Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (13)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (19)
Similar to SeniorSem FinalPaperPresentation
Similar to SeniorSem FinalPaperPresentation (20)
SeniorSem FinalPaperPresentation
- 1. Cross-Cultural Research: Do Independent and Interdependent Cultures Manifest Similar and Different Self-Concepts? Jessie Nolasco
- 2. Learning Outcomes 1. The students will understand the definition of self- concept and culture. 2. The students will understand the similarities and differences between European Americans’ and Japanese’s self-concept. 3. The students will understand the cross-cultural self- concept research studies explored in this presentation. 4. The students will learn how self-concept researchers can be more culturally-sensitive when developing cross- cultural self-concept models and measurement tools.
- 3. Outline • Introduction • Self-Concept Definition • Independent vs. Interdependent Cultures • Methods • Dichotomous Approach • Kanagawa, Cross, and Markus (2001) • Multidimensional Approach • Timothy Church et al. (2012) • Multidimensional Model and Measurement • Discussion • Limitations • Implications • Conclusion • Take-Home Message
- 4. Introduction
- 5. Definition of Self-Concept • Self-schemas = units of information about the self • Processed unconsciously • Connect to form self-concepts • Self-concept = information about the self • Self-relevant information is processed consciously
- 6. Self-Concepts • Have personal belief systems • Understand the physical, emotional, and mental characteristics of one-self • Perceive the global evaluation of the self (i.e., self-esteem) • Answer the question “Who and/or what am I?”
- 7. Definition of Culture • Specific patterns of activity that are created and practiced by individuals through social interactions and have meaningful purposes • E.g., Japanese Cherry Blossom Festival and Japanese Kimono
- 8. Cultural Orientations Independent • Characteristics • Autonomous • Individual Goals • Separate entities • E.g., the United States Interdependent • Characteristics • Relational • Group harmony • Wider social networks • E.g., Japan
- 9. Methods
- 10. Traditional Approach • Dichotomy • Dualist Perspective • Independence OR Interdependence
- 11. Kanagawa, Cross, and Markus (2001) • Participants • 133 European American and 128 Japanese undergraduate women • Measurement • Twenty Statements Test (TST) • Results • Japanese individuals were more sensitive to contextual situations • European Americans made more self-concept descriptions in relation to their family and friends
- 12. Multidimensional Approach • Cultures = Multidimensional and Complex • Independent and Interdependent Cultures = Independent and Interdependent People • People in these cultures = Multidimensional Traits • …. Self-Concept Models and Measurements Should Reflect this Process
- 13. Timothy Church et al. (2012) • Participants • 131 European Americans and 191 Japanese undergraduates • Measurement • Trait-Role Questionnaire • Results • Japanese participants show overall less self-concept consistency • BUT their self-concepts were stable within relationship contexts • Japanese sample had low independent AND interdependent self- concept scores
- 14. Multidimensional Model • Raeff’s Model (2006) • “Sometimes independence, sometimes interdependence” • Flexible and culturally sensitive
- 15. Multidimensional Measurement • Self-Concept Measurements across Cultures • E.g., Twenty Statements Test (TST) • Open-ended questionnaire “Who are you? • Shows independent and interdependent traits • Sensitive to individual and cultural differences
- 16. Discussion
- 17. Limitations • Culturally insensitive model and measure • Self-report questionnaires (e.g., Likert scales) • Convenience sampling • Undergraduate participants • Small sample size • Compare only two cultures
- 18. Implications • Random Sampling • Recruit different age groups • Explore cultures not frequently studied • Multidimensional and culturally sensitive measurement models and tools create construct validity and measurement equivalence • E.g., Raeff’s Model (2006) • E.g., TST
- 19. Conclusion • If future theorists and researchers begin to appreciate the complexity of independent and interdependent cultures’ view of self-concept and how individuals within these cultures demonstrate both independent and interdependent self-concepts, then future studies will greatly benefit and contribute even more to the cross-cultural self-concept literature.
- 20. Take-Home Message • The learning outcomes • Did we achieve the learning outcomes? • I encourage you to be more culturally sensitive • Pay attention to cultural differences and similarities
Editor's Notes
- Good afternoon class, thank you for coming to my presentation today. I am Jessie and before I present my topic, I have some interesting stats to share with you. Did you know that GlobalScan, this international polling company, conducted a global poll of 39, 435 people for the BBC World Series. The poll was used to explore how people in 33 countries view people in various countries. Based on this poll, 31 out of the 33 countries polled gave positive ratings to Japanese individuals because these individuals are considered as positive role models in the world. Now, you may ask yourself, why might this be? Can we really attribute more positive than negative characteristics to this group of people? Therefore, my topic is a cross-cultural research….?
- Now, the main purpose of this presentation is to inform you of this research area and achieve some learning outcomes. Because this audience is composed mostly of students, I thought it would be relevant to include some learning outcomes. The learning outcomes are: (read from slide) Hopefully, by the end of the presentation, we will have achieved these learning outcomes! At the end, we will review these outcomes.
- In this presentation, we will explore the definition of self-concept, then I will explain the differences between independent and interdependent cultures. Then discuss the approach most of the researchers in this field have used, which is the dichotomous approach. Then I will discuss how a more multidimensional approach is more culturally sensitive than the dichotomous approach. I will explain an example of a multidimensional approach and how researchers can revise the measurement tools. Finally, in the discussion section, I will discuss the strengths and weakness of the studies I reviewed, give my concluding thoughts, and the take-home message.
- 5 minutes
- The definition of self-concept is defined in terms of self-schemas. Self-schemas are units of information about the self. People first process information unconsciously, which create their self-schemas, then those self-schemas help create their self-concepts, which are self-relevant information processed at a conscious level.
- To better understand this concept, say for example, we have a European American female friend in the US who is overweight. This friend interacts with the cultural setting in a daily basis by reading Cosmo, watching Miss America, interacting with friends that are skinnier than her, etc. So by doing all of this, she begins to form negative feelings about her body image. These negative feelings are part of her self-schema which is processed unconsciously because she is not aware that all these interactions with her cultural setting are influencing her and creating her ideal body image. But once she becomes aware of her negative feelings about her body image, she may decide to exercise or eat healthier, and this information is processed at a conscious level and becomes part of her body image self-concept. So, the idea here is that from self-schemas, we create our self-concepts which in turn help us create our belief systems and understand self-relevant information about ourselves. Now, the information you can have because of your self-concept, are (read from slide)…
- Now, the definition of culture. Culture is (read from slide)
- Culture is also defined in terms of independent and interdependent cultures. Independent cultures have specific characteristics such as being autonomous, having individual goals, and being separate from others. An example is the United States. Interdependent cultures are more relational, emphasize group harmony, and have wider social networks. An example is Japan. These are the two cultures I focus on in this presentation.
- 10 minutes
- Now, to explore the cross-cultural self-concept research, we have to understand that researchers have mainly used the Dichotomous Approach to explain the differences between independent and interdependent cultures. This approach is also know as a dualist perspective because it emphasize either the independent OR interdependent traits of these cultures. For example, the United States is an independent culture and should only show independent characteristics. The approach is useful and it is the most commonly used because it is the traditional approach but does that mean it is accurate? Sure the approach has produced useful information but as we will observe in the next slide, the dualist approach is not always accurate.
- Now we will explore a study conducted by Kanagawa, Cross, and Markus (2001) who investigated the cultural differences between European Americans and Japanese individuals’ self-concept. They recruitment through convenience sampling because the participants were participating for credit for their psychology class. The participants were 133 European American and 128 Japanese undergraduate women. They had to answer the Twenty Statements Tests (TST), an open-ended question “Who are you?,” 20X, every 45 seconds. The researchers controlled the social context by randomly assigning the participants to one of the four conditions. They completed the questionnaire with an a faculty present, alone in a research booth, with a large group of 20-30 people, or with a peer. The results indicate that the Japanese women’s self-concept descriptions were more varied across contextual situations than the European Americans’ self-concept descriptions. This means that Japanese individuals are more sensitive to context-specific situations, meaning that the context-environment influences Japanese individuals’ self-concept descriptions of who they are, which explains why they will have different self-concepts descriptions in different contextual situations. However, the findings also demonstrate that the European Americans made more self-concept descriptions in relation to their family and friends, which contradicts the dichotomous approach because the European Americans showed more interdependent traits than the Japanese group. Remember that European Americans are considered more independently-inclined than Japanese individuals. This means that European Americans cannot be exclusively categorized as independent when they also show interdependent traits.
- This means that the dichotomous approach is not as accurate as many researchers assume and is actually missing an important component in this research area, which is the cultural sensitivity to show the similarities and differences across independent and interdependent cultures. Therefore, researchers must use a more culturally sensitive and appropriate approach that will really demonstrate both the independent and interdependent traits of cultures like the United States and Japan. One possibility is the Multidimensional Approach. Researchers who use the multidimensional approach prefer this model because it includes a more inclusive perspective and allows researchers to appreciate both the individual and cultural similarities and differences of people across cultures. The idea is that is independent and interdependent cultures are multidimensional and people in these cultures exhibit both types of traits, the self-concept models and measures researchers use should also reflect that cultural complexity and this logical process.
- In this study conducted by Timothy Church et al. (2012), they hypothesized that East Asians’ (e.g., Japanese) self-concept personality traits are not always unstable and inconsistent due to a social context; rather, stability and consistency depends on within-relationship contextual situations. The Ps were 131 European American and 191 Japanese undergraduates. The researchers used the Trait-Role Questionnaire, which measured the consistency of self-concept trait ratings across roles. The participants had to rate the traits that best described them when they were interacting with close friends, parents, professors, younger siblings or relatives, and strangers. The traits were extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness to experience. The results suggest that the Japanese sample did show overall less self-concept consistency compared to the European American sample but Japanese self-concepts were stable and consistent within relationship-contexts. The stable and consistent self-concepts within relationship-contexts among the Japanese group promote relationship harmony and smooth social interactions, as explained by the dichotomous approach. However, the results also indicate that the Japanese sample had relatively low independent and interdependent self-concept scores, not just low independent scores, which contradicts the dichotomous approach. Therefore, the study supports both the dichotomous and multidimensional approaches because there it shows how both cultural groups show both independent and interdependent traits.
- So one multidimensional model example is Raeff’s “sometimes independence, sometimes interdependence” model which indicates that depending on the context, cultural groups will demonstrate both independent and interdependent traits. This model shows great potential because it is a more flexible and culturally sensitive model because researchers can see participants’ individual and cultural independent and interdependent traits. However, Raeff hasn’t conducted any studies, she just proposed this model, so its efficacy can’t be confirmed but for future research, it is a good possibility.
- Likewise, when researchers use multidimensional measurements, like the Twenty Statements Test, as we saw in the Kanagawa, Cross, and Markus (2001) study, it allows the researchers to be sensitive to individual and cultural differences and the researchers are able to see both the independent and interdependent traits the participants may manifest. Also, it eliminates the use of Likert scales,
- Now the Discussion section 5 minutes
- There were limitations as well. Some researchers used culturally insensitive models and measures, like the dichotomous approach for example but we have discussed the limitations of this model. The majority of studies used self-report questionnaires on a Likert scale. Now, self-reports are handy sometimes but researchers may present this questionnaire in a certain way that could create biases and influence the participants to answer the questionnaire in a certain way. That is a limitation. Also, most of the studies used convenience sampling to recruit their participants. The participants were randomly assigned to different conditions but convenience sampling limits the sample groups because most of the researchers only recruited from psychology classes. For the Japanese samples, there were researchers that had to hand-pick the Japanese sample because there weren’t many Japanese participants. Most of these participants were undergraduate students, as I mentioned they were recruited from their psychology classes. That is a limitation. Also, there weren’t many studies that compared more than two cultures and all had the US as one of the cultures. Now I understand that the US is commonly investigated because it shows independent traits but there is also the issue that most of these questionnaires are Western-centered because they are created in the US or some European culture. That means that the measures the researchers use will not be culturally sensitive and appropriate.
- Therefore, researchers need to create more multidimensional models that incorporate other cultural worldviews, not just the United States worldview. More research is needed that will develop more culturally sensitive measurements that will provide the culturally appropriate multidimensional perspective to examine independent and interdependent traits people across cultures may manifest in different contextual settings. As I mentioned, Raeff’s model is one possibility and the TST measurement. Future researchers could investigate the efficacy of these alternative model and measurement. An important note to make is that multidimensional and culturally sensitive measurement models and tools ensure construct validity and measurement equivalence, which are important for the reliability and validity of these cross-cultural self-concept studies. Also, explore other cultures beside the US and some other country. Future researchers could focus on cultures that are often marginalized and forgotten. It would be very interesting to understand the self-concepts of some of these unfrequently studied cultures, like the Philippines for example. Random sampling and recruiting different age group is important to increase generalizability of the research. We can’t generalize to other cultures because each culture is different in how it manifests its independent and interdependent traits.
- Now I want to leave you with a concluding thought I think summarizes this research topic well….
- The learning outcomes: 1. The students will understand the definition of self-concept and culture 2. The students will understand the similarities and differences between European Americans’ and Japanese’s self-concept 3. The students will understand the cross-cultural self-concept research studies explored in the presentation 4. The students will learn how self-concept researchers can be more culturally-sensitive when developing cross-cultural self-concept models and measurement tools I also encourage you to pay close attention to cultural differences and similarities, and be more culturally sensitive because we live in a global environment with many different cultural backgrounds and perspectives.
- Answer 5 questions; 30 minutes total