Textbook Notes (280,000)
CA (170,000)
UTSC (20,000)
Psychology (10,000)
PSYC14H3 (200)
Sisi Tran (100)
Chapter 6,8,9,12

PSYC14H3 Chapter Notes - Chapter 6,8,9,12: Ingroups And Outgroups, Categorical Perception, Gemeinschaft And Gesellschaft


Department
Psychology
Course Code
PSYC14H3
Professor
Sisi Tran
Chapter
6,8,9,12

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 22 pages of the document.
Cross-Cultural Social Psychology
Review Guide for Unit II
I. Self and Motivation
a. Self-Descriptions
i. Independent and Interdependent Views of Self
1. Ma & Schoeneman (1997)
Interdependent view of self: individuals are not perceived as separate and distinct entities but
as participants in a larger social unit. Their experience of identity is reflexive in that is contingent
on their position relative to others and their relationships with those others.
First, the border surrounding the interdependent self overlaps with an individuals significant
relationships: interdependent individualsidentities are closely connected with others
Second, the bold X’s indicates the key aspects of identity that rest at the intersection between
the individual and his/her relationships.
Third, the interdependent self is indicated by the dotted line that encapsulates the individual:
person is experienced as somewhat fluid in different situations.
Last, the border that separates the ingroup from the outgroup is drawn with a solid line:
people do not easily become ingroup members, nor do close relationships easily dissipate into
outgroup relations.
2. Markus & Kitayama (1991)
Independent view of self (Markus and Kitayama, 1991): The self can be thought to derive its
identity from its inner attributes. These attributes are assumed to reflect an inner essence of
the individual in that they are the basis of the individual’s identity; they are viewed as
stable across situations and across the lifespan, they are perceived to be unique (in the sense
that no other individual possesses the same configuration of attributes), they are
self-contained in that they are perceived to arise from the individual and not from interactions
with others, they are viewed as significant for regulating behavior, and individuals feel an
obligation to publicly advertise themselves in ways consistent with these attributes.

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

First, the circle around the individual does not overlap with any of the borders surrounding
its significant relationships. Independent individuals experience their identities as largely
distinct from their relationships. Second, the Xs inside the circles reflect aspects of identity;
the larger Xs reflect the especially important self-defining aspects of identity and these
important aspects tend to lie within the individual. Third, the border around the individual is
drawn with a solid line to indicate that the self is bounded and that means it is rather stable
and does not change much. Fourth, the border around the ingroup that separates ones close
relations from one’s more distant relations is drawn with a dotted line to show that others
can move between boundary of ingroup and outgroup relatively easily. In sum, independent
selves tend to be viewed as distinct, autonomous entities that are grounded in a variety of
internal component features and who interact with other similarly independent entities.
ii. Relations with Ingroups and Outgroups
People in more interdependent cultures:
Ingroup relations are so critical for self-definition
Obligations to others are an important part of ingroup relations and it is of vital importance
for them to distinguish those toward whom they have obligations from those they do not.
Becoming a member of an ingroup is thus a rather substantial accomplishment, and such
relationships should be entered cautiously.
Not easy for outgroup members to become part of the value ingroup and rare for a member of
the ingroup to lose one’s privileged status
The boundary distinguishing ingroups from outgroups would be particularly salient for
members
Independent person:
Perceive oneself as existing and functioning separately from the social environment
New relationships can be formed and old relationships can be dissolved without having a
large impact
More willing to form new relationships, maintain larger networks of relationships and be
less distressed when relationships fade away

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

The boundary distinguishing ingroups from outgroups is less consequential to
self-construction for those and it should be experienced as rather fluid and permeable.
Asian-Americans were more accurate than European-Americans in identifying the emotions
experienced by their close friends, European-Americans were more accurate than
Asian-Americans in identifying the emotions that were experienced by strangers.
Yamagishi and colleagues developed a model to explain trust and commitment among people
with independent and interdependent selves: they maintain that in a society characterized by
strong group ties, feelings of trust are confined to that group. The stronger the bonds among
members within a group, the weaker the ties between group.
Places like Japan, commitment to ingroup members is strong and less of a willingness to
cooperate with outgroup members. Interdependent selves should focus their trust on
people with whom they share relationship.
Americans tend to have higher levels of general trust toward strangers than Japanese do.
The conformity of people with interdependent selves appears to be more contingent on the
nature of the majority group than for independent people.
When in a situation with strangers, people with interdependent selves conform as much as
those with independent selves, or even show some evidence of anti-conformity. However, in a
situation with their peers, those with interdependent selves show evidence of heightened
conformity.
The largest amount of conformity involved Indian and Japanese participant conforming to
groups that included peers; the degree of conformity for Westerners did not appear to be
contingent on the relationships between subjects and the majority group.
People with interdependent selves view ingroup members as an extension of themselves
while maintaining distance from outgroup members; people with independent selves show a
tendency to view themselves as distinct from all others, regardless of their relationships to
the others.
iii. Individualism and Collectivism
People in individualistic cultures are more likely to elaborate on independent aspects of
themselves and they feel distinct from others & emphasize the importance of being
self-sufficient.
People in collectivistic culture are more likely to attend to interdependent aspects of their
self-concepts, such as their close relationships &group memberships.
Geert Hofstede, a Dutch psychologist, gave questionnaires to 117000 employees in IBM
offices in 40 different countries. According to his data:
The most individualistic country in the world is the United States, closely followed by
other English-speaking countries and by Western European nations.
Countries that scored high in collectivism were various nations in Latin America and Asia.
Other evidence is found in Asia, Africa, southern Europe, Eastern Europe, and South
Pacific.
Most people in collectivistic cultures where interdependent selves are more common and
compass more than 80% of the worlds population.
Individualism varies as a function of social class: people from higher socioeconomic
backgrounds tend to be more independent than those from poorer backgrounds, within the
same country.
Wealthier Icelandic children describe themselves more inner psychological traits than
poorer one
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version