Heather M. Coon

Rethinking Individualism and Collectivism: Evaluation of Theoretical Assumptions and Meta-Analyses

Are Americans more individualistic and less collectivistic than members of other groups? The authors summarize plausible psychological implications of individualism-collectivism (IND-COL), meta-analyze cross-national and within-United States IND-COL differences, and review evidence for effects of IND-COL on self-concept, well-being, cognition, and relationality. European Americans were found to be both more individualistic-valuing personal independence more-and less collectivistic-feeling duty to in-groups less-than others. However, European Americans were not more individualistic than African Americans, or Latinos, and not less collectivistic than Japanese or Koreans. Among Asians, only Chinese showed large effects, being both less individualistic and more collectivistic. Moderate IND-COL effects were found on self-concept and relationality, and large effects were found on attribution and cognitive style.

Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity

We describe the development and validation of a new instrument, KEYS: Assessing the Climate for Creativity, designed to assess perceived stimulants and obstacles to creativity in organizational work environments. The KEYS scales have acceptable factor structures, internal consistencies, test-retest reliabilities, and preliminary convergent and discriminant validity. A construct validity study shows that perceived work environments, as assessed by the KEYS scales, discriminate between high-creativity projects and low-creativity projects; certain scales discriminate more strongly and consistently than others. We discuss the utility of this tool for research and practice.

Cultural Orientations in the United States (Re)Examining Differences among Ethnic Groups

The authors investigate differences in individualism and collectivism between the four largest ethnic groups in the United States (African Americans, Asian Americans, Latino Americans, and European Americans). It has been asserted that U.S. minorities score higher in collectivism compared to European Americans, whereas European Americans score higher in individualism than minorities. The authors reexamined these assumptions using meta-analytic techniques with new data (total N = 1,510). Asian Americans and African Americans but not Latinos scored higher in collectivism than did European Americans. African Americans exhibited the highest levels of individualism. The authors discuss the cultural, historical, and social factors that should be taken into account to adequately characterize cultural orientation of socially constructed groups.

Cultural psychology, A new look: reply to Bond (2002), Fiske (2002), Kitayama (2002), and Miller (2002).

M. H. Bond (2002), A. P. Fiske (2002), S. Kitayama (2002), and J. G. Miller (2002) joined D. Oyserman, H. M. Coon, and M. Kemmelmeier (2002) in highlighting limitations of the individualism-collectivism model of culture. Concern is warranted; nevertheless, individualism-collectivism helps structure discourse on the influence of culture on the mind. To avoid level-of-analysis entanglements, Oyserman et al. propose an integrative model that includes distal, proximal, and situated cultural features of societies and internalized models of these features, highlights the importance of subjective construal, and uses evolutionary perspectives to clarify the basic problems cultures address. Framed this way, it is clear that, depending on situational requirements, both individualism- and collectivism-focused strategies are adaptive; thus, it is likely that human minds have adapted to think both ways.

Opposite Ends of the Same Stick? Multi-Method Test of the Dimensionality of Individualism and Collectivism

The construct of individualism–collectivism (IND-COL) has become the definitive standard in cross-cultural psychology, management, and related fields. It is also among the most controversial, in particular, with regard to the ambiguity of its dimensionality: Some view IND and COL as the opposites of a single continuum, whereas others argue that the two are independent constructs. We explored the issue through seven different tests using original individual-level data from 50 studies and meta-analytic data from 149 empirical publications yielding a total of 295 sample-level observations that were collected using six established instruments for assessing IND and COL as separate constructs. Results indicated that the dimensionality of IND-COL may depend on (a) the specific instrument used to collect the data, (b) the sample characteristics and the cultural region from which the data were collected, and (c) the level of analysis. We also review inconsistencies, deficiencies, and challenges of conceptualizing IND-COL and provide guidelines for developing and selecting instruments for measuring the construct, and for reporting and meta-analyzing results from this line of research.

Undergraduates' Ability to Recognize Correlational and Causal Language Before and After Explicit Instruction

The ability to distinguish between correlational and causal claims is core knowledge for scientific literacy. News reports of scientific research prominently feature these claims. Thus, this knowledge has significant real-world application, and distinguishing among claims is critical to making sense of the reported research. We constructed an introductory psychology course with a series of brief exercises and assessments designed to improve students’ abilities to both understand the core concepts of correlation and causation and to apply their knowledge to real-world situations. Pre–post data on definitions and research in the news headlines revealed that students improved on both tasks by the end of the term.