Bringing culture to basic psychological theory--Beyond individualism and collectivism: Comment on Oyserman et al. (2002).

D. Oyserman, H. M. Coon, and M. Kemmelmeier (2002) (see record 2002-00183-001) offered a comprehensive literature review on individualism and collectivism that forwards valuable suggestions for ways to enhance future research conducted within this framework. The author argues that although their criticisms of much contemporary social psychological research on individualism and collectivism are valid, even more fundamental problems need to be recognized as characterizing work within this tradition, such as the insufficiently subtle nature of the views held of culture, the limited attention given to meanings, and the downplaying of contextual variation. The author suggests adopting more nuanced and process-oriented conceptions of culture and more contextually grounded views of its impact on psychological functioning as a way of realizing the promise of cultural psychology to broaden and provide insight into basic psychological theory. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Culture and basic psychological processes--Toward a system view of culture: Comment on Oyserman et al. (2002).

D. Oyserman, H. A. Coon, and M. Kemmelmeier (2002) (see record 2002-00183-001) provide a most comprehensive review of empirical studies that used attitudinal surveys to capture cultural variations in individualism and collectivism. In the present article, the author suggests that the cross-cultural validity of attitudinal surveys can no longer be taken for granted. Moreover, the meta-theory underlying this literature (called the entity view of culture) is called into question. The author presents an alterative meta-theory (called the system view of culture) and discusses its implications for future work in cultural and cross-cultural psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reclaiming the individual from Hofstede's ecological analysis--A 20-year odyssey: Comment on Oyserman et al. (2002).

D. Oyserman, H. M. Coon, and M. Kemmelmeier (2002) (see record 2002-00183-001) challenge the stereotype that European Americans are more individualistic and less collectivistic than persons from most other ethnic groups. The author contends that this stereotype took firm empirical root with G. Hofstede's (1980) monumental publication identifying the United States as the most individualistic of his then 40 nations. This empirical designation arose because of challengeable decisions Hofstede made about the analysis of his data and the labeling of his dimensions. The conflation of concepts under the rubric of cultural individualism plus psychologists' unwarranted psychologizing of the construct then combined with Hofstede's empirical location of America to set a 20-year agenda for data collection. Oyserman et al disentangle and organize this mass of studies, enabling the discipline of cross-cultural psychology to forge ahead in more productive directions, less reliant on previous assumptions and measures. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Using individualism and collectivism to compare cultures--A critique of the validity and measurement of the constructs: Comment on Oyserman et al. (2002).

Analyzing national and ethnic differences in individualism and collectivism, D. Oyserman, H. M. Coon, and M. Kemmelmeier (2002) (see record 2002-00183-001) showed that small differences in scales or samples produce markedly divergent results, challenging the validity of these constructs. The author examines the following limitations of research on individualism and collectivism: It treats nations as cultures and culture as a continuous quantitative variable; conflates all kinds of social relations and distinct types of autonomy; ignores contextual specificity in norms and values; measures culture as the personal preferences and behavior reports of individuals; rarely establishes the external validity of the measures used; assumes cultural invariance in the meaning of self-reports and anchoring and interpretation of scales; and reduces culture to explicit, abstract verbal knowledge. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses.

Are Americans more individualistic and less collectivistic than members of other groups? The authors summarize plausible psychological implications of individualism-collectivism (IND-COL), meta-analyze cross-national and within-United States IND-COL differences, and review evidence for effects of IND-COL on self-concept, well-being, cognition, and relationality. European Americans were found to be both more individualistic--valuing personal independence more--and less collectivistic--feeling duty to in-groups less--than others. However, European Americans were not more individualistic than African Americans, or Latinos, and not less collectivistic than Japanese or Koreans. Among Asians, only Chinese showed large effects, being both less individualistic and more collectivistic. Moderate IND-COL effects were found on self-concept and relationality, and large effects were found on attribution and cognitive style. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Where Is the Evidence for Pancultural Self-Enhancement? A Reply to Sedikides, Gaertner, and Toguchi (2003).

C. Sedikides, L. Gaertner, and Y. Toguchi (2003; see record 2002-08440-007) maintained that the self-enhancement motivation (as defined by tendencies to view oneself in overly positive terms) is universal. The present article challenges their claim. A review of the literature revealed that many studies contradict their findings regarding the domain-specific nature of East Asian self-enhancement. It is argued that Sedikides et al. did not replicate past research because they did not measure self-enhancement in their studies. The present article provides a theoretical basis for understanding cross-cultural differences in self-enhancement and considers the question of universality by exploring 2 different conceptualizations of positive self-regard. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Pancultural self-enhancement reloaded: A meta-analytic reply to Heine (2005).

C. Sedikides, L. Gaertner, and Y. Toguchi (2003; see record 2002-08440-007) reported findings favoring the universality of self-enhancement. S. J. Heine (2005; see record 2005-13803-005) challenged the authors' research on evidential and logical grounds. In response, the authors carried out 2 meta-analytic investigations. The results backed the C. Sedikides et al. (2003) theory and findings. Both Westerners and Easterners self-enhanced tactically. Westerners self-enhanced on attributes relevant to the cultural ideal of individualism, whereas Easterners self-enhanced on attributes relevant to the cultural ideal of collectivism (in both cases, because of the personal importance of the ideal). Self-enhancement motivation is universal, although its manifestations are strategically sensitive to cultural context. The authors respond to other aspects of Heine's critique by discussing why researchers should empirically validate the comparison dimension (individualistic vs. collectivistic) and defending why the better-than-average effect is a valid measure of self-enhancement. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Stress and specificity: Reply to Miller (2009).

T. F. Denson, M. Spanovic, and N. Miller (see record 2009-19763-001) meta-analytically tested the hypotheses that specific appraisals and emotions would predict cortisol and immune responses to laboratory stressors and emotion inductions. Although the cortisol data supported the integrated specificity hypothesis, G. E. Miller (see record 2009-19763-002) raised questions concerning the extent to which the immunity data supported specificity. The authors respond to these concerns. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Corporal punishment, physical abuse, and the burden of proof: Reply to Baumrind, Larzelere, and Cowan (2002), Holden (2002), and Parke (2002).

This reply explores issues reviewed in comments by D. Baumrind, R. E. Larzelere, and P. A. Cowan (2002, see record 2002-01514-002), G. W. Holden (2002, see record 2002-01514-003), and R. D. Parke (2002, see record 2002-01514-004) on E. T. Gershoff's (2002, see record 2002-01514-001) article on parental punishment. The current discussion includes how corporal punishment should be defined, how corporal punishment can be distinguished from physical abuse, and whether established associations with child behaviors are best thought of as parent- or child-driven effects. In light of their comments, Gershoff herein revises the process-context model, revisits the issue of whether current knowledge is sufficient to condemn the use of parental corporal punishment, and concludes that lack of demonstrated positive effects and the potential links to physical abuse argue for discouraging corporal punishment in favor of alternative methods of discipline. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Establishment of a diazepam preference in human volunteers following a differential-conditioning history of placebo versus diazepam choice: Reply to Bouton (2002), Carroll (2002), Kelly (2002), Stewart (2002), and Vuchinich (2002).

The 6 submitted commentaries (see records 2002-12827-003, 2002-12827-004, 2002-12827-005, 2002-12827-006, 2002-12827-007, 2002-12827-008) on the authors' study examining the establishment of diazepam as a conditioned reinforcer were generally supportive of the need to characterize environmental determinants of drug self-administration while emphasizing the need for more research. The comments discuss several important topics, including clarifying the mechanisms responsible for the switch in drug preference the authors reported, comparing the strengths of various procedures used to confer reinforcing efficacy onto a drug, opportunities for collaborative research, and practical applications of differential conditioning to the treatment of drug abuse. The authors suspect that future work on this topic will incorporate the issues discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Advantages and disadvantages of studying the process of relapse in rats: Reply to Baker and Curtin (2002), Bardo (2002), Goeders (2002), Marlatt (2002), and Tiffany and Conklin (2002).

The authors investigated the effects of an episode of heroin self-administration (i.e., lapse) after extinction on subsequent drug seeking in the absence of heroin (i.e., relapse). Reexposure to heroin in the presence of drug seeking was identified as a critical element of a lapse experience, leading to elevated drug seeking on the test of relapse. T. B. Baker and J. J. Curtin (see record 2002-06535-002), G. A. Marlatt (see record 2002-06535-005), and S. T. Tiffany and C. A. Conklin (see record 2002-06535-006) indicate that animal studies fail to model important aspects of human addiction. M. T. Bardo (see record 2002-06535-003) and N. E. Goeders (see record 2002-06535-004) point out specific methodological problems. In spite of these difficulties, the authors' research makes a valuable contribution to the study of relapse by focusing on aspects of learning and memory involved in the transition from lapse to relapse. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reply to Strain, Patterson, and Seidenberg (2002).

E. Strain, K. E. Patterson, and M. S. Seidenberg (2002) reported an effect of imageability and a Regularity X Imageability interaction in a regression analysis of naming latencies to 120 words. One of their items (couth) was named correctly by just 5 of their 24 participants, and its reaction time was an outlier on their distribution. When that single item is removed, the significant predictors are age of acquisition (AoA), word frequency, regularity, and length. Analyses of the combined data from J. Monaghan and A. W. Ellis's (2002) Experiments 1-3 indicate that AoA predicts naming latencies for exception words but not consistent words. E. Strain et al.'s other points are considered in the light of these observations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Repressive defensiveness and subjective well-being: Reply to Pauls (2007).

This reply acquiesces to Pauls' (see record 2007-15350-001) suggestion that repressive defensiveness is not the most important personality correlate for subjective well-being and makes suggestions for future research on personality and subjective well-being. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Planting a tree while envisioning the forest--The recursive relation between theory and research: Reply to Blustein (2003).

In his comments regarding D. M. Tokar, J. R. Withrow, R. J. Hall, and B. Moradi's (see record 2002-08430-002) article, "Psychological Separation, Attachment Security, Vocational Self-Concept Crystallization, and Career Indecision: A Structural Equation Analysis," D. L. Blustein (see record 2002-08430-003) offered several useful suggestions for future research in the area of relationship variables and career development and also raised several concerns about Tokar et al's rationale for and use of structural equation modeling in testing their models. In this reply, the authors note points of agreement with Blustein and respond to comments with which they disagree. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"The practice of forensic psychology: A look toward the future in light of the past": Comment on Otto and Heilbrun (2002).

Comments on the article by R. K. Otto and K. Heilbrun (see record 2002-10575-001) discussing the state of the field of forensic psychology. The current author objects to what he perceives as Otto and Heilbrun's attempt to discredit all but closely protected American Psychological Association (APA) affiliated organizations, and their subsequent biased comments based on poor research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Wringing the perceptual rags: Reply to IJzerman and Koole (2011).

We Landau, Meier, & Keefer (2010) reviewed a growing body of research demonstrating metaphors' far-reaching influence on social information processing. In their commentary, IJzerman and Koole (2011) claimed that we devoted insufficient attention to the origin of metaphors, and they reviewed research showing that bodily, social, and cultural experiences constrain metaphor development. Given the focus of our article and the tone of our admittedly cursory treatment of metaphors' origins, we view IJzerman and Koole's commentary less as a critique and more as a valuable extension of our analysis. We elaborate on this extension and address three related issues raised in the comment: metaphors and representational format, the explanatory value of a metaphor-enriched perspective over the embodied cognition perspective, and the direction of metaphoric mappings between concrete and abstract concepts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

The essential role of behavioral genetics in developmental psychology: Reply to Partridge (2005) and Greenberg (2005).

The authors address the methodological, theoretical, and ideological criticisms of their article on adolescent perceptions of parenting behavior (see record 2005-14938-011) made by G. Greenberg (see record 2005-14938-013) and T. Partridge (see record 2005-14938-012). Behavioral genetic methods have provided unique insights on the origins of individual differences in behavior and, when applied to parenting and other putative psychosocial influences, challenge conventional developmental theory. McGue et al.'s goal was not, as Greenberg and Partridge appeared to believe, to establish the heritability of parenting--that was already known; rather, McGue et al. showed how the relationship between inherited factors and an individual's environment changes during a critical developmental transition. There is a great need for developmental researchers to explore the combined influence of genetic and environmental factors using a range of approaches, including that of McGue et al. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

What is more important for national well-being: Money or autonomy? A meta-analysis of well-being, burnout, and anxiety across 63 societies.

What is more important: to provide citizens with more money or with more autonomy for their subjective well-being? In the current meta-analysis, the authors examined national levels of well-being on the basis of lack of psychological health, anxiety, and stress measures. Data are available for 63 countries, with a total sample of 420,599 individuals. Using a 3-level variance-known model, the authors found that individualism was a consistently better predictor than wealth, after controlling for measurement, sample, and temporal variations. Despite some emerging nonlinear trends and interactions between wealth and individualism, the overall pattern strongly suggests that greater individualism is consistently associated with more well-being. Wealth may influence well-being only via its effect on individualism. Implications of the findings for well-being research and applications are outlined. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex and location as determinants of handedness: Reply to Vuoksimaa and Kaprio (2010).

In response to the comment by Vuoksimaa and Kaprio (2010) on our previous article on sex differences in left-handedness (Papadatou-Pastou, Martin, Munafò, and Jones, 2008), we carried out an additional meta-analysis to explore whether the widely observed tendency for rates of left-handedness to be greater among male than female individuals is also found in Scandinavian (Nordic) studies. The overall male-to-female ratio for left- to right-handedness odds provides evidence in favor of this hypothesis. However, the results were subject to a significant moderating effect related to nation of origin. We discuss the potential impact on observed measures of additive rather than multiplicative processes that may underlie sex differences in handedness and also the date-of-study effect on handedness rates. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)