Four studies investigated ideal standards for one’s marital partner and relationship held by Taiwan Chinese and European Americans. We first generated a list of attributes that tapped lay representations of marriage ideals based on free responses from Chinese and European Americans, and we uncovered attributes describing extended family that were overlooked in Western research (Study 1). We found similar ideal knowledge structures across the two cultural groups; importantly, Chinese prioritized ideals denoting financial resources and extended family to a greater extent than did European Americans (Study 2). These cultural differences were explained by interdependent self-construal (Study 3). Finally, the agreement between ideals and perceptions of current partner/relationship was related to positive relationship outcomes in both cultural groups (Study 4). Our research highlights both cultural similarities and differences in the content, structure, endorsement, and evaluative functions of ideals in Chinese and Western cultural contexts.
BeckerG. (1996). The meta-analysis of factor analyses: An illustration based on the cumulation of correlation matrices. Psychological Methods, 1, 341-353.
2.
BromanC. L. (2005). Marital quality in Black and White marriages. Journal of Family Issues, 26, 431-441.
3.
BryantC. M.CongerR. D.MeehanJ. M. (2001). The influence of in-laws on change in marital success. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 614-626.
4.
BussD. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1-49.
5.
BussD. M.AbbottM.AngleitnerA.AsherianA.BiaggioA.Blanco-VillasenorA.. . . TangK. S. (1990). International preferences in selecting mates: A study of 37 cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 21, 5-47.
6.
BussD. M.SchmittD. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: A contextual evolutionary analysis of human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204-232.
7.
BuunkB. P.DijkstraP.FetchenhauerD.KenrickD. T. (2002). Age and gender differences in mate selection criteria for various involvement levels. Personal Relationships, 9, 271-278.
8.
CantorN.MischelW.SchwartzJ. (1982). A prototype analysis of psychological situations. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 45-77.
9.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233-255.
10.
CrossS. E.HardinE.Gercek-SwingB. (2011). The what, how, why, and where of self-construal. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 142-179.
11.
CrossS. E.UskulA. K.Gercek-SwingB.SunbayZ.AlozkanC.GunsoyC.. . . Karakitapoglu-AygunZ. (2014). Cultural prototypes and dimensions of honor. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 232-249.
12.
DionK. K.DionK. L. (1993). Individualistic and collectivistic perspectives on gender and the cultural context of love and intimacy. Journal of Social Issues, 49, 53-59.
13.
EastwickP. W.LuchiesL. B.FinkelE. J.HuntL. L. (2014). The predictive validity of ideal partner preferences: A review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 623-665.
14.
EastwickP. W.NeffL. A. (2012). Do ideal partner preferences predict divorce? A tale of two metrics. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 3, 667-674.
15.
FaverC. A. (1982). Life satisfaction and the life-cycle: The effects of values and roles on women’s well-being. Sociology and Social Research, 66, 435-452.
16.
FehrB. (1988). Prototype analysis of the concepts of love and commitment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 557-579.
17.
FletcherG. J. O.KininmonthL. (1992). Measuring relationship beliefs: An individual differences scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 26, 371-397.
18.
FletcherG. J. O.SimpsonJ. A.ThomasG. (2000). Ideals, perceptions, and evaluations in early relationship development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 933-940.
19.
FletcherG. J. O.SimpsonJ. A.ThomasG.GilesL. (1999). Ideals in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 72-89.
20.
FurrR. M. (2008). A framework for profile similarity: Integrating similarity, normativeness, and distinctiveness. Journal of Personality, 76, 1267-1316.
21.
HeineS. J.LehmanD. R. (1999). Culture, self-discrepancies, and self-satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 915-925.
22.
HeineS. J.RenshawK. (2002). Interjudge agreement, self-enhancement, and liking: Cross-cultural divergences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 578-587.
23.
HenrichJ.HeineS. J.NorenzayanA. (2010). The weirdest people in the world?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61-135.
24.
HiewD. N.HalfordW. K.van der VijverF. J. R.LiuS. (2015). The Chinese-Western Intercultural Couple Standards Scale. Psychological Assessment, 27, 816-826.
25.
HoD. (1996). Filial piety and its psychological consequences. In BondM. H. (Ed.), The Handbook of Chinese psychology (pp. 155-165). Hong Kong, China: Oxford University Press.
26.
HofstedeG. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
27.
Hoshino-BrowneE.ZannaA. S.SpencerS. J.ZannaM. P.KitayamaS.LackenbauerS. (2005). On the cultural guises of cognitive dissonance: The case of easterners and westerners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 294-310.
28.
HsuF. L. K. (1981). Americans and Chinese: Passage to differences (3rd ed.). Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii.
29.
HuL.-T.BentlerP. M.Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424-453.
30.
JohnsonM. D. (2012). Healthy marriage initiatives: On the need for empiricism in policy implementation. American Psychologist, 67, 296-308.
31.
KarneyB. R.BradburyT. N. (2005). Contextual influences on marriage. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 171-174.
32.
KlineS. L.ZhangS. (2009). The role of relational communication characteristics and filial piety in mate preferences: Cross-cultural comparisons of Chinese and US college students. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 40, 325-353.
33.
KlineS. L.ZhangS.ManoharU.RyuS.SuzukiT.MustafaH. (2012). The role of communication and cultural concepts in expectations about marriage: Comparisons between young adults from six countries. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 36, 319-330.
34.
LeeA. Y.AakerJ.GardnerW. L. (2000). The pleasures and pains of distinct self-construals: The role of interdependence in regulatory focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 1122-1134.
35.
LeungK.BondM. H.de CarrasquelS. R.MunozC.HernandezM.MurakamiF.. . . SingelisT. (2002). Social axioms: The search for universal dimensions of general beliefs about how the world functions. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 286-302.
36.
LevineR.SatoS.HashimotoT.VermaJ. (1995). Love and marriage in eleven cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26, 554-571.
37.
LittleT. D.CunninghamW. A.ShaharG.WidamanK. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151-173.
38.
MaiselN. C.KarneyB. R. (2012). Socioeconomic status moderates associations among stressful events, mental health, and relationship satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 26, 654-660.
39.
MarigoldD. C.HolmesJ. G.RossM. (2007). More than words: Reframing compliments from romantic partners fosters security in low self-esteem individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 232-248.
40.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
41.
MeltzerA. L.McNultyJ. K.JacksonG. L.KarneyB. R. (2014). Sex differences in the implications of partner physical attractiveness for the trajectory of marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 418-428.
42.
NorenzayanA.HeineS. J. (2005). Psychological universals: What are they and how can we know?Psychological Bulletin, 131, 763-784.
43.
OverallN. C.FletcherG. J. O.SimpsonJ. A. (2006). Regulatory processes in intimate relationships: The role of ideal standards. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 662-685.
44.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717-731.
45.
RusbultC. E.MartzJ. M.AgnewC. R. (1998). The Investment Model Scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357-391.
46.
ShwederR. A.Balle-JensenL.GoldsteinW. (2003). Who sleeps by whom revisited. In ShwederR. A. (Ed.), Why do men barbecue? (pp. 46-73). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
47.
SimpsonJ. A.FletcherG. J. O.CampbellL. (2001). The structure and function of ideal standards in close relationships. In FletcherG. J. O.ClarkM. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Interpersonal processes (pp. 86-106). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
48.
SingelisT. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580-591.
49.
Toro-MornM.SprecherS. (2003). A cross-cultural comparison of mate preferences among university students: The United States vs. The People’s Republic of China (PRC). Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 34, 151-170.
50.
TuckerL. R. (1951). A method for synthesis of factor analysis studies (Personnel Research Section Report No. 984). Washington, DC: Department of the Army.
51.
vandeVijverF.LeungK. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
52.
WoodD.FurrR. M. (2015). The correlates of similarity estimates are often misleadingly positive: The nature and scope of the problem, and some solutions. Personality and Social Psychology Review. doi:10.1177/1088868315581119
53.
WuT.-F.CrossS. E.WuC.-W.ChoW.TeyS.-H. (2016). Choosing your mother or your spouse: Close relationship dilemmas in Taiwan and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. doi:10.1177/0022022115625837
54.
YehK.-H. (2003). The beneficial and harmful effects of filial piety: An integrative analysis. In YangK. S.HwangK. K.PedersonP. B.DaiboI. (Eds.), Asian social psychology: Conceptual and empirical contributions (pp. 67-82). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing.
55.
YehK.-H.BedfordO. (2003). A test of the dual filial piety model. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 215-228.
56.
ZhangS.KlineS. L. (2009). Can I make my own decision? A cross-cultural study of perceived social network influence in mate selection. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40, 3-23.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
