Multicultural Psychology. Jennifer T. PedrottiЧитать онлайн книгу.
this not the usual view presented on a map in the United States. We tend to place our own country in more of a place of prominence—in our culture it is often in the middle or to the top left. Maps in other countries often do not take the same vantage point, placing their country’s continent front and center. Worldview helps us to determine what is “normal” or “right” from our point of view.
In a discussion of worldview, it is also important to distinguish this concept from others that are sometimes used interchangeably with it. Some may refer to worldview statements as values statements. Researcher Milton Rokeach (1973) produced a seminal book titled The Nature of Human Values in which he dissected the types of beliefs that humans may have and the differences that may exist between different functions and definitions of the different types. Rokeach’s model posits that three types of beliefs can be seen as impacting one’s overall nature: existential beliefs, evaluative beliefs, and proscriptive/prescriptive beliefs (which Rokeach described as values; see Table 3.1 for examples). In thinking about worldview specifically, however, Koltko-Rivera (2004) notes that all three types of Rokeach’s beliefs can be influential in creating a view of the world (see Figure 3.2).
Figure 3.2 Worldview Statements and Their Contributing Beliefs
Source: Koltko-Rivera. M. E. (2004). The psychology of worldviews, Review of General Psychology, 8, 3–58.
Table 3.1
Source: Koltko-Rivera (2004, p. 5).
In this figure, Koltko-Rivera shows that any of the different types of beliefs can impact a worldview statement, but they may do so in different ways: “Worldviews thus encompass certain values but go beyond to include other kinds of beliefs as well” (2004, p. 5).
Cultural and Unique Experiences
Worldview can be formed by a variety of different sources, but many researchers have grouped these formative influences into two general domains: cultural experiences and unique experiences (Treviño, 1996). Culture is an important precursor to how an individual thinks, feels, and acts. As an example, different cultural societies around the world, and domestically within the United States, have been shown to use different thinking styles from one another (Nisbett, 2003). For this reason it follows, as Treviño notes, “that something about culture forms cognition; this something may include culturally transmitted worldviews” (p. 23). Some of these cultural experiences may be related to norms and values within the culture itself. Here, consider several areas in which culture may make a difference on worldview.
Value System
Whether a country is more individualistic in nature versus more collectivistic may make a difference in terms of how the world looks. Individualism, as denoted by Triandis (1995), is a system adhered to by many Western cultural groups that value the individual above the group in most cases. Competition and focus on the self is common, with a high value for independence as a behavioral and personality trait. This system differs sharply from collectivism, which is focused on the group as a whole, and encourages cooperation and dependence. In collectivist cultures, the group is valued above the individual. The United States is probably the best example of an individualist nation with our focus on moving forward as individuals and our culture’s rewarding of jobs that value this ideology (see Figure 3.3).
For example, jobs such as those of stockbrokers, CEOs, and hedge fund managers are focused on competition and personal gain and garner some of the highest salaries in this country. Compare that to more group-focused jobs such as those in the fields of social work, teaching, or nursing, and you find some of the lowest salaries. This is not to say that everyone in the United States has an individualist focus, but the value as a culture is clearly there for those who value this ideology.
Collectivist countries are myriad, as collectivism is a much more common ideology in the world. Often Asian countries such as Japan or China are used as examples for this type of value system. In these countries, a focus on the group often trumps the desires of the individual. Consider many years ago in 1980 when China began to regulate the number of children a couple might be allowed to produce. Many individuals in China may have wanted to have more than one child, but these laws were put into place to decrease population size to protect the resources for the group (Berensen, 2015). At the time many people in the United States were outraged by these laws (Hvistendahl, 2017), but it may be that many in China were as outraged by the lack of care for population overload the United States appeared to have in not adopting a law such as this.
Figure 3.3 Norms and Individual Differences for Individualistic and Collectivistic Societies
Source: Lopez, Pedrotti, & Snyder (2019, p. 29).
Again, it is likely that not all in China agreed with this policy, especially in light of the fact that it is no longer a national policy, but the culture at the time dictated the most strongly valued worldview. People whose personal value systems do not mesh with their culture’s value system are often called countercultural. An allocentric (or collectivist-oriented) person living in an individualist culture, or an idiocentric (or individualist-oriented) person living in a collectivist culture, may experience some discomfort or lack of value for their views and behaviors (Jung, McCormick, & Gross, 2012; Triandis, 2006). Finally, it is also important to note that racial groups within a country may be more or less countercultural depending on the dominant group. In the United States, for example, White Americans are the majority and dominant in terms of societal power, and the individualist nature of the European cultures their ancestors came from is strong within this cultural group. Asian Americans, however, may retain some of their ancestors’ collectivist values, but as they are a minority group, these values are not given the same cultural weight as the dominant culture’s values.
Time Orientation
Value system is not the only cultural trait that impacts worldview. The way a culture thinks about time is also influential. In the United States, the focus is most often on the future in terms of time, particularly in a European American mindset. Most questions are of the “where are you going” ilk, as opposed to the “where have you been.” Making plans for the future, saving for retirement (often to the detriment of current life experience), and future goals often dominate our perspective. When individuals in the United States exhibits this mindset, we might call them go-getters or high achievers.
Other cultural groups may have more of a focus on the past. Asian cultures, for example, often have a stronger value for a past time orientation and may look backward to ancestors and past family events to give meaning to their present. Consider the old Chinese fable, “The Old Horse Knows the Way.” In this story, a group of warriors has been to war for many years, and when at last it is time for those of them who are left to return home, they become lost. One of the soldiers realizes: “We can use the wisdom of an old horse. Release the old horses and follow them and thereby reach the right road” (Pei, 2005, p. 1). In this cultural group, looking backward and to those who know the past leads to answers and is valued.
Finally, some cultural groups are more focused on the present. Many American Indian groups, for example, take the approach to time that “something happens when it happens” as opposed to thinking of a specific starting time as important. More examples are given in our later discussion of the value of time orientation in relation to worldview models, but this basic information helps us to understand that time and the way it is valued is often