Subjective Culture

The definition of subjective culture is followed by a listing of the elements of subjective culture and an examination of the content of each element and the methodological problems in studying that element

When does group norm or group identity predict cooperation in a public goods dilemma? The moderating effects of idiocentrism and allocentrism

In this study we examined how perceived group norm and group identity influence individual cooperative behavior in a public goods dilemma across cultural settings. Six hundred and eight students in the United States and People's Republic of China participated in a laboratory experiment in which group norm and group identity were manipulated and the individual cultural orientations of idiocentrism and allocentrism were measured. We found that idiocentrism and allocentrism moderated the relationship between perceived group norm and cooperation but not between group identity and cooperation. In particular, members who endorsed allocentrism to a greater extent cooperated more when they perceived a more cooperative group norm than did members who endorsed lower levels of allocentrism. On the other hand, people scored high on idiocentrism cooperated less when perceiving a more cooperative norm than did people scored low on idiocentrism. The results suggest that allocentrics are not cooperative in every context but are rather highly sensitive to social cues whereas idiocentrics, while tending to behave in a way that maximizes personal outcomes at the expense of the group, are also somewhat aloof to the situation

Role Perceptions In Peru 1

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/102211/1/ijop8247242.pd

Self-deception: An Introduction

Self-deception has been studied by philosophers and psychologists for some time. Frenkel-Brunswik (1939) published the first psychology paper. In Triandis (2009, p. ix) there are references to 24 papers by philosophers and psychologists that examined this concept. All humans have self-deceptions, some more frequently than others. That is, they see the world the way they would like to be rather than the way it is. As I thought about the concept over the years I believe that the most important point for understanding self-deception is to examine what percentage of the information that humans use when constructing (Taylor, 1998b) the way they see the world comes from inside their body or from outside their body. If most of it comes from inside their body there is a high probability that they have a self-deception. The information from inside the body consists of emotions (e.g., hopes), needs (e.g., hunger pangs), desires (e.g., imagined attractive objects), cognitive systems (e.g., prejudices, stereotypes, in-group preferences), memories (e.g., we are descendents of heroes), theories, ideologies, and elements of subjective culture acquired during socialization. The information from the outside the body is reality, and captures aspects of the ecology. Geography, climate, the actions of others, occupations, and events in the environment, are all relevant. For example, when a wild animal is attacking we focus on outside information. But when making judgments about philosophy, economics, religion, education, politics, terrorism, aesthetics and the like we often use inside information to shape our perceptions. The Buddha had the insight that we use information from both outside the body (reality, truth) and inside our body (emotions, ideology) when he said "Where self is, truth is not; where truth is, self is not." (Spencer-Rogers, Williams, & Pang, 2010). In this paper I will start with some examples of self-deception. Then I will discuss some of the characteristics of self-deception-it is often linked to cognitive simplicity, megalomania, and if we have no self-deceptions we might be depressed, but if we have large self-deceptions we might be mentally ill. Then I will discuss how self-deception is implicated in many of the controversial issues of our times. I will end with some suggestions for further research linking culture and self-deception

Toward Understanding Violence in Islam

In the context of reduced violence world-wide, as documented by Pinker (2011), Islam is an exception; i.e., it is more violent than other cultures. Can contemporary cultural psychology explain aspects of this difference? It is hypothesized that violence is more frequent in cultures that are vertical collectivist than in cultures that are horizontal individualist. The paper reviews data that are generally consistent with this hypothesis. Furthermore, most Muslims are not violent, but perhaps 1 percent do engage in jihad. What personality aspects might explain this difference? It is argued that self-deception is very common among humans and the jihadists are especially susceptible to self-deception. Religion provides important benefits but it is also often related to violence. One way to reduce aspects of Islamic violence is for the West to ridicule Islam less. The paper also provides Islam with a more realistic model of its religion

Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, Vol. 2/ Harry C. Triandis

Terdiri atas 4 volume: ill,tab.; 24 cm