The concept of status differentiation is introduced along with a description of the development and initial validation of an individual-difference measure called the Status Differentiation Scale (SDS). This is followed by reports of cross-cultural differences on the SDS in three countries. Study 1 used American participants and established the scoring procedure for the SDS, its internal reliability and structural relationships, and construct validity. Study 2 used American and Japanese participants and demonstrated its internal reliability, structural relationships, and construct validity with a measure of allocentrism in both countries and predictable country differences that could not be accounted for by collectivism. Study 3 used American and South Korean participants and documented its internal reliability, structural relationships, and construct validity with a measure of values in both countries and predictable country differences that could not be accounted for by values. The concept of status differentiation, and the availability of the SDS, can have important theoretical and empirical ramifications for future studies of culture.
Au, K. (1999). Intra-cultural variation: Evidence and implications for international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 30, 799-812.
2.
Au, K. (2000). Intra-cultural variation as another construct of international management: A study based on secondary data of 42 countries. Journal ofInternational Management, 6, 217-238.
3.
Chang, L.C., Arkin, R.M., Leong, F.T., Chan, D.K.S., & Leung, K. (2004). Subjective overachievement in American and Chinese college students. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 152-173.
Ekman, P. (1972). Universal and cultural differences in facial expression of emotion. In J. R. Cole (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1971 (pp. 207-283). Lincoln: Nebraska University Press.
6.
Fu, P.P., & Yukl, G. (2000). Perceived effectiveness of influence tactics in the United States and China. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 251-266.
7.
Georgas, J., van de Vijver, F.J.R., & Berry, J.W. (2004). The ecocultural framework, ecosocial indices, and psychological variables in cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 74-86.
Gough, H.G. (1986). Manual for the California Psychological Inventory . Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
10.
Gudykunst, W.B., Matsumoto, Y., & Ting-Toomey, S. (1996). The influence of cultural individualism—collectivism, self construals, and individual values on communication styles across cultures. Human Communication Research, 22, 510-543.
11.
Hall, E.T. (1966). The hidden dimension. New York : Doubleday.
12.
Hall, E.T. (1973). The silent language. New York : Anchor.
13.
Hofstede, G.H. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
14.
Hofstede, G.H. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .
15.
Lam, A.G., & Zane, N. (2004). Ethnic differences in coping with interpersonal stressors: A test of self-construals as cultural mediators. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 446-459.
16.
Matsumoto, D. (1999). Culture and self: An empirical assessment of Markus and Kitayama's theory of independent and interdependent self-construals. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2, 289-310.
17.
Matsumoto, D. (2002). The new Japan. Yarmouth, ME : Intercultural Press.
18.
Matsumoto, D., Choi, J.W., Hirayama, S., Domae, A., & Yamaguchi, S. (2003). Culture, display rules, emotion regulation, and emotion judgments. Manuscript submitted for publication.
19.
Matsumoto, D., Consolacion, T., Yamada, H., Suzuki, R., Franklin, B., Paul, S., et al. (2002). American-Japanese cultural differences in judgments of emotional expressions of different intensities. Cognition and Emotion, 16, 721-747.
20.
Matsumoto, D., & Juang, L. (in press). Culture and psychology (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
21.
Matsumoto, D., Weissman, M., Preston, K., Brown, B., & Kupperbusch, C. (1997). Context-specific measurement of individualism—collectivism on the individual level: The IC Interpersonal Assessment Inventory (ICIAI). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , 28, 743-767.
22.
McCrae, R.R., & Costa, P.T. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. In L. A. Pervin & O. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 139-153). New York: Guilford.
23.
Mulder, M. (1976). Reduction of power differences in practice: The power distance reduction theory and its application. In G. Hofstede & M. S. Kassem (Eds.), European contributions to organize theory (pp. 79-94). Assen, Netherlands: Van Gorcum.
24.
Mulder, M. (1977). The daily power game. Leyden , Netherlands: Martinus.
25.
Nakane, C. (1970). Japanese society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
26.
Oyserman, D., Coon, H.M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses . Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3-72.
27.
Pratto, F., Liu, J.H., Levin, S., Sidanius, J., Shih, M., Bachrach, H., et al. (2000). Social dominance orientation and the legitimization of inequality across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , 31, 369-409.
28.
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L.M., & Malle, B.F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741-763.
29.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
30.
Schwartz, S.H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1-65). New York: Academic Press.
31.
Schwartz, S.H. (1994a). Are there universals in the content and structure of values?Journal of Social Issues, 50, 19-45.
32.
Schwartz, S.H. (1994b). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. In U. E. Kim, H. C. Triandis, et al. (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (Vol. 18, pp. 85-119). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33.
Schwartz, S.H. (2004). Mapping and interpreting cultural differences around the world. In H. Vinken, J. Soeters, & P. Ester (Eds.), comparing cultures, dimensions of culture in a comparative perspective (pp. 43-73). Leiden, Netherlands: Brill.
34.
Schwartz, S.H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Harris, M., & Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 519-542.
35.
Schwartz, S.H., & Sagiv, L. (1995). Identifying culture specifics in the content and structure of values. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , 26, 92-116.
36.
Schwartz, S.H., Sagiv, L., & Boehnke, K. (2000). Worries and values. Journal of Personality, 309-346.
37.
Singelis, T. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 20, 580-591.
38.
Singelis, T., Bond, M., Sharkey, W.F., & Lai, C.S.Y. (1999). Unpackaging culture's influence on self-esteem and embarassability. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , 30, 315-341.
39.
Takano, Y., & Osaka, E. (1999). An unsupported common view: Comparing Japan and the U.S. on individualism/ collectivism. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2, 311-341.
40.
Trafimow, D., Triandis, H.C., & Goto, S.G. (1991). Some tests of the distinction between the private self and the collective self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 649-655.
41.
Triandis, H.C., Bontempo, R., Betancourt, H., & Bond, M. (1986). The measurement of the etic aspects of individualism and collectivism across cultures. Australian Journal of Psychology , 38, 257-267.
42.
Uskul, A.K., Hynie, M., & Lalonde, R.N. (2004). Interdependence as a mediator between culture and interpersonal closeness for Euro-Canadians and Turks. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 174-191.
43.
Yukl, G., Fu, P.P., & McDonald, R. (2003). Cross-cultural differences in perceived effectiveness of influence tactics for initiating or resisting change. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 52, 68-82.
