Simultaneous administration of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale in 53 nations: exploring the universal and culture-specific features of global self-esteem

The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) was translated into 28 languages and administered to 16,998 participants across 53 nations. The RSES factor structure was largely invariant across nations. RSES scores correlated with neuroticism, extraversion, and romantic attachment styles within nearly all nations, providing additional support for cross-cultural equivalence of the RSES. All nations scored above the theoretical midpoint of the RSES, indicating generally positive self-evaluation may be culturally universal. Individual differences in self-esteem were variable across cultures, with a neutral response bias prevalent in more collectivist cultures. Self-competence and self-liking subscales of the RSES varied with cultural individualism. Although positively and negatively worded items of the RSES were correlated within cultures and were uniformly related to external personality variables, differences between aggregates of positive and negative items were smaller in developed nations. Because negatively worded items were interpreted differently across nations, direct cross-cultural comparisons using the RSES may have limited value.     

Current Controversies in the Study of Personality across Cultures

Research on culture and personality is thriving. In this article, I address several prominent controversies, including: (a) alternative perspectives on the relationship between culture and personality; (b) the cross‐cultural universality versus specificity of personality structure; (c) whether comparisons of mean inventory profiles reveal valid cultural differences in trait levels; and (d) the importance and role of the trait concept across cultures. Greater consensus regarding the relationship between culture and personality will likely be achieved if researchers clarify which aspects of personality they are addressing (e.g., basic tendencies vs. characteristic adaptations). Recent lexical and indigenous studies have weakened consensus regarding the universality and comprehensiveness of the Five‐Factor Model. The validity of cultural mean profiles remains unresolved. Research on the importance of traits across cultures provides support for both trait and cultural psychology perspectives, although more culture‐comparative studies of consistency and predictive validity are needed. Suggestions for research are offered.     

Compiling Measurement Invariant Short Scales in Cross-Cultural Personality Assessment Using Ant Colony Optimization

Examining the influence of culture on personality and its unbiased assessment is the main subject of cross-cultural personality research. Recent large-scale studies exploring personality differences across cultures share substantial methodological and psychometric shortcomings that render it difficult to differentiate between method and trait variance. One prominent example is the implicit assumption of cross-cultural measurement invariance in personality questionnaires. In the rare instances where measurement invariance across cultures was tested, scalar measurement invariance—which is required for unbiased mean-level comparisons of personality traits—did not hold. In this article, we present an item sampling procedure, ant colony optimization, which can be used to select item sets that satisfy multiple psychometric requirements including model fit, reliability, and measurement invariance. We constructed short scales of the IPIP-NEO-300 for a group of countries that are culturally similar (USA, Australia, Canada, and UK) as well as a group of countries with distinct cultures (USA, India, Singapore, and Sweden). In addition to examining factor mean differences across countries, we provide recommendations for cross-cultural research in general. From a methodological perspective, we demonstrate ant colony optimization's versatility and flexibility as an item sampling procedure to derive measurement invariant scales for cross-cultural research. © 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology     

Ubiquitous Personality-Trait Concepts in 13 Diverse and Isolated Languages: A Cluster–Classification Approach

There is longstanding interest in the generalizability of personality across diverse cultures. To investigate the generalizability of personality concepts, we examined the English translations of individual-difference entries from the dictionaries of 12 small-scale societies previously studied for ubiquity of individual differences plus the dictionary of an additional society not previously studied in this manner. These 13 societies are highly diverse in geographical location, culture, and language family; their languages developed in isolation from modern-world languages. The goal of our exploratory research was to discover ubiquitous personality concepts in these 13 independent societies and their languages, providing a window into personality concepts across a broad range of cultures and languages. This study used clusters of empirically related terms (e.g. brave, courageous, and daring), based on a taxonomy of English-language personality concepts that consisted of 100 personality-trait clusters. English-language definitions of dictionary entries from the 13 languages were matched to the meanings of the synonym clusters. The cluster–classification method uncovered nine ubiquitous personality concepts, plus six that were present in at least 12 of the 13 languages. The nine ubiquitous personality concepts include some not previously identified and suggest a core of possibly universal concepts. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Personality profiles of cultures: aggregate personality traits

Personality profiles of cultures can be operationalized as the mean trait levels of culture members. College students from 51 cultures rated an individual from their country whom they knew well (N=12,156). Aggregate scores on Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) scales generalized across age and sex groups, approximated the individual-level 5-factor model, and correlated with aggregate self-report personality scores and other culture-level variables. Results were not attributable to national differences in economic development or to acquiescence. Geographical differences in scale variances and mean levels were replicated, with Europeans and Americans generally scoring higher in Extraversion than Asians and Africans. Findings support the rough scalar equivalence of NEO-PI-R factors and facets across cultures and suggest that aggregate personality profiles provide insight into cultural differences.     

The structure of goal contents across 15 cultures

The authors investigated the structure of goal contents in a group of 1,854 undergraduates from 15 cultures around the world. Results suggested that the 11 types of goals the authors assessed were consistently organized in a circumplex fashion across the 15 cultures. The circumplex was well described by positioning 2 primary dimensions underlying the goals: intrinsic (e.g., self-acceptance, affiliation) versus extrinsic (e.g., financial success, image) and self-transcendent (e.g., spirituality) versus physical (e.g., hedonism). The circumplex model of goal contents was also quite similar in both wealthier and poorer nations, although there were some slight cross-cultural variations. The relevance of these results for several theories of motivation and personality are discussed.     

Integrating global and local perspectives in psycholexical studies: A GloCal approach

Similarities and differences in the results of psycholexical research across cultures may be due to real cross-cultural differences or to specific methodological choices. Two typically approaches used are: global, which follows a variation of the original lexical paradigm, and local, which is indigenous in methods and assumptions. We propose a GloCal approach that is more likely to yield a comprehensive picture of personality by combining approaches informed by a thorough understanding of that language and culture. The GloCal approach allows researchers to (a) identify shared and unique components of personality across cultures, (b) ensure that the lexicon used is relevant to the culture and (c) increase the ecological validity of stimulus materials in personality inventories.     

Tell me where you come from and I know what makes you tick: Managing the consumer personality–satisfaction link in diverse cultures

Marketing programs that evoke high satisfaction and marketing success in one culture often fail in others, but the understanding of those cultural differences is insufficient. The question of how culture is linked to consumer satisfaction is still not answered satisfactorily. One promising paradigm for exploring such questions comes from progress in cross-cultural personality psychology. Thus, we examine the influence of individual-level cultural orientations on personality, and the role of personality and affect in satisfaction formation across cultures. Based on experimental data, we show that a high individualism orientation triggers higher levels of extraversion; a high uncertainty-avoidance orientation triggers higher levels of neuroticism. Based on field data from Japan, Spain, and the United States, we identify equivalent relationships amongst personality-related antecedent processes shaping satisfaction indicating universality across these cultures. The findings demonstrate the usefulness of cross-cultural personality psychology theory and methods for understanding and predicting consumer responses to marketing actions across cultures.     

Personality Measurement in Cross-Cultural Perspective

I first provide an overview of general issues in personality measurement across cultures (e.g., measurement bias and equivalence, levels of test adaptation or indigenization). Then, in keeping with the organization of this special issue, I discuss personality measurement from alternative theoretical perspectives that have addressed, in varying degrees, personality and its measurement in cross-cultural perspective (i.e., trait perspectives, projective techniques, cultural psychology and constructivist perspectives, evolutionary perspectives). An integrated measurement approach is advocated, incorporating diverse aspects or levels of personality, while drawing on the complementary strengths of alternative approaches.     

The face of personality: Adaptive inferences from facial cues are moderated by perceiver personality and motives

Humans have historically been interested in understanding stable individual differences in behavioral tendencies, often referred to as personality traits. Recent work suggests that between‐person personality variability may be adaptive insofar as certain variations in personality constellations facilitate survival and reproduction across various types of groups and ecological niches. While past research has demonstrated that personality can be accurately inferred from self‐reports, other‐reports, and targets' past behavior, we discuss a more contemporary, yet understudied, means of personality inference: facial structure. We summarize research on personality traits that can be accurately inferred from facial structure, as well as how aspects of individuals' own personality, chronically accessible motives, and acutely activated goals lead to preferences for facially communicated personality that would aid in the satisfaction of these goals (e.g., higher need to belong predicts a stronger preference for faces whose structure communicates greater extraversion). We also discuss limitations of current approaches to understanding the relationship between perceiver personality and motives and their relation to perceptions of facially communicated personality as well as fruitful directions for future research.     

Cultural differences in unrealistic optimism and pessimism: the role of egocentrism and direct versus indirect comparison measures

Recent research has raised questions regarding the consistency of unrealistic optimism and related self-enhancing tendencies, both within cultures and across cultures. The current study tested whether the method used to assess unrealistic optimism influenced cross-cultural patterns in the United States and Japan. The results showed that the direct method (a single comparison judgment between self and peers) produced similar patterns across cultures because of cognitive biases (e.g., egocentrism); specifically, participants were unrealistically optimistic about experiencing infrequent/negative events but pessimistic about experiencing frequent/ negative events. However, the indirect method (separate self- and peer judgments) produced different patterns across cultures because culturally specific motivational biases emerged using this method; specifically, the U.S. sample was more unrealistically optimistic than the Japanese sample. The authors discuss how these results might influence the interpretation of previous findings on culture and self-enhancement.     

Trait Psychology and Culture: Exploring Intercultural Comparisons

Personality traits, studied for decades by Western personality psychologists, have recently been reconceptualized as endogenous basic tendencies that, within a cultural context, give rise to habits, attitudes, skills, beliefs, and other characteristic adaptations. This conceptualization provides a new framework for studying personality and culture at three levels. Transcultural research focuses on identifying human universals, such as trait structure and development; intracultural studies examine the unique expression of traits in specific cultures; and intercultural research characterizes cultures and their subgroups in terms of mean levels of personality traits and seeks associations between cultural variables and aggregate personality traits. As an example of the problems and possibilities of intercultural analyses, data on mean levels of Revised NEO Personality Inventory scales from college age and adult samples (N = 23,031) of men and women from 26 cultures are examined. Results showed that age and gender differences resembled those found in American samples; different subsamples from each culture showed similar levels of personality traits: intercultural factor analysis yielded a close approximation to the Five-Factor Model; and factor scores were meaningfully related to other culture-level variables. However, mean trait levels were not apparent to expert raters, casting doubt on the accuracy of national stereotypes. Trait psychology can serve as a useful complement to cultural perspectives on human nature and personality.     

Why can't a man be more like a woman? Sex differences in Big Five personality traits across 55 cultures

Previous research suggested that sex differences in personality traits are larger in prosperous, healthy, and egalitarian cultures in which women have more opportunities equal with those of men. In this article, the authors report cross-cultural findings in which this unintuitive result was replicated across samples from 55 nations (N = 17,637). On responses to the Big Five Inventory, women reported higher levels of neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness than did men across most nations. These findings converge with previous studies in which different Big Five measures and more limited samples of nations were used. Overall, higher levels of human development--including long and healthy life, equal access to knowledge and education, and economic wealth--were the main nation-level predictors of larger sex differences in personality. Changes in men's personality traits appeared to be the primary cause of sex difference variation across cultures. It is proposed that heightened levels of sexual dimorphism result from personality traits of men and women being less constrained and more able to naturally diverge in developed nations. In less fortunate social and economic conditions, innate personality differences between men and women may be attenuated.     

A Cross-Cultural and Developmental Analysis of Self-Esteem in Chinese and Western Children

In this review, we examine the construct of self-esteem from a cross-cultural perspective in Chinese and Western children and adolescents. We also explore the role of childrearing practices in the development of self-esteem in these different cultures. In doing so, we first review the concepts of emic (i.e., variations in patterns of behavior within a given culture) and etic research (i.e., variations in common patterns of behavior or activities across cultures). Then, we invoke Berry's notions of “imposed-etic” and “derived-etic” approaches (J. Berry, 1989) in understanding crucial cross-cultural differences that are evident in the literature. We pose basic questions such as: (1) What does self-esteem “look” like in Chinese children? (2) How do childrearing practices in China influence the development of self-esteem in children? And, (3) what are the limitations of cross-cultural research in understanding a phenomenon such as self-esteem? We suggest that self-esteem does not “mean” the same things across these collectivist and individualistic cultures. We conclude our discourse with specific recommendations for clinical theory, research, and practice.     

Do bilinguals have two personalities? A special case of cultural frame switching

Four studies examined and empirically documented Cultural Frame Switching (CFS; Hong, Chiu, & Kung, 1997) in the domain of personality. Specifically, we asked whether Spanish–English bilinguals show different personalities when using different languages? If so, are the two personalities consistent with cross-cultural differences in personality? To generate predictions about the specific cultural differences to expect, Study 1 documented personality differences between US and Mexican monolinguals. Studies 2–4 tested CFS in three samples of Spanish–English bilinguals, located in the US and Mexico. Findings replicated across all three studies, suggesting that language activates CFS for Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Further analyses suggested the findings were not due to anomalous items or translation effects. Results are discussed in terms of the interplay between culture and self.     

Translation and Cultural Comparison: Some Epistemological Reflections

In its traditional guise, cross-cultural psychology is a science of comparative measurement. Its chief method is the regulated observation or recording of behaviour in different cultural milieux and its quantitative conversion into a common metric. This method allows for the estimation of differences across cultures on the strength or magnitude of the behaviour. We can therefore speak of one cultural group doing more of Y, or being more Y, than some other group, where Y is a conceptually and operationally defined behaviour taken to apply equally well to both groups. The culture-independence of the definition supports examination of how the magnitude of the behaviour may be determined or conditioned by some cultural variable X. According to this picture, culture (the independent variable) differs from place to place and the features by which it differs produce more or less of the universally defined behaviour (the dependent variable) under study. The hypothetical contingency of ‘culture affecting behaviour’ that underlies this approach is thereby maintained. In this paper, I use the problem of translation to cast doubt on this picture of cross-cultural research and the inferential strength of its comparative method. In opposition, I argue that we never measure the same behaviour across cultures if behaviour is understood as socially significant action. Rather, the specification of analogous actions across cultures is a highly uncertain approximation involving the inevitable projection of one’s own conceptual scheme. I argue further that most social phenomena of interest to cross-cultural psychologists cannot be adequately defined in a manner that divorces them from the local linguistic conventions and normative frameworks through which they are realized as part of cultural life. For this reason, cross-cultural psychology cannot effectively model itself on the natural sciences. It is as much hermeneutics as psychometrics.     

A Cross-Cultural Study of Response Biases in Personality Measures

The purposes of this study were to (a) compare the response bias tendencies of U.S. and Philippine college students and men and women in each culture when responding to personality measures, (b) examine the comparability of different measures of the same response biases, (c) examine the stability or consistency of response biases across instruments, (d) examine the extent to which controlling for response biases affects cultural mean comparisons in personality variables, and (e) test hypothesized personality correlates of response biases. The results did not support the presence of large cross-cultural or gender differences in response biases. Moderate to high agreement was found between different indexes of the same biases. Participants' response bias tendencies were moderately stable across instruments. Controlling for response biases led to trivial changes in effect sizes; in most cases, conclusions about cultural differences in personality constructs did not change. Most hypotheses relating personality variables to response biases were not supported.     

The multidimensionality of suicide risk factors and criteria in a nonclinical population: Replication across two countries and two languages

Across two countries and two languages, this research examined the multidimensional associations between suicidality (e.g., past ideation/attempts, communication of intent) and empirically important psychological risk factors (e.g., mental pain, perceived burdensomeness, thwarted belongingness). For samples of 228 Canadian and 331 Portuguese university undergraduates, four dimensions emerged in each sample with two of these, intrapersonal and interpersonal, demonstrating strong replicability across countries and languages. It was concluded that suicidality is a phenomenon that demonstrates some multidimensional similarities across cultures.     

Differences in Emotional Labor Across Cultures: A Comparison of Chinese and U.S. Service Workers

Purpose

In the global economy, the need for understanding cross-cultural differences and the customer service-related processes involved in emotional labor is evident. The current study attempts to examine this issue by developing and testing hypotheses pertaining to cross-cultural differences between U.S. and Chinese service workers on the levels of display rule perceptions, emotion regulation, and burnout (i.e., emotional exhaustion, personal accomplishment, and depersonalization) as well as the relationships among these variables.

Design/Methodology/Approach

Data was collected from service workers in the U.S. (n = 280) and China (n = 231). We tested for measurement differences, mean differences, and differences in the relationships among emotional labor variables between the two samples using a variety of analyses.

Findings

It was found that the relatively robust sequence of display rules to surface acting to burnout was observed in a U.S. sample but was not observed in a Chinese sample, with some relationships being significantly weaker in the Chinese sample (e.g., surface acting to burnout dimensions) and others exhibiting relationships with the opposite sign (e.g., display rules were negatively related to surface acting in the Chinese sample).

Implications

The results of this study suggest that many of the relationships among emotional labor variables vary as a function of the cultural context under consideration.

Originality/Value

This is the first study to directly compare emotional labor across samples from Eastern and Western cultures. Additionally, this study begins to answer questions concerning why models of emotional labor generated in a Western culture may not apply in other cultures.