Cultural Framework

2.4.2.1 Cultural Framework by Inglehart

World Values Survey (WVS) provides a cross-cultural measure of peoples’ values. Many aspects of human values (concern) such as attitude toward politics, economy, religion and family are asked in the survey. To date various methods have been developed and introduced to identify the character of values useful in describing cultures. This study highlights two frameworks to describe cultures. That is cultural framework by Inglehart and cultural

28

framework by Schwartz.

Inglehart (1997) proposes a cultural framework using data from WVS. The study analyzes 43 societies based on 22 items from WVS. By principal components factor analysis, it is found that first two dimensions account for 51 percent of the cross-national variation among these items. Further, additional dimensions explain relatively small amount of cross-national variations among them. It is reported that these two dimensions are robust to dropping items included in the research. Inglehart and Baker (2000) extracted two factors at both individual and country levels using 10 items from WVS. They named two factors “traditional versus secular-rational12 _”

dimension and “survival versus self-expression13 _{” dimension. These two}

dimensions are robust because many researchers obtained similar results from other combinations of survey questions from WVS14_{. Survey questions}

that Inglehart and Baker (2000) used are shown in Table 2.2. Traditional values emphasize “Importance of God”, “Teach Children Obedience and Faith rather than Independence and Determination”, “Disapproval of Abortion”, “National Pride”, and “Respect for Authority”. On the other hand, survival values emphasize “Priority for Economic and Physical Security”, “Feeling of Unhappiness”, “Abstaining from Signing Petitions”, “Disapproval of Homosexuality” and “Distrusting in Other People”

12 _{Secular-rational values have the opposite preferences to the traditional}

values.

13 _{Self-expression values have the opposite preferences to the survival}

values.

14 _{According to Inglehart and Welzel (2010), “The resulting cross-cultural}

map is so robust that, using a completely different way of measuring basic values, different types of samples and a different type of dimensional analysis Schwartz finds very similar transnational groupings among 76 countries”. Further, “traditional versus secular-rational” dimension and “survival versus self-expression” dimension appear in analysis using

different sets of years and countries (Inglehart, 1997; Inglehart and Baker, 2000, Inglehart and Welzel, 2005).

29

Table 2. 2 Ten Items for Inglehart’s Dimensions

Traditional vs. Secular-Rational values (Traditional values emphasize the following)

God is important in respondent’s life.

It is more important for a child to learn obedience and religious faith than independence and determination (i.e.Autonomy index).

Abortion is never justifiable.

Respondent has strong sense of national pride. Respondent favors more respect for authority

Survival vs. Self-Expression values (Survival values emphasize the following)

Respondent gives priority to economic and physical security over self- expression and quality-of-life (i.e. Materialist/Postmaterialist values index) Respondent describes self as not very happy.

Respondent has not signed and would not sign a petition Homosexuality is never justifiable.

You have to be very careful about trusting people. Source: Inglehart and Baker (2000, p24)

These two dimensions explain more than 70 percent of the cross-national variance on these items. These dimensions make it possible to locate individuals and each society on a global map15_{. Figure 2.1 shows the locations}

of societies based on these two dimensions in wave 4, 1996. Average score of traditional vs. secular-rational score and survival vs. self-expression score are used to derive national scores. We can see similarities between cultures by this map. A cultural map in wave 5 (2008) is shown in Appendix-Figure 2.1 Further, a map in wave 6 (2010-2014) is shown in Appendix-Figure 2.2. We observe that Protestant Europe such as Sweden has high scores in Secular-rational and Self-expression values. Countries in Ex-communist tend

15 _{This thesis aims to seek diversity in human values so that we are not going to place}

individuals into this cultural map. Therefore, this thesis uses items that are used to create “traditional versus secular-rational” dimension and “survival versus self-expression” dimension.

30

to have high scores in Secular-rational and Survival values. Further, English speaking countries inclined to have high Traditional and Self-expression values.

Figure 2. 1 Map of countries (wave 4, 1996) Source: World Values Survey

Extracted from: http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSContents.jsp

2.4.2.2 Cultural Framework by Schwartz

31

that “Values (a) are concepts or beliefs, (b) pertain to desirable end states or behaviors, (c) transcend specific situations, (d) guide selection or evaluation of behavior and events, and (e) are ordered by relative importance. (page 4)”. Further it is stated that “the primary content aspect of a value is the type of goal or motivational concern that it expresses. (page 4)”. Schwartz adopts widely used conception of values (Feather, 1995 etc.) and proposed 10 Schwartz values that relates to motivational goal.

The following are the 10 broad basic values that Schwartz specifies, each followed by its motivational goal:

In Schwartz (1992), the following ten different types of human values are shown.

Power: Social status and prestige, control or dominance over people and

resources

Achievement: Personal success through domonstrating competence

according to social Standards

Hedonism: Pleasure and sensuous gratification for oneself. Stimulation: Excitement, novelty, and challenge in life.

Self-direction: Independent thought and action-choosing, creating,

exploring.

Universalism: Understanding, appreciation, tolerance, and protection for

the welfare of all people and for nature.

Benevolence: Preservation and enhancement of the welfare of people with

whom one is in frequent personal contact.

Tradition: Respect, commitment, and acceptance of the customs and ideas

that traditional culture or religion provide.

Conformity: Restraint of actions, inclinations, and impulses likely to upset

or harm others and violate social expectations or norms.

Security: Safety, harmony, and stability of society, of relationships, and of

32

Schwartz summarized these 10 values with the following two orthogonal dimensions; Self-enhancement vs. self-transcendence dimension and Openness to change vs. Conservatism dimension. Appendix-Figure 2.3 shows relations between ten motivational types of value. Further, the followings show the explanation for each dimension.

Two dimensions by Schwartz

Self-enhancement vs. Self-transcendence:

“This dimension captures the conflict between values that emphasize concern for the welfare and interests of others (universalism, benevolence) and values that emphasize pursuit of one's own interests and relative success and dominance over others (power, achievement). Hedonism shares elements of both openness to change and self-enhancement (Schwartz, 2012).”

Openness to change vs. Conservatism:

“This dimension captures the conflict between values that emphasize independence of thought, action, and feelings and readiness for change (self- direction, stimulation) and values that emphasize order, selfrestriction, preservation of the past, and resistance to change (security, conformity, tradition) (Schwartz, 2012).”

WVS contains 10 questions that represent these 10 values. This paper uses cultural framework by Schwartz in chapter 4 so that we discuss them later.