Causes of Culture: National Differences in Cultural Embeddedness

What causes national differences in culture? Past attempts to answer this question take insufficient account of how slowly culture changes or of the fact that culture itself influences the social structural, political, and demographic variables identified as causes. Convincing causes of cultural differences must meet three criteria: They should reflect the formative historical experiences of societies, they should not be influenced reciprocally by culture, and theoretically plausible process should explain their impact on culture. I propose and explain causes of national differences in cultural embeddedness, a value orientation that calls upon people to find meaning in life through identifying with their in-group, participating in its shared way of life, and striving toward its shared goals. Analyses of data from 77 cultural groups (74 countries) demonstrate that cultural embeddedness is greater in ethnically heterogeneous societies, with a relatively short history of viable state institutions, whose historically dominant religion was Islam rather than Protestantism or Roman Catholicism. These causal findings are not due to diffusion of culture to nearby countries or colonies. They hold up even when predicting differences in cultural embeddedness among eight world regions or within Eastern and within Western Europe. This research can be a model for investigating causes of various cultural differences among nations and other groups

A Repository of Schwartz Value Scales with Instructions and an Introduction

This repository of value instruments includes the numerous authorized language versions of each of the four instruments developed by Schwartz to measure the basic values in his theory: The Schwartz Value Survey (SVS), the Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ40), the PVQ21 (aka the Human Values Scale of the European Social Survey [ESS21]), and the revised PVQ-RR. For each instrument, the repository includes instructions for coding and analysis and the most important references relevant to it. A short introductory essay briefly outlines the key assumptions underlying the theory and instruments, the principles that organize the values into a circle, and the translation protocol. The essay includes a table that compares the four instruments on 12 characteristics relevant for choosing the one most appropriate for use in a particular study.Click on \u27download\u27 to see the introductory essay

Culture Rules: The Foundations of the Rule of Law and Other Norms of Governance

This study presents evidence about relations between national culture and social institutions. We operationalize culture with data on cultural dimensions for over 50 nations adopted from cross-cultural psychology and generate testable hypotheses about three basic social norms of governance: the rule of law, corruption, and accountability. These norms correlate systematically and strongly with national scores on cultural dimensions and also differ across cultural regions of the world. Regressions indicate that quantitative measures of national culture are alone remarkably predictive of governance, that economic inequality and British heritage add to predictive power, but that economic development and other factors add little. The results suggest a framework for understanding the relations between fundamental institutions of social order as well as policy implications for reform programs in transition economies.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/39991/3/wp605.pd

Culture Rules: The Foundations of the Rule of Law and Other Norms of Governance

This study presents evidence about relations between national culture and social institutions. We operationalize culture with data on cultural dimensions for over 50 nations adopted from cross-cultural psychology and generate testable hypotheses about three basic social norms of governance: the rule of law, corruption, and accountability. These norms correlate systematically and strongly with national scores on cultural dimensions and also differ across cultural regions of the world. Regressions indicate that quantitative measures of national culture are alone remarkably predictive of governance, that economic inequality and British heritage add to predictive power, but that economic development and other factors add little. The results suggest a framework for understanding the relations between fundamental institutions of social order as well as policy implications for reform programs in transition economies.Rule of Law, Corruption, Accountability, Culture, Governance, Economic Inequality, Economic Development

Measuring the refined theory of individual values in 49 cultural groups: Psychometrics of the revised portrait value questionnaire

Researchers around the world are applying the recently revised Portrait Value Questionnaire (PVQ-RR) to measure the 19 values in Schwartz’s refined values theory. We assessed the internal reliability, circular structure, measurement model, and measurement invariance of values measured by this questionnaire across 49 cultural groups (N = 53,472) and 32 language versions. The PVQ-RR reliably measured 15 of the 19 values in the vast majority of groups and two others in most groups. The fit of the theory-based measurement models supported the differentiation of almost all values in every cultural group. Almost all values were measured invariantly across groups at the configural and metric level. A multidimensional scaling analysis revealed that the PVQ-RR perfectly reproduced the theorized order of the 19 values around the circle across groups. The current study established the PVQ-RR as a sound instrument to measure and to compare the hierarchies and correlates of values across cultures

Values and subjective well-being

Research on relations of personal values to subjective well-being has begun to flourish only recently. This is surprising because our values represent what we consider important and worth pursuing in life, and our subjective well-being (henceforth SWB) represents how happy and satisfied we are with the life we are leading. This chapter summarizes what we know about value—SWB relations and identifies some of what we do not know but would like to know. We first discuss the nature of values and the structured system they form. We then note three theoretical perspectives on relations of values to SWB (Sagiv & Schwartz, 2000; Sagiv, Roccas & Hazan, 2004). The first perspective seeks to explain direct relations between values and SWB. The second examines the congruence (or similarity) between people’s values and the values prevailing in their environment as a determinant of SWB. The third sees the attainment of valued goals as the source of SWB. We present these perspectives and the literature based on them. Throughout, we note ideas for future research

Values and subjective well-being

Research on relations of personal values to subjective well-being has begun to flourish only recently. This is surprising because our values represent what we consider important and worth pursuing in life, and our subjective well-being (henceforth SWB) represents how happy and satisfied we are with the life we are leading. This chapter summarizes what we know about value—SWB relations and identifies some of what we do not know but would like to know. We first discuss the nature of values and the structured system they form. We then note three theoretical perspectives on relations of values to SWB (Sagiv & Schwartz, 2000; Sagiv, Roccas & Hazan, 2004). The first perspective seeks to explain direct relations between values and SWB. The second examines the congruence (or similarity) between people’s values and the values prevailing in their environment as a determinant of SWB. The third sees the attainment of valued goals as the source of SWB. We present these perspectives and the literature based on them. Throughout, we note ideas for future research

Values that Underlie and Undermine Well-Being : Variability Across Countries

We examined relations of 10 personal values to life satisfaction (LS) and depressive affect (DEP) in representative samples from 32/25 countries (N=121495). We tested hypotheses both for direct relations and cross-level moderation of relations by Cultural Egalitarianism. We based hypotheses on the growth versus self-protection orientation and person-focus versus social-focus motivations that underlie values. As predicted, openness to change values (growth/person) correlated positively with subjective well-being (SWB: higher LS, lower DEP) and conservation values (self-protection/social) correlated negatively with SWB. The combination of underlying motivations also explained more complex direct relations of self-transcendence and self-enhancement values with SWB. We combined an analysis of the environmental context in societies low versus high in Cultural Egalitarianism with the implications of pursuing person-focused versus social-focused values to predict how Cultural Egalitarianism moderates value-SWB relations. As predicted, under low versus high Cultural Egalitarianism, (i) openness to change values related more positively to SWB, (ii) conservation values more negatively, (iii) self-enhancement values less negatively and (iv) self-transcendence values less positively. Culture moderated value-SWB relations more weakly for DEP than for LS. Culture moderated value-LS relations more strongly than the socio-economic context did. This study demonstrates how the cultural context shapes individual-level associations between values and SWB. Copyright (c) 2017 European Association of Personality PsychologyPeer reviewe

Bringing values back in: the adequacy of the European Social Survey to measure values in 20 countries

Values are prominent in public discourse today. Theorists have long considered values central to understanding attitudes and behavior. The Schwartz (1992) theory of basic human values has promoted a revival of empirical research on values. The semi-annual European Social Survey (ESS) includes a new 21-item instrument to measure the importance of the ten basic values of the theory. Representative national samples in 20 countries responded to the instrument in 2002-3. We briefly describe the theory and the ESS instrument and assess its adequacy for measuring values across countries. Using multiple group confirmatory factor analyses, augmented with mean-structure information, we assess the configural and measurement (metric) invariance of the values—necessary conditions for equivalence of the meaning of constructs, and scalar invariance—a precondition for comparing value means across countries. Only if such equivalence is established can researchers make meaningful and clearly interpretable cross- national comparisons of value priorities and their correlates. The ESS values scale demonstrates configural and metric invariance, allowing researchers to use it to study relationships among values, attitudes, behavior and socio-demographic characteristics across countries. Comparing the mean importance of values across countries is possible only for subsets of countries where scalar invariance holds