Cultural Psychologist, China Scholar & World Traveler
Joined February 2022
- Tweets232
- Following53
- Followers59
- Likes281
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
Defining collectivism as duties in relationships rather than generalized warmth improves predictive validity in 100 cultures dlvr.it/TVV3Pt
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
文化比較の「集団主義」が、どちらかというと向社会性みたいな定義だったので、「義理」に近い responsibilism というのを定義して測りなおしてみた、という研究
・温かい感情や楽しさは要求しない。あくまで「行動としての義務・役割・責任」に焦点を当てる
・親しい関係と疎遠な関係を明確に区別する（親には尽くすが、見知らぬ他人には義務を感じない）
・「グループに属している」だけでは不十分で、具体的で親密な関係性（親、信頼できる同僚など）が重要
🚨 It's finally out! 🚨 This is the big one. 100 cultures, 12,000 people, 108 researchers. Why people (and our most-used surveys) get collectivism wrong and how to fix it. Join me for a fun thread! 🧵 @NatureHumBehav nature.com/articles/s41562-0…
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
I appreciate the kind words! You’re spot on when you say “responsible to whom?” One thing that set me on this path was seeing all the survey questions that used the word “others.” “To me, pleasure is spending time with others.” The “who” is important!
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
Haven't read the paper but the tweet storm about it makes perfect and aligns with the explanation I have adopted. Collectivism-individualism scale for measuring cultures does not make sense because (among others) people in collectivist cultures often find it difficult to collaborate with strangers. How people are expected to be responsible to whom is what makes the difference. Hope this get traction in the field @ThomasTalhelm.
The paper is open access at Nature Human Behaviour. It's time to retire the old surveys! 📣 @NaturePortfolio nature.com/articles/s41562-0…
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
You nailed the summary! More concise than my version. 👏 And when you disambiguate, you can find social class (left graph) and political (right graph) differences that earlier measures mostly miss.
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
When they disambiguated between collectivism as feel-good altruistic sentiment and nuts-and-bolts responsibilities, this is the map they got for the latter
A new paper led @ThomasTalhelm @wei_liuqing separates two conflated ideas of collectivism: general prosociality and close-relationship responsibilities. Responsibilism Scale" focuses on behavioral duties to specific people. nature.com/articles/s41562-0…
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
By "don't work," they meant they produced weird results, like people in China saying they value independence more than Americans. psycnet.apa.org/record/1997-…
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
And this meta-analysis of 76 survey studies finding no differences in collectivism between East Asia and the West. Seems weird! 🧐 psycnet.apa.org/record/2002-…
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
People offered explanations. Maybe it's response styles. People in some cultures just agree more with everything. And that messes up the comparison.
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
These explanations have evidence behind them, but I think they miss the bigger problem. The problem was in our heads all along. What do people think collectivism is?
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
One fun way to answer this is to do a simple Google image search and see what pops up.
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
A lot of those images reflect what I call "warm fuzzy" collectivism. I mean, look at those toothy smiles!
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
You can see warm fuzzy intuitions in survey items researchers were using.
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
When researchers give these survey questions to people around the world, it's WESTERNERS who agree more with the warm fuzzies.
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
But there's another intuition people have about collectivism that's totally different from the warm fuzzies. You can see it in this survey item.
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
So here's the big idea: Remember those 76 studies that failed to find East-West differences in collectivism? If we understand collectivism as responsibilism (and NOT warm fuzzies), I bet we'll find those differences people were looking for! So I made a survey.
AlexEnglish_Psych retweeted
I thought it was important to define the situation and the relationship concretely. Here's one item.
