Restricted accessOtherFirst published online 1996-03
A Plea for a Hypothesis-Generating Approach to Link the Individual's World of Meaning and Society's Cultural Orientation: A Commentary on Oerter et al. (1996)
After a brief summary of my understanding of the authors' conceptual framework for cross-cultural comparison, I suggest that the universal levels of conceptualization that the authors claim to exist may be a mere reflection of their conception of human nature which gives a priority to cognitive ability. In order to understand the multiplicity of factors involved in the formation of the individual's world of meanings, including the concept of human beings, a new theoretical framework is proposed. A change from a hypothesis-testing approach to a hypothesis-generating orientation is advocated.
Glaser, B.G.
, & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
2.
Markus, H.
, & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
3.
Minoura, Y.
(1992). A sensitive period for the incorporation of a cultural meaning system: A study of Japanese children growing up in the United States. Ethos, 20(3), 304-339.
4.
Oerter, R.
(1994). Persons' conception of human nature: A cross-cultural comparison. In J. Valsiner (Ed.), Child development within culturally structured environments: Vol. 3. Comparative-cultural and constructivist perspectives (pp. 210-242). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
5.
Oerter, R.
, Oerter, R., Agostiani, H., Kim, H., & Wibowo, S. (1996). The concept of human nature in East Asia: Etic and emic characteristics. Culture & Psychology, 2(1), 9-51.
6.
Sapir, E.
(1958). Culture, language and personality: Selected essays. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
7.
Triandis, H.C.
(1989). The self and the social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96, 506-520.
