PSY/450 Diversity and Cultural
Factors in Psychology
Cross-cultural psychology is a comparative study of human
psychology with respect to the diversity of said psychology that “draws its
conclusions from at least two samples that represent at least two cultural
groups” (Shiraev & Levy, 2010, p. 2).
Where cross-cultural psychology attempts to establish psychological
universals and diversities as a whole, cultural psychology seeks to discover
the links between cultures and the psychology of individuals living within the
cultures. And of course when people talk
of culture, they are referring to “a set of attitudes, behaviors, and symbols
shared by a large group of people” (Shiraev & Levy, 2010, p. 3). Philosopher Pandurang Shastri Vaijnath Athavale
(n.d.) stated “culture includes – [a] way of thinking, [a] way of life and [a]
way of worship” (para. 1). Thus, when
dealing with cultural and cross-cultural psychology one must look at the
relationship between the two, as-well-as the critical thinking involved, and
the methodology associated with cross-cultural psychology.
Relationship Between
Cultural and Cross-Cultural Psychology
There is no society that is culturally homogeneous; neither
entirely similar nor completely different than any other (Shiraev & Levy,
2010). As such, cross-cultural
psychology seeks to establish a link between at least two cultural groups, but
cultural dichotomies exist (e.g., “high- versus low power distance, high-
versus low uncertainty avoidance, [masculinity versus femininity,] and
collectivism versus individualism”) and play a large role in the cultural mix
of a group (Shiraev & Levy, 2010, p. 11).
In this, cultural psychology takes on an integrative approach to human
thoughts and behaviors as they relate to individual, socioeconomic,
environmental, political, and cultural conditions for individuals of a group, and
cross-cultural psychology compares those same factors on a broader sense as
they affect the group as a whole.
Critical Thinking in
Cross-Cultural Psychology
Evaluating cultural differences takes critical thinking
skills. One’s own language and his or
her preferences for the words he or she uses limit the ability to remain
neutral when evaluating any culture (Shiraev & Levy, 2010). It is, therefore, the reciprocal influence of
attitudes and language that affect beliefs, values, and perceptions and vice
versa. In addition to this
interdependence of values, perceptions, and language, differentiating
dichotomous variables create potential pitfalls. Avoiding such pitfalls, indicates Hermans and
Kempen (1998) as restated by Shiraev and Levy (2010) requires that one “…try to
avoid artificial or false dichotomies” (p. 58).
Statements that seem to be a “one-size-fits-all” personality description
can prove to be bias and inaccurate; however, known as Barnum statements, they
are pervasive throughout popular media because of their plausibility. While these statements may have validity
about people in general, one must keep in mind that they reveal nothing
distinctive about any single individual or sociocultural group to help
dissipate their effect (Shiraev & Levy, 2010). Furthermore, critical thinking helps
cross-cultural psychologists to avoid personal biases and generalizations that lie
within his or her own schemas. As new
information becomes available the propensity to assimilate rather than accommodate
the information increases; however, with improved critical thinking
differentiating the two can take place.
Methodology
Associated with Cross-Cultural Research
Quantitative Research
Research methodology consists of two categories:
“quantitative and qualitative” (Shiraev & Levy, 2010, p. 28). Quantitative research involves activities
that require comparative measurements, of which the most common are measures of
central tendency (i.e., the location of most of the distribution). “There are three measures of central tendency:
the mode, the median, and the mean” (Shiraev & Levy, 2010, p. 29). There are four types of measurement scales:
Nominal scale - for identification purposes
Ordinal scale - designates rank order
Interval scale - indicates some level of support or
opposition; and
Ratio scale - represents the true amount of variable present.
The final quantitative approach measures the correlation
coefficient. In effect, a psychologist
tries to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between two or more variables.
Qualitative Research
When subjectivity
is the desire, qualitative research can be the best method of research because
it deals easily with such “phenomena that are difficult to measure (such as dreams…)
and variables that are not completely conceptualized or operationally defined…”
(Shiraev & Levy, 2010, p. 31). Take
psychobiographical research, which is an in-depth analysis of a historically
significant person’s life (e.g., George Washington, George Bush, or Nelson
Mandela). Such research provides a
picture of how the individual’s behaviors manifest from within his or her
cultural conditions. For cross-cultural
psychology empirical studies explore and report on the significance and meaning
for both similarities and differences with a variety of different methods:
observation (naturalistic and laboratory), survey (direct and indirect),
experimental (independent and dependent), content-analysis, focus-group methodology,
and meta-analysis (Shiraev & Levy, 2010).
Once the research data is collected, interpreting the
results into common language can then take place, and should be done by several
people and in several versions (Shiraev & Levy, 2010). Evaluative comparisons take place with two
approaches: the absolutist approach and the relativist approach. From the absolutist approach, phenomena are
considered equal or consistent in all cultures.
From the relativist approach, human behavior should only be studied from
within an individual’s culture and any cross-cultural comparisons are
considered bias (Shiraev & Levy, 2010).
However, according to Shiraev and Levy (2010), “most cross-cultural
psychologists today accept a view that combines these two approaches… [even
though] comparisons and interpretations of findings have to be made cautiously”
(p. 42). This is the point of critical
distinction (PCD) for cross-cultural psychology; defining, comparing, and
contrasting phenomena. Either examining
the variables before the PCD for similarities or the variables at or after the
PCD for the differences or both for a complete picture, a cross-cultural
psychologist can gain an better understanding of the cultural relationships he
or she are researching (Shiraev & Levy, 2010).
Conclusion
As a comparative research, cross-cultural psychology is
complex but provides detailed and comprehensive information on the similarities
and differences of cultures throughout the world. In addition cross-cultural psychology can help
with cultural psychology by identifying integrative thoughts and behaviors of
the socioeconomic, environmental, political, and cultural conditions of the
group. Regardless, methodology of
cross-cultural research is important and both a qualitative and a quantitative
approach should be adopted to avoid dichotomous variables and biases. However, the antidote to dichotomous
variables and biases is critical thinking; differentiating between variables
and avoiding false dichotomies (Shiraev & Levy, 2010). One thing for certain with cross-cultural
psychology, there are fewer differences than one might think and more
differences than one might expect.
No comments:
Post a Comment