首页> 外文OA文献 >What is Right? What is Wrong? and Does the Answer Tell Something about Culture? - an Investigation into Culture and Morality Using the Values Concept
【2h】

What is Right? What is Wrong? and Does the Answer Tell Something about Culture? - an Investigation into Culture and Morality Using the Values Concept

机译:什么是正确的?怎么了?答案是否能说明文化? -使用价值观念考察文化与道德

摘要

Morality, or what is considered right or wrong, varies seemingly across cultures. However, the literature shows that moral psychologists have mainly investigated moral reasoning assuming a universal morality. Cross-cultural psychologists in contrast have widely neglected moral issues such as prescriptive beliefs of what people ought to do in a culture, and have predominantly measured culture through personal values. This thesis attempts to bridge this gap by focusing on the values concept. Four empirical studies were conducted to critically examine values as a measure of culture and their relationship to morality. Chapter one is an introduction into the topics morality, culture and values. Chapter two outlines the conceptual and methodological issues associated with deriving cultural values through the statistical aggregation of individuals' personal values. A value taxonomy is presented in which personal moral values and societal moral valuesare proposed as alternatives for measuring the cultural context. Following this critique, personal values are examined in two empirical studies in a cross-cultural context scrutinizing the validity of Schwartz' (1994) Culture-level Value Theory. Study 1 is a cross-cultural meta-analysis using the Rokeach Value Survey (Rokeach, 1973) showingthat Schwartz' culture-level value structure was replicable with different samples, and a different method for assessing value priorities. Nonetheless, a set of values not included in Schwartz' analysis formed a new value type: Self-fulfilled Connectedness (SFC) which is related to the pursuit of non-material goals and endorsed in countries in which basic needs are fulfilled. Study 2 tested in a multilevel regression model whetherSchwartz' cultural values predicted individuals' moral attitudes with data from more than 40 different countries. The findings indicated that the value dimension Autonomy-Embeddedness explained individuals' lenient attitude towards personal-sexual, but not towards dishonest-illegal issues. Study 3 dealt with the fundamental critique raised in chapter two that Schwartz(1994) does not operationalize micro- and macro-level constructs independently when measuring cultural values. To address this empirically, personal moral values and societal moral values were explicitly measured in student samples from eight cultures. Societal moral values showed greater cross-cultural differences than personal moral values. Furthermore, societal moral values at the culture-level conceptually replicated the multilevel findings from Study 2. This suggests that societal moral values are a valid macro-level variable for the measurement of culture. Finally, Study 4 was conducted to elicit implicit moral values. Respondents from four cultures free-listedtheir associations of a 'moral person'. correspondence analyses revealed thatcollectivistic-oriented samples mentioned more traditional moral attributes, whereas individualistic samples reported more liberal attributes. Furthermore, accessibility ofimplicit moral values - matched with the SVS - correlated with explicit ratings of personal moral values from Study 3, providing convergent validity for this kind of values. This multi-method finding corroborated that personal moral values and societal moral values are different concepts. In sum, these studies support the validity of Schwartz' theory and suggest that notions of right and wrong do indeed tell us something about culture, but it depends on (1) the issues studied (personal-sexual issues), and (2) the kind of values measured (societal moral values).
机译:道德,或被认为是对还是错,似乎在不同文化之间有所不同。但是,文献表明,道德心理学家主要研究了假设普遍道德的道德推理。相反,跨文化心理学家则忽略了道德问题,例如人们对某种文化应该做什么的规定性信念,并且主要通过个人价值观来衡量文化。本文试图通过关注价值观念来弥合这一差距。进行了四项实证研究,以批判性地检验价值观,以衡量文化及其与道德的关系。第一章是对道德,文化和价值观念的介绍。第二章概述了通过个人个人价值的统计汇总来推导文化价值的概念和方法论问题。提出了一种价值分类法,其中提出了个人道德价值和社会道德价值作为衡量文化背景的替代方法。在进行这种批评之后,在跨文化背景下的两项实证研究中,研究了个人价值,考察了施瓦茨(Schwartz)(1994)的文化水平价值理论的有效性。研究1是使用Rokeach价值调查(Rokeach,1973年)进行的跨文化荟萃分析,表明Schwartz的文化水平价值结构可以在不同样本中复制,并且可以采用不同的方法评估价值优先级。尽管如此,Schwartz的分析中未包括的一组价值观形成了一种新的价值观类型:自我实现的联系(SFC),与追求非物质目标有关,并在满足基本需求的国家中得到认可。研究2在多层次回归模型中进行了检验,根据来自40多个不同国家的数据,施瓦茨的文化价值观是否能够预测个人的道德态度。研究结果表明,“自主嵌入”的价值维度解释了个人对性爱的宽容态度,但没有解释对不诚实的非法问题的宽容态度。研究3处理了在第二章中提出的基本批评:Schwartz(1994)在衡量文化价值时并未独立地操作微观和宏观结构。为了从经验上解决这个问题,在八种文化的学生样本中明确地衡量了个人道德价值观和社会道德价值观。与个人道德价值观相比,社会道德价值观表现出更大的跨文化差异。此外,文化层面的社会道德价值观在概念上复制了研究2的多层次发现。这表明社会道德价值观是衡量文化的有效宏观层面变量。最后,进行研究4来得出内在的道德价值。来自四种文化的受访者自由列出了他们与“道德人”的联系。对应分析表明,以集体为导向的样本提到了更多的传统道德属性,而个人主义样本则报告了更多的自由主义属性。此外,隐性道德价值观的可及性(与SVS相匹配)与研究3中对个人道德价值观的明确评级相关,从而为此类价值观提供了收敛效度。这一多方法的发现证实了个人道德价值观和社会道德价值观是不同的概念。总而言之,这些研究支持施瓦兹理论的正确性,并表明对与错的概念确实的确告诉我们关于文化的一些知识,但这取决于(1)所研究的问题(人性问题),以及(2)衡量的价值种类(社会道德价值)。

著录项

  • 作者

    Vauclair Christin-Melanie;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2010
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en_NZ
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号