集体主义与贿赂

贿赂是指财物由行贿者向受贿者转移, 公共权力由受贿者向行贿者的暂时转移, 并涉及到为私利而滥用公共权力的过程。研究者认为集体主义是影响贿赂的文化心理根源, 而实证研究发现集体主义与贿赂的关系受到两个方面因素的影响。一方面贿赂的研究视角影响集体主义与贿赂的关系。研究一致证明集体主义促进贿赂行为意向。然而虽然大部分研究表明集体主义与贿赂感知和贿赂态度正相关, 但仍有少量不一致结果。另一方面集体主义类型也影响着集体主义和贿赂的关系。前人关于集体主义对贿赂的作用机制仍以理论探讨为主, 实证研究主要以道德卷入和计划行为理论为基础。未来可以从澄清不同贿赂研究视角的区别与联系、区分不同类型集体主义与贿赂的关系以及关注集体主义对贿赂的作用机制这三个角度进行深入探索。     

个体主义的地区差异和代际变迁

个体主义作为一个重要的文化维度, 是指强调注重自我的独立性、重视个人目标和成就的价值取向。个体主义的测量方法包括自我报告、启动法以及心外之物的客观指标测量。近来气候—经济理论和病原体假说等新的影响个体主义的因素被证实。个体主义不仅存在着文化之间差异, 同时也存在着同一文化内部的地区(州、省)差异。另外, 从纵向的角度利用大数据和客观指标发现, 同一文化内个体主义呈现逐渐增强的代际变化趋势。未来个体主义的研究要从多种测量方法来综合考察。     

“集体主义—个体主义”的差异:来自基因、大脑的证据

文章以"集体主义—个体主义"这一基本文化差异维度为基础,围绕文化、基因和大脑之间的关系,介绍了国内外最新研究进展。研究显示当人类执行各种文化任务时,那些为人类生存提供有力帮助的基因会被选择和保留下来;在自我表征,注意和知觉,决策、情绪和意向推断等心理状态或过程上的"集体主义—个体主义"文化差异都可追溯到脑功能的差异。研究者先后提出社会脑假设、文化—基因协同进化论、神经—文化交互作用模型等理论来解释基因、文化与大脑交互作用的现象。文章分析了当前研究中存在的问题,并对未来的研究进行了展望。     

个体主义—集体主义问卷编制与信效度分析

编制区分参照对象的个体主义—集体主义问卷,检验其信度和效度.在文献和实证研究基础上,构建个体主义—集体主义的理论维度,编写问卷条目.先对385名被试实施初测,进行项目分析和探索性因素分析.再对766名被试实施再测,进行结构验证和信度检验.结果发现,区分参照对象的个体主义—集体主义问卷是包含价值选择和行为理念的两维结构,由19个条目组成.该问卷构想效度和信度良好.因此,区分参照对象的个体主义—集体主义问卷可以作为测量个体主义—集体主义的有效工具.     

正在进行中的自愿拓疆运动与个体主义:来自多种文化任务分析的证据

自愿移居假说认为自愿拓疆运动能够促进个体主义的地区文化。从正在进行中的自愿拓疆运动地区(深圳)和对照地区(襄樊)两地抽取583名大学生,将是否本地人作为干扰变量进行控制,采用自我建构量表、集体主义量表、图片分类任务、归因任务、"亲亲性"任务等独立我/互依我测量指标,考察正在进行中的自愿拓疆运动与个体主义的关系。结果显示,在控制是否本地人后,深圳样本比襄樊样本报告了更高的个体主义指数得分和更低的集体主义量表得分,更低的整体思维,对朋友诚实更低的奖励,对朋友欺骗更高的惩罚。结果表明,深圳作为正在进行中的自愿拓疆地区,已经形成了与对照地区相比更偏向个体主义的地区文化,自愿移居假说也适用于源文化是集体主义的东方文化。     

文化模式及其对心理与行为的影响

文化可分为集体主义文化和个体主义文化两种模式。集体主义文化培育出集体中心的人格倾向,个体主义文化培育出个体中心的人格倾向。这两种人格倾向具有不同的自我概念,并进而对认知、学习、情绪和动机等产生影响。由此得出的结论是：心理学的研究成果具有文化的局限性,没有所谓的“放之四海而皆准”的心理和行为定律。     

自我对跨期决策的影响——基于个人-集体主义文化视角

跨期决策是指发生在不同时期的收益和成本的权衡决策。已有研究发现, 决策者的自我意识对跨期决策有着重要影响, 个人?集体主义文化在自我形成中起着重要作用, 但当文化因素被纳入自我对跨期决策影响的研究中时, 三者间的关系显得模糊不清。为了从已有文献中厘清三者间的理论关系, 我们基于个人?集体主义文化视角, 综述了自我对跨期决策影响的相关研究：介绍了跨期决策的相关概念及理论, 详细阐述了跨期决策中的两种自我理论(多重自我模型和自我连续性模型), 探讨了个人?集体主义文化对自我的影响, 并简要介绍了个人主义与集体主义文化下人们的跨期决策偏好差异及其心理机制。最后, 分别从研究内容、研究方法与实际应用三个方面, 提出了将个人?集体主义文化这一因素纳入自我对跨期决策影响过程、系统地考虑三者间关系的研究构想, 以期为未来研究提供新的思路, 深化人们对跨期决策机制的理解。     

不同的文化,不同的“人”——人格模型之文化阐释

人格是文化的产物。文化影响了个体人格的形成与发展。文章介绍了文化对人格模型及自我的具体影响,集体主义文化与个体主义文化有不同的人格模型和自我增强方式,在两种文化下特质理论的意义并不相同。当代心理学主要以西方文化为理论基础,如果我们的目标是理解全人类的行为,就必须首先建立属于各文化的本土心理学。     

影响说谎行为的情境因素——基于自我概念维持理论的视角

情境因素会影响人们的说谎行为。本文基于自我概念维持理论的视角,从个体内部状态（自我控制资源、宗教表征/道德观念启动）和外部因素（金钱奖励、人际因素）两方面介绍情境因素对说谎行为的影响,并指出未来研究应关注自我觉察水平这一情境因素以及情境因素影响说谎行为的心理机制和神经机制。     

自我决定理论在教育领域中的应用和启示

自我决定理论顺承人本主义对人积极方面的关注,以实证的方法切入有关人的动机、人格、发展等问题。本文简要介绍了自我决定理论,回顾了该理论在学生自主性动机方面的实证研究,并从教育者和环境两个方面梳理出能够满足学生基本心理需要、促进学生自主性动机产生的因素,为教师和教学管理者在实际工作中提供了科学的支撑和参考,最后从宏观的角度提出了自我决定理论带给我国教育者和教学管理者的启示。     

论集体主义的历史特征及其生命力——从集体主义与个人主义的关系说起

作为新的价值观,集体主义与个人主义是有本质区别的,它们分别植根于不同的社会关系基础上,有着不同的历史特征;但是,前者对后者又有着深刻的历史继承关系,集体主义充分吸取了个人主义的有价值因素,所以,集体主义是比个人主义更高层次的价值观。集体主义的这个形成过程,使它具有了比个人主义更强大的生命力。     

个人主义与集体主义结构的验证性研究

本文用实证方法通过对中国大陆303名被试的调查,对个人主义、集体主义的维度及其测量问卷的构想效度进行初步验证,结果支持Triandis提出的个人主义、集体主义可以分成水平、垂直两个维度,在个人水平上,个人主义与集体主义有四种类型的构想。验证性因素分析表明,Singelis的问卷有较好的构想效度,但在中国被试的测试结果上表现出一些题目的不适合,有待于进一步修正。     

The Values and Lifestyles of Idiocentrics and Allocentrics in an Individualist Culture: A Descriptive Approach

A considerable degree of research in cross‐cultural consumer psychology has focused on the effects of individualism–collectivism on consumer preference for advertising appeals. Recently, psychologists have demonstrated a growing interest in the individual‐level manifestations of individualism–collectivism. Idiocentrism refers to person‐level individualism, whereas allocentrism refers to person‐level collectivism. Drawing on individualism–collectivism theory, in this article we look at the lifestyle of idiocentrics and allocentrics. Our findings suggest a convergence between the etic‐ and emic‐level approaches, thus strengthening individualism–collectivism theory. The emic‐level findings of this study also suggest additional questions to be explored at the etic level. Finally, we make suggestions for applications in consumer communication.     

Assessing alternative models of individualism and collectivism: a confirmatory factor analysis

Six alternative structural models of individualism–collectivism are reviewed and empirically compared in a confirmatory factor analysis of questionnaire data from an Australian student sample (N = 340). Central to the debate about the structure of this broad social attitude are the issues of (1) polarity (are individualism and collectivism bipolar opposites, or orthogonal factors?) and (2) dimensionality (are individualism and collectivism themselves higher‐order constructs subsuming several more specific factors and, if so, what are they?). The data from this Australian sample support a model that represents individualism and collectivism as a higher‐order bipolar factor hierarchically subsuming several bipolar reference‐group‐specific individualisms and collectivisms. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The relationship between relational models and individualism and collectivism: evidence from culturally diverse work groups

Relational models theory (Fiske, 1991 ) proposes that all thinking about social relationships is based on four elementary mental models: communal sharing, authority ranking, equality matching, and market pricing. Triandis and his colleagues (e.g., Triandis, Kurowski, & Gelfand, 1994 ) have suggested a relationship between the constructs of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism and Fiske's relational models. However, no previous research has examined this proposed relationship empirically. The objective of the current study was to test the association between the two frameworks in order to further our understanding of why members of culturally diverse groups may prefer different relational models in interactions with other group members. Findings from this study support a relationship between Triandis' constructs and Fiske's four relational models and uphold Fiske's ( 1991 ) claim that the use of the relational models is culturally dependent. As hypothesized, horizontal collectivism was associated with a preference for equality matching and communal sharing, vertical individualism was related to a preference for authority ranking, and vertical collectivism was related to a preference for authority ranking and communal sharing. However, contrary to expectations, horizontal individualism was not related to a preference for equality matching and market pricing, and vertical individualism was not associated with market pricing. By showing that there is a relationship between Triandis' and Fiske's frameworks, this study closes a gap in relational models theory, namely how culture relates to people's preferences for relational models. Thus, the findings from this study will enable future researchers to explain and predict what relational models are likely to be used in a certain cultural context.     

Does culture influence what and how we think? Effects of priming individualism and collectivism

Do differences in individualism and collectivism influence values, self-concept content, relational assumptions, and cognitive style? On the one hand, the cross-national literature provides an impressively consistent picture of the predicted systematic differences; on the other hand, the nature of the evidence is inconclusive. Cross-national evidence is insufficient to argue for a causal process, and comparative data cannot specify if effects are due to both individualism and collectivism, only individualism, only collectivism, or other factors (including other aspects of culture). To address these issues, the authors conducted a meta-analysis of the individualism and collectivism priming literature, with follow-up moderator analyses. Effect sizes were moderate for relationality and cognition, small for self-concept and values, robust across priming methods and dependent variables, and consistent in direction and size with cross-national effects. Results lend support to a situated model of culture in which cross-national differences are not static but dynamically consistent due to the chronic and moment-to-moment salience of individualism and collectivism. Examination of the unique effects of individualism and collectivism versus other cultural factors (e.g., honor, power) awaits the availability of research that primes these factors.     

中国澳大利亚4～5岁幼儿人格特征的跨文化研究

该研究的目的是考察不同文化特质对幼儿人格形成的影响。使用幼儿人格发展教师评定问卷,以集体主义/个人主义理论范式对中澳4~5岁幼儿人格特征形成进行跨文化研究。结果表明中国幼儿具有集体主义人格倾向,澳大利亚幼儿具有个人主义人格倾向,幼儿人格形成受到文化特质的影响。     

How values of individualism and collectivism influence impulsive buying and money budgeting: the mediating role of acculturation to global consumer culture

This study examined the effects of individual‐level cultural values of individualism and collectivism on impulsive buying and money budgeting and the mediating role of acculturation to global consumer culture. By applying the person‐environment fit theory and acculturation theory, we argue that people who hold cultural values congruent with the culture they come into contact with are more likely to acculturate to it, and that those who acculturate to global consumer culture (GCC) are more likely to display consumption behaviors stimulated by GCC, namely impulsive buying and poor money budgeting. The findings show that consumers acculturated to GCC report higher impulsive buying and lower money budgeting, and that it is not the distinction between individualism and collectivism, but rather between the vertical and horizontal values that determines the acceptance of GCC and the studied consumption behaviors. Results revealed that vertical individualists (those who believe in competition between individuals and who prioritize their needs over the needs of others) and vertical collectivists (those who believe in the subordination of individuals to groups) were more likely to be acculturated to GCC. Thus, the acceptance of inequality between individuals among other individuals, or within groups, is related to the acceptance of GCC and impulsive buying and money budgeting. The level of acculturation to GCC mediates the relations between vertical individualism and collectivism values and impulsive buying and money budgeting. Theoretical contributions to the research on horizontal/vertical individualism/collectivism, acculturation to GCC, and person‐environment fit theory, as well as practical implications for marketers are discussed.     

Implicit Theories of Creativity of Secondary School Students from Estonia and Russia: Effects of Collectivism,Individualism, and A Bilingual Educational Environment

Implicit theories of creativity provide an understanding of attitude towards among different populations, including students. Insights on how students see and define creativity might help to adjust educational settings and thus make it possible to provide students with better conditions to support their creativity. Although many studies have been conducted on creativity in different cultural settings, little is known on individualism or collectivism is connected to implicit theories of creativity. This study was carried out among secondary school students in Estonia and Russia to identify possible differences in how students from different cultural backgrounds (and varying in individualism and collectivism) define creativity. The results indicated that there were differences in how students from Estonia and Russia defined creativity: Although students from Russia tend to identify creativity more with novel ideas, students from Estonia defined creativity more in terms of self-expression (students from schools with Estonian as the language of instruction) and uniqueness (students from schools with Russian as the language of instruction). Implications and further research suggestions are discussed.     

Leadership as a Dominant Cultural Myth: A Strain‐Based Perspective on Leadership Approaches

The current paper is a review of leadership theory from the perspective of “strain” theories of conceptual development. From this perspective, key cultural concepts emerge to the extent that they can mediate between contradictory cultural values and symbolically capture both sides of opposing dimensions, leading such concepts to become both generally attractive and semantically ambiguous. I argue that the leadership literature, with its highly varied and sometimes contradictory conceptualizations of leadership, can be understood as such a symbolic mediation. To illustrate, the review illustrates several classical leadership approaches as attempts to capture both sides of the value dimensions of individualism–collectivism and agency–structure. While generally privileging one side of each dimension, each leadership approach tries to explain both sides, with some approaches taking borderline or hybrid positions. The potential of this approach to understanding leadership scholarship, and to building reflexivity in scholarship, is discussed.