Assessing the Importance of Internal and External Self-Esteem and Their Relationship to Honor Concerns in Six Countries

IF 2.3 3区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Yvette van Osch, Michael Bender, Jia He, B. Adams, Filiz Kunuroglu, Richard N. Tillman, Isabel Benítez, L. Sekaja, Neo Mamathuba
{"title":"Assessing the Importance of Internal and External Self-Esteem and Their Relationship to Honor Concerns in Six Countries","authors":"Yvette van Osch, Michael Bender, Jia He, B. Adams, Filiz Kunuroglu, Richard N. Tillman, Isabel Benítez, L. Sekaja, Neo Mamathuba","doi":"10.1177/1069397120909383","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We assessed empirical support for (a) the widely held notion that across so-called “honor, dignity, and face cultures,” internal and external components of self-esteem are differentially important for overall self-esteem; and (b) the idea that concerns for honor are related to internal and external components of self-esteem in honor cultures but not in dignity and face cultures. Most importantly, we also set out to (c) investigate whether measures are equivalent, that is, whether a comparison of means and relationships across cultural groups is possible with the employed scales. Data were collected in six countries (N = 1,099). We obtained only metric invariance for the self-esteem and honor scales, allowing for comparisons of relationships across samples, but not scale means. Partly confirming theoretical ideas on the importance of internal and external components of self-esteem, we found that only external rather than both external and internal self-esteem was relatively more important for overall self-esteem in “honor cultures”; in a “dignity” culture, internal self-esteem was relatively more important than external self-esteem. Contrary to expectations, in a “face” culture, internal self-esteem was relatively more important than external self-esteem. We were not able to conceptually replicate earlier reported relationships between components of self-esteem and the concern for honor, as we observed no cultural differences in the relationship between self-esteem and honor. We point toward the need for future studies to consider invariance testing in the field of honor to appropriately understand differences and similarities between samples.","PeriodicalId":47154,"journal":{"name":"Cross-Cultural Research","volume":"54 1","pages":"462 - 485"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1069397120909383","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cross-Cultural Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397120909383","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

We assessed empirical support for (a) the widely held notion that across so-called “honor, dignity, and face cultures,” internal and external components of self-esteem are differentially important for overall self-esteem; and (b) the idea that concerns for honor are related to internal and external components of self-esteem in honor cultures but not in dignity and face cultures. Most importantly, we also set out to (c) investigate whether measures are equivalent, that is, whether a comparison of means and relationships across cultural groups is possible with the employed scales. Data were collected in six countries (N = 1,099). We obtained only metric invariance for the self-esteem and honor scales, allowing for comparisons of relationships across samples, but not scale means. Partly confirming theoretical ideas on the importance of internal and external components of self-esteem, we found that only external rather than both external and internal self-esteem was relatively more important for overall self-esteem in “honor cultures”; in a “dignity” culture, internal self-esteem was relatively more important than external self-esteem. Contrary to expectations, in a “face” culture, internal self-esteem was relatively more important than external self-esteem. We were not able to conceptually replicate earlier reported relationships between components of self-esteem and the concern for honor, as we observed no cultural differences in the relationship between self-esteem and honor. We point toward the need for future studies to consider invariance testing in the field of honor to appropriately understand differences and similarities between samples.
评估内外自尊的重要性及其与六国关注的关系
我们评估了对以下观点的实证支持:(a)在所谓的“荣誉、尊严和面子文化”中,自尊的内部和外部成分对整体自尊的重要性不同;以及(b)在荣誉文化中,对荣誉的关注与自尊的内部和外部组成部分有关,而在尊严和面子文化中则无关。最重要的是,我们还着手(c)调查衡量标准是否等效,也就是说,是否可以将不同文化群体的手段和关系与使用的量表进行比较。数据收集于6个国家(N=1099)。我们只获得了自尊和荣誉量表的度量不变性,允许对样本之间的关系进行比较,但不允许对量表均值进行比较。我们发现,在“荣誉文化”中,只有外部自尊而不是外部自尊和内部自尊对整体自尊相对更重要,这在一定程度上证实了自尊的内部和外部成分的重要性的理论观点;在“尊严”文化中,内部自尊相对来说比外部自尊更重要。与预期相反,在“面子”文化中,内部自尊相对来说比外部自尊更重要。我们无法在概念上复制早期报道的自尊组成部分和对荣誉的关注之间的关系,因为我们没有观察到自尊和荣誉之间的关系存在文化差异。我们指出,未来的研究需要考虑荣誉领域的不变性测试,以适当地理解样本之间的差异和相似性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cross-Cultural Research
Cross-Cultural Research SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
8.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Cross-Cultural Research, formerly Behavior Science Research, is sponsored by the Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (HRAF) and is the official journal of the Society for Cross-Cultural Research. The mission of the journal is to publish peer-reviewed articles describing cross-cultural or comparative studies in all the social/behavioral sciences and other sciences dealing with humans, including anthropology, sociology, psychology, political science, economics, human ecology, and evolutionary biology. Worldwide cross-cultural studies are particularly welcomed, but all kinds of systematic comparisons are acceptable so long as they deal explicity with cross-cultural issues pertaining to the constraints and variables of human behavior.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信