- •Cross-cultural universal traits and the culturally specific in human behavior Cross-cultural and Cultural Psychology Knud s. Larsen
- •Introduction
- •Introduction
- •Cross-cultural psychology in a changing world
- •Behavior as culture specific or universal.
- •1.2 The etic and emic approaches.
- •1.3 Cross-cultural psychology and cultural/ indigenous psychology.
- •1.4 Culture versus ethnicity and race.
- •1.5 All groups with a significant history have culture
- •1.6 Toward an inclusive definition of culture.
- •1.6.1 Culture is the evolution of human society.
- •1.6.2 Animal and human culture.
- •1.6.3 The ecological and sociological context.
- •1.7 Resource rich or poor cultures.
- •1.8 Cultural values and dimensions.
- •1.8.1 Universal values.
- •1.8.2 Cultural value dimensions.
- •1.8.3 The social axioms of Leung and Bond.
- •1.9 Enculturation, culture, and psychological outcomes.
- •1.10 Understanding cross-cultural psychology in a changing world.
- •1.11 The major objectives of cross-cultural psychology.
- •1.12 The ethnocentrism of Psychology.
- •Summary
- •Research approaches and critical thinking in cross-cultural psychology
- •2.1 Cultural bias and criterion of equivalence.
- •2.1.1 The issue of language equivalence.
- •2.1.2 Psychometric equivalence.
- •2.1.3 Selecting equivalent samples in cross-cultural psychology.
- •2.2 Nonequivalence in cross-cultural research.
- •2.3 Levels of inference.
- •2.4 Studies of cultural level ecological averages.
- •2.5 What is measured in cross-cultural research?
- •2.6 Bias in psychological assessments.
- •2.7 Inferences from statistical tests on cross-cultural comparisons.
- •2.8 Experimental versus correlational studies.
- •2.9 Qualitative and quantitative research in cross-cultural psychology.
- •2.10 Quantitative comparative cross-cultural research.
- •2.10.1 Surveys.
- •2.10.2 Experiments.
- •2.11 The problems of validity.
- •2.12 A critical look at the findings from cross-cultural comparisons.
- •2.13 Skeptical thinking is the path to an improved cross-cultural psychology.
- •Summary
- •The origin of culture: cultural transformation and sociocultural evolution
- •3.1 The case for the biological foundations of human characteristics.
- •3.1.1 Evolution and the mechanisms of transmission.
- •3.1.2 Races as a biological and social construct.
- •3.1.3 The role of adaptation.
- •3.2 The research supporting the evolution of human emotion.
- •3.2.1 Universal temperament and personality traits are evidence of common evolved history.
- •3.2.2 Intelligence as a biological and racial construct.
- •3.2.3 Behavior genetics and disease.
- •3.2.4 Hardwired optimism: The driver for cultural development.
- •3.3 Sociobiology and evolutionary psychology.
- •3.3.1 Gender differences in mate selection.
- •3.3.2 Is ethnocentrism and racism a broader manifestation of inclusive fitness for reproductive success?
- •3.4 Culture matters!
- •3.5 Socio-cultural evolution: a little history.
- •3.5.1 The evolution of evolutionary theories.
- •3.5.2 Dual inheritance: Approaches to cultural transmission.
- •3.6 Theories of modernization and post-industrial society.
- •Summary
- •Human development: culture and biology
- •4.1 Socialization or enculturation?
- •4.2 Enculturation and choice.
- •4.3 Authoritative versus authoritarian childrearing approaches and cultural differences.
- •4.4 Creating the climate of home: Cultural and cross-cultural studies.
- •4.4.1 The sleeping arrangements of childhood.
- •4.4.2 Attachment in childhood.
- •4.4.3 Relationships with siblings.
- •4.4.4 The influence of the extended family and peers.
- •4.5 Culture and the educational system.
- •4.6 Socio-economic climate.
- •4.7 Social identity.
- •4.8 Comparative studies in child rearing behaviors.
- •4.9 Human development is incorporation of culture.
- •4.10 Stage theories of human development: Culturally unique or universal.
- •4.10.1 The evolution of cognition.
- •4.10.2 The evolution of moral development.
- •4.10.3 Evolution of psychosocial development.
- •4.11 Human development is the expression of biology: the presence of universal values.
- •4.12 The evolutionary basis for human behavior: Maximizing inclusive fitness.
- •4.13 Perspective in the transmission of culture.
- •Summary
- •The evolution of language and socio-culture
- •5.1 The evolution of socioculture and language.
- •5.2 Language development: the meaning of language terms and early speech.
- •5.3 Cultural language difference and linguistic relativity.
- •5.4 Cultural language and thought.
- •5.5 Universals in language.
- •5.6 Intercultural communication.
- •5.6.1 Obstacles and uncertainty reduction in intercultural communication.
- •5.6.2 The affect of bilingualism.
- •5.7 Nonverbal communication and culture.
- •5.8 Darwinian evolution and phylogenetic trees of language and socio-cultural evolution.
- •5.8.1 Selective group genetic advantages in cultural evolution.
- •5.8.2 The analogy of genetic and cultural evolution.
- •5.9 The tree branching of cultural traits.
- •5.10 Limitations of genetic and cultural co-evolutionary theory: Horizontal and vertical cultural evolution.
- •5.11 Cultural stability: Processes countering cultural evolution.
- •5.11.1 Migration and cultural stability.
- •5.11.2 Conformity and geographical mechanisms affecting cultural evolution and language development.
- •5.12 Social learning: Imitating success.
- •5.13 Religion, agriculture development and cultural evolution.
- •5.14 Phylogenetic evidence of the socio-cultural origins of language and other cultural traits.
- •5.14.1 Tracing the evolution of languages.
- •5.14.2 Evidence of language evolution.
- •5.15 Culture as a function of evolving information.
- •5.16 How did language evolve?
- •5.16.1 Contacts between different language speakers.
- •5.16.2 Artefactual languages.
- •Cognition: our common biology and cultural impact
- •6.1 Culture and cognition.
- •6.1.1 Sensation and perception.
- •6.1.2 Cultural impact on sensation and perception.
- •6.2 Cognitive development.
- •6.3 Cognitive style and cultural values.
- •6.3.1 Field dependent and independent cognitive style.
- •6.3.2 Perception studies and cognitive style.
- •6.3.3 Collectivistic and individualistic cognition.
- •6.3.4 Greek versus Asian thinking style.
- •6.3.5 Dialectical and logical thinking.
- •6.3.6 Authoritarianism and dogmatism as a cognitive style.
- •6.4 The general processor implied in cognitive styles versus contextualized cognition.
- •6.5 Cognitive style and priming cognition.
- •6.6 Cross-cultural differences in cognition as a function of practical imperatives.
- •6.7 Intelligence and adaptation: general and cross-cultural aspects.
- •6.7.1 Definitions of general intelligence.
- •6.7.2 Nature or nurture: What determines intelligence?
- •6.7.3 Sources of bias in intelligence testing.
- •6.7.4 Socioeconomic differences and fairness.
- •6.7.5 Race and the interaction effect.
- •6.8 The use of psychological tests in varying cultures.
- •6.9 How intelligence is viewed in other cultures.
- •6.10 General processes in higher order cognition and intelligence.
- •6.10.1 Categorization.
- •6.10.2 Memory functions.
- •6.10.3 Mathematical abilities.
- •6.10.4 The ultimate pedagogical goal: Creativity.
- •Summary
- •Emotions and human happiness: universal expressions and cultural values
- •7.1 The universality of emotions: Basic neurophysiological responses.
- •7.1.1 How we understand the emotion of others: Facial expressions.
- •7.1.2 The effect of language and learning: Criticisms of studies supporting genetically based facial recognition.
- •7.1.3 The definitive answer to the source of the facial expressions of emotions: Biology is the determinant.
- •7.1.4 Universal agreement and cultural emphasis in other emotion constructs.
- •7.1.4.1 Antecedents of emotions.
- •7.1.4.2 Vocalization and intonation in emotional expression.
- •7.1.4.3 Appraisal of emotion.
- •7.2 The role of culture in emotional reactions.
- •7.2.1 The display of emotions.
- •7.2.2 Individualistic versus collectivistic cultures: Display rules in emotion intensity and negativity ratings.
- •7.2.3 Personal space and gestures: Cultural influences in non-verbal communication.
- •7.2.4 Cross-cultural differences in evaluating emotions in other people.
- •7.3. The cultural context of emotional communication.
- •7.4 Toward a positive psychology of emotion: Happiness and well-being.
- •7.4.1 Methodological issues in definitions of happiness and well-being.
- •7.4.2 Sources of well-being.
- •7.4.3 The trending of happiness scores and economic crises and transitions.
- •7.4.4 The impact of culture on happiness and subjective well-being.
- •7.4.5 Creating social policies that promote well-being.
- •7.4.6 The role of national and local government.
- •Personality theory: western, eastern and indigenous approaches
- •8.1 Western thoughts on personality.
- •8.1.1 Freud’s contributions.
- •8.1.2 The humanistic approach to personality.
- •8.1.3 Social-cognitive interaction theory.
- •8.1.4 Locus of control
- •8.1.5 Cross-cultural research on locus of control and autonomy: In control or being controlled.
- •8.1.6 Personality types and hardwired foundations.
- •8.1.7 The Big Five.
- •8.1.8 The genetic and evolutionary basis of personality.
- •8.1.9 Is national character a psychological reality?
- •8.2 Eastern thoughts about personality.
- •8.2.1 The Buddhist tradition.
- •8.2.2 The self and causation.
- •8.2.3 Buddhism and consciousness.
- •8.2.4 Buddhism as a therapeutic approach.
- •8.2.5 A critical thought.
- •8.3 Confucian perspective on personality and the self.
- •8.4 Culture specific personality: As seen from the perspective of indigenous cultures.
- •8.5 Some evaluative comments on Confucianism and indigenous psychology.
- •Summary
- •Culture, sex and gender
- •10.1 Culture and gender.
- •10.1.1 Sex roles, gender stereotypes, and culture.
- •10.1. 2 Gender and families.
- •10.1.3 Traditional versus egalitarian sex role ideologies.
- •10.2 Gender stereotypes and discrimination against women.
- •10.2.1 Dissatisfaction with body image.
- •10.2.2 Equal work equal pay?
- •10.3 Violence against women: a dirty page of history and contemporary society.
- •10.3.1 Intimate violence: The ubiquitous nature of rape.
- •10.3.2 Sexual exploitation.
- •10.3.3 Gender justice and the empowerment of women.
- •10.3.4 Gender ability differences and the role of culture.
- •10.3.5 Culture and Gender differences in spatial abilities.
- •10.3.6 Current research on gender differences in mathematical abilities.
- •10.3.7 Gender and conformity.
- •10.3.8 Gender and aggression.
- •10.4 Sexual behavior and culture.
- •10.4.1 Mate selection.
- •10.4.2 Attractiveness and culture.
- •10.4.3 The future of love and marriage.
- •Summary
- •Culture and human health
- •12.1 The injustice of health disparities in the world.
- •12.1.1 Socio-economic disparities and well-being.
- •12.1.2 Mental health among ethnic minorities: Injustice in the United States.
- •12.1.3 Migrants, refugees and stress: Mental health outcomes.
- •12.2 The role of culture.
- •12.2.1 Cultural health beliefs.
- •12.2.2 Problems in cultural definitions of abnormality and mental illness
- •12.3 Psychopathology as universal or relativist.
- •12.4 Culturally specific and universal factors in mental health.
- •12.4.1 Anxiety disorders.
- •12.4.2 Regulation of mood: Depression.
- •12.4.3 Schizophrenia.
- •12.4.4 Attention deficit disorder.
- •12.4.5 Personality disorders.
- •12.5 Culturally sensitive assessment of abnormal behavior.
- •12.6 Cross-cultural assessments of mental disorder.
- •12.7 Abnormal behavior and psychotherapy from cultural perspectives.
- •12.7.1 The cultural framework matters in psychotherapy.
- •12.7.2 Homogeneity of patient and therapist.
- •12.7.3 Approaches based in indigenous forms of treatment.
- •12.7.4 Adding the biomedical model to indigenous beliefs.
- •Summary
6.7.2 Nature or nurture: What determines intelligence?
The question of what is responsible for a person’s intelligence, nature or nurture, is only important because it is associated with sociopolitical issues where intelligence has been identified with phenotypical race as representative of the affect of invariable “nature”. Consistent differences have been found between phenotypical races on general measures of intelligence. The direction of the differences shows that African Americans score consistently lower than Americans of European background (Jensen, 1968, 1984). The research created a storm in American psychology, not least because it was published just as Black people were finding their way forward after centuries of oppression. Jensen argued that about 80 percent of intelligence is biologically determined and fixed and that therefore compensatory programs for the underprivileged are useless and a waste of resources.
Strong support for the nature theory is found in the studies of twins reared apart compared to fraternal twins reared together (Bouchard & McGue, 1981). If intelligence has a large nature component and is biological inherited then twins reared apart should produce very similar intelligence scores, whereas if the environment is primarily responsible then the fraternal twins raised in the same environment should yield more similarity. In fact the results showed that identical twins reared apart, had more similar scores (.82 correlation) than fraternal twins reared in the same homes. Although most researchers agree that there is a biological component in intelligence (Plomin, 1990), Jensen’s application of these findings to phenotypical race is rejected by most researchers today. It would be more fruitful to examine the relationship between brain size and intelligence (Jensen & Johnson, 1993).
6.7.3 Sources of bias in intelligence testing.
The fact that Afro-Americans scored one standard deviation below samples of European-Americans led Jensen to conclude that significant intellectual differences existed between the two groups. A serious controversial contention occurred in psychology and the broader society when Jensen and others (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994) interpreted these differences as racial variances in intellectual capacity. However, other research has challenged Jensen’s ”nature” conclusions. For example Humphreys (1985) analyzed results from a very large data bank and found that “race” only correlated .17 with intelligence, but .86 with socioeconomic status. The large correlation for socioeconomic status was attributed to the very adverse conditions associated with the lives of Black people who struggle economically that in turn affect opportunity and intelligence scores.
All the readers of this chapter will now also be aware of the large role played by the cultural context in cognition. Can we really know what component of intelligence can be attributed to nature or nurture? Hebb (1949) made a distinction between the genetic capacity associated with the brain that he called intelligence A, and intelligence B which developed in interaction with the cultural context. Vernon (1969) provided an additional distinction that he called intelligence C that was measured by a person’s performance on an intelligence test. These distinctions provide us with two sources of bias in the conceptualization of the construct. First, especially in the cross-cultural context, the intelligence test employed may not adequately sample B, thereby yielding a performance that does not reflect a person’s intelligence adequately. Since not all sources of test variance are controlled for in intelligence testing the lack of equivalence of test scores may be the result of cultural bias. Many variables can contribute to bias including language differences, inadequate items used to measure content, and variable motivation to respond well on the test. The results of intelligence testing then may be nothing more than an assessment of intelligence C performance on the intelligence test, not measuring either A or B. Jensen, Herrnstein and Murray who advocate in favor of racial differences in intelligence seem to confuse intelligence C (the actual measurement) as representing intelligence A (the hardwired capacity).