To check the validity of individualism-collectivism theory in understanding conflict behaviors within a culture, two experiments were run using vignette method. In Experiment 1, children (half Individualists and half Collectivists) were asked to resolve a conflict in which their wish was incompatible with that of another. The other belonged to various in-groups or out-groups. The Collectivists showed far greater discrimination between in-group and out-group members than did the Individualists. In Experiment 2, the same children were asked to play the role of an allocator who, having contributed more to a task, was to divide the reward between him- or herself and the co-worker. Two independent variables manipulated were the co-worker's membership (in-group/ out-group) and the likelihood of future interaction with the co-worker (high/low). Individualists favored an equitable division over an equal division regardless of the experimental manipulations. The Collectivists, however, favored the equitable division only in the out-group-low future interaction condition. In other conditions, they favored equal division. The results provide strong support to the theory of collectivism-individualism, originally developed to understand cross-cultural differences in social acts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bond, M. H. , Leung, K., & Wan, K. C. (1982). How does cultural collectivism operate?: The impact of task and maintenance contributions on reward distribution. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 13, 186-200.
2.
Bond, M. H. , Wan, K. C., Leung, K., & Giacalone, R. (1985). How are responses to verbal insult related to cultural collectivism and power distance?Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16, 111-127.
3.
Campbell, D. T. (1986). Science's social system of validity-enhancing collective belief change and the problems of the social sciences. In D. Fiske & R. Shweder (Eds.), Metatheory in social science. (pp. 108-135). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4.
Choi, S. C. , Kim, U., & Choi, S. H. (in press). Korean culture and collective representation. In U. Kim & J. Berry (Eds.), Indigenous psychologies: Experience and research in cultural context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5.
Commins, B. , & Lockwood, J. (1979). The effects of status differences, favored treatment, and equity on intergroup comparisons. European Journal of Social Psychology, 9, 281-289.
6.
Doise, W. (1986). Levels of explanation in social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
Frager, R. (1970). Conformity and anticonfornity in Japan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 15, 203-210.
8.
Han, G. , & Choe, S.-M. (1995). Effects of family, region, and school network-ties on interpersonal intentions and the analysis of network activities in Korea. Manuscript submitted for publication.
9.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
10.
Hui, C. H. (1988). Measurement of individualism-collectivism. Journal of Research on Personality, 22, 17-36.
11.
Hui, C. H. , & Triandis, H. C. (1986). Individualism-collectivism: A study of cross-cultural researchers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 17, 225-248.
12.
Kagitcibasi, C. (1990). A critical appraisal of individualism and collectivism: Towards a new formulation. Paper presented at the International Conference, Individualism and Collectivism: Psychocultural Perspectives from East and West, Seoul, Korea.
13.
Kim, K. , Park, H.-J., & Suzuki, N. (1990). Reward allocations in the United States, Japan, and Korea: A comparison of individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 188-198.
14.
Leung, K. (1988). Some determinants of conflict avoidance. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 19, 125-136.
15.
Leung, K. , & Bond, M. H. (1984). The impact of cultural collectivism on reward allocation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 793-804.
16.
Leung, K. , & Iwawaki, S. (1988). Cultural collectivism and distributive behavior. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 19, 35-49.
17.
Leung, K. , & Park, H.-J. (1986). Effects of interactional goal on choice of allocation rule: A cross-national study. Organizational Behavior and Hunan Decision Processes, 37, 111-120.
18.
Levine, R. , & Campbell, D. T. (1972). Ethnocentrism: Theories of conflict, ethnic attitudes, and group behavior. New York: Wiley.
19.
Matsuda, N. (1985). Strong, quasi-, and weak conformity among Japanese in the modified Asch procedure. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16, 83-97.
20.
Pepitone, A. , & Triandis, H. C. (1987). On the universality of social psychological theories. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 18,471-498.
21.
Sagan, K. , Pondel, M., & Wittig, M. (1981). The effect of anticipated future interactionon reward allocation in same- and opposite-sex dyads. Journal of Personality, 49, 438-449.
22.
Segall, M. (1983). On the search for the independent variable in cross-cultural psychology. In S. H. Irvine & J. Berry (Eds.), Human assessment and cultural factor. (pp. 127-138). London: NATO Conference Series.
23.
Shapiro, E. G. (1975). Effect of expectations of future interaction on reward allocations in dyads: Equity or equality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31-35, 873-880.
24.
Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. New York: Academic Press.
25.
Trriandis, H. C. (1988). Collectivism and individualism: Areconceptualization of a basic concept in cross cultural psychology. In G. K. Verma & C. Bargley (Eds.), Personality, attitudes, and cognition. (pp. 60-95). London: Macmillan.
26.
Triandis, H. C. (1990). Theoretical and methodological approaches in individualism and collectivism. Paper presented at the International Conference, Individualism and Collectivism: Psychocultural Perspectives from East and West, Seoul, Korea.
27.
Triandis, H. C. , Bontempo, R., Villareal, M. J., Asai, M., & Lucca, M. (1988). Individualism and collectivism: Cross-cultural perspectives on self-in-group relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 323-338.
28.
Triandis, H. C. , Leung, K., Villareal, M., & Clack, F. (1985). Allocentric versus idiocentric tendencies: Convergent and discriminant validation. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 395-415.
29.
Triandis, H. C. , McCusker, C., & Hui, C. H. (1990). Multimethod probes of individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1006-1020.
30.
Walster, E. , Berscheid, E., & Walster, G. W. (1976). Equity theory: Toward a general theory of social interaction. In L. Berkowitz & E. Walster (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology. (Vol. 9). New York: Academic Press.
31.
Wetherell, M. (1982). Cross-cultural studies of minimal groups: Implications for the social identity theory of intergroup relations. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
Williams, T. , & Sogon, S. (1984). Group composition and conforming behavior in Japanese students. Japanese Psychological Research, 26, 231-234.
33.
Yi, J. H. (1991). A cross-cultural analysis of the sense of community from individualist-collectivist perspectives. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Kansas City.
