Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Comparative Psychological Research in East Asia: An Opportunity for East Asian Studies Scholars

Comparative Psychological Research in East Asia: An Opportunity for East Asian Studies Scholars AbstractEast Asian cultures are often labelled as ‘collectivistic’, ‘dialectical’ or ‘Confucian’ in comparative psychological research. This tendency is used to justify the generalisation of results found in one East Asian culture to all East Asian cultures and leads to an absence of psychological research comparing different East Asian cultures. In this paper I first show two examples of illdefined psychological constructs-Geert Hofstede’s individualism and collectivism, and Richard E. Nisbett’s and Peng Kaiping’s dialectical thinking. Then I review the content of two main psychological journals with a focus on how often results from one East Asian culture are generalised to all East Asian cultures. Finally I offer a solution to the problem of neglected research comparing psychological differences among East Asian cultures. I state that lack of diversity in research teams and the under-representation of scholars from other than English-speaking countries in teams undertaking psychological research about East Asia contribute to this process. I suggest that East Asian scholars from non-English speaking countries should persuade psychologists from their universities to engage with East Asia. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Vienna Journal of East Asian Studies de Gruyter

Comparative Psychological Research in East Asia: An Opportunity for East Asian Studies Scholars

Linkov, Václav
Vienna Journal of East Asian Studies , Volume 4 (1): 15 – Jun 1, 2014
Download PDF
15 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/comparative-psychological-research-in-east-asia-an-opportunity-for-JH20rHjX1n
Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
© 2018 Václav Linkov, published by Sciendo
ISSN
2521-7038
eISSN
2521-7038
DOI
10.2478/vjeas-2013-0003
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractEast Asian cultures are often labelled as ‘collectivistic’, ‘dialectical’ or ‘Confucian’ in comparative psychological research. This tendency is used to justify the generalisation of results found in one East Asian culture to all East Asian cultures and leads to an absence of psychological research comparing different East Asian cultures. In this paper I first show two examples of illdefined psychological constructs-Geert Hofstede’s individualism and collectivism, and Richard E. Nisbett’s and Peng Kaiping’s dialectical thinking. Then I review the content of two main psychological journals with a focus on how often results from one East Asian culture are generalised to all East Asian cultures. Finally I offer a solution to the problem of neglected research comparing psychological differences among East Asian cultures. I state that lack of diversity in research teams and the under-representation of scholars from other than English-speaking countries in teams undertaking psychological research about East Asia contribute to this process. I suggest that East Asian scholars from non-English speaking countries should persuade psychologists from their universities to engage with East Asia.

Journal

Vienna Journal of East Asian Studies – de Gruyter

Published: Jun 1, 2014

Keywords: Comparative psychology; collectivism; dialectical self; East Asia

There are no references for this article.