冲突解决过程中伦理和价值观的文化差异:一种解开纠缠的方法

IF 2 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Ajay V. Somaraju
{"title":"冲突解决过程中伦理和价值观的文化差异:一种解开纠缠的方法","authors":"Ajay V. Somaraju","doi":"10.1177/14705958231155014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using a social motives framework, I tested two process models that linked ethical beliefs of Relativism and Idealism to conflict resolution preferences of Compromise and Forcing through social values (Face, Collectivism, Dignity, and Honor). Cultural relativity of the models was assessed across three-cultural subgroups (Confucian, Hindu, and Aristotelian). Results revealed that the process model for Idealism held across cultures as Idealism was indirectly related to Forcing through Dignity and Honor. However, the results suggested that the process model for Relativism differed across cultural groups as Relativism was indirectly related to Compromise through both Face and Collectivism for Confucian cultures, but indirectly related to Compromise through Collectivism for Hindu cultures, and indirectly related to Compromise through Face for Aristotelian cultures. By examining the relationships between ethical beliefs and social values commonly attributed to cultural differences in conflict resolution preferences, the study disentangles the culture-specific and culture-free relationships which are important to resolving interpersonal conflict.","PeriodicalId":46626,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cross Cultural Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cultural differences in ethics and values during conflict resolution: A disentangling approach\",\"authors\":\"Ajay V. Somaraju\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14705958231155014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Using a social motives framework, I tested two process models that linked ethical beliefs of Relativism and Idealism to conflict resolution preferences of Compromise and Forcing through social values (Face, Collectivism, Dignity, and Honor). Cultural relativity of the models was assessed across three-cultural subgroups (Confucian, Hindu, and Aristotelian). Results revealed that the process model for Idealism held across cultures as Idealism was indirectly related to Forcing through Dignity and Honor. However, the results suggested that the process model for Relativism differed across cultural groups as Relativism was indirectly related to Compromise through both Face and Collectivism for Confucian cultures, but indirectly related to Compromise through Collectivism for Hindu cultures, and indirectly related to Compromise through Face for Aristotelian cultures. By examining the relationships between ethical beliefs and social values commonly attributed to cultural differences in conflict resolution preferences, the study disentangles the culture-specific and culture-free relationships which are important to resolving interpersonal conflict.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46626,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Cross Cultural Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Cross Cultural Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14705958231155014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cross Cultural Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14705958231155014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

使用社会动机框架,我测试了两个过程模型,它们将相对主义和理想主义的伦理信仰与通过社会价值观(面子、集体主义、尊严和荣誉)妥协和强迫的冲突解决偏好联系起来。模型的文化相关性在三个文化亚群(儒家、印度教和亚里士多德)中进行了评估。结果表明,作为理想主义的理想主义在不同文化中的过程模型与通过尊严和荣誉的强迫间接相关。然而,研究结果表明,不同文化群体之间的相对主义过程模型不同,因为对于儒家文化来说,相对主义与通过面子和集体主义的妥协间接相关,而对于印度教文化来说,则与通过集体主义的折衷间接相关,对于亚里士多德文化来说,又与通过面子的妥协间接有关。通过考察通常归因于冲突解决偏好的文化差异的伦理信仰和社会价值观之间的关系,本研究解开了对解决人际冲突很重要的文化特定关系和文化无关关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cultural differences in ethics and values during conflict resolution: A disentangling approach
Using a social motives framework, I tested two process models that linked ethical beliefs of Relativism and Idealism to conflict resolution preferences of Compromise and Forcing through social values (Face, Collectivism, Dignity, and Honor). Cultural relativity of the models was assessed across three-cultural subgroups (Confucian, Hindu, and Aristotelian). Results revealed that the process model for Idealism held across cultures as Idealism was indirectly related to Forcing through Dignity and Honor. However, the results suggested that the process model for Relativism differed across cultural groups as Relativism was indirectly related to Compromise through both Face and Collectivism for Confucian cultures, but indirectly related to Compromise through Collectivism for Hindu cultures, and indirectly related to Compromise through Face for Aristotelian cultures. By examining the relationships between ethical beliefs and social values commonly attributed to cultural differences in conflict resolution preferences, the study disentangles the culture-specific and culture-free relationships which are important to resolving interpersonal conflict.
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
3.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Cross Cultural Management is an international peer reviewed journal that publishes the highest quality original research in cross cultural aspects of management, work and organization. The International Journal of Cross Cultural Management (IJCCM) aims to provide a specialized academic medium and main reference for the encouragement and dissemination of research on cross cultural aspects of management, work and organization. This includes both original qualitative and quantitative empirical work as well as theoretical and conceptual work which adds to the understanding of management across cultures.
×
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