Chi-Yue Chiu

Bio: Chi-Yue Chiu is an academic researcher from The Chinese University of Hong Kong. The author has contributed to research in topics: Cultural diversity & Social psychology (sociology). The author has an hindex of 63, co-authored 245 publications receiving 16299 citations. Previous affiliations of Chi-Yue Chiu include Chinese Academy of Social Sciences & Columbia University.

Collective Representations As a Metaconstruct: An Analysis Based on Methodological Relationalism

Abstract: The authors discem an emerging paradigmatic shift in psychology: from methodological individualism to methodological relationalism, which asserts that social behavior invariably takes place in rela...

Normative Expectations of Social Behavior and Concern for Members of the Collective in Chinese Society

Abstract: Some theorists have recently contended that collectivism in Chinese society is target specific. In the present study, I hypothesize that in Chinese society, there are different expectations of social behavior for different relationships. This hypothesis was tested by asking subjects (64 men, 94 women) in Hong Kong to fill out the Chinese Popular Saying Questionnaire (Ho, Chui, Ko, & Mung, 1985), which consists of 35 normative statements (popular sayings) about how an individual should interact with other people. The target-specific Individualism—Collectivism scale (Hui, 1984) was also administered to the subjects. I hypothesized that collectivism in different relationships would be associated with different factors extracted from the Chinese Popular Saying Questionnaire. The results confirm the hypothesis.

Goal commitment and alignment of personal goals predict group identification only when the goals are shared

Abstract: Selfish pursuits of personal goals in group contexts may conflict with the group goal. Drawing on the shared reality theory and the intersubjective consensus approach to cultural dynamics, however,...

Self-Organization and Social Organization: U.S. and Chinese Constructions

Abstract: From the writings of William James (1890) onward, the construct of the social self has been widely employed in North American and European social psychology (see Markus & Cross, 1990, for a review). Many of the most influential theoretical perspectives in social psychology concern how a per­ son cognitively represents and emotionally identifies with groups: social identity theory (Hogg & Abrams, 1988; Tajfel & Turner, 1979), social catego­ rization theory (Turner, 1987), and the group value model (Lind & Tyler, 1988). Although James and many of his Western intellectual heirs have voiced the caveat that the social self is experienced differently in other cultural systems, until very recently there has been little psychological research on this issue.

The role of instrumental emotion regulation in the emotions–creativity link: How worries render individuals with high neuroticism more creative.

Abstract: Based on the instrumental account of emotion regulation (Tamir, 2005), the current research seeks to offer a novel perspective to the emotions-creativity debate by investigating the instrumental value of trait-consistent emotions in creativity. We hypothesize that emotions such as worry (vs. happy) are trait-consistent experiences for individuals higher on trait neuroticism and experiencing these emotions can facilitate performance in a creativity task. In 3 studies, we found support for our hypothesis. First, individuals higher in neuroticism had a greater preference for recalling worrisome (vs. happy) events in anticipation of performing a creativity task (Study 1). Moreover, when induced to recall a worrisome (vs. happy) event, individuals higher in neuroticism came up with more creative design (Study 2) and more flexible uses of a brick (Study 3) when the task was a cognitively demanding one. Further, Study 3 offers preliminary support that increased intrinsic task enjoyment and motivation mediates the relationship between trait-consistent emotion regulation and creative performance. These findings offer a new perspective to the controversy concerning the emotions-creativity relationship and further demonstrate the role of instrumental emotion regulation in the domain of creative performance.

Perceived Behavioral Control, Self-Efficacy, Locus of Control, and the Theory of Planned Behavior

Abstract: Conceptual and methodological ambiguities surrounding the concept of perceived behavioral control are clarified. It is shown that perceived control over performance of a behavior, though comprised of separable components that reflect beliefs about self-efficacy and about controllability, can nevertheless be considered a unitary latent variable in a hierarchical factor model. It is further argued that there is no necessary correspondence between self-efficacy and internal control factors, or between controllability and external control factors. Self-efficacy and controllability can reflect internal as well as external factors and the extent to which they reflect one or the other is an empirical question. Finally, a case is made that measures of perceived behavioral control need to incorporate self-efficacy as well as controllability items that are carefully selected to ensure high internal consistency. Summary and Conclusions Perceived control over performance of a behavior can account for consider- able variance in intentions and actions. However, ambiguities surrounding the concept of perceived behavioral control have tended to create uncertainties and to impede progress. The present article attempted to clarify conceptual ambiguities and resolve issues related to the operationalization of perceived behavioral control. Recent research has demonstrated that the overarching concept of perceived behavioral control, as commonly assessed, is comprised of two components: self-efficacy (dealing largely with the ease or difficulty of performing a behavior) and controllability (the extent to which performance is up to the actor). Contrary to a widely accepted view, it was argued that self-efficacy expectations do not necessarily correspond to beliefs about internal control factors, and that controllability expectations have no necessary basis in the perceived operation of external factors. Instead, it was suggested that self-efficacy and controllability may both reflect beliefs about the presence of internal as well as external factors. Rather than making a priori assumptions about the internal or external locus of self-efficacy and controllability, this issue is best treated as an empirical question. Also of theoretical significance, the present article tried to dispel the notion that self-efficacy and controllability are incompatible with, or independent of, each other. Although factor analyses of perceived behavioral control items provide clear and consistent evidence for the distinction, there is sufficient commonality between self-efficacy and controllability to suggest a two-level hierarchical model. In this model, perceived behavioral control is the overarching, superordinate construct that is comprised of two lower-level components: self-efficacy and controllability. This view of the control component in the theory of planned behavior implies that measures of perceived behavioral control should contain items that assess self-efficacy as well as controllability. Depending on the purpose of the investigation, a decision can be made to aggregate over all items, treating perceived behavioral control as a unitary factor, or to distinguish between self-efficacy and controllability by entering separate indices into the prediction equation.

The WEIRDest People in the World

Abstract: Behavioral scientists routinely publish broad claims about human psychology and behavior in the world's top journals based on samples drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Researchers - often implicitly - assume that either there is little variation across human populations, or that these "standard subjects" are as representative of the species as any other population. Are these assumptions justified? Here, our review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species - frequent outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ. The findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies, including young children, are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Many of these findings involve domains that are associated with fundamental aspects of psychology, motivation, and behavior - hence, there are no obvious a priori grounds for claiming that a particular behavioral phenomenon is universal based on sampling from a single subpopulation. Overall, these empirical patterns suggests that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of human nature on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin, and rather unusual, slice of humanity. We close by proposing ways to structurally re-organize the behavioral sciences to best tackle these challenges.

Rethinking individualism and collectivism: evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses.

Abstract: 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.