Norm enforcement may be important for resolving conflicts and promoting cooperation. However, little is known about how preferred responses to norm violations vary across cultures and across domains. In a preregistered study of 57 countries (using convenience samples of 22,863 students and non-students), we measured perceptions of the appropriateness of various responses to a violation of a cooperative norm and to atypical social behaviors. Our findings highlight both cultural universals and cultural variation. We find a universal negative relation between appropriateness ratings of norm violations and appropriateness ratings of responses in the form of confrontation, social ostracism and gossip. Moreover, we find the country variation in the appropriateness of sanctions to be consistent across different norm violations but not across different sanctions. Specifically, in those countries where use of physical confrontation and social ostracism is rated as less appropriate, gossip is rated as more appropriate.

Despite a proliferation in the number of instruments for assessing the Big 5 traits, extant measures are beset with limitations that render their use problematic in the workplace; that is, they contain generic as opposed to occupationally relevant items, couched in idiosyncratic, culturally specific language, demanding high reading ability levels, and are overly cumbersome. The 5 Factor Model Questionnaire (FFMQ) was devised to address these concerns. Five studies, spanning multiple samples and organizational contexts, demonstrate that the FFMQ is suitable for use with individuals drawn from the widest possible range of ability levels and cultural and socioeconomic groupings. The findings of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses are in line with the hypothesized factor structure, and the resulting new scales exhibit acceptable reliability (internal consistency and temporal stability) and convergent and discriminant validity in respect of Costa and McCrae's (1992) NEO‐PI‐R scales. Furthermore, the new FFMQ scales are differentially correlated with independent ratings of overall job proficiency across three occupationally distinct samples.

Purpose The three neighbouring nations of Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore participated in the 2009, 2012 and 2015 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) cycles. Despite many similarities between the three nations, Singapore has consistently been a top PISA performer, with Malaysia and Indonesia in the bottom third of the international league tables. This paper aims to sketch the comparative Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) context and uses PISA-derived metrics to contrast how differences in decision-making and school leadership, particularly in relation to staff development and training practices, may impact school performance across Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore. Design/methodology/approach Ten scales from the 2015 PISA School Questionnaire for Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia were analysed using ANOVA and t-tests as an aid to exploring the extent to which different approaches to teacher training, school leadership and governance may impact student performance. Findings Although Malaysian and Indonesian school principals report higher levels of autonomy than Singaporean peers, other evidence suggests that schools in Singapore may actually have greater decision latitude. Most significantly, Singaporean teachers take responsibility for key staff development decisions and skills transfer, whereas in Indonesia and Malaysia, teacher training is controlled by government administrators, a factor that may be a critical differentiator between the school systems. Practical implications In Singapore, teacher training is controlled by and for teachers through professional learning teams within schools and professional learning communities across schools; in Malaysia and Indonesia, similar decisions are taken by external administrators. Giving Malaysian and Indonesian teachers control over their own training could be a simple and powerful reform to target skills gaps and to generalise improvements in pedagogy quickly across schools and thus to lift school performance in these countries. Originality/value This paper highlights how differences at systemic and school levels, particularly in approaches to teacher training and leadership and may explain differentials in school performance in three ASEAN education systems.

A sample of Asian participants was assessed using the Brunel Mood Scale and the Positive & Negative Affect Scale before and after music mood induction procedures to which each participant was randomly assigned. A series of mixed analyses of variance with the type of music (happy/positive vs. sad/negative) as the between-subject factor and pre–post music exposure as the within-subject factor revealed that the sad music induction attenuated the positive moods Vigor and Happiness, as well as the negative moods Anger, Tension, Fatigue, and Confusion but had no significant impact on Depression or Calmness, casting doubt on the robustness of Thayer’s circumplex model of mood formation. The happy music induction increased Vigor and decreased Fatigue and Confusion, suggesting that positive music has the potential to lift energy levels. The happy music induction led to increases in Positive Affect only, whereas the sad music condition attenuated both Positive Affect and Negative affect, casting doubt on Watson and Tellegen’s contention that the Affect systems are independent and suggesting that the bipolarity hypothesis may not provide a comprehensive explanation of mood formation. The mechanisms by which music may impact mood and potential differences in the expression of affect between Asian and Western participants are discussed.