Sociocultural Differences in Self-Construal and Subjective Well-Being: A Test of Four Cultural Models

Abstract

In this study, the authors tested four cultural models—independence, interdependence, conflict, and integration—that describe the hypothesized relationships between dimensions of self-construal and components of subjective well-being among individualistic and collectivistic countries. Collectivistic countries that have undergone rapid socioeconomic changes (i.e., East Asian countries) and those with limited changes (i.e., African countries) were differentiated. Participants were 791 university students from four Western countries, 749 university students from three East Asian countries, and 443 university students from three African countries. Findings provided some support for the applicability of (a) the independence model to individuals from Western countries and (b) the integration model to individuals from East Asian countries. Mixed results were found among the African countries. The interdependence model is more applicable to African participants from the sub-Saharan region, but the integration model is more applicable to those from the North African region.

Beyond the ‘east–west’ dichotomy: Global variation in cultural models of selfhood.

“…This seems consistent with portrayals of Middle Eastern cultures as "honor cultures", combining an emphasis on toughness, machismo, and selfenhancement with a close attention to others and to the social consequences of one's actions (e.g., Abu-Lughod, 1985;Gregg, 2005;Maddux, San Martin, Sinaceur, & Kitayama, 2011). Supporting previous characterizations of African selves as interdependent (Adams & Dzokoto, 2003;Beattie, 1980;Chasiotis, Bender, Kiessling, & Hofer, 2010;Cheng et al, 2011;Eaton & Louw, 2000;Ma & Schoeneman, 1997), subSaharan African samples emphasized similarity and dependence on others. Against previous characterizations, these samples also showed a distinctive focus on self-interest and self-containment.…”

Explaining Differences in Subjective Well‐Being Across 33 Nations Using Multilevel Models: Universal Personality, Cultural Relativity, and National Income

“…Consistent with these theoretical notions, studies examining cross‐cultural differences in subjective well‐being provide evidence that factors reflecting the socioeconomic dynamics of a country, such as societal development (Kööts‐Ausmees, Realo, & Allik, ) and societal modernization (Cheng et al., ), are relevant moderators. For instance, members of developing countries undergoing rapid societal modernization are characterized by high levels of both independent and interdependent self‐construals (Cheng et al., ). These individuals are more prone to face conflict between two diverse sets of cultural values than those from collectivist societies undergoing a slower pace of economic development.…”

“…According to the tripartite conceptualization of subjective well‐being (e.g., Busseri & Sadava, ), a high level of subjective well‐being comprises a combination of three components: (a) a cognitive evaluation of life satisfaction, (b) the presence of positive affect, and (c) the relative absence of negative affect. Recognizing that subjective well‐being is important for communities and societies (Cheng et al., ), scholars from different realms of social science have formulated different hypotheses to explain variations in levels of subjective well‐being, and each hypothesis has been tested separately. Study (e.g., design, method) and sample (e.g., ethnicity, gender composition) characteristics vary considerably across studies, thus making comparison difficult.…”

Relationship of health locus of control with specific health behaviours and global health appraisal: a meta-analysis and effects of moderators

“…Cultural self-construal theory posits that there are vast individual differences in cultural self-construal within a given society (Markus & Kitayama, 1999), with some individuals characterised by a more individualist orientation while others by a more collectivist orientation regardless of the orientation of the country as a whole (Cheng et al, 2011). It is thus essential to study moderating effects at both the individual and country levels.…”