Cheung Wing-Yee, Maio Gregory R, Rees Kerry J, Kamble Shanmukh, Mane Sangeetha
University of Southampton, UK
Cardiff University, UK.
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2016 Jun;42(6):769-81. doi: 10.1177/0146167216643932.
Three studies tested whether individualism-collectivism moderates the extent to which values are endorsed as ideal self-guides and ought self-guides, and the consequences for regulatory focus and emotion. Across Studies 1 and 2, individualists endorsed values that are relatively central to the self as stronger ideals than oughts, whereas collectivists endorsed them as ideals and oughts to a similar degree. Study 2 found that individualists justified central values using reasons that were more promotion focused than prevention focused, whereas collectivists used similar amount of prevention-focused and promotion-focused reasons. In Study 3, individualists felt more dejected after violating a central (vs. peripheral) value and more agitated after violating a peripheral (vs. central) value. Collectivists felt a similar amount of dejection regardless of values centrality and more agitation after violating central (vs. peripheral) values. Overall, culture has important implications for how we regulate values that are central or peripheral to our self-concept.
三项研究检验了个人主义-集体主义是否会调节价值观被认可为理想自我导向和应该自我导向的程度,以及对调节焦点和情绪的影响。在研究1和研究2中,个人主义者将相对自我核心的价值观认可为比应该价值观更强的理想价值观,而集体主义者对它们作为理想价值观和应该价值观的认可程度相似。研究2发现,个人主义者使用更多侧重于促进而非预防的理由来为核心价值观辩护,而集体主义者使用的侧重于预防和促进的理由数量相似。在研究3中,个人主义者在违反核心(相对于边缘)价值观后感到更沮丧,在违反边缘(相对于核心)价值观后感到更焦虑。集体主义者无论价值观的核心程度如何都感到相似程度的沮丧,在违反核心(相对于边缘)价值观后感到更焦虑。总体而言,文化对于我们如何调节自我概念核心或边缘的价值观具有重要影响。