This article proposes a model of culture that adds an ontological dimension to conventional wisdom that approaches culture as social-ecological environments and associated practices. This new model entails a paradigm shift from epistemology to ontology and from a downstream to an upstream analysis of culture. The heuristic value of this novel model of culture consists in (1) rendering visible and intelligible the ontological universe of cultural agents; (2) bringing to light the rationality and niche connections essential to building a coherent ontological universe; (3) providing an explanatory framework of cultural loss as the disruption of coherence in one’s ontological universe; and (4) suggesting guidelines for undertaking viable interventions against the disruption and loss of cultures in this era of rampant globalization. Potential contributions of this model to building cultural and cross-cultural psychologies and to suggesting future research directions are discussed.
BerryJ. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In PadillaA. (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models and some new findings (pp. 9–25). Westview.
2.
BondM. H.LuQ.LunV. M.-C.SmithP. B. (2020). The wealth and competitiveness of national economic systems moderates the importance of Big Five personality dimensions for life satisfaction of employed persons in 18 nations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 51(5), 267–282.
3.
BourdieuP. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice (NiceR., Trans). Cambridge University Press. (Original French edition 1972)
4.
BourdieuP. (2000). Making the economic habitus: Algerian workers revisited. Ethnography, 1, 17–41.
5.
CliftonJ. D.BakerJ. D.ParkC. L.YadenD. B.CliftonA. B.TerniP.MillerJ. L.ZengG.GiorgiS.SchwartzH. A.SeligmanM. E. (2019). Primal world beliefs. Psychological Assessment, 31(1), 82–99.
6.
CurtinC. M.BarrettH. C.BolyanatzA.CrittendenA. N.FesslerD. M. T.FitzpatrickS.GurvenM.KanovskyM.KushnickG.LaurenceS.PisorA.ScelzaB.StichS.von RuedenC.HenrichJ. (2020). Kinship intensity and the use of mental states in moral judgment across societies. Evolution and Human Behavior, 41(5), 415–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2020.07.002
7.
DescolaP. (2013). Beyond nature and culture (LloydJ., Trans.). The University of Chicago Press.
8.
EnkeB. (2019). Kinship, cooperation, and the evolution of moral systems. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(2), 953–1019.
9.
FiskeA. P. (2000). Complementarity theory: Why human social capacities evolved to require cultural complements. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 76–94.
10.
FulmerC. A.GelfandM. J.KruglanskiA. W.Kim-PrietoC.DienerE.PierroA.HigginsE. T. (2010). On “feeling right” in cultural contexts: How person-culture match affects self-esteem and subjective well-being. Psychological Science, 21(11), 1563–1569.
11.
GoneJ. P. (2013). Redressing First Nations historical trauma: Theorizing mechanisms for indigenous culture as mental health treatment. Transcultural Psychiatry, 50(5), 683–706.
12.
GoneJ. P. (2021). The (post)colonial predicament in community mental health services for American Indians: Explorations in alter-Native psy-ence. American Psychologist, 76(9), 1514–1525.
13.
GoneJ. P.Calf LookingP. E. (2011). American Indian culture as substance abuse treatment: Pursuing evidence for a local intervention. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 43(4), 291–296.
14.
GoneJ. P.Calf LookingP. E. (2015). The Blackfeet Indian culture camp: Auditioning an alternative Indigenous treatment for substance use disorders. Psychological Services, 12(2), 83–91.
15.
GreenfieldM. P. (2018). Cross-cultural value mismatch: A by-product of migration and population diversity around the world. International Journal of Psychology, 53(S2), 1–2.
16.
HaigB. D. (2025). Repositioning construct validity theory: From nomological networks to pragmatic theories and their evaluation by explanatory means. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 20(2), 340–356.
17.
HajekA.KönigH.-H. (2022). Climate anxiety, loneliness and perceived social isolation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(22), 14991. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192214991
18.
HeideggerM. (1962). Being and time. Harper & Row.
19.
HeideggerM. (1971). Poetry, language, and thought (HofstadterA., Trans.). Harper & Row.
20.
HenrichJ. (2020). The WEIRDest people in the world: How the West became psychologically peculiar and particularly prosperous. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
21.
HenrichJ.BlasiD. E.CurtinC. M.DavisH. E.HongZ.KellyD.KroupinI. (2023). A cultural species and its cognitive phenotypes: Implications for philosophy. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 14, 349–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-021-00612-y
22.
HernandezJ. (2022). Fresh banana leaves: Healing indigenous landscapes through indigenous science. North Atlantic Books.
23.
HolbraadM.PedersenM. A. (2017). The ontological turn. Cambridge University Press.
24.
KandlerC.KühnS.MönkediekB.ForstnerA. J.BleidornW. (2024). A multidisciplinary perspective on person-environment fit: Relevance, measurement, and future directions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 33(3), 198–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214241242451
25.
LeungK.LamB. C. P.BondM. H.ConwayL. G.IIIGornickL. J.AmponsahB.BoehnkeK.DragolovG.BurgessS. M.GolestanehM.BuschH.HoferJ.EspinosaA.delC. D.FardisM.IsmailR.KurmanJ.LebedevaN.TatarkoA. N.SamD. L., . . . ZhouF. (2012). Developing and evaluating the Social Axioms Survey in eleven countries: Its relationship with the Five-Factor Model of personality. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(5), 833–857.
26.
Lévi-StraussC. (1969). Elementary structures of kinship (BellJ. H.von SturmerJ. R.NeedhamR., Trans.). Eyre and Spottswoods. (Original French edition 1949)
27.
MaturanaH. R.VarelaF. J. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. D. Reidel.
28.
MisraG.SundararajanL.TeoT.TingR. S.-K.YangJ. (in press). Decolonial research practices from an indigenous psychology perspective. American Psychologist.
29.
ParsonsM. A. (2022). “I miss my friends, but I also miss strangers”: Pandemic loneliness and the importance of place and practice. SSM – Mental Health, 2, Article 100121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmmh.2022.100121
30.
PikeI. L.CrockerR. M. (2020). “My own corner of loneliness”: Social isolation and place among Mexican immigrants in Arizona and Turkana pastoralists of Kenya. Transcultural Psychiatry, 57(5), 661–672. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363461520938286
31.
PomervilleA.GoneJ. P. (2019). Indigenous culture-as-treatment in the era of evidence-based mental health practice. In FlemingC.ManningM. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of Indigenous wellbeing (pp. 237–247). Routledge.
SamD. L.BerryJ. W. (2010). Acculturation: When individuals and groups of different cultural backgrounds meet. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 472–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610373075
34.
SchulzJ. F.Bahrami-radD.BeauchampJ. P.HenrichJ. (2019). The church, intensive kinship, and global psychological variation. Science, 366(6466), Article eaau5141. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau5141
35.
ShwederR.MahapatraM.MillerJ. (1987). Culture and moral development. In KaganJ.LambS. (Eds.), The emergence of morality in young children (pp. 1–83). University of Chicago Press.
36.
StandingG. (2011). The Precariat: The new dangerous class. Bloomsbury Academic.
37.
SundararajanL. (2015). Understanding emotion in Chinese culture: Thinking through psychology. Springer.
38.
SundararajanL. (2020a). A history of the concepts of harmony in Chinese culture. In W. Pickeren (Eds.), Oxford research encyclopedia of psychology (pp. 1–30). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.679.
39.
SundararajanL. (2020b). Spirituality in a civil religion: The Chinese notions of harmony. In DueckA. (Ed.), Indigenous psychology of spirituality: In my beginning is my end (pp. 51–69). Palgrave Macmillan.
40.
SundararajanL. (2020c). Strong-ties and weak-ties rationalities: Toward an expanded network theory. Review of General Psychology, 24, 134–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268020916438
41.
SundararajanL. (2021). Postscript: Hutu at the crossroads of knowledge and information. In MatthyssenM. (Ed.), Ignorance is bliss: The Chinese art of not knowing (pp. 345–366). Palgrave Macmillan.
42.
SundararajanL. (2023). An ontological turn for psychology in the age of the machine and global warming. International Perspectives in Psychology, 12(2), 123–129.
43.
SundararajanL.HwangK.-K.YehK.-H. (Eds.). (2020). Global psychology from indigenous perspectives: Visions inspired by K. S. Yang. Palgrave Macmillan.
44.
SundararajanL.TingR. S.-K.HsiehS.-K.KimS.-H. (2022). Religion, cognition, and emotion: What can automated text analysis tell us about culture?The Humanistic Psychologist, 50(2), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.1037/hum000020
45.
SundararajanL.YehK.-H. (2022). Strong ties and weak ties rationality: Theory and scale development. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 56(2), 405–419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-021-09645-5
46.
SundararajanL.ZhangK. J.TingR. S.-K.XieZ. Y. (2025). At the cross-roads of cultures: HIV/AIDS stigma among the Yi in Liangshan, Southwest China [Manuscript submitted for publication].
47.
ThongJ. J.-A.TingR. S.-K.JobsonL.SundararajanL. (2024). In the wake of religious conversions: Differences in cognition and emotion across three religious communities of a hunter gatherer tribe in Malaysia. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 16(2), 182–192. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000493
48.
TingR. S.-K.HtaM. K. Z.YehK.-H.NgV. H.-C.LiuC.XieZ.-Y.ChenY.-F.SundararajanL. (2024). Mapping culture and rationality across four countries: Expanding the conceptual horizons of strong-ties and weak-ties rationality. The Humanistic Psychologist, 52(4), 392–413. https://doi.org/10.1037/hum0000339
49.
TingR. S. K.SundararajanL. (2018). Culture, cognition and emotion in China’s religious ethnic minorities: Voices of suffering among the Yi. Palgrave Macmillan.
50.
TingR. S.-K.ZhangK. J.LiM.-D.ChooJ.-Y.LewuA.ZhangK.-N.SundararajanL. (2025). “What is HIV/AIDS?”: A qualitative study on AIDS perception among the Yi-Nuosu of Liangshan China [Manuscript submitted for publication].
51.
WuM. S.ZhouC.ChenH.CaiH.SundararajanL. (2018). Cultural value mismatch in urbanizing China: A large-scale analysis of collectivism and happiness based on social media and nationwide survey. International Journal of Psychology, 53, 54–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12523
52.
YangK. S. (1997). Indigenizing westernized Chinese psychology. In BondM. H. (Ed.), Working at the interface of cultures: Eighteen lives in social science (Chapter 6, pp. 62–76). Routledge.
53.
YangK.-S. (2012). Indigenous psychology, Westernized psychology, and indigenized psychology: A non-Western psychologist’s view. Chang Gung Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 5(1), 1–32. Reprinted in SundararajanL.HwangK. K.YehK.-H. (Eds), Global psychology from indigenous perspectives: Visions inspired by K. S. Yang (pp. 265–291). Palgrave Macmillan.
54.
YangK.-S.WenC.-I. (1982). The Sinicization of research in social and behavioral science. Institute of Ethnology, Academia Sinica.
55.
YangY. (2009). Guanxilization or categorization: Psychological mechanisms contributing to the formation of the Chinese concept of “us”. Social Sciences in China, 30(2), 49–67. http://www.informaworld.com
56.
YehK.-H.SundararajanL.TingR. S.-K.LiuC.LiuT.ZhangK. (2023). A cross-cultural study of strong ties and weak ties rationalities: Toward an ontological turn in psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist, 51(3), 235–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/hum0000284
57.
YehK.-H.Terpstra-TongJ.TingR. S.-K.BondM. H.KhoslaM.YadavV. P.ShuklaS.LiuC.SundararajanL. (2024). Strong-ties and weak-ties rationalities: Toward a mental model of the consequences of kinship intensity. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, Article 1476018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1476018
