霍夫斯泰德个人主义-集体主义的新发展:给学者、教育工作者、培训师和其他实践者的指南

IF 2.8 2区 社会学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Adam Komisarof , Plamen Akaliyski
{"title":"霍夫斯泰德个人主义-集体主义的新发展:给学者、教育工作者、培训师和其他实践者的指南","authors":"Adam Komisarof ,&nbsp;Plamen Akaliyski","doi":"10.1016/j.ijintrel.2025.102200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Introduced as a measure by Geert Hofstede in 1980, the cultural dimension of Individualism-Collectivism (“I-C”) has dominated the field of cross-cultural research and guided intercultural trainers, educators, and other practitioners up to the present. In 2023, The Culture Factor, the global cultural analytics and strategy advisor company associated with Hofstede’s framework, updated their I-C scores due to mounting concerns with Hofstede’s operationalization and measurement of I-C, specifically over its old and non-representative data, as well as its limited face and content validity. These newer I-C scores are derived from the work of Hofstede’s former collaborator, Michael Minkov, and are based on two distinct datasets: a 2015 Hofstede Insights survey covering 55 countries and the World Values Survey covering 47 more, for a total of 102 countries/regions. Conceptually, the model redefines I-C as consisting of three facets: conformism, social ascendancy, and exclusionism. We discuss three major sources of country-level scores associated with Hofstede’s name that pertain to his cultural dimensions, present a synthesized overview of the new developments in understanding and measuring I-C as it pertains to Hofstede’s work, and examine the suitability of both Hofstede’s original work and Minkov’s subsequent revisions to I-C for academic research, intercultural training, and education. Our article concludes with recommendations to (1) rigorously scrutinize the construction of cultural dimensions—in this case I-C—by critically assessing their validity, data sources, and methodologies; (2) validate these dimensions against external evidence; and (3) continue refining I-C measures by emphasizing reliable, representative data and stringent methodological validation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48216,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Intercultural Relations","volume":"107 ","pages":"Article 102200"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New developments in Hofstede’s Individualism-Collectivism: A guide for scholars, educators, trainers, and other practitioners\",\"authors\":\"Adam Komisarof ,&nbsp;Plamen Akaliyski\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijintrel.2025.102200\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Introduced as a measure by Geert Hofstede in 1980, the cultural dimension of Individualism-Collectivism (“I-C”) has dominated the field of cross-cultural research and guided intercultural trainers, educators, and other practitioners up to the present. In 2023, The Culture Factor, the global cultural analytics and strategy advisor company associated with Hofstede’s framework, updated their I-C scores due to mounting concerns with Hofstede’s operationalization and measurement of I-C, specifically over its old and non-representative data, as well as its limited face and content validity. These newer I-C scores are derived from the work of Hofstede’s former collaborator, Michael Minkov, and are based on two distinct datasets: a 2015 Hofstede Insights survey covering 55 countries and the World Values Survey covering 47 more, for a total of 102 countries/regions. Conceptually, the model redefines I-C as consisting of three facets: conformism, social ascendancy, and exclusionism. We discuss three major sources of country-level scores associated with Hofstede’s name that pertain to his cultural dimensions, present a synthesized overview of the new developments in understanding and measuring I-C as it pertains to Hofstede’s work, and examine the suitability of both Hofstede’s original work and Minkov’s subsequent revisions to I-C for academic research, intercultural training, and education. Our article concludes with recommendations to (1) rigorously scrutinize the construction of cultural dimensions—in this case I-C—by critically assessing their validity, data sources, and methodologies; (2) validate these dimensions against external evidence; and (3) continue refining I-C measures by emphasizing reliable, representative data and stringent methodological validation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48216,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Intercultural Relations\",\"volume\":\"107 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102200\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Intercultural Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014717672500063X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Intercultural Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014717672500063X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作为Geert Hofstede于1980年提出的一种衡量标准,个人主义-集体主义(I-C)的文化维度一直主导着跨文化研究领域,并指导着跨文化培训师、教育者和其他实践者。2023年,与Hofstede框架相关的全球文化分析和战略顾问公司The Culture Factor更新了他们的I-C分数,原因是人们越来越担心Hofstede对I-C的操作和测量,特别是其旧的和不具代表性的数据,以及其有限的外观和内容有效性。这些新的I-C分数来自霍夫斯泰德的前合作者迈克尔·明科夫的工作,并基于两个不同的数据集:2015年霍夫斯泰德洞察调查涵盖55个国家和世界价值观调查涵盖47个国家/地区,共102个国家/地区。从概念上讲,该模型将I-C重新定义为由三个方面组成:顺从、社会优势和排斥。我们讨论了与Hofstede的名字有关的三个主要的国家级分数来源,这些分数与Hofstede的文化维度有关,并综合概述了与Hofstede的工作有关的理解和测量I-C的新发展,并检查了Hofstede的原始工作和Minkov随后对I-C的修订在学术研究、跨文化培训和教育方面的适用性。我们的文章总结了以下建议:(1)严格审查文化维度的构建——在本例中是i - c——通过批判性地评估其有效性、数据来源和方法;(2)根据外部证据验证这些维度;(3)通过强调可靠、具有代表性的数据和严格的方法验证,继续完善I-C测量方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
New developments in Hofstede’s Individualism-Collectivism: A guide for scholars, educators, trainers, and other practitioners
Introduced as a measure by Geert Hofstede in 1980, the cultural dimension of Individualism-Collectivism (“I-C”) has dominated the field of cross-cultural research and guided intercultural trainers, educators, and other practitioners up to the present. In 2023, The Culture Factor, the global cultural analytics and strategy advisor company associated with Hofstede’s framework, updated their I-C scores due to mounting concerns with Hofstede’s operationalization and measurement of I-C, specifically over its old and non-representative data, as well as its limited face and content validity. These newer I-C scores are derived from the work of Hofstede’s former collaborator, Michael Minkov, and are based on two distinct datasets: a 2015 Hofstede Insights survey covering 55 countries and the World Values Survey covering 47 more, for a total of 102 countries/regions. Conceptually, the model redefines I-C as consisting of three facets: conformism, social ascendancy, and exclusionism. We discuss three major sources of country-level scores associated with Hofstede’s name that pertain to his cultural dimensions, present a synthesized overview of the new developments in understanding and measuring I-C as it pertains to Hofstede’s work, and examine the suitability of both Hofstede’s original work and Minkov’s subsequent revisions to I-C for academic research, intercultural training, and education. Our article concludes with recommendations to (1) rigorously scrutinize the construction of cultural dimensions—in this case I-C—by critically assessing their validity, data sources, and methodologies; (2) validate these dimensions against external evidence; and (3) continue refining I-C measures by emphasizing reliable, representative data and stringent methodological validation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
122
期刊介绍: IJIR is dedicated to advancing knowledge and understanding of theory, practice, and research in intergroup relations. The contents encompass theoretical developments, field-based evaluations of training techniques, empirical discussions of cultural similarities and differences, and critical descriptions of new training approaches. Papers selected for publication in IJIR are judged to increase our understanding of intergroup tensions and harmony. Issue-oriented and cross-discipline discussion is encouraged. The highest priority is given to manuscripts that join theory, practice, and field research design. By theory, we mean conceptual schemes focused on the nature of cultural differences and similarities.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信