Culturally Construed Dual Sources of Well-being: Preliminary Psychometric Evidences

Transcription

1 SIS J. Proj. Psy. & Ment. Health (2012) 19 : Culturally Construed Dual Sources of Well-being: Preliminary Psychometric Evidences Rakesh Pandey and Nimita Srivastava Researches indicate that culturally induced differences in self-perception have significant influence on an individual s general attitude and behaviour including his/her evaluation of subjective happiness and self-worth. The individualistic cultures focus more on independence, self-sufficiency, uniqueness, and personal success leading to an independent view of self, whereas the collectivist cultures give emphasis on cooperation, group cohesion, interpersonal harmony etc. that leads to interdependent self-view. Based on such cultural differences in self-construal, it was hypothesized that culturally construed dual sources (independent and interdependent) of well-being may also exist. To test this hypothesis a 20 item inventory (10 related to independent and 10 interdependent sources) was developed that asked participants about the importance given to various sources well-being on a 5-point scale. The inventory was administered on 179 participants along with a measure of selfconstrual. The factor analysis yielded two factors. On the first factor, most of the items reflecting interdependent sources of well-being loaded significantly whereas on the second those items loaded significantly that reflected independent sources of well-being. However, a close examination of the pattern of loading revealed that some items initially considered as indicator of independent source of well-being loaded with items reflecting interdependent sources of well-being and vice versa. Thus, the thematic coherence of the items of each factor was re-examined and these factors were re-labelled as interdependent and intrinsic sources of well-being and independent and extrinsic sources of well-being, respectively. Further, it was noted that independent/extrinsic source of wellbeing correlated positively with both independent and interdependent self but the interdependent/ intrinsic source correlated (positively) only with interdependent self. This pattern of correlation provides some support to the validity of the dual sources of well-being. A growing body of empirical evidences collected from cross-cultural studies indicates that cultural norms, ideals, and value systems have significant influence on an individual s behaviour and attitude. Rooted in this idea is the view that cultural value systems also shape one s perception about the self. When the cultural values and ideals are internalized and endorsed it results in such type of selfcognition and psychological bases for selfworth that is congruent with the given cultural value system. The prototypical view of self of different cultures differs markedly depending on what behaviour, attitudes, and traits are valued by the culture. One dichotomous cultural distinction often made in cross-cultural studies is of Eastern (collectivist) and Western (individualistic) cultures. These two cultures value different characteristics and thus foster different types of self-perceptions. For example, the Western cultural value system places emphasis on independence, self-sufficiency, uniqueness, freedom from societal constraints, separateness from others, and personal success (Bellah, Madsen, Sullivan, Swidler, and Tipton, 1985; Cahoone, 1996; Lewis, 1995; Spindler and Spindler, 1990) and lead to a self-cognition that is referred to as independent self-construal (Markus and Kiatayama, 1991, 1994). The Eastern culture, on the other hand, give emphasis on coordination, cooperation, group cohesion, shame and apologies, interpersonal harmony, the importance of others, and the responsibility to the group Rakesh Pandey, Ph.D., FSIS, Professor, Dept of Psychology, Banaras Hindu University,Varanasi (India),(Correspondence to Rakesh Pandey, rpan_in@yahoo.com) and Nimita srivastava Head, Psychological Counseling and Testing Cell, Training and placement Department, L.T.J.S.S, Nagpur. Key words: Culture, Independent and interdependent self, sources of well-being

2 26 Pandey and Srivastava (Bond, Leung, and Wan, 1982; De Vos, 1985; Hsu, 1948; Leung, 1997; Uno, 1991) and leads to the self-cognition called as interdependent self-construal (Markus and Kiatayama, 1991, 1994). Researchers have theorized that when these individualistic and collectivistic values are internalized they lead to entirely different types of behavioural constellation and selfperception. The individualistic culture fosters a self-cognition characterized by internal attribute, uniqueness, and separateness from others (independent self-view), whereas the collectivistic culture leads to self-cognition defined by connectedness, relationship and social context (interdependent self-view; see Markus and Kitayama, 1991; Singelis, 1994 for a review). There are, though, several theories that make such cultural distinctions at individual level attitude towards self and others (e.g., individualism collectivism theory of Triandis, 1989), the present study is based on the Markus and Kitayam s (1991, 1994) cultural theory of self also called self-construal theory. This theory proposes that the individualistic and collectivistic culture shape and nurture two entirely distinct types of self-cognitions leading to dual self-processes called independent and interdependent self construals. Self-construal is defined as an individual s mental representation of him or herself (Markus and Kitayama, 1991). The self construal theory assumes that the sense of self, including self-concepts and selfappraisals, is constructed rather than directly perceived or experienced. An independent view of self derives from a belief in the wholeness and separateness of each individual s pattern of internal attributes and places emphasis on such aspects as selfactualization, realizing oneself, expressing one s unique pattern of needs, rights and capabilities, and developing one s distinctive potential (see Markus and Kitayama, 1991, 1994). In contrast, an interdependent view of self derives from a belief in the individual s connectedness and interdependence to others. This construal places emphasis on fitting in, belongingness, fulfilling and creating obligations, and becoming part of society. This is the representative Eastern characterization of the self, which places crucial self- representation not within the unique individual attributes, but within his/ her social relationships in which he/she feels embedded (see Markus and Kitayama, 1991, 1994). The culturally shaped psychological processes at individual level, such as independent and interdependent self-construal (Markus, and Kitayam, 1991), may provide a link between culture and SWB (See Diener and Suh 2000, for a review) and insight into how the culture determines the SWB of an individual. The meaning of SWB or happiness and satisfaction may also differ for individuals of different cultures. What does it mean to be happy or well for individuals of Western culture may not be the same for Eastern culture (see Diener and Suh, 2000 for a review). Further, it has also been noted that emotions considered positive in one culture may be considered negative in the other. For example, Scollon and associates (2004) observed that while individuals of Western culture viewed pride as positive emotion, it grouped with the unpleasant emotions in India. Empirical studies focusing on the cultural differences in the subjective viewpoint or meaning of subjective well-being have reported the existence of culturally distinct facets of wellbeing for different cultures (e.g., Ingersoll, 1985; Ingersoll and Ingersoll 1987). For example, Ingersoll-Dayton and associates (Ingersoll- Dayton, Saengtienchai, Kespichayawattana, and Aungsuroch, 2001) examined the subjective meaning of psychological well-being of Thai elders and identified five dimensions of well-being: harmony, interdependence, acceptance, respect and enjoyment. They further noted that most of the dimensions of well-being were distinct from that of Western view. Only one dimensions of well-being (i.e., social relatedness) was found to be shared

3 Culturally Construed Dual Sources of Well-being 27 by both Asians and Americans. The most interesting observation of this study was that the majority of the dimensions of well-being observed in Thai sample were other focused and not self-focused. Similar cultural differences in meaning of happiness and well-being have been presented by others also. For example, Kitayama (2002) theorized that for an individual with independent self- construal happiness is a subjective state that belongs to an individual and thus experienced as a personal property. Contrary to it, for collective individuals (having interdependent self-view) the happiness is an inter-subjective state shared with others. For them, happiness is mediated by interpersonal relationships and harmony. He also argued that while evaluating one s SWB the person of individualistic culture (with independent view of self) does the evaluation in the context of his/her internal psychological attributes and personal qualities. On the other hand, an individual of collective culture evaluates one s life in the interpersonal context such as in relation to family and friends. Moreover, SWB for Western culture (independent self) is largely viewed as maximization of positive affect and minimization of negative effects whereas for Eastern culture it may be a balance between the positive and negative affect (Kitayama and Markus, 2000). From the foregoing studies, it is evident that individualistic and collectivistic cultural values and mandates differently influence the construal of self-perception, as well as the attitude and behavior of an individual. Further, the different cultural values and the consequent self-construal may influence differently the subjective evaluation of one s happiness and well-being as well as the subjective meaning of happiness and well-being. The observation that such cultural differences bring difference in the subjective meaning of happiness lead to the hypothesis that these cultural differences could also bring variation in what an individual considers important for one s well-being. In other words, the source of deriving happiness and life satisfaction may differ for the individuals of the two cultures having two different self-view. More specifically, based on the cultural theory of self (Markus and Kitayama, 1991) it was speculated that similar to culturally distinct dual self-process (independent and interdependent self-construal), two culturally distinct sources (independent and interdependent sources) of well-being may also exist. Derived from the Markus and Kitayama s cultural theory of self, the dual sources of well-being were also hypothesized to differ in their focus on either the self or the others. The independent source of well-being was operationally defined as those sources of deriving happiness that focus on the individuals own worth and social status such as one s own success, gaining material prosperity, developing one s potential, skill and knowledge etc. Contrary, to it, the interdependent source of well-being was conceived as that source which is related to the growth, development, and happiness of the significant others like family members. To test the hypothesis of the existence of the dual sources of well-being the psychometric approach was adopted. An inventory was developed that asked the participants how much important they consider the listed sources for their well-being. After getting the ratings of the participants the data was factor analyzed with the assumption that if there would exist two distinct sources of well-being then all the items of the inventory would divide into two factorsitems related to one source would cluster together and load on one factor only. It was also assumed that for the Indian participants the first factor explaining the largest proportion of the total variance would comprise of those sources of well-being that focus on the shared happiness and growth. To validate the concept of culturally construed dual sources of wellbeing, the relationship of the dual sources of well-being was also examined with measures of independent and interdependent self. It was

4 28 Pandey and Srivastava hypothesized that the said dual sources of wellbeing would relate differently with the measures of independent and interdependent self. Materials and Methods: Sample: The study was conducted on an incidentally sampled group of 179 Hindi Speaking Indian participants. Out of the 179 participants, 112 were males and the remaining 67 were females. All the participants belonged to middle class socio-economic status and have an education level of undergraduate or above. The sample was relatively heterogeneous with regard to age and occupational background. The age of the participants ranged from 20 to 60 years. As far as the occupation is concerned, the present sample included, students, engineers, doctors, bank employees, clerical staff and officers from various public and private sector organizations, as well as self-employed individuals and businessmen. The attempt to get a relatively heterogeneous sample was made in order to ensure wide variations in response so that reliability and validity of the scale is not artificially truncated because of restricted response variance. Tools: Dual Sources of Well-Being Inventory was developed for the present study. For the development of this inventory, first of all an open ended questionnaire was administered to a small group of participants (N =30) that asked, What makes you feel happy and satisfied? The answers of each participant was content analysed and 20 different categories of sources (10 independent and 10 interdependent) that commonly appeared in the responses of most of the participants were identified. The sources classified under independent category included personal growth and development, personal achievements, praise of one success and achievements etc. The interdependent sources included growth, development and achievement of the family members, cordial relationship within the family, family adjustment etc. These 20 sources of well-being were presented in a questionnaire form and the respondents were asked to rate on a 5-point scale the importance given to each for their well-being. To assess the self-construal of the participants the Independent-Interdependent Self-construal Scale was used that consists of 30 items 17 measuring interdependent self and 13 the independent self. The respondents are asked to rate each item of the scale on a 7-point rating scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Thus, the higher score on this scale reflects higher level of the trait being measured. Procedure: The aforesaid inventories were administered either individually or in small groups. Before the administration of the questionnaires the participants were briefed about the purpose of the study and their task. After getting the consent of the participants the aforesaid questionnaires were administered as per the standard instructions of each questionnaire. All participants were requested to ensure that they have responded to each items of every questionnaire/scale. The obtained data were subjected to a principal component analysis followed by varimax rotation. The bi-variate correlation between the measures of selfconstrual and dual sources of well-being was also examined. Results and Discussion The principal component analysis of the data yielded 20 components. However, the scree plot indicated that the first two components may be considered significant that account most of the total variance. Thus, these two components were subsequently rotated using varimax method with Keiser Normalizaton criterion. The obtained results have been displayed in Table-1. It is evident from this table that as per our expectations most of the items reflecting

5 Culturally Construed Dual Sources of Well-being 29 the shared happiness, growth and development (interdependent sources) loaded on the first factor. On the other hand, the items focusing on individual level growth, development and prosperity (independent sources) loaded mostly on the second factor. Thus, these two factors may be labelled as independent and interdependent sources of well-being, respectively. However, a close look at the pattern of factor loadings suggest that some of the items hypothesized to reflect independent source of well-being loaded on the first factor. For example, gaining academic excellence, better health and energy, accomplishing one s goal, and successfully playing one s roles (initially hypothesized to be the independent source of well-being) loaded on the first factor along with the various interdependent sources of well-being. Similarly, a few items (e.g. social popularity, identification with one s family) initially hypothesized to be the interdependent sources of well-being loaded on the second factors with independent sources of well-being. This pattern of cross loading suggests that the observed dual sources of well-being in the present study do not completely reflect the hypothesized independent and interdependent sources of well-being. Table1 Rotated Component Matrix of Sources of Well-being Inventory Sources of Well being Component 1 2 Progress and betterment of family.832 Successful fulfillment of the family responsibilities and liabilities.689 Cordial relationship with family members.687 Harmony and adjustment within family.686 Significant accomplishment and success of family members.670 Academic/professional excellence/achievement.650 Healthy body full of energy and vigor.636 Successful accomplishment of one s own roles.624 Achievement of goals set for self.584 Happiness of the family.573 Personal progress and development Honour and recognition of your work by others.772 Admiration of your achievements by others.740 Obtaining means of comfort and luxury.732 Financial affluence and becoming owner of valuable assets.684 Getting recognition in society.667 To be called enlightened and knowledgeable person.658 Social popularity.618 Availability of physical means of comfort and pleasure.580 Personal achievements.444

6 30 Pandey and Srivastava Thus, we tried to re-examine the thematic coherence of the items of the each factor and re-label the factors. The examination of the item content of the first factors revealed that all the items on this factor can be grouped into two categories. The first consisting of items focussing on the shared happiness and growth (interdependence) and the second on the intrinsic growth. Thus, based on this we labelled the first factor as interdependent and intrinsic sources of well-being. Similarly, the items of the second factor also grouped into two categories- independent and extrinsic sources. Thus, we labelled this factor as independent and extrinsic sources of well-being. Overall, the findings of the present study suggest that there exist two distinct sources of well-being. The one consists of those sources of deriving happiness that fulfils the intrinsic need of the individual and/or the growth and development of the family members. The second source from which an individual may derive the happiness and well-being comprise the personal growth and prosperity and/or fulfilment of the extrinsic need. Given the pattern of differences in the cultural values and mandates of the individualistic and collectivistic nations, it appears that the first source of well-being (interdependent and intrinsic source) is more a characteristic of the collectivistic culture and the second (independent and extrinsic sources) that of the individualistic culture. For, example, in the collectivistic oriental culture there is a strong belief that the happiness and satisfaction is not external to an individual rather it resides within the individual. To examine the validity of the dual sources of well-being we examined the correlation of these sources with the measures of independent and interdependent self. The correlations are displayed in Table 2. Table 2 The relationship of independent and interdependent self with dual source of well being Independent self Interdependent self Independent source of well being 381** 214** Interdependent source of well being ** The obtained pattern of correlations suggest that those who view themselves as interdependent place greater importance to both sources of well-being whereas independent individuals give significantly greater importance to independent sources of well-being but not to interdependent sources of well-being. This differential pattern of correlation of the dual sources of well-being with culturally construed dual self-process provide some support to the validity and existence of culturally determined and differential sources of deriving happiness and well-being. Despite, the encouraging evidence that there exist two distinct sources of well-being and these dual sources may reflect the values and mandates of the dual culture of collectivism and individualism, it would be premature to attribute the observed distinction in the sources of wellbeing to cultural differences. Cross-cultural studies focusing on cross-nation differences in future should be conducted to establish that these dual sources of well-being reflect differences in cultural value pattern. Further, there is also a need to extend this type of study by including some other independent/ interdependent as well as intrinsic/extrinsic sources of well-being.

7 Culturally Construed Dual Sources of Well-being 31 References: Bellah, R. N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A., and Tipton, S. M. (1985). Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. Berkeley: University of California Press. Bond, M. H., Leung, K., and Wan, K. C. (1982). The social impact of self-effacing attributions: The Chinese case. Journal of Social Psychology, 118, Cahoone, N. (1996). History of the Western mind. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. De Vos, G. A. (1985). Dimensions of the self in Japanese culture. In A. J. Marsella, G. De Vos, and F. L. K. Hsu (Eds.), Culture and self: Asian and Western perspectives (pp ). New York: Tavistock. Diener, E., and Suh, E. M. (2000). Culture and subjective well-being. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hsu, F. L. K. (1948). Under the ancestor s shadow: Chinese culture and personality. New York: Columbia University Press. Ingersoll, F. and Ingersoll, J. (1987). Both a borrower and a lender be: Ethnography, oral history, and grounded theory, Oral History Review 15, Ingersoll, J. (1985). Are they better off? Social well-being as a framework for judging development results. Paper presented at the Society for Economic Anthropology, Warrenton, VA. Ingersoll-Dayton, B., Saengtienchai, C., Kespichayawattana, J., and Aungsuroch, Y. (2001). Psychological well-being Asian style: The perspective of Thai elders. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 16, Kitayama, S. (2002). Cultural and basic psychological processes--- towards a system view of culture: Comment on Oyserman et. al., (2002). Psychological Bulletin, 128, Kitayama, S., and Markus, H. R. (2000). The pursuit of happiness and the realization of sympathy: Cultural patterns of self, social relations, and well-being. In E. Diener and E. M. Suh, (Eds.) Culture and subjective well-being, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Leung, M. (1997). Negotiation and reward allocation across cultures. In P. C. Earley and M. Erez (Eds.), New perspectives on international industrial and organizational psychology (pp ). San Francisco: Lexington. Lewis, C. C. (1995). Educating hearts and minds. New York: Cambridge University Press. Markus, H., and Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and self: Implications for cognition, emotion and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, Markus, H. R., and Kitayama, S. (1994). The cultural construction of self and emotion: Implications for social behaviour. In S. Kitayama and H.R. Markus (Eds.), Emotion and culture: Empirical studies of mutual influence, pp Washington, Dc: American Psychological Association. Scollon, C. N., Oishi, S., Deiner, E. and Deiner, B. R. (2004). Emotions across cultures and methods. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 35, Singelis, M., Bond, M. H., Sharkey, W. F., and Lai, C. S. Y. (1999). Unpacking culture s influence on self-esteem and embarrassability. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, Spindler, G. D., and Spindler, L. S. (1990). American mainstream culture. In G. D. Spindler and L. S. Spindler (Eds.), The American cultural dialogue and its transmission (pp ). New York: Falmer Press. Triandis, H. C. (1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96, Uno, T. (1991). Chinese ideology. (H. Park, Trans.). Seoul, South Korea: Daewon.