scholarly journals Niche Diversity Can Explain Cross-Cultural Differences in Personality Structure

Author(s):  
Paul Smaldino ◽  
Aaron Lukaszewski ◽  
Chris von Rueden ◽  
Michael Gurven

The structure of personality refers to the covariation among specific behavioral patterns in a population. Statistically derived models of personality---such as the Big Five or HEXACO models---usually assume that the covariance structure of personality characteristics is a human universal. Cross-cultural studies, however, have challenged this view, finding that less complex societies exhibit stronger covariation among behavioral characteristics, resulting in fewer derived personality factors. To explain these results, we propose the niche diversity hypothesis, which predicts that a greater diversity of social and ecological niches elicits a more diverse set of multivariate behavioral profiles, and hence lower trait covariance, at the population level. We formalize this hypothesis as a computational model in which individuals assort into niches, which influence their behavioral traits. The model provides strong support for the niche diversity hypothesis and reproduces empirical results from recent cross-cultural studies. The model also provides a novel prediction for which we find support empirically: individual trait variation increases with niche diversity. This work provides a general explanation for differences in personality structure between populations in both humans and other animals. It also suggests a radical reimagining of personality trait research: instead of reifying statistical descriptions of manifest personality structures, research should focus more attention on modeling their underlying causes.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priscilla Achaa-Amankwaa ◽  
Gabriel Olaru ◽  
Ulrich Schroeders

Cross-cultural comparisons often focus on differences in broad personality traits across countries. However, many cross-cultural studies report differential item functioning which suggests that considerable group differences are not accounted for by the overarching personality factors. We argue that this may reflect cross-cultural personality differences at a lower level of personality, namely personality nuances. To investigate the degree of cultural similarities and differences between participants of ten countries that formerly belonged to the British Empire, we scrutinized participants’ personality scores on domain, facet, and nuance level of the personality hierarchy. More specifically, we used the responses of 9,110 participants on the IPIP-NEO 300-item personality inventory in cross-validated and regularized logistic regressions. Based on the trait domain and facet scores, we were able to identify the country of residence for 60% and 73% of the participants, respectively. By using the nuance level of personality, we correctly identified the nationality of 89% of the participants. This pattern of results explains the lack of measurement invariance in cross-cultural studies. We discuss implications for cross-cultural personality research and whether the high degree of cross-cultural item-level differences compromises the universality of the personality structure.


2020 ◽  
pp. 089020702096232
Author(s):  
Priscilla Achaa-Amankwaa ◽  
Gabriel Olaru ◽  
Ulrich Schroeders

Cross-cultural comparisons often focus on differences in broad personality traits across countries. However, many cross-cultural studies report differential item functioning which suggests that considerable group differences are not accounted for by the overarching personality factors. We argue that this may reflect cross-cultural personality differences at a lower level of personality, namely personality nuances. To investigate the degree of cultural similarities and differences between participants of 10 English speaking countries (of which nine formerly belonged to the British Empire), we scrutinized participants’ personality scores on the domain, facet, and nuance level of the personality hierarchy. More specifically, we used the responses of 9110 participants on the IPIP-NEO 300-item personality inventory in cross-validated and regularized logistic regressions. Based on the trait domain and facet scores, we were able to identify the country of residence for 60% and 73% of the participants, respectively. By using the nuance level of personality, we correctly identified the nationality of 89% of the participants. This pattern of results explains the lack of measurement invariance in cross-cultural studies. We discuss implications for cross-cultural personality research and whether the high degree of cross-cultural item-level differences compromises the universality of the personality structure.


2020 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Bender

Abstract Tomasello argues in the target article that, in generalizing the concrete obligations originating from interdependent collaboration to one's entire cultural group, humans become “ultra-cooperators.” But are all human populations cooperative in similar ways? Based on cross-cultural studies and my own fieldwork in Polynesia, I argue that cooperation varies along several dimensions, and that the underlying sense of obligation is culturally modulated.


1999 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 196-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosario Martínez-Arias ◽  
Fernando Silva ◽  
Ma Teresa Díaz-Hidalgo ◽  
Generós Ortet ◽  
Micaela Moro

Summary: This paper presents the results obtained in Spain with The Interpersonal Adjective Scales of J.S. Wiggins (1995) concerning the variables' structure. There are two Spanish versions of IAS, developed by two independent research groups who were not aware of each other's work. One of these versions was published as an assessment test in 1996. Results from the other group have remained unpublished to date. The set of results presented here compares three sources of data: the original American manual (from Wiggins and collaborators), the Spanish manual (already published), and the new IAS (our own research). Results can be considered satisfactory since, broadly speaking, the inner structure of the original instrument is well replicated in the Spanish version.


1968 ◽  
Vol 8 (4, Pt.2) ◽  
pp. 1-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry C. Triandis ◽  
Vasso Vassiliou ◽  
Maria Nassiakou

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 375-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Matsumoto ◽  
Hyisung C. Hwang

We discuss four methodological issues regarding cross-cultural judgment studies of facial expressions of emotion involving design, sampling, stimuli, and dependent variables. We use examples of relatively recent studies in this area to highlight and discuss these issues. We contend that careful consideration of these, and other, cross-cultural methodological issues can help researchers minimize methodological errors, and can guide the field to address new and different research questions that can continue to facilitate an evolution in the field’s thinking about the nature of culture, emotion, and facial expressions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document