The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On the Empirical Identification of Dimensions for Cross-Cultural Comparisons
Abstract
In cross-cultural psychology a major goal is to identify dimensions of culture. For this purpose, the cross-cultural analysis (referred to as ecological analysis by Hofstede, 1980) is often used. Two methodological difficulties associated with this method are discussed, and their solution is proposed. A method intended to identify universal dimensions of individual difference, the pancultural analysis, is likely to produce results similar to those obtained in a cross-cultural analysis and hence is unable to achieve its purpose of identifying individual dimensions. A new procedure, based on a within-culture standardization procedure, is introduced for this purpose. A case study of the differences in the results produced by the cross-cultural and the new analyses is then used as a springboard for a further discussion of Shweder's(1973) between-within issue. The theoretical meaning of cultural and individual dimensions is also discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Guttman, L. (1968) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02290164 · Cited by 1,343
Cited by
Schwartz, S. H. (1992) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6 · Cited by 14,619
GUDYKUNST, W. B., MATSUMOTO, Y., TING-TOOMEY, S., NISHIDA, T., KIM, K., & HEYMAN, S. (1996) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00377.x · Cited by 1,100
Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: test of a trickle-down model.
Aryee, S., Chen, Z. X., Sun, L.-Y., & Debrah, Y. A. (2007) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.191 · Cited by 914
Smith, P. B., Dugan, S., & Trompenaars, F. (1996) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/0022022196272006 · Cited by 807
Impact of Culture on Human Resource Management Practices: A 10‐Country Comparison
Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R., Mendonca, M., Yu, K., Deller, J., Stahl, G., & Kurshid, A. (2000) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00010 · Cited by 786
Metadata
- Authors
- Leung, K., & Bond, M. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1989-06
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 133-151
- ISSN
- 0022-0221 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-5422
- OpenAlex
- W2165018471
- Cited by
- 403
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
