Perception of individualism and collectivism in Dutch society: A ...

International Journal of Behavioral Development 2004, 28 (4), 336–346

# 2004 The International Society for the Study of Behavioural Development

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pp/01650254.html

DOI: 10.1080/01650250444000009

Perception of individualism and collectivism in Dutch society: A developmental approach Louis Oppenheimer University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands Within Triandis’s (1994) theoretical framework, two studies are reported that deal with the developmental course for subjective perceptions of cultural dimensions in Dutch society (i.e., vertical and horizontal individualism and collectivism). While perceptions of society are always subjectively determined, the perceived dimensions that are prevalent in society do not necessarily have to parallel subjective evaluations of the self in terms of the same dimension. In the first study, 245 secondary school pupils and 268 psychology students participated; they were divided into six age groups with mean ages 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, and 22 years and above. Outcomes on the Individualism–Collectivism scale (INDCOL; Singelis et al., 1995) demonstrated age- and gender-related changes in perception of society. By calculating the separate dimensions of individualism, collectivism, verticality, and horizontality, a disappearance of collectivism and verticality and an increase in horizontality across age were observed. In the second study, 226 adolescents divided into five age groups participated (mean ages 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 years). They were presented with a generalised and personal version of the INDCOL. Again, age- and gender-related differences were observed. Of interest was the presence of a developmental lag between general and personal perceptions of collectivism, with personal perceptions following general perceptions. The increase in personal adherence to horizontality (i.e., equality among people) across age followed and exceeded the general perceptions of horizontality in society.

Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological model has for some decades served to detail and describe interactive processes between immediate social contexts (i.e., microsystems like the family and school) and the developing child. The nature and role of larger social systems such as the macro-systems or ‘‘nation-specific socio-cultural structures’’ (i.e., society) and ‘‘social institutions’’, however, have remained mostly unspecified (cf. Oppenheimer, 1995a, 1995b). This is surprising, since society and its institutions affect the values and norms inherent in behavioural patterns of parenting, socialisation, and education (Oppenheimer, 1996). This sequence of effective influences corresponds to Triandis’s (1994) theoretical framework involving the sequence from ecology to behaviour (i.e., ecology ! culture ! socialisation ! personality ! behaviour, p. 22). Additionally, characteristics of society and its institutions such as parenting, socialisation, and education are not fixed but change over time (cf. Toulmin, 1990; Triandis, 1994). In particular, on the individual level, the perception and understanding of society and its institutions constitute developmental acquisitions resulting from the interaction between the cognitively and emotionally maturing individual and the values emphasised by society at a particular period in time (Smetana, 1999; Valsiner, Branco, & Melo Dantas, 1997; Wertsch, 1985). The purpose of the first study is to examine how Dutch adolescents and adults perceive characteristics of society and whether these perceptions change across age. To date, no information about age-related changes in the perception of

society is available. Individuals’ perceptions of society have often been interpreted to represent their personal attitudes toward society (Sallay, Mu¨nnich, & Oppenheimer, 2001; Singelis, 1994); in the second study, the validity of this assumption is examined. In contemporary cross-cultural literature, societies are often described in terms of individualism and collectivism (cf. Triandis, 1994). Individualism and collectivism refer to the nature of the relationship between the individual and the group or the difference between self-actualisation and collectivity (Parsons, 1949). In a study of basic value structures that characterise cultures, Hofstede (1980) reported four structures involving individualism–collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity. For the purpose of the present study, we focus on the first two of these structures (i.e., individualism–collectivism and power distance). According to Hofstede, individualism involves loose ties among individuals in a society. That is, ‘‘everyone is expected to look after himself or herself and his or her immediate family’’. In collectivist societies, individuals are, from birth onward, part of ‘‘cohesive ingroups, which throughout people’s lifetime continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty’’ (p. 51). Interpersonal relationships in individualistic as well as collectivistic societies are also characterised by distances between individuals in the upper and lower parts of the social structure: That is, the extent to which a hierarchical ranking according to status is present in a society (Fiske, 1990, 1992) and whether

Correspondence should be addressed to Louis Oppenheimer, Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Roetersstraat 15, 1018 WB Amsterdam, Nederland; e-mail: [email protected].

I would like to express my gratitude to two anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions on an earlier draft of this paper.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DEVELOPMENT, 2004, 28 (4), 336–346

such a ranking involves differences in power between individuals or groups of individuals (Hofstede, 1980), or the perception of equality or inequality among individuals in a society (Bhawuk, 2001; Gelfand, Bhawuk, Nishii, & Bechtold, 2000; Singelis, Triandis, Bhawuk, & Gelfand, 1995; Triandis & Gelfand, 1998). In relation to Hofstede’s (1980) dimensions of individualism–collectivism and power distance, Dutch society is perceived as high on the dimension of individualism (Individualism Index ¼ 80) and moderate on the dimension of power distance (Power Distance Index ¼ 40). In spite of subjective experiences of relatively high emphases on selfactualisation, self-reliance, and competition (Singelis et al., 1995; Triandis & Gelfand, 1998) in Dutch society, an emphasis on equality among individuals is also experienced. According to Fiske (1990, 1992), forms of social behaviour (i.e., socialities) that relate to Hofstede’s dimensions can be observed in every culture (cf. Triandis & Bhawuk, 1997). They are expressed differently, however, because of differences in the construction of these behaviours by subjective perceptions of cultural elements of individuals in particular cultural settings. A central concern of the present paper is to examine whether and how subjective perceptions of cultural elements change across age and the extent to which subjective perceptions correspond with subjective attitudes defined by the same cultural elements. For this purpose, the subjective perceptions (i.e., evaluations) of individualistic and collectivist elements of society will be assessed by means of the INDCOL (Singelis et al., 1995). The INDCOL distinguishes between horizontal and vertical dimensions of individualism and collectivism. Whereas the horizontal dimensions refer to equality among individuals (i.e., the absence of power distance), the vertical dimensions stress inequality and hierarchical power relationships. Consequently, horizontal individualism (HI) emphasises uniqueness and distinctiveness, whereas equality is also emphasised (i.e., nobody is better than the other: ‘‘I want to do my own thing’’). The acquisition of higher status, becoming distinguished, and competition are characteristics of vertical individualism (VI; i.e., ‘‘I want to be the best’’). To perceive each other as similar, to share common goals, interdependence, and sociability are features of horizontal collectivism (HC; one person, one vote), while the emphasis of in-group integrity, the readiness to sacrifice personal goals for the sake of the in-group, and support for in-group competition with outgroups is characteristic of vertical collectivism (VC; Triandis & Gelfand, 1998, p. 119). In other words, equality, a major characteristic of collectivist societies, is also observed in individualistic societies (e.g., social democracies), while inequality—a characteristic of competitive, individual societies—is also observed in collectivist societies (Triandis & Gelfand, 1998). Consequently, societies cannot be characterised in a unidimensional way, for example, as either horizontal collectivistic or vertical individualistic. Each society is characterised by patterns of vertical and horizontal individualism and collectivism. Some support for this theory has been obtained on the individual level (Singelis et al., 1995; Triandis & Gelfand, 1998). From a developmental point of view, important changes in the perception of the emphasis of collectivism and individualism by society are expected when children move from the protective environment of the family (i.e., a collective environment) to the more competitive environment of sec-

337

ondary education and university (i.e., an individualistic environment). We expected that the initial perceived emphasis on collectivism at the age of 12 will diminish and be replaced by a perceived larger emphasis on individualism. Simultaneously, a shift from horizontality (i.e., equality) to verticality (i.e., power distance based on competition) could be expected, if the family environment could be unequivocally defined as egalitarian (i.e., authoritative). Recent research (Oppenheimer & Hetteling, 2004) has shown, however, that the perception of the family environment and parenting also changes across age from authoritarian with young adolescents, to authoritative, and finally to permissive with older adolescents. That is, young adolescents perceived parenting to be characterised by authoritarian parent–child relationships based on inequality and the presence of power distance, whereas older adolescents evaluated parenting more in terms of equality. In addition, gender differences indicated that young adolescent females perceive parenting as less authoritarian than young adolescent males. In the present study, gender differences in the perception of society across age will be exploratively examined. In addition, since expectations were formulated with respect to age-related changes in the perceptions of collectivism– individualism, as well as horizontality–verticality dimensions, both dimensions are also studied separately. Related to this issue is the question pertaining to whether perceptions of society in terms of individualism and collectivism reflect personal individualistic and collectivistic attitudes or independent and interdependent dimensions of the self (Singelis, 1994). Whereas individuals’ perceptions of society have been interpreted to represent their personal attitudes toward society (Sallay et al., 2001; Singelis, 1994), little empirical evidence is available to support this interpretation. Similarly, it is questioned whether perceptions of relationships among individuals within society in terms of horizontality and verticality or equality and inequality parallel personal attitudes towards interpersonal relationships (Singelis, 1994). In the second study, the extent to which subjective perceptions of society reflect personal attitudes or cultural aspects of the self are examined.

Study 1 Method Participants. In total 245 secondary school pupils and 268 psychology students participated in this study. The secondary school pupils were selected from the first (n ¼ 70; 43 females and 27 males), third (n ¼ 120; 51 females and 69 males), and fifth grades (n ¼ 55; 27 females and 28 males) of secondary schools serving middle-class neighbourhoods. The mean ages and standard deviations for the groups were 12.8 (SD ¼ 0.71), 14.8 (SD ¼ 0.51), and 16.7 (SD ¼ 0.60), respectively. Written parental permission for these participants was obtained. With the exception of the third-grade participants, the secondary school pupils were all selected from the highest educational track in secondary education (i.e., VWO or preparatory scientific education) to permit pooling of the secondary school participants with the students. The educational programme of secondary education in the Netherlands consists of different educational tracks resulting in different forms of secondary education and, subsequently, different forms of higher education (i.e., advanced elementary educa-

338

OPPENHEIMER / INDIVIDUALISM AND COLLECTIVISM ACROSS AGE

tion, higher general secondary education, and preparatory scientific education). In addition, the educational tracks also differ in the number of years of obligatory education (i.e., 4, 5, and 6 years, respectively). Taking into account that educational activities in the last year of each track are focused primarily on final exams, representative samples of pupils could only be selected from the third grades of the three different educational tracks to allow the exploratory examination of educational level effects on perceptions of society. To date, no information is available suggesting that subjective perceptions of society differ as the result of educational level. The psychology students were also divided into three age groups consisting of 119 first-year students (mean age 18.6, SD ¼ 0.49; 91 females and 28 males), 88 second- and thirdyear students (mean age 20.4, SD ¼ 0.48; 64 females and 24 males), and 61 fourth-year students (mean age 26.1, SD ¼ 7.39; 47 females and 14 males). For the first-year students participation in this study was obligatory. The imbalance between the genders is a phenomenon of the higher interest of women in the study of psychology. Materials and procedure. The INDCOL, assessing subjectively perceived dimensions of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism, consisted of 32 statements (Singelis et al., 1995) and was administered in written form to groups (i.e., classes) of participants. Each statement required an evaluation by means of a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from strongly agree (5) to strongly disagree (1). The dimensions of vertical and horizontal individualism (i.e., VI and HI) and collectivism (i.e., VC and HC) were each assessed by 8 items. For the different age groups the reliability coefficients for vertical individualism ranged from .76 to .79; for horizontal individualism from .60 to .75; for vertical collectivism from .50 to .69; and for horizontal collectivism from .61 to .64. Because the INDCOL assesses culturally informed features, Triandis and Gelfand (1998) concluded that low to moderate reliability coefficients are normal for the vertical and horizontal dimensions of individualism and collectivism (p. 124, note 2; cf. Singelis et al., 1995). Since a characterisation of a society by the global dimensions of individualism and collectivism alone offers too little information about its nature, the use of the horizontal and vertical dimensions is to be preferred to any other solution (Triandis & Gelfand, 1998; see also Turiel & Neff, 2000). No effects for educational level could be demonstrated for the subjective perceptions of society with the third graders.

Results To examine age- and gender-related differences in the subjective perceptions of society, analyses of variance were conducted. Given the large number of participants, an alpha of .01 was used. Age and gender. To illustrate the relative strength of a particular dimension in relation to the others, the vertical and horizontal individualism (i.e., VI and HI) and collectivism (i.e., VC and HC) scores are presented in Figure 1. (In Appendix A, the mean scores and standard deviations for these dimensions are presented.) Separate 6 2 (age group by gender) ANOVAs were conducted on the scores for VI, HI, VC, and HC. With alpha ¼ .01, no significant effects for the interaction between age and gender were evident for any of the dimensions. Significant effects for age were present with

vertical, F(5, 501) ¼ 3.32, p 5 .01), and horizontal individualism, F(5, 501) ¼ 8.54, p 5 .001, but not for either dimension of collectivism. Similarly, significant gender effects were evident for vertical, F(5, 501) ¼ 14.49, p 5 .001, and horizontal individualism F(5, 501) ¼ 13.71, p 5 .001, but not for the collectivist dimensions. Since the different subjectively perceived dimensions of society are present simultaneously, the dimensions represent patterns (Triandis & Gelfand, 1998). Whereas a gradual increase is present in subjective perception of societal emphasis on horizontal individualism across age, for the perception of vertical individualism a reversed u-like-curve development is evident (see Figure 1). Gender differences indicated that males demonstrate a significantly stronger and rather stable perception of societal emphasis on individualism than females (p 5 .05). For vertical individualism females demonstrated a significant increase in their subjective perceptions, F(5, 317) ¼ 4.65, p 5 .001, while this was not the case for males. Only after the age of 22 did the subjective perception of vertical individualism for males fall below that for females. For subjective perceptions of horizontal individualism again a significant increase is present for females across age, F(5, 317) ¼ 3.12, p 5 .01, while for all ages males perceive a significant higher societal emphasis on horizontal individualism than females. Following these analyses, we were interested to examine the way in which the different dimensions of individualism, collectivism, verticality, and horizontality were divided over the different age groups. If individualism and collectivism represent independent societal constructs, and verticality, in particular, has different meanings within individualistic and collectivistic frameworks (Gelfand et al., 2000; Triandis & Gelfand, 1998), then, for instance, no relationship between vertical individualism and vertical collectivism should be present. Nevertheless, the relationship between VI and VC was significant (r ¼ .12, p ¼ .008). Verticality, then, could be interpreted as the common mediating variable in vertical individualism and collectivism. On the basis of this finding, the dimensions of individualism, collectivism, verticality, and horizontality were calculated. For this purpose the reverse process was used by which the horizontal and vertical collectivism and individualism items were initially developed (see Triandis & Gelfand, 1998). This reverse process involved adding and averaging the items emphasising individualism and collectivism, irrespective of horizontal or vertical qualifications (i.e., VI + HI and VC + HC), as well as adding and averaging the items emphasising horizontality and verticality irrespective of the collectivistic and individualistic qualifications (i.e., VI + VC and HI + HC). The resulting dimensions are in accordance with the earlier characterisation of societies as individualistic and/or collectivistic (Singelis et al., 1995) or as hierarchical and/or egalitarian (Hofstede, 1980). To detect patterns involving the dimensions of collectivism, individualism, horizontality, and verticality the score of 3 (i.e., more or less agree) was used as cut-off point for the average score on each dimension. That is, responses 5 3 were categorised as low (l ) and responses 3 as high (h). In spite of the loss of information as the result of dichotomisation of the data, 17 different response patterns could be distinguished. The patterns, ranging from high, high, high, high on the four dimensions to low, low, low, low, could be interpreted in terms of VI, HI, VC, HC, and combinations thereof. In Table 1 the proportions for these patterns for each age group are presented.

339


Figure 1. Patterns of vertical and horizontal individualism and collectivism (i.e., VERIND, HORIND, VERCOL, and HORCOL, respectively) for each age group.

Table 1 Individualism–collectivism and verticality–horizontality patterns, their characterisation, and proportional presence (i.e., percentages) for each age group and all age groups combined (N ¼ 513) Dimension Pattern

I

C

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

h l h l h h l l h h h l l l

h l l h h h l l l l l h h h

Age

V

H

Characterisation

h l h l h l h l h l l h l h missing

h l l h l h l h h l h h l l

H/V/I/C [?] V/I H/C V/I/C H/I/C V H V/H/I I H/I H/V/C C V/C

12

14

16

18

20

22

Total

N

14.3 22.9 0.0 18.6 0.0 7.1 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 2.9 2.9 0.0 7.1

16.7 11.7 0.0 18.3 1.7 9.2 0.8 5.8 2.5 1.7 19.2 2.5 0.8 0.8 8.3

9.1 3.6 0.0 16.4 3.6 5.5 0.0 9.1 1.8 1.8 25.5 0.0 3.6 0.0 20.0

17.6 4.2 0.0 15.1 1.7 16.8 0.0 7.6 4.2 0.8 20.2 1.7 0.8 0.0 9.2

13.6 4.5 0.0 11.4 0.0 20.5 0.0 8.0 2.3 2.3 21.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.9

16.4 4.9 0.0 8.2 0.0 14.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.0

15.2 8.6 0.0 15.0 1.2 12.9 0.2 8.6 2.1 1.2 20.3 1.4 1.2 0.2 12.1

78 44 — 77 6 66 1 44 11 6 104 7 6 1 62

h ¼ high and l ¼ low; cutting-off point was 3 and 5 3 on the response scale. The patterns ‘‘h h l l’’ and ‘‘l l h h’’ are not logical and did not occur. For 62 participants there were missing data on one or more of the dimensions.

340


Table 2 The proportion of patterns for individualism–collectivism for each age group and all age groups combined

a

Pattern 1 2 3 [I] 4 [C] 5 a

12

14

16

18

20

22

Total

% (N)

% (N)

% (N)

% (N)

% (N)

% (N)

% (N)

16.4 10 4.9 3 23.0 14 8.2 5 47.5 29

15.2 78 8.6 44 23.6 121 17.7 91 34.9 179

14.3 22.9 14.3 24.3 24.3

10 16 10 17 17

16.7 11.7 23.3 22.5 25.8

20 14 28 27 31

9.1 5 3.6 2 29.1 16 20.0 11 38.2 21

17.6 4.2 25.2 17.6 35.3

21 5 30 21 42

13.6 4.5 26.1 11.4 44.3

12 4 23 10 39

Patterns 1 and 2 are identical to those in Table 2; Pattern 5 involves all patterns not included in the calculation of either the I-C or H-V patterns.

Across age, various interesting shifts in proportions are apparent. In addition, it is important to note that the total scores for each pattern (i.e., dimension) for the whole group (i.e., without taking age into account) is clearly not in accordance with the score of any particular age group. That is, the perception of society is subject to significant age effects that are not reflected by overall perceptions. The method used was cross-validated by the absence of two illogical response patterns involving (1) high individualism and collectivism and low verticality and horizontality and (2) low on the first and high on the second pair of dimensions. Patterns (1) and (2) clearly suggest the use of the extremes of the scales. Whereas in the first pattern all dimensions scored extremely high (i.e., the H/V/C/I pattern; Table 1, pattern 1), in the second pattern all dimensions scored extremely low (i.e., the noninterest pattern; Table 1, pattern 2). Of the remaining patterns, those involving horizontality and collectivism (i.e., H/ C; pattern 4), verticality, horizontality, and collectivism (i.e., H/I/C; pattern 6), horizontality (i.e., H; pattern 8), and horizontality and individualism (i.e., HI; pattern 11) were of major interest and subject to significant changes across age (p 5 .01). On the basis of these patterns, combinations could be made of patterns that involved individualism (I), collectivism (C), verticality (V), and horizontality (H): Individualism–Collectivism: Pattern 3 [individualism ¼ I] ¼ I [10] + V/I [3] + H/I [11] + V/H/I [9] Pattern 4 [collectivism ¼ C] ¼ C [13] + V/C [14] + H/C [4] + V/ H/C [12] Verticality–Horizontality: Pattern 3 [horizontality ¼ H] ¼ H [8] + H/I [11] + H/C [4] + H/I/C [6] Pattern 4 [verticality ¼ V] ¼ V [7] + V/I [3] + V/C [14] + V/I/C [5]

In both cases Patterns 1 and 2 are identical to those in Table 2 and Pattern 5 involves all patterns not included in the calculation of either the I-C or H-V patterns. Again the proportions for the different dimensions were calculated (see Tables 2 and 3), showing changes in the distributions of individualism and collectivism across age (Table 2) and verticality and horizontality (Table 3). These data show that from age 12 to 22 and onward an increase (and apparent decrease) of the subjective perception of individualism is paralleled by a gradual decrease of the subjective perception of collectivism in Dutch society. In addition, for none of the age groups was subjectively perceived verticality (i.e., inequality or power distance) found to be a relevant characteristic of Dutch society. Subjectively perceived horizontality (i.e., equality), on the other hand, increased, while even at the age of 12 this dimension was perceived to have a dominant presence in Dutch society.

Discussion For developing individuals, society is not a stable and ordered entity with fixed characteristics (cf. Rokeach, 1973). Although it may be perceived as such from the outside, our findings suggest that during adolescence, and also during adulthood, individuals continue to construe their understanding of society. This is a dynamic process that is informed by the interaction between the environments in which individuals directly function and their level of emotional and cognitive development (i.e., co-construction; Valsiner, 1998; Valsiner et al., 1997). This implies that the understanding and interpretation of society will and never can be identical to any objective characterisation of society because individual, subjective variables modify such features. The minor differences in understanding and interpreting societal characteristics and values, which define time-cohorts or generations, result in the long term in modifications of the very same ‘‘objective’’

Table 3 The proportion of patterns for verticality–horizontality for each age group and all age groups combined 12

14

16

18

20

22

Total

Pattern

% (N)

% (N)

% (N)

% (N)

% (N)

% (N)

% (N)

1 2 3 [H] 4 [V] 5

14.3 10 22.9 16 50.0 35 0.0 – 12.9 9

9.1 5 3.6 2 56.4 31 3.6 2 27.3 15

17.6 21 4.2 5 59.7 71 1.7 2 16.8 20

13.6 12 4.5 4 61.4 54 0.0 – 20.5 18

16.4 10 4.9 3 60.7 37 0.0 – 18.0 11

15.2 78 8.6 44 56.7 291 1.6 8 17.9 92

a

a

16.7 11.7 52.5 3.3 15.8

20 14 63 4 19

Patterns 1 and 2 are identical to those in Table 2; Pattern 5 involves all patterns not included in the calculation of either the I-C or H-V patterns.


societal characteristics and cultural values and lead to cultural and societal evolution (i.e., development; Toulmin, 1990). In Dutch society, the progressive understanding of societal characteristics is most evident for perceived societal emphasis on individualism. In comparison to subjective perceptions of collectivism, adolescents and adults become progressively more aware of societal appeals on individualism. Or, to put it another way, with increasing age, adolescents and adults perceive that society puts higher demands on self-reliance. With respect to collectivism, our findings indicate that by the age of 12 years, collectivity within Dutch society is perceived and understood to be emphasised which does not change from that age on. From an objective point of view, Dutch society is perceived to emphasise the horizontal dimensions of individualism and collectivism in particular. Neither vertical individualism nor vertical collectivism are perceived as significant characteristics. These findings show that 20 years after Hofstede’s (1980) study, adolescents and adults characterise Dutch society as primarily an egalitarian society (i.e., no hierarchical relationships or power distance between individuals and groups) in which self-reliance and social solidarity are simultaneously emphasised (see also Hofstede, 2001, p. 217). It is of interest to note that with respect to the perception of vertical as well as horizontal individualism, an increase was observed for females. In an earlier study with 16-year-old Dutch and Hungarian adolescents (Oppenheimer & Sallay, 2001), it was thought that irrespective of nationality, genderrelated subcultures are present in which self-reliance, competition, and achievement (Schwartz, 1992) are more stimulated among males than females. The present findings suggest that at a later age (i.e., approximately 22 years) females catch up with their male peers and reach an identical understanding and interpretation of these societal emphases. Development of subjective perceptions of society is a complex process, the more so when shifts in different response patterns to the INDCOL are examined. Though it is claimed that the interpretation of verticality and horizontality are different in individualistic and collectivistic societies (Schwartz, 1992; Triandis & Gelfand, 1998), the relationship between vertical individualism and vertical collectivism suggest that the vertical dimension (i.e., hierarchical power relations among individuals and groups within a society) is the binding variable between both societal dimensions. According to Triandis and Gelfand (1998), verticality in combination with collectivism refers to some kind of ascribed status and is similar to Hofstede’s (1980, 2001) notion of power distance. In combination with individualism, however, verticality refers to something like an achieved status, one that is negotiated and is subject to competition. It is not like Hofstede’s notion of power distance, but more akin to Schwartz’s (1992) notion of achievement (cf. Parsons & Shils, 1951). Here we argue that the interpretation of verticality (or for that matter horizontality) within the context of individualism and collectivism may be the result of developmental construal processes rather than the interpretation of fixed characteristics. That is, while ‘‘verticality’’ and ‘‘horizontality’’ in themselves involve the presence and absence of power relations among individuals in a society (i.e., power distance; Hofstede, 2001), inequality and equality become interpreted differently by individuals only after the emphases on individualism and/or collectivism are perceived and understood. When the individualism, collectivism, verticality, and horizontality dimensions

341

are combined and high and low scores on each of these dimensions are calculated, a total of 17 different response patterns could be discerned. Of all the separate dimensions (i.e., individualism, collectivism, verticality, and horizontality) only horizontality plays a role during adolescence, albeit becoming less important with increasing age. During adolescence and adulthood, individualism, collectivism, and verticality are not perceived as relevant dimensions of Dutch society. Growing independence or autonomy from the protective setting of the family may form an explanation for the gradually diminishing perceptions of horizontality and horizontal collectivism as separate dimensions of society. Perceptions of horizontal individualism and collectivism and finally the dimension of horizontal individualism successively replace the latter perceptions only. These patterns suggest a growing understanding of progressive societal demands on self-reliance and self-enhancement while equality (i.e., social solidarity) is maintained. This last conclusion is further detailed by combining the different patterns to examine the actual presence of individualism and collectivism in Dutch society. Whereas individualism comes to be perceived more clearly as the predominant societal emphasis to the disadvantage of collectivism, verticality is not perceived as playing any role at all in Dutch society. To the contrary, horizontality (i.e., equality among people) is progressively perceived to be the most important emphasis of Dutch society for adolescents and adults. However, the interest of adolescents and adults in the way that society structures and emphasises features of interpersonal relationships is not stable. Only from the age of 14 on (i.e., after adolescents entered secondary education at the age of 12) does interest in society become apparent; up to that age, at least 23% of the adolescents demonstrate a clear interest in societal dimensions. On the basis of our findings, we tend to question which societal dimension is subordinate to the other, or whether individualism, collectivism, verticality, and horizontality are each dimensions in their own right reflecting separateness (I) versus group belongingness (C) and inequality (V; i.e., power relations or competition) versus equality (H). Also, which are the really important dimensions to take account of (see also Bhawuk, 2001). The extent to which the subjectively perceived societal dimensions reflect personal attitudes or cultural aspects of the self (Singelis, 1994) is examined in the second study.

Study 2 From the point of view of acculturation theory, the developing individual adjusts her or his self-image to culturally or societally emphasised characteristics (cf. Berry, 1994; Bhawuk, 2001; Bhawuk & Brislin, 1992). This assumption implies that individuals’ subjective perceptions of society determine their personal attitudes toward society (Sallay et al., 2001; Singelis, 1994). That is, from the moment cultural dimensions are perceived and understood, an emphasis on individualism will result in a more individualistic or independent self-perception. Similarly, emphases on collectivism, verticality, and horizontality directly relate to the appearance of these dimensions in self-construals (Bhawuk, 2001), a process that is similar to the formation of a personal culture on the basis of ‘‘communally shared meanings, social norms, and everyday life practices, all united in a heterogeneous complex’’ (i.e., ‘‘collective culture’’;

342


Valsiner, 1998, p. 30). On the basis of an acculturation model, the appearance of particular cultural dimensions in selfperceptions (i.e., individualistic-independent and collectivistic-interdependent self-perceptions) should developmentally follow the perception of the same dimensions in society (i.e., cultural self-construal; Singelis, 1994). However, if the development of personal culture is a process of ‘‘idiosyncratic constructions . . . under the canalizing directions of the collective culture’’ (i.e., co-construction; Valsiner, 1998, p. 30) and not simply mapping (collective) cultural aspects in the personal culture, then the perception of cultural aspects of the self do not necessarily have to parallel (albeit with a delay) cultural aspects of the collective culture (i.e., society). To examine the way in which society is perceived and its impact on or relationship with the perception of cultural aspects of the self, a second study was conducted in which two modified versions of the INDCOL were used. In an earlier study, Singelis (1994) examined independent (individualistic) and interdependent (collectivistic) self-construals. For this purpose Singelis transformed the then existing individualism– collectivism scale (i.e., without inclusion of the horizontal and vertical dimensions) to a completely personalised scale (i.e., in the ‘‘I’’ form). In a similar way two versions of the INDCOL were developed in the present study. These versions involved a general and a personal version of the INDCOL in which the original INDCOL items were transformed in a conceptual and personal version of the INDCOL. For instance, the item ‘‘We should keep our aging parents with us at home’’ changed into ‘‘Aging parents should be taken care of by their children’’ (i.e., conceptual or general version) and ‘‘I will take care of my aging parents’’ (i.e., personal version; see Singelis et al., 1995, pp. 255–256).

Method Participants. In total 226 adolescents participated in this study, divided into five age groups with mean ages 12 years (n ¼ 52; 29 females and 23 males); 13 years (n ¼ 47; 24 females and 23 males), 14 years (n ¼ 53; 38 females and 15 males), 15 years (n ¼ 48; 27 females and 21 males), and 16 years (n ¼ 26; 11 females and 15 males). Again all participants were selected from the highest educational track in secondary education. Written parental permission for these participants was obtained. Materials and procedure. To develop a general and a personal version of the INDCOL, all items of the original INDCOL were transformed into either a purely conceptual version (i.e., general: ‘‘We should keep our aging parents with us at home’’ changed into ‘‘Aging parents should be taken care of by their children’’) or a purely self-oriented version (i.e., personal: ‘‘Children should be taught to place duty before pleasure’’ changed into ‘‘I will teach my children that duty should be placed before pleasure’’; Singelis et al., 1995, pp. 255–256). Again, each statement required an evaluation by means of a 5point Likert-type scale ranging from strongly agree (5) to strongly disagree (1). The dimensions of vertical and horizontal individualism (i.e., VI and HI) and collectivism (i.e., VC and HC) were each assessed by 8 items. The reliability coefficients for the dimensions assessed by the general version of the INDCOL for the five age groups ranged from .70 to .71 for vertical individualism; from .66 to .89 for horizontal individualism; from .55 to .72 for vertical

collectivism; and from .70 to .85 for horizontal collectivism. With the personal version of the INDCOL, these coefficients ranged from .77 to .83 for vertical individualism; from .71 to .77 for horizontal individualism; from .62 to .75 for vertical collectivism; and from .63 to .76 for horizontal collectivism. The two versions of this scale were presented in two sessions separated by an interval of 1 month. At the first session half of the participants within each age group received either the general or the personal version and vice versa at the second session. No differences were evident between the two sessions for either of the scale versions.

Results Our first interest concerned developmental trends and genderrelated differences in general and personal perceptions of society. For that purpose analyses of variance were conducted. Also in this study, alpha was set at .01. In Table 4 the mean scores for general and personal perceptions of society are presented. General perceptions of society. Separate 5 2 (age gender) ANOVAs were conducted on each of the assessed dimension of general and personal perceptions of society. Only one significant effect for the age by gender interaction was evident for general perceptions of horizontal individualism F(4, 193) ¼ 4.60, p ¼ .001. This finding indicated that only at the age of 14 did females perceive society to emphasise horizontal individualism more strongly than their male peers. Significant age effects were present for general perceptions of horizontal individualism, F(4, 193) ¼ 13.43, p 5 .001, and personal perceptions of horizontal individualism, F(4, 193) ¼ 14.24, p 5 .001, and collectivism, F(4, 193) ¼ 5.26, p 5 .001. In all instances a gradual increase across age was present. For general perceptions of vertical individualism and collectivism, significant effects for gender were present, F(1, 193) ¼ 20.66, p 5 .001 and F(1, 193) ¼ 8.42, p 5 .01, respectively. These findings indicated that males perceive society to emphasise vertical individualism and vertical collectivism significantly more than their female peers. Significant gender effects were also present for personal perceptions of vertical and horizontal individualism, F(1, 193) ¼ 27.19, p 5 .001 and F(1, 193) ¼ 8.12, p 5 .01, respectively, showing that males perceive themselves to adhere more to vertical and horizontal individualism than females. Using the same method as in the first study, the proportions for general and personal individualism and collectivism (see Table 5), and verticality and horizontality were calculated (see Table 6). A comparison between proportions of individualism and collectivism, as well as verticality and horizontality, between the standard INDCOL (i.e., Study 1) and the modified general version of the INDCOL (i.e., Study 2) revealed some surprising differences. The subjective perception of individualism within society with the standard INDCOL is considerably higher than with the modified general INDCOL. Of interest to note is that the general INDCOL also resulted in a much higher perception of collectivism with the 12-year-olds. Hence, differences are present in the subjective perceptions of individualism and collectivism within society as a result of different versions of the INDCOL. No such differences were observed for verticality and horizontality. When the general perceptions of individualism and collecti-

343


Table 4 Averages (and standard deviations) for general (Gen) and personal (Pers) vertical and horizontal individualism (VI & HI) and collectivism (VC & HC) for each age group and gender 12 years INDCOL GenVI GenHI GenVC GenHC PersVI PersHI PersVC PersHC

13 years

14 years

15 years

16 years

F

M

F

M

F

M

F

M

F

M

2.48 (0.41) 3.18 (0.41) 3.30 (0.27) 3.73 (0.44)

2.88 (0.71) 3.30 (0.43) 3.14 (0.58) 3.69 (0.51)

2.57 (0.59) 3.49 (0.59) 2.80 (0.68) 3.75 (0.68)

3.01 (0.64) 3.65 (0.66) 3.07 (0.55) 3.40 (0.63)

2.69 (0.68) 3.84 (0.48) 2.83 (0.37) 3.86 (0.47)

2.94 (0.61) 3.40 (0.51) 3.17 (0.39) 3.68 (0.39)

2.53 (0.37) 3.80 (0.38) 2.96 (0.48) 3.97 (0.44)

3.05 (0.55) 3.99 (0.41) 3.22 (0.51) 3.89 (0.61)

2.70 (0.45) 3.68 (0.27) 2.86 (0.36) 3.73 (0.36)

3.05 (0.52) 4.01 (0.79) 3.09 (0.56) 3.71 (0.79)

2.43 (0.55) 2.85 (0.48) 3.20 (0.30) 3.43 (0.51)

2.71 (0.56) 3.22 (0.50) 3.06 (0.56) 3.19 (0.44)

2.33 (0.67) 3.15 (0.61) 2.86 (0.46) 3.53 (0.68)

2.98 (0.82) 3.32 (0.78) 3.01 (0.64) 3.22 (0.87)

2.41 (0.61) 3.21 (0.50) 3.06 (0.47) 3.83 (0.53)

2.84 (0.63) 3.31 (0.51) 2.95 (0.68) 3.67 (0.42)

2.43 (0.53) 3.72 (0.41) 3.05 (0.39) 3.44 (0.60)

3.09 (0.62) 3.81 (0.65) 3.37 (0.63) 3.61 (0.77)

2.50 (0.47) 3.56 (0.36) 2.92 (0.26) 3.93 (0.34)

2.85 (0.77) 3.94 (0.50) 3.05 (0.67) 3.81 (0.58)

vism within society are compared to the personal perceptions (i.e., self-perceptions or attitudes) of these dimensions, it can be concluded that for individualism both general and personal perceptions coincide. For collectivism, however, a sudden drop in the perceived emphasis of collectivism is observed from the age of 12 (51.9%) to 13 years (19.1%; p 5 .01) followed by a gradual, though not significant, decrease following that age. With personal perceptions of collectivism this drop is observed 2 years later, i.e., between the ages of 14 (47.2%) and 15 years (12.5%), p 5 .01. For verticality, the general perceptions of the 12-year-olds are considerably lower than the personal perceptions (i.e., 3.8 vs. 13.5, respectively). After this age, both types of perceptions parallel each other. With horizontality, the general perceptions are considerably higher than the personal perceptions until the age of 14 years. After that age personal perceptions of horizontality come to parallel general perceptions of horizon-

tality. Significant effects for age were present for general, F(4, 118) ¼ 3.10, p 5 .05, as well as personal perceptions of horizontality, F(4, 98) ¼ 7.27, p 5 .001. Of interest also is that on the personal level, and in contrast to the general level, up to the age of 14 years a considerable percentage of the participants showed little interest in self-aspects of individualism, collectivism, verticality, and horizontality, but small numbers of participants in the different computed patterns meant that no gender differences could be studied. Finally, to examine the contribution of general perceptions of societal dimensions to personal perceptions, stepwise regression analyses were done with each of the personal dimensions as dependent variable and the general dimensions as independent variables. The analyses revealed the personal dimension of individualism to be significantly affected by the general dimensions of individualism, horizontality, and verticality, F(3, 199) ¼ 47.07, p 5 .001, R2 ¼ .42 (for the Beta

Table 5 The proportion of patterns for individualism–collectivism from the personal and general perspective for each age group (N ¼ 216; Oppenheimer & Hetteling, 2004) Age a

Perspective

Pattern

12

13

14

15

16

Personal

1 2 3 [I] 4 [C] 5

19.2 15.4 1.9 48.1 15.4

12.8 14.9 12.8 40.4 19.1

20.8 3.8 1.9 47.2 26.4

37.5 6.3 10.4 12.5 33.3

23.1 0.0 7.7 19.2 50.0

General

1 2 3 [I] 4 [C] 5

23.1 0.0 3.8 51.9 19.2

21.3 8.5 10.6 19.1 40.4

28.3 0.0 3.8 22.6 45.3

39.6 0.0 10.4 10.4 39.6

26.9 3.8 7.7 3.8 57.7

a Pattern 1 ¼ VI þ HI þ VC þ HC; Pattern 2 ¼ no interest; and Pattern 5 involves all patterns not included in the calculation of either the I-C or H-V patterns.

344


Table 6 The proportion of patterns for verticality–horizontality from the personal and general perspective for each age group (N ¼ 216; Oppenheimer & Hetteling, 2004) Age Perspective

Patterna

Personal

General

12

13

14

15

16

1 2 3 [H] 4 [V] 5

19.2 15.4 34.6 13.5 17.3

12.8 14.9 38.3 12.8 21.3

20.8 3.8 58.5 5.7 11.3

37.5 6.3 39.6 10.4 6.3

23.1 0.0 65.4 3.8 7.7

1 2 3 [H] 4 [V] 5

23.1 0.0 50.0 3.8 21.2

21.3 8.5 51.1 8.5 10.6

28.3 0.0 58.5 7.5 5.7

39.6 0.0 54.2 4.2 2.1

26.9 3.8 61.5 7.7 0.0

a

Pattern 1 ¼ VI þ HI þ VC þ HC; Pattern 2 ¼ no interest; and Pattern 5 involves all patterns not included in the calculation of either the I-C or H-V patterns.

values see Figure 2); personal collectivism by general collectivism and horizontality, F(2, 200) ¼ 44.55, p 5 .001, R2 ¼ .31; personal verticality by general verticality, F(1, 201) ¼ 97.52, p 5 .001, R2 ¼ .33, and personal horizontality by general horizontality and verticality, F(2, 200) ¼ 44.16, p 5 .001, R2 ¼ .31. These findings indicate that significant parts of variation in the personal perceptions are explained by general perceptions.

Discussion In the second study, a distinction was made between general perceptions of society involving subjective perceptions and

understanding of societal (i.e., cultural) emphases, and personal perceptions, or the understanding of personal adherence to the same cultural aspects (i.e., cultural selfconstruals). That is, the differentiation is emphasised between a more general and conceptual understanding of cultural aspects of society (i.e., ‘‘shared collective culture’’) and a more subjective evaluation of adherence to the same cultural aspects (i.e., ‘‘idiosyncratic personal culture’’; Valsiner, 1998, p. 30). If the construction of a personal culture or self-construal, for example of individual adaptation to the social environment, entails projection of perceived characteristics of society onto the self, then subjective adherence to cultural features should parallel (i.e., be identical to) perceived features of culture (i.e.,

Figure 2. The impact of general perceptions on personal perceptions of individualism, collectivism, verticality, and horizontality. The depicted values represent significant Beta values (p 5 .05).


society). In particular, when the four different dimensions of vertical and horizontal individualism and collectivism are split into more concise dimensions of individualism, collectivism, verticality, and horizontality, such projection processes appear evident. Increases and decreases in perceived characteristics of society are followed by parallel increases and decreases in subjective adherence to the same cultural features. However, for the different features the latter increases and decreases occur at different moments in development and are genderrelated. With respect to general perceptions, only horizontal individualism becomes gradually more emphasised by society with increasing age. Despite this perceived increase, males experienced society to be more competitively oriented and to stimulate inequality more then their female peers. These gender-related differences in perceptions of society were also present in the personal adherence to vertical individualism and collectivism with males. Personally, males focused more on competition and inequality than females. The above interpretations of the findings have to be considerably modified when the dimensions of individualism, collectivism, verticality, and horizontality are taken into consideration. The dimension of individualism was almost absent on the general societal level, as well as on the level of personal adherence. This finding may be due to the distinction between general and personal versions of the INDCOL, as a result of which confusion about the exact meaning of an item (general or personal) was reduced. The course for general and personal perceptions of collectivism with increasing age showed personal perceptions to follow general perceptions developmentally. A sudden drop in the perceived emphasis of general perceptions of collectivism between the ages of 12 and 13 years may be due to the educational shift from elementary to secondary education (i.e., on average around the age of 12 years). That is, at the age of 12 adolescents are introduced into a school system with different demands (i.e., individual achievement rather than cooperative activity) and where feelings of being part of a group (i.e., collectivism) are reduced as the consequence of shifting classes and departmentalisation of the educational system (Simmons, Burgeson, Carlton-Ford, & Blyth, 1987). In addition, parental involvement with the adolescents changes from that in the previous childhood period (Hess, Holloway, Dickson, & Price, 1984). The developmental lag in personal adherence to collectivism suggests that adolescents personally continue to adhere to the more bounded context they knew within the family during childhood and take 2 years after the perception of changed demands of society to adapt to them (i.e., a low adherence to collectivist characteristics). Apparently, from the age of 14 until at least the age of 16, neither individualism nor collectivism plays an important role in the lives of adolescents. During this age period they may be preoccupied by the process of establishing their gender identity (Feldman, Fisher, Ransom, & Damiceli, 1995). Similarly, little societal emphasis is experienced on verticality. Nor did the participants show evidence for any personal adherence to the dimension of verticality. Our interpretation from the first study, that apparently boys perceive society as emphasising vertical individualism and collectivism and personally adhere to these dimensions more than their female peers, has to be modified. Males as compared to females within each of the verticality patterns experienced an excessive societal emphasis on verticality and consequently evidenced a

345

higher adherence to verticality (i.e., competition and inequality). Such an experience could be the result of particular socialisation processes by which boys (i.e., males) are more oriented towards competition than females (cf. Oppenheimer & Sallay, 2001). However, the presence of verticality in general and personal perceptions pale into insignificance beside the presence of horizontality (see also Study 1). Even from the age of 12 years, 50% of the participants perceived society to emphasise horizontality, a number that increased to 61.5% among 16-year-olds. In personal perceptions (i.e., adherence to) horizontality these percentages increased from 34.6 to 65.4. Clearly, adherence to horizontality (i.e., equality among people) follows the perceived societal emphasis of this dimension. The dominant presence of this dimension resulted among others in the contemporary characterisation of Dutch society as a ‘‘Polder model society’’ based on negotiation and a high level of interpersonal tolerance, as well as families that are characterised by a high level of negotiation among family members (cf. Han & Park, 1995).

Conclusion The two studies presented in this paper offer ample support for the assumption that cultural dimensions of society (i.e., vertical and horizontal individualism and collectivism) are simultaneously present and constitute cultural patterns (Singelis et al., 1995; Triandis & Gelfand, 1998). Age- and gender-related changes in these patterns suggest that they are not fixed characteristics of a society but are co-constructed by the developing individual and changing demands of society. The focus on the separate dimensions of individualism, collectivism, verticality, and horizontality suggests that since Hofstede’s (1980) initial study, contemporary Dutch society is perceived as neither high on individualism nor collectivism, extremely low on the dimension of power distance (i.e., verticality), and high on equality (i.e., horizontality). When these dimensions are combined, horizontality is expressed by high horizontal collectivism and high horizontal individualism. Neither vertical individualism nor vertical collectivism are perceived to be emphasised dimensions of society, nor are these dimensions the emphasised personal dimensions of the participants in this study (see also Hofstede, 2001). We are aware that the studies were conducted with participants from the highest educational track in secondary education in the Netherlands (i.e., preparatory scientific education), as well as psychology students. Whereas no differences in subjective perceptions of society as the result of educational level were observed with third-graders (i.e., 15year-olds), such differences may be present when differences in educational level as well as social background are more salient and when other age groups are involved. Hence, more research involving different population sections from different educational backgrounds is required to enable the generalisation of our findings. In addition, the way society is perceived and experienced, as well as any personal adherence to the same characteristics, are assumed to be the result of socialisation processes and, hence, should be reflected by perceptions of parenting, friendship, school, and self. Again, additional research is required to study these questions. Manuscript received March 2003 Revised manuscript received December 2003 PrEview publication April 2004

346


References Berry, J.W. (1994). Acculturation and psychological adaptation: An overview. In A.-M. Bouvy, F.J. Vijver, P. Boski, & P.G. Schmitz (Eds.), Journeys into crosscultural psychology (pp. 129–141). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger. Bhawuk, D.P.S. (2001). Evolution of culture assimilators: Toward theory-based assimilators. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 25, 141–163. Bhawuk, D.P.S., & Brislin, R.W. (1992). The measurement of intercultural sensitivity using the concepts of individualism and collectivism. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 413–436. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Feldman, S.S., Fisher, L., Ransom, D.C., & Damiceli, S. (1995). ‘‘Is what is good for the goose good for the gander?’’ Sex differences in relations between adolescent coping and adult adaptation. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 5, 333–359. Fiske, A.P. (1990). Structures of social life: The four elementary forms of human relations. New York: Free Press. Fiske, A.P. (1992). The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations. Psychological Review, 99, 689–723. Gelfand, M.J., Bhawuk, D.P.S., Nishii, L.H., & Bechtold, D. (2000). Individualism and collectivism. Unpublished manuscript. College Park, MD: University of Maryland, Department of Psychology. Han, G., & Park, B. (1995). Children’s choice in conflict: Application of the theory of individualism–collectivism. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26, 298–313. Hess, R.D., Holloway, S.D., Dickson, W.P., & Price, G.G. (1984). Maternal variables as predictors of children’s school readiness and later achievement in vocabulary and mathematics in sixth grade. Child Development, 55, 1902– 1912. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Oppenheimer, L. (1995a). Peace, but what about societal constraints? Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 1, 383–397. Oppenheimer, L. (1995b). War as an institution, but what about peace: Developmental perspectives. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 19, 201–218. Oppenheimer, L. (1996). Developmental processes in socio-cultural contexts: The need for multidisciplinary cooperation. Polish Quarterly of Developmental Psychology, 2, 169–180. Oppenheimer, L., & Hetteling, K. (2004). Society, parenting, self, and well-being: A developmental study of interrelationships. Manuscript in preparation. Oppenheimer, L., & Sallay, H. (2001). Subjectively perceived patterns of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism and parenting: A comparison between

16-year-old Hungarian and Dutch adolescents. Paper presented at the IRIC Conference Comparing Cultures. Tilburg, NL: April 27, 2001. Parsons, T. (1949). Essays in sociological theory; pure and applied. New York: The Free Press. Parsons, T., & Shils, E.A. (1951). Toward a general theory of action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press. ´ ., & Oppenheimer, L. (2001). Self-construal in a Sallay, H., Mu¨nnich, A changing society. Studia Iagellonica Humani Cultus Progressus, 5, 35–51. Shwartz, S.H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1–66. Simmons, R.G., Burgeson, R., Carlton-Ford, S., & Blyth, D.A. (1987). The impact of cumulative change in early adolescence. Child Development, 58, 1220–1234. Singelis, T.M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580–591. Singelis, T., Triandis, H.C., Bhawuk, D.S., & Gelfand, M.J. (1995). Horizontal and vertical dimensions of individualism and collectivism. Cross-cultural Research, 29, 240–275. Smetana, J.G. (1999). Context, conflict, and constraint in adolescent–parent authority relationships. In M. Killen & D. Hart (Eds.), Morality in everyday life: Developmental perspectives (pp. 225–255). New York: Cambridge University Press. Toulmin, S. (1990). Cosmopolis: The hidden agenda of modernity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Triandis, H.C. (1994). Culture and social behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill. Triandis, H.C., & Bhawuk, D.P.S. (1997). Culture theory and the meaning of relatedness. In P.C. Earley & M. Erez (Eds.), New perspectives on international/ organizational psychology (pp. 13–52). New York: New Lexington Press. Triandis, H.C., & Gelfand, M.J. (1998). Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 118–128. Turiel, E., & Neff, K. (2000). Religion, culture, and beliefs about reality in moral reasoning. In K.S. Rosengren, C.N. Johnson, & P.L. Harris (Eds.), Imagining the impossible: Magical, scientific, and religious thinking in children (pp. 269– 304). New York: Cambridge University Press. Valsiner, J. (1998). The guided mind. A sociogenetic approach to personality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Valsiner, J., Branco, A.U., & Melo Dantas, C., (1997). Co-construction of human development: Heterogeneity within parental belief orientations. In J. E. Grusec & L. Kuczynski (Eds.), Parenting and children’s internalization of values (pp. 283–304). New York: Wiley. Wertsch, J.V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

APPENDIX A Mean scores (and standard deviations) for vertical and horizontal individualism (VI and HI) and collectivism (VC and HC) for each age group and gender (M, F) 12 years F VI

2.20 (0.48) HI 3.22 (0.59) VC 2.65 (0.63) HC 3.41 (0.65)

14 years

16 years

18 years

20 years

22 years

M

Total

F

M

Total

F

M

Total

F

M

Total

F

M

Total

F

M

Total

2.74 (0.53) 3.39 (0.76) 2.77 (0.64) 3.33 (0.46)

2.14 (0.56) 3.28 (0.66) 2.70 (0.63) 3.38 (0.58)

2.47 (0.73) 3.26 (0.55) 2.75 (0.60) 3.32 (0.56)

2.86 (0.62) 3.53 (0.69) 2.74 (0.59) 3.24 (0.56)

2.69 (0.69) 3.42 (0.65) 2.74 (0.59) 3.30 (0.56)

2.61 (0.79) 3.57 (0.66) 2.45 (0.71) 3.35 (0.67)

2.90 (0.85) 3.74 (0.70) 2.65 (0.72) 3.20 (0.64)

2.75 (0.83) 3.67 (0.68) 2.55 (0.71) 3.27 (0.65)

2.74 (0.63) 3.58 (0.42) 2.85 (0.42) 3.40 (0.40)

2.91 (0.62) 3.72 (0.49) 2.76 (0.41) 3.22 (0.42)

2.78 (0.63) 3.62 (0.44) 2.82 (0.42) 3.36 (0.41)

2.63 (0.60) 3.68 (0.43) 2.70 (0.52) 3.31 (0.50)

2.95 (0.51) 3.77 (0.45) 2.76 (0.48) 3.30 (0.41)

2.71 (0.59) 3.71 (0.43) 2.72 (0.51) 3.31 (0.47)

2.65 (0.66) 3.60 (0.41) 2.59 (0.52) 3.22 (0.42)

2.41 (0.71) 3.99 (0.57) 2.46 (0.59) 3.16 (0.67)

2.60 (0.67) 3.69 (0.47) 2.56 (0.53) 3.20 (0.48)