Abstract
The two featured models for cross-culture or culture dimensions are the Hofstede’s cultural differences and the Cattell cultural dimension. Each is different in the areas of concern and factors for analysis. The Hofstede measure the dimension in between nations meanwhile the Cattell measures the personality of each individual. But beside form determining their scope, the reliability and validity is still subject for criticism and further development.
Hofstede Cultural Differences
Geert Hofstede analyzed the cultural differences or dimensions across nations. Other country differently behaves than the other country that is why sometimes the cultural shock affects the new immigrants. Based on the human instinct, people create decisions the same as he makes decisions in a usual way (Amat, et al., 2002). But when he applied it in different country, the tendency is to create bad decisions rather than the good one. Therefore, it is important to understand the differences of the home country from the host country.
Hofstede introduced the four and sometimes dimension of cultural differences which scopes the individualism (versus collectivism), power distance (between a leader and his subordinates), uncertainty avoidance (human life future), masculinity (versus femininity), and the long-term orientation (against the short-term orientation).
Reliability and Validity
Hofstede’s cultural dimensions or framework has been applied in a wide variety of contexts and most of the behavioral science disciplines. Hofstede’s framework is also utilized in the fields of management and marketing to examine the cross-cultural differences in attitudes and behaviors. The cultural dimension has been applied in studies of advertising, global strategies, and in ethical decision making (Blodgett, 2001). The same culture dimension is applied in different countries and assessing the validity of it in the individual level is a difficult manner. The cultural framework can be improved if the information has been provided in achieving goals. From the past studies, the concerns on analyzing the validity of Hofstede’s framework have been raised (Blodgett, 2001).
Cattell’s Cultural Dimension
Raymond Cattell attempted the first empirical approach to determine the dimensions of culture by applying the factor analytical approach and developing the personality tests. Clearly, the Cettell cultural dimension is an instrument to the society level or for the individuals. The approach is to measure the historical and political aspects, social, legal, religious indicators, economical, and medical dimensions (Hofstede and McCrae, 2004).
The Cattell cultural dimension’s concept is to identify the personality of individuals that can be difficult to interpret but have the obvious impact or influence on the economic development of one country. Mostly, the cultural diversity is an instrument used in personality tests. As part of the psychological research, the goal is to establish laws about what different people will do in all kinds of social and general environmental situations. Because the personality is a factor which permits a prediction of what a person will do in a given situation (Cattell, 1950).
Reliability and Validity
The evidence of validity is through the counseling, clinical and career development, personnel selection and development, educational, and research settings. The results can be used in a wide range of criteria such as leadership, creativity, academic achievement, skills, and dozens of occupational profiles (Cattell, Cattell, and Cattell, 1993). As a tool used in psychology, the measurement is a subject for criticism and the attempt to develop a common personality categories. Cattell’s Sixteenth Personality Factor Model is based upon personality adjectives taken from the natural language and his theory has not been successfully replicated (Fehriinger, 2002).
References:
Amat, O., et al., 2002. Dimensions of National Culture and the Accounting Environment. [Online] Available at: http://www.econ.upf.edu/docs/papers/downloads/394.pdf. [Accessed 16 Nov 2009].
Blodgett, J., et al., 2001. A Test of the Validity of Hofstede’d Cultural Dimensions. [Online] Available at: http://www.marketing.byu.edu/.../blodgett-rose-horton-bakir.doc. [Accessed 17 Nov 2009].
Cattell, R., 1950. Personality: A Systematic Theoretical and Factual Study. McGraw-Hill, New York, Ed. 1, p. 2
Cattell, R., Cattell, K., & Cattell, H., 1993. Basics of the 16PF Questionnaire, Fifth Edition. Retrieved 6 Aug 2003. [Online] Available at: http://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/49/04712342/0471234249.pdf. [Accessed 17 Nov 2009].
Fehriinger, H., 2002. Contributions and Limitations of Cattell’s Sixteenth Personality Factor Model. [Online] Available at: http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/fehringer.html. [Accessed 17 Nov 2009].
Hofstede, G., & McCrae, R., 2004. Personality and Culture Revisited: Linking Traits and Dimensions of Culture. [Online] Available at: http://www.itim.no/bruker/documents/artpersonalityculture.pdf. [Accessed 17 Nov 2009].
No comments:
Post a Comment