Preference for modernization is universal, but expected modernization trajectories are culturally diversified: A nine-country study of folk theories of societal development

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Kuba Krys, Colin A. Capaldi, Yukiko Uchida, Katarzyna Cantarero, Claudio Torres, İdil Işık, Victoria Wai Lan Yeung, Brian W. Haas, Julien Teyssier, Laura Andrade, Patrick Denoux, David O. Igbokwe, Agata Kocimska-Zych, Léa Villeneuve, John M. Zelenski
{"title":"Preference for modernization is universal, but expected modernization trajectories are culturally diversified: A nine-country study of folk theories of societal development","authors":"Kuba Krys,&nbsp;Colin A. Capaldi,&nbsp;Yukiko Uchida,&nbsp;Katarzyna Cantarero,&nbsp;Claudio Torres,&nbsp;İdil Işık,&nbsp;Victoria Wai Lan Yeung,&nbsp;Brian W. Haas,&nbsp;Julien Teyssier,&nbsp;Laura Andrade,&nbsp;Patrick Denoux,&nbsp;David O. Igbokwe,&nbsp;Agata Kocimska-Zych,&nbsp;Léa Villeneuve,&nbsp;John M. Zelenski","doi":"10.1111/ajsp.12533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Cultural sensitivity in societal development has been advocated for since at least the 1960s but has remained understudied. Our goal is to address this gap and to investigate folk theories of societal development. We aimed to identify both universal and culturally specific lay beliefs about what constitutes good societal development. We collected data from 2,684 participants from Japan, Hong Kong (China), Poland, Turkey, Brazil, France, Nigeria, the USA, and Canada. We measured preferences for 28 development aims. We used multidimensional scaling, analysis of variance, and pairwise comparisons to identify universal and country-specific preferences. Our results demonstrate that what people understand as modernization is fairly universal across countries, but specific pathways of development and preferences towards these pathways tend to vary between countries. We distinguished three facets of modernization—foundational aims (e.g., trust, economic development), welfare aims (e.g., poverty eradication, education), and inclusive aims (e.g., openness, gender equality)—and incorporated them into a folk meta-theory of modernization. In all nine countries, the three facets of modernization were preferred more than conventional aims (e.g., military, demographic growth). We propose a method of implementing our findings into a culturally sensitive modernization index.</p>","PeriodicalId":47394,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajsp.12533","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajsp.12533","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Cultural sensitivity in societal development has been advocated for since at least the 1960s but has remained understudied. Our goal is to address this gap and to investigate folk theories of societal development. We aimed to identify both universal and culturally specific lay beliefs about what constitutes good societal development. We collected data from 2,684 participants from Japan, Hong Kong (China), Poland, Turkey, Brazil, France, Nigeria, the USA, and Canada. We measured preferences for 28 development aims. We used multidimensional scaling, analysis of variance, and pairwise comparisons to identify universal and country-specific preferences. Our results demonstrate that what people understand as modernization is fairly universal across countries, but specific pathways of development and preferences towards these pathways tend to vary between countries. We distinguished three facets of modernization—foundational aims (e.g., trust, economic development), welfare aims (e.g., poverty eradication, education), and inclusive aims (e.g., openness, gender equality)—and incorporated them into a folk meta-theory of modernization. In all nine countries, the three facets of modernization were preferred more than conventional aims (e.g., military, demographic growth). We propose a method of implementing our findings into a culturally sensitive modernization index.

Abstract Image

对现代化的偏好是普遍的,但预期的现代化轨迹在文化上是多样化的:对社会发展民间理论的九国研究
至少从20世纪60年代开始,社会发展中的文化敏感性就一直被提倡,但一直没有得到充分的研究。我们的目标是解决这一差距,并调查社会发展的民间理论。我们的目的是确定普遍的和特定文化的外行信仰是什么构成了良好的社会发展。我们收集了来自日本、中国香港、波兰、土耳其、巴西、法国、尼日利亚、美国和加拿大的2684名参与者的数据。我们衡量了人们对28个发展目标的偏好。我们使用多维尺度、方差分析和两两比较来确定普遍和特定国家的偏好。我们的研究结果表明,人们对现代化的理解在各国是相当普遍的,但具体的发展途径和对这些途径的偏好往往因国家而异。我们区分了现代化的三个方面——基础目标(如信任、经济发展)、福利目标(如消除贫困、教育)和包容性目标(如开放、性别平等)——并将它们纳入了现代化的民间元理论。在所有九个国家中,现代化的三个方面比传统目标(例如军事、人口增长)更受重视。我们提出了一种方法,将我们的发现应用到一个文化敏感的现代化指数中。
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
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.20%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Asian Journal of Social Psychology publishes empirical papers and major reviews on any topic in social psychology and personality, and on topics in other areas of basic and applied psychology that highlight the role of social psychological concepts and theories. The journal coverage also includes all aspects of social processes such as development, cognition, emotions, personality, health and well-being, in the sociocultural context of organisations, schools, communities, social networks, and virtual groups. The journal encourages interdisciplinary integration with social sciences, life sciences, engineering sciences, and the humanities. The journal positively encourages submissions with Asian content and/or Asian authors but welcomes high-quality submissions from any part of the world.
×
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