Unpacking east-west differences in the extent of self-enhancement from the perspective of face versus dignity culture

Hae In Lee, Angela K y Leung, Young Hoon Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The question of whether or not the need for self-enhancement is culturally universal has been a controversial issue in cultural psychology. Though there have been numerous studies arguing that East Asians also have the need for self-enhancement, the controversy remained. We contend that the field is ready to see a cohesive theory that integrates and explains when and why East Asians do and do not manifest their need for self-enhancement. In this paper, we provide the theoretical logics of and rationales behind face and dignity cultures as the new theoretical proxies that integrate and explain East Asians' self-enhancing behaviors, supplementing the former approach that uses the individualism-collectivism dichotomy. In particular, four representative properties of face culture - humility, public (versus private) concern, prevention regulatory focus, and harmony - are discussed to explain cross-cultural differences in the extent and ways of manifestations of self-enhancement motivation between European Americans and East Asians. Theoretical corroborations and empirical findings supporting this approach are also discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)314-327
Number of pages14
JournalSocial and Personality Psychology Compass
Volume8
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Asian Americans
Proxy
Motivation
Psychology

Cite this

@article{5e25079686ac4c2682b4936754b311a5,
title = "Unpacking east-west differences in the extent of self-enhancement from the perspective of face versus dignity culture",
abstract = "The question of whether or not the need for self-enhancement is culturally universal has been a controversial issue in cultural psychology. Though there have been numerous studies arguing that East Asians also have the need for self-enhancement, the controversy remained. We contend that the field is ready to see a cohesive theory that integrates and explains when and why East Asians do and do not manifest their need for self-enhancement. In this paper, we provide the theoretical logics of and rationales behind face and dignity cultures as the new theoretical proxies that integrate and explain East Asians' self-enhancing behaviors, supplementing the former approach that uses the individualism-collectivism dichotomy. In particular, four representative properties of face culture - humility, public (versus private) concern, prevention regulatory focus, and harmony - are discussed to explain cross-cultural differences in the extent and ways of manifestations of self-enhancement motivation between European Americans and East Asians. Theoretical corroborations and empirical findings supporting this approach are also discussed.",
author = "Lee, {Hae In} and Leung, {Angela K y} and Kim, {Young Hoon}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1111/spc3.12112",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "314--327",
journal = "Social and Personality Psychology Compass",
issn = "1751-9004",
publisher = "John Wiley & Sons",
number = "7",

}

Unpacking east-west differences in the extent of self-enhancement from the perspective of face versus dignity culture. / Lee, Hae In; Leung, Angela K y; Kim, Young Hoon.

In: Social and Personality Psychology Compass, Vol. 8, No. 7, 2014, p. 314-327.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Unpacking east-west differences in the extent of self-enhancement from the perspective of face versus dignity culture

AU - Lee, Hae In

AU - Leung, Angela K y

AU - Kim, Young Hoon

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - The question of whether or not the need for self-enhancement is culturally universal has been a controversial issue in cultural psychology. Though there have been numerous studies arguing that East Asians also have the need for self-enhancement, the controversy remained. We contend that the field is ready to see a cohesive theory that integrates and explains when and why East Asians do and do not manifest their need for self-enhancement. In this paper, we provide the theoretical logics of and rationales behind face and dignity cultures as the new theoretical proxies that integrate and explain East Asians' self-enhancing behaviors, supplementing the former approach that uses the individualism-collectivism dichotomy. In particular, four representative properties of face culture - humility, public (versus private) concern, prevention regulatory focus, and harmony - are discussed to explain cross-cultural differences in the extent and ways of manifestations of self-enhancement motivation between European Americans and East Asians. Theoretical corroborations and empirical findings supporting this approach are also discussed.

AB - The question of whether or not the need for self-enhancement is culturally universal has been a controversial issue in cultural psychology. Though there have been numerous studies arguing that East Asians also have the need for self-enhancement, the controversy remained. We contend that the field is ready to see a cohesive theory that integrates and explains when and why East Asians do and do not manifest their need for self-enhancement. In this paper, we provide the theoretical logics of and rationales behind face and dignity cultures as the new theoretical proxies that integrate and explain East Asians' self-enhancing behaviors, supplementing the former approach that uses the individualism-collectivism dichotomy. In particular, four representative properties of face culture - humility, public (versus private) concern, prevention regulatory focus, and harmony - are discussed to explain cross-cultural differences in the extent and ways of manifestations of self-enhancement motivation between European Americans and East Asians. Theoretical corroborations and empirical findings supporting this approach are also discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84903742615&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/spc3.12112

DO - 10.1111/spc3.12112

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 314

EP - 327

JO - Social and Personality Psychology Compass

JF - Social and Personality Psychology Compass

SN - 1751-9004

IS - 7

ER -