Collectivism Culture Research Paper

1. Characteristics

Among the most important characteristics of this cultural pattern are the following:

(a) Individuals define themselves as aspects of a collective, interdependent with some in-group, such as the family, tribe, co-workers, nation, or religious, political, ideological, economic, or aesthetic group.

 (b) They give priority to the goals of that collective rather than to their personal goals.

(c) Their behavior is determined more often by the norms, roles, and goals of their collective than by their personal attitudes, perceived rights, or likes and dislikes.

(d) They stay in relationships even when the costs of staying in these relationships exceed the advantages of remaining.

These are defining attributes of collectivism. There are as many kinds of collectivism as there are collectivist cultures. To distinguish among collectivist cultures, additional attributes are necessary (Triandis 1995).

2. History

The term was first used in political philosophy in the eighteenth century in contrast to the individualism advocated by John Locke and Adam Smith. An early exponent was Jean Jacques Rousseau, who in his Social Contract (1762) advocated submission to the ‘general will,’ which was conceived as the common core of societal opinion. Georg Fredrick Hegel and Karl Marx also proposed collectivist philosophic systems.

The term was introduced into psychology by Hofstede (1980), in a study of the values of IBM employees in some 80 countries. He found that by summing the responses to value items of individuals from each country, and using the country as the unit of analysis, it was possible to identify a cluster of responses that reflected collectivism and individualism. Triandis (1995, in press) summarized the literature which used that construct in social psychology, and Kagitcibasi (1997) provided a critical evaluation of the construct.

Historical analysis suggested that collectivism was the typical cultural pattern in traditional societies, and individualism began emerging in England as early as in the thirteenth century. Traces of individualism have also been found in ancient Greece.

3. Distribution

Within any society there are individuals who behave like persons in collectivist cultures. They are called allocentrics, and contrast with those who behave like persons in individualist cultures who are called idiocentrics. It is assumed that there are both allocentrics and idiocentrics in every society, but their distributions are different, with more allocentrics found in collectivist cultures. The distinction between collectivism and allocentrism is important because in some cases a phenomenon observed at the cultural level is quite different from the phenomenon at the individual level of analysis.

Collectivism is maximal in relatively homogeneous societies, such as theocracies and monasteries, while individualism is maximal in heterogeneous societies that are very affluent. Thus, there will be few idiocentrics in monasteries and few allocentrics among Hollywood stars.

All individuals have access to cognitive systems that include both allocentric and idiocentric cognitions but they sample them with different probabilities, depending on the situation. For example, if the in-group is under attack most individuals become allocentric. In the company of other allocentrics the norms for allocentric behavior become salient and individuals are more likely to sample allocentric cognitions. Some situations provide very clear norms about appropriate behavior (e.g., in a house of worship), while other situations do not (e.g., at a party). Individuals will be more allocentric in the former than in the latter situations. When the in-group can supervise an individual’s behavior norms are more likely to be observed, and the individual will be more allocentric. When individuals are asked to think for two minutes about what they have in common with their family and friends they are likely to sample allocentric cognitions. Situations are more important than the personality of individuals as determinants of allocentric behaviors.

Collectivism can appear in all or none of the domains of social life. For example, it can be found in politics, religion, aesthetics, social life, economics, or philosophy, as was the case in China during the Mao period, or in none of these domains, as among Hollywood stars.

4. Antecedents

4.1 Homogeneity Of The Collective

An important antecedent is the homogeneity of the collective. If members of the collective do not agree concerning what are the group’s norms of behavior, it is left up to the individual to decide which normative system to follow.

4.2 Interdependence Imposed By The Situation

Collectivism is higher when members of the collective are interdependent, for example when they engage in activities that must be coordinated and when what one does affects the success of others, or where cooperation is essential for success. When the goal is to execute large projects such as irrigation canals, or defensive walls, collectivism is more likely. In societies where people are financially interdependent, collectivism is high.

4.3 Population Density

In dense social environments many rules develop that are designed to reduce conflict and ensure the smooth functioning of the group. People make sure that the rules are observed. When group norms are more important than attitudes as determinants of social behavior, collectivism is high. Urban environments often include members of different groups, and individuals can decide for themselves whether to observe the norms of one or another group, thus they become idiocentric. On the other hand, an urban setting may have neighborhoods of culturally homogeneous individuals, which increases the collectivism of that group.

4.4 Social Stability

When the collective is stable, it is more likely to develop agreements about norms, and to make sure that the norms are observed. By contrast, individuals who have migrated from their societies or have experienced social mobility are more likely to be idiocentric. When social change is slow, the norms can be observed more reliably than when social change is rapid. There is evidence that the older members of all societies are more allocentric than the younger members.

4.5 Low Economic Status

The lower social classes tend to be more conforming to social norms than members of the upper classes. The poor have fewer choices in life, and tend to do what norms specify. When resources are limited, one often depends on group members for assistance, especially in emergencies. These factors increase collectivism. On the other hand, those in positions of leadership tend to be idiocentric.

4.6 One Large In-group Rather Than Many In-groups

Those who only have one in-group can channel all their energy into that group. Also, they cannot afford to develop poor relationships with members of that group, so they are more likely to observe its norms. Those who have many in-groups have superficial relationships with most of them, and if they do not have good relationships with one of these in-groups they drop it and spend more of their energy with some other in-group. Intense involvement in relatively large in-groups (extended family, religious, or national in-group) is more common among collectivists than individualists. Intensive involvement in individualist cultures is usually limited to first-degree family members.

4.7 Low Exposure To Other Cultures

People who only know one culture are unlikely to have more than one set of norms for social behavior. They tend to be maximally ethnocentric, authoritarian, and submissive to in-group authorities. Those who are more educated, traveled, and have lived in more than one cultural group develop idiocentric tendencies.

4.8 Salient Common Fate

Common fate with members of the in-group (e.g., the in-group is under attack) increases collectivism. Time pressure for decisions has similar consequences. When there is time pressure an in-group authority must make quick decisions that do not allow time for discussion, and that places most members of the in-group in a condition of common fate, as well as requiring conformity to these decisions.

4.9 Collective Mobility Is Advantageous

If individual upward social mobility is not possible, then collective mobility may be used. Thus, individuals invest their energy in promoting the status of their in-group.

4.10 Large Families

In large families it is not practical to allow each child to follow idiosyncratic schedules, or have much privacy. Many rules are enforced, and that creates collectivism.

4.11 Strict Religious Upbringing

Most religions use a large number of norms that are reliably observed. That increases collectivism.

4.12 Little Exposure To Modern Mass Media

US-made television is widely available throughout the world. Content analyses show that the themes used are highly individualistic (emphasis on pleasure, doing what the individual wishes to do even if that is inconsistent with the wishes of authorities). Countries where people have little exposure to the US-made mass media are more collectivist.

5. Consequences

5.1 Socialization

Children are socialized to be obedient, reliable, follow traditions, do their duties, sacrifice for the in-group, and be conforming. An important value is self-control. For example, in a Chinese preschool children are taken together to the bathroom only three or four times a day. This procedure is extolled by Chinese teachers as providing orderliness and training in self-control. American educators find it objectionable because it does not allow for individual differences or personal choice, which is an important value among individualists.

5.2 Low Well-Being

While members of all cultures are satisfied with their life, members of collectivist cultures are less satisfied than members of individualist cultures. Well-being tends to be correlated with individualism (Diener et al. 1995). Even when controlling statistically for income, this relationship persists.

5.3 Consequences For Cognition, Emotion, And Motivation

Markus and Kitayama (1991) have reviewed an extensive literature that shows that members of collectivist cultures differ from members of individualist cultures in their cognition, emotion, and motivation.

5.4 Social Behavior

Collectivists are extremely concerned with saving their face, and even attempt to save the face of the persons with whom they are interacting. Preserving harmony within the in-group and being pleasant in relationships with in-group members are often important values. On the other hand, collectivists do not care much about their relationships with outgroups. They usually be-have quite differently toward in-group and outgroup members, showing sacrifice and extreme cooperation with in-group members, and suspicion and hostility toward outgroup members.

5.5 Receive Much Social Support If They Conform

Allocentrics report that they receive more social support and a better quality of social support than idiocentrics. However, those who do not conform to in-group norms are rejected, and may even be killed (Triandis 1995).

5.6 Have Poor Skills In Entering New Groups

Members of collectivist cultures do not have good skills for entering new groups because they are not socialized to do this. They are comfortable as members of their in-groups, thus they do not need to enter others. On the other hand they have more intimate relationships with those with whom they interact than idiocentrics who tend to have superficial relationships (e.g., cocktail parties).

5.7 Are Easy To Mobilize For Confrontations With Outgroups

When in-groups are in conflict it is easier to arouse members of collectivist cultures to fight for the in-group than it is to do so with members of individualist cultures. Ethnic cleansing is more often found in collectivist than in individualist cultures.

5.8 Describe The Self By Using Roles, Groups

When asked to complete 20 statements that begin with ‘I am … ,’ members of collectivist cultures provide sentence completions that have more social content (I am a brother, I am a member of the communist party) than members of individualist cultures.

5.9 Attributions

Allocentrics make external attributions in explaining events, while idiocentrics show the opposite pattern. Thus, idiocentrics make the fundamental attribution error (seeing internal rather than external causes for the behavior of other people, while actors see external causes more often than internal causes) more frequently than allocentrics. Also, allocentrics attribute their successes to the help they have received from others and their failures to personal shortcomings (e.g., I did not try hard enough).

5.10 Have The Ideal Of Fitting-In Rather Than Shining

Allocentrics prefer to fit in and be like most others in their in-group rather than shining and sticking out. Idiocentrics tend to be high in self-enhancement (report that they are better than most other people on most desirable attributes). Allocentrics tend to be modest when they compare themselves to others.

5.11 Show Little Social Loafing

Allocentrics show little evidence of social loafing (the tendency to produce less when they work in a group than when working alone if their output is not identifiable). They usually produce as much as possible when they work with in-group members, but they show social loafing if their co-workers are outgroup members.

5.12 Within The In-group Distribute Resources Equally Or According To Need

When interacting with in-group members, members of collectivist cultures tend to distribute resources equally or according to need. When interacting with outgroup members, however, they use the equity principle (to each according to contribution).

5.13 Recreation Occurs In Groups

Members of collectivist cultures seek recreation in groups to a greater extent than members of indi-vidualist cultures (e.g., bowling rather than skiing).

5.14 Communication

Members of collectivist cultures rely on the context (distance between and position of bodies, eye contact, gestures, tone of voice) more than on the content of communications. For example, rather than saying ‘no’ they may serve incongruous foods, to put across their negative message without causing the other person to lose face. When they describe a person they are likely to use context, e.g., ‘he is intelligent in the market place,’ rather than decontextualized statements such as ‘he is intelligent.’ Silence is used more than in individualist cultures. Compliments are not used as frequently as in individualist cultures. The languages of collectivist cultures do not require the use of ‘I.’ Collectivists use more action verbs (e.g., he asked for help) rather than state verbs (e.g., he is helpful), which suggests that they use communications that make greater use of context, are more concrete, and place less emphasis on internal attributes of the person.

5.15 Conflict Resolution

Members of collectivist cultures avoid conflict with in-group members, and in the case of disagreement prefer silence to argument. They prefer mediation to confrontation.

5.16 Conformity

Members of collectivist cultures show more conformity in experiments that measure conformity.

5.17 Emotions

Members of collectivist cultures get angry when something unpleasant happens to in-group members more often than when something unpleasant happens to themselves. They do not express negative emotions as often as members of individualist cultures.

5.18 Apologize More For Transgressions Of The In-group

Members of collectivist cultures apologize more when an in-group member commits a crime than is common in individualist cultures.

6. Globalization And Collectivism

In the process of globalization, is collectivism to be avoided and individualism to be promoted? This issue is especially relevant as societies become more affluent, because they tend to acquire some of the attributes of the West, including individualism. The tribe is rejected, and the individual becomes the center of social change. People in cities, in small apartments that do not have room for extended families, drift toward individualism.

Is ‘economic development’ necessarily associated with more individualism and less collectivism? My view is that the problem is much more complex than just stated. First, one can be both modern (use computers and fax machines) and collectivist. Second, societies are complex, i.e., they have many aspects. Some aspects might change and become more Western, while most aspects may stay the way they were. In general superficial attributes, dress, public behavior, and economic life might change while fundamental values may not. In any case, for collectivist societies, one might ask: is it desirable to ‘promote’ individualism, or is it better to stay with collectivism? As is the case with most complex issues, the answer is ‘it depends.’

A major problem can be the extremity of collectivism and individualism. Extreme collectivism is stifling. One becomes a tool manipulated by others, unable to reach personal goals. Extreme individualism is isolating, and leads to ego-centered narcissism. Furthermore, extremely individualistic societies are often extremely competitive, and that results in remarkably high levels of stress. Escapes from stress may include drug abuse.

It is possible to list both positive and negative factors associated with each cultural pattern. In the case of individualism we find affluence, self-determination, and self-actualization. These factors are associated with feeling good about oneself, and being satisfied with life and happy. Also, in individualist cultures there is an emphasis on individual rights, and people are expected to shape the direction of societal change to fit their personal needs. Participation in democratic processes is emphasized. Personal freedom is an important value. In democracies the state usually acts so as to satisfy personal values.

On the other hand, Naroll (1983) has assembled much empirical information suggesting that the weak interpersonal bonds that are associated with individualism result in higher rates of civil disturbance, riots, murder, delinquency, theft and fraud, drug and alcohol abuse, suicide, brawling, wife beating, child battering, and mental illness. The competition found in individualist cultures often results in some segments of the society remaining economically behind and becoming especially susceptible to social pathologies.

By contrast, collectivism is associated with social controls, including extreme punishment for crimes, prompt punishment, and active gossip. Social control is also achieved through emotional closeness, social support, appeals to memorable myths, and a plausible ideology that supports the in-group’s norms. People feel embedded in the social system, so they are less likely to try to change it, to commit crimes or suicide, to steal from the in-group, or use drugs that isolate them from it. One of the best predictors of drug abuse is the combination of high pressure for achievement with low social support, a combination often found in individualist cultures.

On the negative side, collectivism is often found in societies where groups assume that the individual is relatively unimportant and must do what is best for the group. This is especially significant when the group is the state. People are expected to be ‘patriotic,’ i.e. sacrifice themselves for the good of the state. However, very often what is good for the state is in fact only good for those in power, who frequently take advantage of the masses to further their personal goals. As we have seen, leaders in all cultures are idiocentric, and the history of the world offers too many examples where they order their followers to do what is good for the leader rather than what is good for the followers. Also, collectivism makes it easier to convince the in-group to fight outgroups, and wars are more frequent between collectivist countries than be-tween individualist cultures. In a world with nuclear weapons, there may be much to be said in favor of reduced collectivism.

Note also that while the social pathology associated with individualism is formidable, it does not affect most individuals in a society. Pathology by definition is found among a small minority in any society. Thus, the majority can enjoy the benefits of affluence without the negative consequences of individualism.

In short, an evaluation of the desirability of collectivism or individualism depends on what criteria we wish to maximize. If we wish to emphasize the creativity that individualism allows, which often results in more affluence, the freedom and self-actualization of individuals, democratic processes, and the independence of individuals from the social pressures of groups, we may wish to see globalization leading to more individualism. But if we wish to emphasize the values of the in-group, we may resist the weakening of collectivism associated with affluence. These values include religious beliefs, the social support that one can get from the in-group in moments of crisis, and the security, both material and emotional, that the in-group can provide.

In addition to the above considerations, there are issues of individual differences. For those who are intelligent, educated, easily changed, adaptable, an individualistic society can offer a great deal. Creativity requires freedom to pursue different courses of action, and in a society where one is supposed to consult others, and act according to well-established customs, creativity is not likely to flourish. On the other hand, for those who value especially family life, harmony, security, and a life of little stress, a collectivist society may be optimal.

Bibliography:

1. Diener E, Diener M, Diener C 1995 Factors predicting the subjective well-being of nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69: 851–64
2. Hofstede G 1980 Culture’s Consequences. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA
3. Kagitcibasi C 1997 Individualism and collectivism. In: Berry J W, Segall M H, Kagitcibasi C (eds.) Handbook of Cross-cultural Psychology, 2nd edn. Allyn & Bacon, Boston, pp. 1–50
4. Markus H, Kitayama S 1991 Culture and self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review 98: 224–53
5. Naroll R 1983 The Moral Order. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA Triandis H C 1995 Individualism and Collectivism. Westview Press, Boulder, CO
6. Triandis H C in press Individualism and collectivism. In: Matsumoto D (ed.) Handbook of Cultural Psychology. Oxford University Press, New York