CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 54Cultural Differences and ValuesGlobal and Cross-Cultural ManagementStress and Burnout Research

Are Country and Culture Values Interchangeable?: A Case Example Using Occupational Stress and Coping

Open access
Sawang, Sukanlaya, Oei, Tian P.S., Goh, Yong Wah·2006·International Journal of Cross Cultural Management
DOI 10.1177/1470595806066330
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Cross cultural research in occupational stress and coping has produced a wealth of knowledge. Although advances have been made, there are still problems to be solved. One of these problems is the confusion generated in the literature by researchers claiming that nation or country represents cultural values, and the use of the two terms interchangeably. It remains unclear whether this practice is correct. The present article reported on this by using 511 full-time employees from Australia, Singapore and Sri Lanka to study occupational stress and coping. Results revealed that cultural value paradigms (i.e. Individualism–Collectivism) were distributed across the three nations such that over 60% of participants were either high or low in both I–C paradigms. The findings also indicated that the relationship between cultural value paradigm and country impacted on stress and coping differently. The study shows that significant differences exist within countries as well as between countries, such that any attempt to equate ‘culture’ with ‘country’ becomes problematic. Therefore these findings established that country or nation is not the same as culture values and cannot be used interchangeably.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1470595806066330

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Asians tended to have higher levels of collectivistic values that prioritise group goals more than individual goals.

    “Sawang, Oei, and Goh (2006) found that Asians tended to have higher levels of collectivistic values that prioritise group goals more than individual goals.”

    From Maladaptive Perfectionism, Disguised Distress, and Help Seeking in the Culture of 'Saving Face': Links to Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms among Asian Youth (2019) · cites this paper as Sawang, Oei, and Goh (2006)

    The Cultural Paradigm section describes collectivist values as promoting the welfare of the in-group rather than personal desires. But the sample results do not establish that Asians generally had higher collectivism: 45.8% of Singaporeans, versus 50.6% of Australians, scored high on collectivism when those who also scored high on individualism are included. The paper also cautions against treating nationality and cultural values as interchangeable (INSERT TABLE 1 HERE; page unavailable). (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. Chiu, Randy K., Kosinski, Frederick A. (1999). The role of affective dispositions in job satisfaction and work strain: Comparing collectivist and individualist societies. International Journal of Psychology, 34(1), 19-28.
  2. Dewe, P. J. (1991). Examining the nature of work stress: Individual evaluations of stressful experiences and coping. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 64, 331-351.
  3. Eaton, L., & Louw, J. (2000). Culture and self in South Africa: Individualism-Collectivism predictions. Journal of Social Psychology, 140, 210-217.
  4. Feather, N. T. (1993). Devaluing achievement within a culture: Measuring the cultural cringe. Australian Journal of Psychology, 45(3), 182-188.
  5. Feather, N. T. (1994). Values and national identification: Australian evidence. Australian Journal of Psychology, 46(1), 35-40.
  6. Freeman, M.A., & Bordia, P. (2001). Assessing alternative model of individualism and collectivism : A confirmatory analysis. European Journal of Personality, 15, 105- 121.
  7. Gates, D. M. (2001). Stress and coping: A model for the workplace. AAOHN Journal, 49, 390-398.
  8. Goh, Y. W. (2003). The aetiology of occupational stress and coping. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
  9. Ho, D.Y.F., & Chiu, C.Y. (1994). Component ideas of Individualism, Collectivism, and social organisation: An application in the study of Chinese culture. In U. Kim, H.C. Triandis et al. (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications. Cross-cultural research and methodology series, Vol. 18 (pp. 137-156). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
  10. Hunter, S. C., & Boyle, J. M. E. (2004). Appraisal and coping strategy use in victims of school bullying. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 83-107.
  11. Irvin, S. K. (2001). Waiting: Concept analysis. Nursing Diagnosis, 12 (4), 128-137.
  12. Jackson, A., & Sears, S.J. (1992). Implications of an Afrocentric world view in reducing stress for African American. Journal of Counseling and Development, 71, 184-189.
  13. Jex, S. M., & Bliese, P. D. (1999). Efficacy beliefs as a moderator of the impact of work- related stressors: A multilevel study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 349-361.
  14. Kitayama, S., Markus, H. R., & Lieberman, C. (1995). The collective construction of self- esteem: Implications for culture, self, and emotion. In J.A. Russell, A. James et al. (Eds.), Everyday conceptions of emotion: An introduction to the psychology, anthropology and linguistics of emotion. NATO ASI series D: Behavioural and social sciences, Vol. 81 (pp. 523-550). New York, NY, US: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  15. Lavee, Y., & Katz, R. (2003). The family in Israel: Between tradition and modernity. Marriage & Family Review, 35, 193-217.
  16. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.
  17. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
  18. Osipow, S. H., & Spokane, A.R. (1987). The Occupational Stress Inventory. New York: Marathon Consulting Press.
  19. Perrewe, P. L., & Zellars, K. L. (1999). An examination of attributions and emotions in the transactional approach to the organizational stress process. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 739.
  20. Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S., & Xie, J. L. (2000). Collective efficacy versus self-efficacy in coping responses to stressors and control: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 512-525.
  21. Scherer, R. F., Hwang, C.E., Yan, W., & Li, J. (2000). The dimensionality of coping among Chinese health care workers. The Journal of Social Psychology, 140, 317-327.
  22. Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a universal psychological structure of human values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 550-562.
  23. Schwartz, S.H., & Bilsky, W. (1990). Toward a theory of the universal content and structure of values: Extensions and cross-cultural replications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 878-891.
  24. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M.P Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 25 (pp. 1-65). San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press.
  25. Schwartz, S.H. (1994). Beyond individualism and collectivism: New cultural dimensions of human values. In U. Kin, H.C. Triandis et al. (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications. Cross-cultural research and methodology series, Vol.18 (pp. 85-119). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
  26. Slavin, L. A., Rainer, K. L., McCreary, M. L., & Gowda, K. K. (1991). Towards multicultural model of the stress process. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 156-163.
  27. Sun, L.N.N., & Stewart, S.M. (2000). Psychological adjustment to cancer in a collective culture. International Journal of Psychology, 35, 177-185.
  28. Triandis, H. C. (1995b). Individualism and Collectivism: New direction in social psychology. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
  29. Voronov, M., & Singer, J. (2002). The Myth of Individualism-Collectivism: A Critical Review. The Journal of Social Psychology, 142, 461-480.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sawang, S., Oei, T. P. S., & Goh, Y. W.
Affiliations
  • Queensland University of Technology (AU)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • University of Southern Queensland (AU)
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2006-08
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
205-219
ISSN
  • 1470-5958 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-2838
DOI
10.1177/1470595806066330
OpenAlex
W2009401684
Cited by
54
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • International Journal of Cross Cultural Management (publishedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Global and Cross-Cultural Management
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
Keywords
cultural values, individualism-collectivism, occupational stress, coping, cross-cultural comparison, national identity, Australia, Singapore, Sri Lanka

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