Individual differences in the motivation to comply across cultures: the impact of social obligation

被引:27
作者
Barrett, DW
Wosinska, W
Butner, J
Petrova, E
Gornik-Durose, M
Cialdini, RB
机构
[1] Arizona State Univ W, Glendale, AZ 85306 USA
[2] Silesian Univ, Dept Psychol, PL-40007 Katowice, Poland
[3] Arizona State Univ, Dept Psychol, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA
关键词
individualism; collectivism; social responsibility; IC primacy; social obligation; cross-cultural differences;
D O I
10.1016/j.paid.2003.08.024
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
This study investigated the hypothesis that similar behavior in different cultures may mask individual differences in the reasons for that behavior. Most previous research on culture and behavior has examined culture-based differences in overt behavior. In contrast, the present research focused on cultural variation in reasons for identical behavior (that is, individual differences in motivation), rather than cultural variation in behavior itself. Specifically, we investigated the impact of personal individual-collective primacy, personal individualism-collectivism, and nationality on social obligation-based compliance in Poland and the United States. We found that, in both nations, collectivists were more likely to be motivated to comply with the same request for other-oriented rather than self-oriented reasons and that collective-primacy persons reported a greater tendency to comply with a request to help a stranger for reasons of social obligation to their group than did individual-primacy persons. Our research (1) indicates that individual differences in motivation may underlie similar behavior in different cultures; (2) points to an important new direction for research into individual differences across cultures; and (3) demonstrates the value of circumscribed measures of cultural orientation in the prediction of behavior above and beyond a global measure. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:19 / 31
页数:13
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], PRACTICE SOCIAL INFL
[2]  
Bierbrauer Gunter., 1994, Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Method, and Applications, P189
[3]   Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Asch's (1952b, 1956) Line judgment task [J].
Bond, R ;
Smith, PB .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1996, 119 (01) :111-137
[4]   COMPLIANCE AND VALUE INTERNALIZATION IN BRAZIL AND THE UNITED-STATES - EFFECTS OF ALLOCENTRISM AND ANONYMITY [J].
BONTEMPO, R ;
LOBEL, S ;
TRIANDIS, H .
JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1990, 21 (02) :200-213
[5]   Who is this ''we''? Levels of collective identity and self representations [J].
Brewer, MB ;
Gardner, W .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1996, 71 (01) :83-93
[6]   Toward an explanation of cultural differences in in-group favoritism: The role of individual versus collective primacy [J].
Chen, YR ;
Brockner, J ;
Katz, T .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1998, 75 (06) :1490-1502
[7]   Individual-collective primacy and ingroup favoritism: enhancement and protection effects [J].
Chen, YR ;
Brockner, J ;
Chen, XP .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 38 (05) :482-491
[8]  
Cialdini RB, 2001, APP SOC RES, P33
[9]   Compliance with a request in two cultures: The differential influence of social proof and commitment/consistency on collectivists and individualists [J].
Cialdini, RB ;
Wosinska, W ;
Barrett, DW ;
Butner, J ;
Gornik-Durose, M .
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN, 1999, 25 (10) :1242-1253
[10]   RECIPIENTS MOOD, RELATIONSHIP TYPE, AND HELPING [J].
CLARK, MS ;
POWELL, MC ;
OUELLETTE, R ;
MILBERG, S .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1987, 53 (01) :94-103