Uyghur-Chinese and Han-Chinese differences on social orientation

Abstract

In two studies, the authors predicted and found that Uyghur-Chinese are more independent and interdependent than Han-Chinese in explicit and implicit measurements: (a) Uyghur-Chinese are more independent in explicit beliefs and show strong dispositional bias and express more socially disengaging emotion and more relational mobility. Their independence could partially mediate the relationship between culture and dispositional bias and socially disengaging emotion and relational mobility. (b) At the same time, Uyghur-Chinese are more interdependent in explicit beliefs and show strong situational bias and express more socially engaging emotion and more holistic thinking style. Their interdependence could partially mediate the relationship between culture and situational bias and socially engaging emotion and holism. The results suggest that Uyghur-Chinese may have a unique self-construal pattern different from the eastern-western paradigm.

Historical Sustenance Style and Social Orientations in China: Chinese Mongolians Are More Independent Than Han Chinese

“…Previous studies have identified differences in social orientations between different ethnic groups, i.e., the Uyghur and Han Chinese (Ren et al, 2014) and between Northern and Southern Chinese , which was consistent with our results. We assume the differences observed in the current study are related to the fact that the Mongolian have traditionally been known as nomadic herders (Li and Huntsinger, 2011;Wang et al, 2013), while the Han Chinese have been known as traditional agrarian community .…”

“…According to Uskul et al (2008), exploring variations in cognitive tendencies within an environment with shared identity, ethnicity, or language in relation to variations in social orientations is extremely useful; it allows for enhanced control over a potentially large number of confounding variables (Uskul et al, 2008). This premise has been confirmed by several studies that reported differences between the Uyghur Chinese and Han Chinese in terms of social orientation (Ren et al, 2014), as well as the Hokkaido Japanese and mainland Japanese, where the former were more independent and showed more dispositional bias in attribution (Kitayama et al, 2006). Furthermore, Northern Italians have been shown to be more independent than Southern Italians (Martella and Maass, 2000), and neighboring villages in Turkey were observed to diverge in terms of individual/interdependent orientations based on their main economic activities (Uskul et al, 2008).…”

“…China has been traditionally regarded as a collectivistic country, and the Chinese are seen as more collectivist than most other populations on earth, which is traced back predominantly to their Confucian heritage (Nisbett and Masuda, 2003). Nevertheless, recent research has shown variations in the social orientations of the Uyghur and Han Chinese (Ren et al, 2014) and between the northern and southern Chinese , and Confucianism falls short in explaining these differences (Van de Vliert et al, 2013). The Mongolian have traditionally been known as nomadic herders (Li and Huntsinger, 2011;Wang et al, 2013), while the Han Chinese have been known as a traditional agrarian community .…”

“…Accordingly, different researchers have shown that the protestant religion has led to individualism in western cultures, unlike Catholicism, which has promoted community, interdependence, and collectivism (Oyserman et al, 2002). Also, while the Han Chinese do not have formal religion and are predominantly oriented toward Confucianism (Ren et al, 2014), the Mongolian are known to practice the worship of Heaven (80%), Buddhism (12%), Christianity (2%), and Islam (1%). Thus, future research should examine these practices more in detail, along with their potential impacts on the social orientations of these ethnic groups.…”

An Integrated Ecological Approach to Mapping Variations in Collectivism Within China: Introducing the Triple-Line Framework

“…Evidence for collectivism differences between Region I and the other regions has mainly come from studies comparing Uyghur, Tibetan, and Mongolian ethnic groups with Han groups. Ren et al (2014) found that Uyghur Chinese exhibited both high individualism and high collectivism in self-report questionnaires, attribution, relational mobility, social engaging/ disengaging emotions, and other tasks compared with Han Chinese. Mamat et al (2014, Study 2) found that Uyghur Chinese were lower in relational self than Han Chinese using a self-reference paradigm task.…”