Ya-Ru Chen

Toward an explanation of cultural differences in in-group favoritism: The role of individual versus collective primacy.

Previous research conducted on a Westem sample has shown that people are less apt to exhibit in-group favoritism when they perform well individually while their in-group performs poorly. The authors evaluated whether this finding would be moderated by the cultural dimension of individualcollective primacy, which refers to whether people give more weight to their personal interests rather than their in-groups interests when forced to choose between the two. The authors hypothesized that relative to their counterparts from the United States, participants from the Peoples Republic of China would have more of a collective-primacy orientation and therefore would exhibit more in-group favoritism when they performed well individually while their in-group performed poorly. The results supported the hypothesis. Implications for the literatures on in-group favoritism and cross-cultural differences are discussed.

Aspiration-Level Adaptation in an American Financial Services Organization: A Field Study

Using field data from an American financial services organization, we examined the effects of three important variables in Cyert and Marchs (1963) initial conceptualization of the aspiration-level adaptation process: The previous aspiration level, performance feedback, and social comparison. Past findings obtained in controlled contexts (Glynn et al. 1991; Lant 1992) have provided empirical support for the attainment discrepancy model (Lewin et al. 1944), which includes variables of the previous aspiration level and attainment discrepancy (i.e., performance feedback). We replicated these findings in the field: The effects of the previous aspiration level and attainment discrepancy on the current aspiration levels were significant and positive. In addition, we investigated the effect of social comparison using a variable based on the difference between the performance of the focal unit and the performance of comparable others (Greve 1998). Based on the assumption that decision makers in organizations will expect to observe similar performance levels among those in the same comparison group (Wood 1989), we posited that the effect of social comparison would be negative, refiecting managerial efforts to reduce performance discrepancies among similar units. The empirical results supported the prediction from this reasoning. We conclude by discussing implications of our findings for theory and research in organizational learning and the behavioral theory of the firm.

When is it "a pleasure to do business with you?" The effects of relative status, outcome favorability, and procedural fairness

Abstract Previous research on encounters between parties of differing status tend to examine the influence of the higher status party (e.g., managers) on the lower status party (e.g., their direct reports), rather than the other way around. We suggest that it is important to examine the reactions of both higher and lower status parties (e.g., their desire for future interaction) to their encounters with one another. Furthermore, both parties’ relative status is hypothesized to influence their desire for future interaction with one another, in conjunction with the outcome favorability associated with the encounter and the other’s procedural fairness. This hypothesis was tested in a pilot study as well as in two full-scale studies. All three studies showed that outcome favorability and procedural fairness interacted to influence participants’ desire for future interaction with the other party. However, the nature of the interactive relationship differed as a function of participants’ relative status. For lower status people, high procedural fairness reduced the positive relationship between outcome favorability and their desire for future interaction with the other party, relative to when procedural fairness was low. For higher status people, high procedural fairness heightened the positive relationship between outcome favorability and desire for future interaction, relative to when procedural fairness was low. Implications for the literatures on relationships in work organizations, organizational justice, and status are discussed.

National cultural distance as liability of foreignness: the issue of level of analysis

In this study, we focus on the use of measures of national cultural distance as a proxy for liabilities of foreignness. In particular, we focus on the dominant measure of national cultural distance: a linear combination of the differences between the two countries where the workplaces are located using indices from previously published research. Our question concerns whether measures of distance based on previously published indices at the national level are appropriate measures of cultural distance at the organizational level. Our results suggest that they are not; implications for theory and research are discussed.

Individual–collective primacy and ingroup favoritism: enhancement and protection effects

Abstract Individual–collective primacy refers to the extent to which people emphasize their individual interests (individual-primacy) vs. the interests of their ingroup (collective-primacy). This study examined the interactive effects of individual–collective primacy, ingroup performance, and outgroup performance on ingroup favoritism. Participants from two cultures completed a measure of their individual vs. collective-primacy orientation. Performance feedback (favorable or unfavorable) for themselves, their ingroup, and the outgroup were manipulated orthogonally. As predicted, greater collective-primacy led to more ingroup favoritism when the ingroup performed better or worse than the outgroup. However, when the ingroup and outgroup both performed well or both performed poorly, the relationship between collective-primacy and ingroup favoritism was not significant. Implications for analyses of ingroup favoritism and cross-cultural differences are discussed.

The Importance of Who You Meet: Effects of Self- versus Other- Concerns among Negotiators in the United States, the People's Republic of China, and Japan

Abstract This study examines intracultural negotiation within three different cultures—the United States (US), the People’s Republic of China (PRC), and Japan. Within these cultures, we focus on the interactive effects of the self-concerns (operationalized as aspiration level) and other-concerns (operationalized as egoistic vs. prosocial motives) of negotiators in a dyadic setting ( De Dreu, Weingart, & Kwon, 2000 ; Pruitt & Rubin, 1986 ). After allowing negotiators to set their own aspiration levels, we predicted that the positive effect on final individual profit of having a higher aspiration than one’s opponent would be stronger among negotiators with an egoistic social motive orientation. We also hypothesized that egoistic negotiators with higher aspiration levels than their opponents would achieve greater profit in the PRC and Japan, relative to their counterparts in the US. We argue that this effect is due to “who you meet” as a negotiation opponent—there is a higher probability of encountering an egoistic negotiation opponent in the US, but a higher probability of encountering a prosocial negotiation opponent in the PRC and Japan. Our results supported these hypotheses. Implications for the literatures on negotiation and cross-cultural research are discussed.

THE MODERATING ROLES OF SELF-ESTEEM AND SELF-CONSTRUAL IN REACTION TO A THREAT TO THE SELF: EVIDENCE FROM THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND THE UNITED STATES.

The present study examined the relationship between self-esteem and self-protection in response to negative feedback in the United States (US) and the Peoples Republic of China (PRC). A positive relationship was observed in the US, but not in the PRC. However, more individualistic people in the PRC exhibited a positive relationship between self-esteem and self-protection.