Is self‐esteem a universal need? Evidence from The People's Republic of China

In a provocative article, Heine et al. concluded that self-esteem needs are less important in collectivistic, East Asian countries than in individualistic, Western ones. Their conclusion was based, in part, on evidence that: (i) self-esteem scores are less positively biased in Japan than in Western countries; and that (ii) low self-esteem is less predictive of psychological distress in Japan than in Western countries. The present research examined whether these cultural differences occur in another collectivistic culture: The People's Republic of China. Two meta-analyses were conducted. Study 1 found that, for young and old alike, self-esteem was positively biased, with most participants reporting high levels of self-esteem. Study 2 found that low self-esteem in China is associated with three indicators of psychological distress: depression, anxiety and low subjective well-being. These findings are consistent with results in Western samples and suggest that high self-esteem may indeed be a universal psychological imperative.     

Do birds of a feather universally flock together? Cultural variation in the similarity‐attraction effect

Three experiments explored the similarity‐attraction effect (SAE) among North American and Japanese samples. In all studies, North Americans showed a significantly more pronounced SAE than the Japanese. The North Americans consistently revealed a strong SAE whereas the Japanese effect was only significant in the methods with the most power. The cultural differences emerged across different methods, and for the domains of personality, activities, attitudes and demographics. The cultural difference was mediated by self‐esteem, indicating that a motivation for positive self‐views is a mechanism underlying the SAE.     

Disregarding Preliminary Information When Rating Job Applicants' Performance: Mission Impossible?1

Firms allocate considerable resources to test job applicants' skills and to ensure that hiring decisions are nondiscriminatory. Interpreting selection output in light of preliminary information may undermine the impartiality of personnel selection decisions. In this study, human resource managers were presented preliminary information about a candidate's performance and asked to rate him according to a detailed assessment‐center report of his performance. We examined several interventions for reducing reliance on preliminary information: retrieving assessment‐center information, generating a rating model, or both. Participants (N = 167) excluded preliminary information from the interventions, but relied on it when rating the candidate. The documented failure to control for the effects of preliminary information on subsequent judgments can contribute to improved selection procedures.