reaffirmation effect: bicultural individuals endorse even more traditional values associated with their native culture than did native monocultural individuals in those native cultures -Japanese Americans more collectivistic than the Japanese nationals in the native culture -immigrant group clings to the only culture it knows in order to deal with the uncertainties of living in a new place and time, thus express native culture more
Culture and Attributions Attributions: inferences people make about the causes of events and their own and others’ behaviors -represent the ways we understand the world around us and behavior of others -attribute intentional agency to other people -enables us to create attributions -everyone makes attributions -exerting psychological control over the world internal attributions: cause of behavior within person external attributions: cause of behavior outside a persons control (god, other people, nature), also known as situational dispositions Cultural Differences in Attributional Style Fundamental attribution error: refers to a bias towards inferences about an actor’s disposition even if the presence of a very obvious situational constraints has been termed -also known as correspondence bias self-serving bias: tendency to attribute one’s successes to personal (internal) factors and one’s failures to situational factors -japanese use a group oriented collective approach -indian women more likely to attribute success and failure to internal causes -Chicanas tended to make more attributions on the basis of luck, ethnicity, and gender Universality and Culture-Specificity of Attributional Style -ALL nationalities and ethnicities show a large degree of self-serving bias in some way. -asian cultures effect was lowered, but still there
6 -suggest that simple explanations based on collectivism or individualism are not sufficient for cultural differences -attributional biases such as the self-serving bias or fundamental attribution error is universal
Chapter Thirteen: Culture, Self, and Identity Defining Self Self concept: cognitive representations of ones own self, that is, the ideas or images that one has about oneself and how and why one behaves -we create self as psychological construct to help understand ourselves and our world better -descriptive labels like “sociable” people apply to themselves imply that: 1. we have this attribute within us, just as we possess other attributes such as abilities, attitudes, perceived rights, or interests, 2. our past actions, feelings, or thoughts have lose connections with this attribute 3. our future plans, actions, feelings or thoughts will be controlled or guided by this attribute and can be predicted more or less accurately by it -concept of self rooted in contextualized beliefs about actions, thoughts, feelings, motives and plans Where Does the Self Concept Originate? Cultural practices: refer to discrete, observable, objective, and behavioral aspects of human activities in which people engage related to culture -parent-child sleeping arrangements are an example of a cultural practice -management of emotional expression is different in varying cultures -refers to the doing of culture cultural worldviews: belief systems about one’s culture. Cognitive generalizations about how ones culture is or should be, regardless of whether those generalized things are true or not. -humans are unique in that we have the cognitive ability to know that: 1. the self exists and is an intentional agent 2. that other selves exist and they are also intentional agents 3. that others make judgments about oneself as an intentional agent -also have long-term memory, hypothetical thinking about future -uniquely use symbols and verbal language create narratives of our lives and cultures -concept of self is critical to worldview because how one sees oneself in relation to the rest of the world is an integral part of ones culture -self concept aids in addressing needs for affiliation and uniqueness, explains importance of understanding values as guiding principles within a specific culture -self concept development deeply rooted in culture The Independent vs. Interdependent Self-Construal Theory -given that self concept is rooted in culture, and cultural worldviews differ across cultures, then concept of self must also differ across cultures. -differences in self concept emerge because different cultures ruled by different systems of rules of living and exist in different social and economic environments, and natural habitats. Markus & Kitayama (1991): used these ideas to describe two fundamentally different senses of self, contrasting western or individualistic construal of self as an independent, separate entity vs. a composite construal of self more common in non-western, collectivity cultures, in which the individual is viewed as inherently connected or interdependent with others and inseparable from a social context. -argued that in the US, standing out and asserting yourself is a virture “squeaky wheel gets the grease” -strong belief in separateness of individuals
2 -socialized to be unique, express ourselves, realize and actualize inner self, promote personal goals -when these are successfully carried out, self esteem rises independent construal of self: individuals focus on personal, internal attributes – individual ability, intelligence, personality traits, goals, or preferences – expressing them in public and verifying and confirming them in private through social comparison -in contrast to independent construal of self, authors suggested that among many nonwestern , collectivist cultures neither assume not value overt separateness -primary task is to fit in and maintain the interdependence among individuals -socialized to adjust themselves to an attendant relationship or a group to which they belong, to read one other’s minds, to be sympathetic, to occupy and play their assigned roles, and to engage in appropriate actions -self esteem of individuals in these cultures will be different, depends mainly on whether they can fit in and be part of a relevant ongoing relationship -individuals focus on their interdependent status with other people and strive to meet or even create duties, obligations, and social responsibilities. Interdependent construal of self: self is unbounded, flexible, and contingent on service. Most salient aspects of self defined by relationships, inseparable from certain social contexts -the nail that sticks up shall get pounded -authors used this self construal framework to explain many cross cultural differences in psychological processes, especially between US and Asian countries -argued that with independent construal of self, ones internal attributes such as abilities or personality traits are the most salient self-relevant information -internal attributes not most salient for interdependent construal of self, instead based more in social relationships or specific contexts (“me” in school) -study done: participants asked to write down as many of their characteristics as possible. Found that individuals with independent construal of self generate more abstract traits (I am sociable) than do those with an interdependent construal of self (I am usually sociable when I am with my friends) self in particular social relationship or context
An Empirical Assessment of the Independent vs. Interdependent Self Construal Theory Data -theory starts with idea that Asian cultures are collectivistic, and American culture is individualistic -when scoring is done using instruments to measure individualistic/collectivistic traits, researchers often do not find that Americans are more individualistic and Asians more collectivistic. -one study reported that 70% of Japanese were individualistic -another by Oyserman and colleagues was a meta analysis comparing data from 83 studies on these two dimensions. Comparing North Americans (Americans and Canadians) to other people from other countries and ethic groups within the U.S. -results showed that European Americans were in general more individualistic and less collectivistic than Chinese, Taiwanese, Indians, and Asian Americans -however, European Americans were not more individualistic than African Americans or Latinos, and not less collectivistic than Japanese or Koreans -given popularity of Self Construal theory, instruments to test the two self construal’s were developed -found no cultural difference in independent self construal between American and Japanese students, but Americans were found to be more interdependent than the Japanese -contradictory to the theory! Opposite findings than what was expected Li (2003): used ethnographic, qualitative, and quantitative methodologies to explore differences between AngloCanadians and mainland Chinese in their self-construal’s and self-other boundaries, also reported findings
3 contradictory to what theory predicts. -concluded that evidence for predicted cultural differences is weak, inconsistent, or non-existent -interestingly, some neuroscience research suggests that cultural differences in self construal may be real -fMRI studies have shown that the self is represented in specific brain area (ventral medial prefrontal cortex) for European Americans while significant others (ex. Mother) is represented elsewhere. Yet they also found that for Asians, self and mother are represented in the same brain region! -found that priming with western cues primes neural differentiation, wile priming with Chinese cues decreases differentiation Methodological Issues? -another issue: consider the degree to which previous findings showing country differences are associated with the research methodology used to test for those differences. -find that Asians have a hard time explaining themselves without specifying a relevant context. So, Asians should be comfortable specifying aspects of themselves once a context has been specified -Cousins (1989): 20 statements test to ask American and Japanese respondents to write down who they were in various social contexts. -instruction supposedly helped respondents picture a concrete social situation, including who was there and doing what. -data revealed that Asians actually generated more abstract internal attributes (I am hardworking, trustworthy) than did the Americans -Americans tended to qualify their statements (I am more or less sociable at work, I am sometimes optimistic at home) -Americans basically saying, this is how I am at work, but don’t assume this is the way I am everywhere -thus, previous differences were specific to the certain way in which the data was collected (ex. In a noncontextualized, general task) -Pen choice study: found that pen choice was related to incentive structures, rather than cultural self-construal. All participants had a preference for unique pen, but did so (or not) based on how people have learned to behave depending on rewards and incentives in the situation Going Beyond Independent and Interdependent Self-Construal’s -find that independent and interdependent self construal’s coexist simultaneously within individuals -self contained individualism: sharp line drawn between self and others -ensembled individualism: less of a divide between self and others, others are part of oneself -some researchers suggest that evolutionary pressures of natural selection have fostered two basic developmental approaches: 1. self definition 2. development of interpersonal relatedness -these two intertwined, development of a mature sense of self depends in part on the development of a mature self in the other Triandis (1989): proposed 3 types of self: 1. public 2. private 3. collective -coexisting -individualistic setting fosters more of a private self, whereas collectivist fosters public and collective. -individuals can clearly balance both the need to belong with the need to be different -no dichotomous view of self is sufficient, many factors coexisting in an individual
4 Culture, Self Esteem, and Self-Enhancement Self esteem: refers to the cognitive and affective evaluations we make about ourselves -concept of self is a cognitive generalization about who one believes one is and is an important part of one’s cultural worldviews, while self-esteem refers to how we evaluate ourselves within one cultural worldview. Self enhancement: refers to a collection of psychological processes by which we bolster our self esteem -popular theory about the origin of self esteem: terror management theory: suggests that because we have unique cognitive abilities, we are aware that we will die eventually and are terrified of that inevitable death -we create psychological phenomena as a buffer against terror of dying -fabricate and give meaning to our being in order to raise our human existence above nature so that meaning can be drawn from life -this meaning is not our physical nature nor does it actually exist as objective element -given this, cultural worldviews are also fabricated and given meaning by peoples minds -goal of cultural worldview is also to raise human existence about nature Is Self-Enhancement Universal or Culture-Specific? -Early studies on self-esteem indicated that individualistic cultures report higher self esteem than do collectivistic cultures -also find that collectivistic cultures did not self-enhance, but did engage in opposite tendency, to self-efface self effacement: refers to the tendency to downplay ones virtues. -find particularly Japanese more critical about themselves and more attuned to negative than positive selfevaluations, both in private and public settings. Better than average effect: found that American adults typically consider themselves to be more intelligent and more attractive -effect stronger for males than females -could be that we define self esteem differently than do people in collectivistic cultures -have certain types of self esteem -researchers suggest: highly collectivistic cultures promote the development of global self esteem (general selfliking , while at the same time challenging the development of another dimension of self-esteem, reflected in generalized competence -individualistic cultures have opposite tendency -as predicted, Chinese were lower in self-esteem but higher in self-liking than the Americans -findings support notion that self-esteem may have multiple facets, and that different cultural milieus either support or challenge the development of different facets -recent studies shown that in cultures thought not to have self-enhance directly and explicitly, members can enhance their selves through a process known as mutual self enhancement: self enhancement is achieved through the giving and receiving of compliments between partners in close relationships tactical self enhancement: enhancement can occur on different traits, explicitly or implicitly, or in different contexts. People in different cultures find different ways of self enhancing Culture and Identity Identity: refer to the way individuals understand themselves and are recognized by others. Personal identity: refers to the qualities and attributes that distinguish oneself from others Collective identities: refers to our recognition that we belong to social categories (occupation, religion, culture) Relational identities: refer to our qualities of ourselves in relation to others -Identities necessary, it seems there is a universal need for affiliation -relationships help us reproduce, ensures survival -studies show those accepted in groups have better physiological and psychological outcomes cultural, ethnic, and racial identities: refer to our recognizing that we belong to specific cultures, ethnicities, and races
5 -national identities -identity can also be described in spoken language ex. Anglophones, francophones, allophones Identity is Fluid -identity not fixated, fluid. -constructed in relation to who your with and where you are ex. American when talking to a person from another country, Californian when talking to a member of country -assumption that being American equals being “white” identity denial: sometimes one is not recognized as a member of a group to which he or she identifies -found Asian Americans have identity denial more frequently that other ethnic groups in the US, tend to demonstrate knowledge of American culture and participation in American practices more than other groups. Multicultural Identities -if culture is defined as a psychological construct, then multicultural identities suggest the existence of multiple psycho-cultural systems of representations in the minds of multicultural individuals -bicultural individuals have two cultural identities and can switch back and forth depending on context they are in (cultural frame switching) cultural reaffirmation effect: bicultural individuals endorse even more traditional values associated with their native culture than did native monocultural individuals in those native cultures -Japanese Americans more collectivistic than the Japanese nationals in the native culture -immigrant group clings to the only culture it knows in order to deal with the uncertainties of living in a new place and time, thus express native culture more
Culture and Attributions Attributions: inferences people make about the causes of events and their own and others’ behaviors -represent the ways we understand the world around us and behavior of others -attribute intentional agency to other people -enables us to create attributions -everyone makes attributions -exerting psychological control over the world internal attributions: cause of behavior within person external attributions: cause of behavior outside a persons control (god, other people, nature), also known as situational dispositions Cultural Differences in Attributional Style Fundamental attribution error: refers to a bias towards inferences about an actor’s disposition even if the presence of a very obvious situational constraints has been termed -also known as correspondence bias self-serving bias: tendency to attribute one’s successes to personal (internal) factors and one’s failures to situational factors -japanese use a group oriented collective approach -indian women more likely to attribute success and failure to internal causes -Chicanas tended to make more attributions on the basis of luck, ethnicity, and gender Universality and Culture-Specificity of Attributional Style -ALL nationalities and ethnicities show a large degree of self-serving bias in some way. -asian cultures effect was lowered, but still there
6 -suggest that simple explanations based on collectivism or individualism are not sufficient for cultural differences -attributional biases such as the self-serving bias or fundamental attribution error is universal
