2. Project Findings
So far, our research has been disseminated in a series of scientific journal papers, symposia at international and national conferences, and book chapters. Additionally, we have built new research capacity, creating a multinational network of researchers, training several new researchers through the project, and making our large, cross-cultural dataset available for secondary analyses.
Methodological Advances
Identity motives questionnaire. Pre-existing data on distinctiveness-seeking in the UK and Sweden illustrate the cross-cultural use of our multilevel approach to measuring identity motives. We published a paper about this method in a Special Issue of Psychological Studies (Eriksson et al., 2011).
Our extensive sampling of subcultures within nations is a major advance over preceding cross-cultural studies.
Conceptualising and Measuring Psychological Culture
Personhood beliefs. Beliefs about personhood are understood to be a defining feature of individualism-collectivism (I-C), but they have been insufficiently explored, given the emphasis of research on values and self-construals. We propose the construct of contextualism, referring to beliefs about the importance of context in understanding people, as a facet of cultural collectivism. A brief measure was developed and validated. We described the construct and its measure in a paper published in Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology (Owe et al., 2013).
Self-Construals. Markus and Kitayama’s (1991) theory of independent and interdependent self-construals has been highly influential in highlighting cross-cultural diversity in people’s sense of self. However, their perspective has been criticized for an overreliance on comparisons between North America and East Asia, and research using the prevailing two-dimensional measurement model popularized by Singelis (1994) has commonly failed to find the predicted pattern of cultural differences between “Western” and “Eastern” samples. We revisited the conceptualization and measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals in 2 large-scale multinational surveys, using improved methods for cross-cultural research. We developed and validated across cultures a new 7-dimensional model of self-reported ways of being independent or interdependent. Patterns of global variation support some of Markus and Kitayama’s predictions, but a simple contrast between independence and interdependence does not adequately capture the diverse models of selfhood that prevail in different world regions. Cultural groups emphasize different ways of being both independent and interdependent, depending on individualism-collectivism, national socioeconomic development, and religious heritage (Vignoles et al., 2016).
Motive Strengths across Cultures
Replicating previous Western findings, participants perceived as most central those identity aspects that provided feelings of self-esteem, meaning, distinctiveness and continuity, as well as belonging (previously a weaker predictor), and participants were happiest with those identity aspects that provided feelings of self-esteem, belonging, efficacy and meaning. This pattern was found in Study 1 (cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses) and replicated in Study 2.
Motive strengths varied with economic, political, population, physical, religious and cultural differences—each motive was typically stronger in motive-frustrating contexts, unless more basic, survival needs were unmet (e.g., low life-expectancy). Against relativism, motives were not stronger in contexts with matching cultural values. Supporting universalism, effects of each motive remained significant across the full observed range of almost every moderating variable.
Possible Additional Motives?
We included six possible additional motives in Study 1, suggested by our collaborators: security, religious meaning, self-improvement, broadening perspectives, autonomy, and relationship harmony. Controlling for effects described above, many of these constructs contributed to predictions of subjective identity structures, but they accounted for little additional variance beyond the original six-motive model. These constructs also typically predicted satisfaction of the motives already theorised: e.g., relationship harmony predicted feelings of belonging and self-esteem. Thus, the six motives largely accounted for the role of these constructs.
Sources of Motive Satisfaction across Cultures
What gives you self-worth?
Our research shows individuals' self-esteem is based on the prevailing values of their culture.
As predicted, self-esteem was constructed more in terms of controlling one's life in cultures where openness to change values were more prevalent, in terms of doing one's duty in cultures where conservation values are more prevalent; in terms of benefitting others (and doing one's duty) in cultures where self-transcendent values are prevalent, and in terms of achieving social status in cultures where self-enhancement values are more prevalent (Study 1). Thus, participants derived self-esteem especially from identity aspects that matched values emphasized in their cultural environments. Corresponding effects of individuals’ personal values were negligible. Seemingly, bases of self-esteem are defined collectively rather than individually, reflecting normative cultural values rather than personal, internalized values. This has been reported in one journal article (Becker et al., 2014).
Sources of distinctiveness
(picture adapted from Vignoles et al., 2002)
As predicted, distinctiveness was associated more closely with difference and separateness in more individualistic cultures, and more closely with social position in more collectivistic cultures (Study 1). These differences were not dependent on individuals' personal values and beliefs, suggesting that the emphasis on different sources of distinctiveness in identity construction is a collective, genuinely cultural, process (Becker et al., 2012). In Study 2, we replicated these results, showing an additional moderating effect of urbanisation: social position was emphasised relatively more as a source of distinctiveness in rural areas, separateness relatively more in small towns, and difference relatively more in cities (Easterbrook et al., in prep).
Similar findings have emerged for other identity motives. For example, sources of self-continuity are meaningfully predicted by cultural differences in essentialist personhood beliefs (Becker et al., 2018).