Cultural variables from many different cross-cultural studies can be divided into two clusters of variables that are strongly correlated within each cluster. This is reflected in two factors that are found to be reproduced by independent sets of cultural variables and also reflected in several different cross-cultural studies. The first factor, called superfactor, reflects the combined effects of development and modernization, together with social-psychological effects such as collectivism, conservatism, regality, and tightness. The second factor, called East Asian factor, combines several effects related to East Asian cultures, and possibly also differences in response style. These two factors can be found in several previously published cultural maps, but rotated differently. The common practice of factor rotation has obscured similarities between many different cross-cultural studies. Many previously published cultural factors with different names are in fact differently rotated solutions reflecting the same or closely related underlying cultural differences.
BeugelsdijkS.WelzelC. (2018). Dimensions and dynamics of national culture: Synthesizing Hofstede with Inglehart. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(10), 1469–1505.
2.
BondM. H.LeungK.AuA.TongK.-K.De CarrasquelS. R.MurakamiF.… Rees LewisJ. (2004). Culture-level dimensions of social axioms and their correlates across 41 cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(5), 548–570.
3.
BondM. H.LunV. M. -C. (2014). Citizen-making: The role of national goals for socializing children. Social Science Research, 44, 75–85.
4.
Chinese Culture Connection. (1987). Chinese values and the search for culture-free dimensions of culture. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 18(2), 143–164.
5.
FangT. (2003). A critique of Hofstede’s fifth national culture dimension. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 3(3), 347–368.
6.
FischerR. (2013). Gene-environment interactions are associated with endorsement of social hierarchy values and beliefs across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(7), 1107–1121.
7.
FogA. (2017). Warlike and peaceful societies: The interaction of genes and culture. Open Book Publishers.
8.
GelfandM. J.RaverJ. L.NishiiL.LeslieL. M.LunJ.LimB. C., . . . Others. (2011). Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. Science, 332(6033), 1100–1104.
9.
GuoT.SpinaR. (2019). Cross-cultural variations in extreme rejecting and extreme affirming response styles. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 50(8), 955–971.
10.
HarzingA. W. (2006). Response styles in cross-national survey research: A 26-country study. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 6(2), 243–266.
11.
HofstedeG.HofstedeG. J.MinkovM. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
12.
HouseR. J.HangesP. J.JavidanM.DorfmanP. W.GuptaV. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. SAGE.
13.
InglehartR. (2018). Cultural evolution: Peoples motivations are changing and reshaping the world. Cambridge University Press.
14.
InglehartR.WelzelC. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: The human development sequence. Cambridge University Press.
15.
LevineR. V.NorenzayanA. (1999). The pace of life in 31 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30(2), 178–205.
16.
LevineR. V.NorenzayanA.PhilbrickK. (2001). Cross-cultural differences in helping strangers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 543–560.
17.
LiL. M. W.BondM. H. (2010). Value change: Analyzing national change in citizen secularism across four time periods in the world values survey. The Social Science Journal, 47(2), 294–306.
18.
MalekiA.de JongM. (2014). A proposal for clustering the dimensions of national culture. Cross-Cultural Research, 48(2), 107–143.
19.
MinkovM. (2009). Nations with more dialectical selves exhibit lower polarization in life quality judgments and social opinions. Cross-Cultural Research, 43(3), 230–250.
20.
MinkovM. (2011). Cultural differences in a globalizing world. Emerald.
21.
MinkovM. (2013). Cross-cultural analysis: The science and art of comparing the world’s modern societies and their cultures. SAGE.
22.
MinkovM. (2014). The K factor, societal hypometropia, and national values: A study of 71 nations. Personality and Individual Differences, 66, 153–159.
23.
MinkovM.BondM. H.DuttP.SchachnerM.MoralesO.SanchezC.JandosovaJ.KhassenbekovY.MuddB. (2018). A reconsideration of Hofstede’s fifth dimension: New flexibility versus monumentalism data from 54 countries. Cross-Cultural Research, 52(3), 309–333.
24.
MinkovM.DuttP.SchachnerM.MoralesO.SanchezC.JandosovaJ.KhassenbekovY.MuddB. (2017). A revision of Hofstede’s individualism-collectivism dimension: A new national index from a 56-country study. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 24(3), 386–404.
25.
MinkovM.HofstedeG. (2012). Hofstede’s fifth dimension: New evidence from the World Values Survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(1), 3–14.
26.
NardonL.SteersR. M. (2009). The culture theory jungle: Divergence and convergence in models of national culture. In BhagatR. S.SteersR. M. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of culture, organizations, and work (pp. 3–22). Cambridge University Press.
27.
NisbettR. (2004). The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerners think differently. . . and why. Simon and Schuster.
28.
OweE.VignolesV. L.BeckerM.BrownR.SmithP. B.LeeS. W.EasterbrookM.GadreT.ZhangX.GheorghiuM. (2013). Contextualism as an important facet of individualism-collectivism: Personhood beliefs across 37 national groups. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(1), 24–45.
29.
RonenS.ShenkarO. (2013). Mapping world cultures: Cluster formation, sources and implications. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(9), 867–897.
30.
SaucierG.KennerJ.IurinoK.MalhamP. B.ChenZ.ThalmayerA. G.… AltschulC. (2015). Cross-cultural differences in a global “Survey of World Views.”Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(1), 53–70.
31.
SchmittD. P. (2005). Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: A 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(2), 247–275.
32.
SchaferJ. L. (1997). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
33.
SchwartzS. H. (1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. In KimU.TriandisH. C.KagitcibasiC.ChoiS. -C.YoonG. (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 85–119). SAGE.
34.
SchwartzS. H. (2006). A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and applications. Comparative Sociology, 5(2–3), 137–182.
35.
SmithP. B.TrompenaarsF.DuganS. (1995). The Rotter locus of control scale in 43 countries: A test of cultural relativity. International Journal of Psychology, 30(3), 377–400.
36.
StankovL. (2015). Four GLOBE dimensions of perceived social norms in 33 countries. Learning and Individual Differences, 41, 30–42.
37.
StankovL.LeeJ. (2015). Toward a psychological atlas of the world with mixture modeling. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 47(2), 249–262.
38.
StankovL.LeeJ.van de VijverF. (2014). Two dimensions of psychological country-level differences: Conservatism/liberalism and harshness/softness. Learning and Individual Differences, 30, 22–33.
39.
StankovL.SaucierG. (2015). Social axioms in 33 countries. Good replicability at the individual but less so at the country level. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(2), 296–315.
40.
TarasV.RowneyJ.SteelP. (2009). Half a century of measuring culture: Review of approaches, challenges, and limitations based on the analysis of 121 instruments for quantifying culture. Journal of International Management, 15(4), 357–373.
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.
