The Impact of the Parameter Individualism — Collectivism on the Formation of Behavioral Characteristics in People of Various National Cultures

Different theories of cross-cultural communication developed by researchers in the field of humanities including cultural anthropology, social psychology, cognitive science, etc., offer a variety of ways to classify national cultures. At the same time, many agree that there is a need for finding clear and measurable fundamental parameters underlying any national culture. The article substantiates the use of the parameter of individualism vs. collectivism, already tested in the framework of anthropology and philosophy of culture with regard to both Western and non-Western cultures, as an effective way for cultural comparison. The article aims to give an overview of various theories of cross-cultural interaction and their elements; to examine where they overlap or diverge; to look into the correlation between individualist/collectivist value orientations and behavior; and to study this parameter realization on a number of cases. The study is based on philosophical, anthropological, and cultural psychological theories, including the theory of guilt and shame cultures by R. Benedict, theory of self–presentations by R. Baumeister and D. Hutton, theory of personality’s self-construction by H. Marcus and S. Kitayama, as well as theory of cultural logics by A. Leung and D. Cohen. As an empirical confirmation of the above theoretical approaches, the article provides real-life examples, collected by the author. Literature was subject to categorical analysis. Empirical data was collected and analyzed using methods such as participant observation and discourse analysis. The comparative approach and hermeneutics techniques served as a general methodological prism. The study shows that, at least since the 1960s, specialists in the field of cultural studies have been increasingly discovering limitations and inconsistencies in theories that previously claimed to be universal: many of the models which originated in the West do not adequately represent non-Western cultures. The study proves the workability of the parameter of individualism vs. collectivism for interpretation of behavioral inconsistencies between people of different cultures. This parameter is compatible with a wide range of frameworks and shows a clear correlation between behavioral characteristics in different cultures and allows to interpret phenomena that were previously uninterpretable.

1. Baumeister, R. F. and Hutton, D. G. (1987) ‘Self-Presentation Theory: Self-Construction and Audience Pleasing’, in Theories of Group Behavior. New York: Springer, pp. 71–87. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4612-4634-3_4.

2. Benedict, R. (1989) The Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Patterns of Japanese Culture. Boston: HoughtonMifflin Trade and Reference.

3. Conrad, R. (2019) Culture Hacks: Deciphering Differences in American, Chinese, and Japanese Thinking. Austin: Lioncrest Publishing.

4. D’Lima, T., Solotaroff, J. L. and Pande, R. P. (2020) ‘For the Sake of Family and Tradition: Honour Killings in India and Pakistan’, ANTYAJAA: Indian Journal of Women and Social Change, 5(1), pp. 22–39. https://doi. org/10.1177/24556327198808

5. Dianina, S. Y. (2015) ‘Honor Killings in the Context of Multiculturalism: Can Culture Kill?’, Issues of cultural studies, (1), pp. 68–73. (In Russian).

6. Franck, T. M. (1997) ‘Is Personal Freedom a Western Value?’, American Journal of International Law, 91(4), pp. 593–627. https://doi.org/10.2307/2998096

7. Geertz, C. (1983) Local Knowledge. Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. New York: Basic books.

8. Gunkel, M., Schlägel, C. and Engle, R. L. (2014) ‘Culture’s Influence on Emotional Intelligence: An Empirical Study of Nine Countries’, Journal of International Management, 20(2), pp. 256–274. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.intman.2013.10.002

9. Hills, M. D. (2002) ‘Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s Values Orientation Theory’, Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 4(4). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1040

10. Hofstede, G. (2001) Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

11. Huang, S. (2022) ‘Differences in the Principle of Politeness in Chinese and Russian Linguistic Cultures’, Litera, (5), pp. 176–183. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-8698.2022.5.37904

12. Kim, Y.-H. and Cohen, D. (2010) ‘Information, Perspective, and Judgments About the Self in Face and Dignity Cultures’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(4), pp. 537–550. https://doi. org/10.1177/0146167210362398

13. Khalil, M. A. (2018) ‘Perspectives of Religious Reform of Islam in the Light of Axiological Features of the Arab Culture’, Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series Philosophy, (1), pp. 122–129. (In Russian).

14. Leung, A. K.-Y. and Cohen, D. (2011) ‘Withinand between-culture variation: Individual differences and the cultural logics of honor, face, and dignity cultures.’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(3), pp. 507–526. doi: 10.1037/a0022151.

15. Lévy-Bruhl, L. (1935) Primitives and the Supernatural. New York: E.P. Dutton & Company, Incorporated.

16. Malyavin, V. (2007) Kitay upravlyayemyy. Staryy dobryy menedzhment [China controlled. Good old management]. Moscow: Evropa Publ. (In Russian).

17. Markus, H. R. and Kitayama, S. (1991) ‘Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.’, Psychological Review, 98(2), pp. 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224

18. Miceli, M. and Castelfranchi, C. (2018) ‘Reconsidering the differences between shame and guilt’, Europe’s

19. Journal of Psychology, 14(3), pp. 710–733. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v14i3.1564

20. Minkov, M. (2011) Cultural Differences in a Globalizing World. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

21. Minkov, M., Sokolov, B. and Lomakin, I. (2023) ‘Evolution of the Hofstede Model of Cultural Dimensions: Parallels Between Objective and Subjective Culture’, Russian Sociological Review, 22(3), pp. 287–317. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-287-317

22. Murdock, G. P. (1949) Social structure. New York: The Free Press. (Russ. ed.: (2003) Sotsial’naya struktura. Moscow: OGI Publ.).

23. Murdock, G. P. and White, D. R. (1969) ‘Standard Cross-Cultural Sample’, Ethnology, 8(4), pp. 329–369. https://doi.org/10.2307/3772907

24. Silantyeva, M. V. et al. (2020) Filosofiya kul’tury v sisteme izucheniya mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniy: v 2 kn. Kn. 1: Paradoksy issledovatel’skoy prizmy [Philosophy of culture in the system of studying international relations: in 2 books. Book 1: Paradoxes of the research prism]. Moscow: MGIMO University Publ. (In Russian).

25. Smith, P. B. et al. (2021) ‘Is an Emphasis on Dignity, Honor and Face more an Attribute of Individuals or of Cultural Groups?’, Cross-Cultural Research, 55(2–3), pp. 95–126. https://doi. org/10.1177/1069397120979571

26. Spengler, O. (1918) Der Untergang des Abendlandes. Umrisse einer Morphologie der Weltgeschichte. Band

27. Gestalt und Wirklichkeit. Wien: Braumüller. (Russ. ed.: (1998) Zakat Evropy. Rostov-on-Don: Feniks Publ.).

28. Teehankee, J. C. (2005) Liberalism. A Primer. Manila: The National Institute for Policy Studies.

29. Triandis, H. C. (1994) Culture and Social Behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.

30. Tsarkov, I. I. (2015) ‘Christian Anthropology’, Vestnik Volžskogo universiteta imeni V.N. Tatiŝeva, (2), pp. 256–264. (In Russian).

31. Vagapova, N. A., Andriyanova, A. A. and Kuzmischova, E. A. (2009) ‘Communicative Qualities of the Person as the Factor without the Conflict of Interaction’, Kazan State Power Engineering University bulletin, (3), pp. 47–51. (In Russian).

32. Wierzbicka, A. (1991) ‘Japanese Key Words and Core Cultural Values’, Language in Society, 20(3), pp. 333–385.

33. Yutang, L. (2010) My Country and My People. Oxford: Oxford City Press.