Anastassiya Kovaleva

Cross-Cultural Differences in a Global “Survey of World Views”

We know that there are cross-cultural differences in psychological variables, such as individualism/collectivism. But it has not been clear which of these variables show relatively the greatest differences. The Survey of World Views project operated from the premise that such issues are best addressed in a diverse sampling of countries representing a majority of the world’s population, with a very large range of item-content. Data were collected online from 8,883 individuals (almost entirely college students based on local publicizing efforts) in 33 countries that constitute more than two third of the world’s population, using items drawn from measures of nearly 50 variables. This report focuses on the broadest patterns evident in item data. The largest differences were not in those contents most frequently emphasized in cross-cultural psychology (e.g., values, social axioms, cultural tightness), but instead in contents involving religion, regularity-norm behaviors, family roles and living arrangements, and ethnonationalism. Content not often studied cross-culturally (e.g., materialism, Machiavellianism, isms dimensions, moral foundations) demonstrated moderate-magnitude differences. Further studies are needed to refine such conclusions, but indications are that cross-cultural psychology may benefit from casting a wider net in terms of the psychological variables of focus.

Measuring Four Perspectives of Justice Sensitivity With Two Items Each

People differ systematically in their vulnerability to injustice. We present two-item scales for the efficient measurement of justice sensitivity from 4 perspectives (victim, observer, beneficiary, perpetrator). In Study 1 using a quota-based sample of German adults, a latent state–trait analysis revealed the factorial validity and high reliabilities of the scales. In Study 2 employing a large random sample, we tested for measurement invariance of the items within the context of our short 2-item scales compared to the original 10-item scales. Multigroup confirmatory factor analyses confirmed that the validity of the indicators and the internal structure of the assessed constructs did not change across item contexts. In both studies, correlations with personality dimensions and life satisfaction provide evidence for the validity of our scales. With the presented instrument, future research can extend scientific knowledge regarding the role of individual differences in reactions to injustice for the explanation of well-being and physical health.