The authors outline a strategy for introducing a Western psychological construct into a different culture. A series of three studies tested how the construct of individuation functions in a collectivist culture. It was hypothesized that the original one-factor model of individuation would not be sufficient to capture the meaning of individuating behaviors in a collectivist culture. Rather, a culture-specific model with two factors, namely, Taking the Lead and Seeking Attention, was expected. In Study 1, the two-factor model showed a better fit than the original one-factor model in a Chinese sample. In Study 2, replicating the original one-factor model in an individualistic culture eliminated an explanation for the obtained two-factor model based on a methodological artifact. In Study 3, the authors examined the nomological network of the two types of individuation and determined whether the imported construct of individuation changes meanings in the new culture.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barbaranelli, C. , Caprara, G., & Maslach, C. (1997). Individuation and the Five Factor Model of personality traits. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 13, 75-84.
2.
Block, J. (1978). The Q-sort method in personality assessment and psychiatric research. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. (Original work published 1961)
3.
Bond, M. H. , & Forgas, J. P. (1984). Linking person perception to behavior intention across cultures: The role of cultural collectivism. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 15, 337-352.
4.
Bond, M. H. , & King, A. Y. C. (1985). Coping with the threat of Westernization in Hong Kong. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 9, 351-364.
5.
Brislin, R. W. , Lonner, W., & Thorndike, R. M. (1973). Cross-cultural research methods. New York: John Wiley.
6.
Costa, P. T., Jr. , & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
7.
Cronbach, L. J. , & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281-302.
8.
Hayduk, L. A. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL: Essentials and advances. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
9.
Ho, E. K. F. (1994). Validating the Five-Factor Model of personality: The Hong Kong case. Unpublished bachelor’s thesis, Chinese University of Hong Kong.
10.
Jöreskog, K. G. , & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the simplis command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International, Inc.
11.
Kagitcibasi, C. (1984). Socialization in traditional society: A challenge to psychology. International Journal of Psychology, 19, 145-157.
12.
Kagitcibasi, C. (1995). Is psychology relevant to global human development issues?American Psychologist, 50, 293-300.
13.
Kwan, V. S. Y. , Bond, M. H., & Singelis, T. M. (1997). Pancultural explanations for life satisfaction: Adding relationship harmony to self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(5), 1038-1051.
14.
Markus, H. R. , & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
15.
Maslach, C. (1974). Social and personal bases of individuation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 411-425.
16.
Maslach, C. , Santee, R. T., & Wade, C. (1987). Individuation, gender role, and dissent: Personality mediators of situational forces. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1088-1093.
17.
Maslach, C. , Stapp, J., & Santee, R. T. (1985). Individuation: Conceptual analysis and assessment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 729-738.
18.
McArthur, L. Z. , & Baron, R. M. (1983). Toward an ecological theory of social perception. Psychological Review, 90, 215-238.
19.
McCrae, R. R. , & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52, 509-516.
20.
McCrae, R. R. , Costa, P. T., Jr., & Yik, M. S. (1996). Universal aspects of Chinese personality structure. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The handbook of Chinese psychology. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
21.
McCrae, R. R. , Yik, M. S. M., Trapnell, P. D., Bond, M. H., & Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Interpreting personality profiles across cultures: Bilingual, acculturation, and peer rating studies of Chinese undergraduates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1041-1055.
22.
Paulhus, D. L. , Duncan, J., & Yik, M. S. M. (2000). Patterns of shyness in students of European and Asian heritage. Unpublished manuscript, University of British Columbia.
23.
Sears, R. R. (1971). Transcultural variables and conceptual equivalence. In B. Kaplan (Ed.), Studying personality cross-culturally (pp. 445-455). New York: Harper & Row.
24.
Singelis, T. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580-591.
25.
Triandis, H. C. , McCusker, C., & Hui, C. H. (1990). Multimethod probes of individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1006-1020.
26.
Van de Vijver, F. , & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis of comparative research. In J. W. Berry, Y. H. Poortinga, & J. Pandey (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: Vol. 1. Social psychology, personality and psychopathology. Needham, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
27.
Whitney, K. , Sagrestano, L. M., & Maslach, C. (1994). Establishing the social impact of individuation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1140-1153.
28.
Wu, D. Y. H. (1996). Looking at problems in Chinese child-rearing from an anthropological perspective. Thought and Word (Taiwan), 3, 741-745 (in Chinese).
29.
Yang, K. S. (1986). Chinese personality and its change. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The psychology of the Chinese people (pp. 106-170). Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
30.
Yang, K. S. (1996). The psychological transformation of the Chinese people as a result of societal modernization. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The handbook of Chinese psychology (pp. 479-498). Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
31.
Yang, K. S. , Yu, A. B., & Yeh, K. H. (1991). Zhongguoren de geren chuantongxing yu xiandaixing: Gainian yu celiang [Chinese individual traditionality and modernity: Conceptualization and measurement]. In K. S. Yang & K. K. Hwang (Eds.), The mind and behavior of the Chinese: Selected papers of the 1989 Taipei conference (pp. 241-306). Taipei, Taiwan: Laureate Publishing Co. (in Chinese).
32.
Yik, M. S. M. , & Bond, M. H. (1993). Exploring the dimensions of Chinese person perception with indigenous and imported constructs: Creating a culturally balanced scale. International Journal of Psychology, 28, 75-95.
33.
Zhang, J. , & Bond, M. H. (1998). Personality and filial piety among college students in two Chinese societies: The added value of indigenous constructs. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 402-417.
