scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

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.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined the relationship between cultural tightness and COVID-19 case and mortality rates as of Oct 16, 2020, using an ordinary least squares regression.

234 citations

BookDOI
16 Dec 2013
TL;DR: This book discusses culture in a historical context, the psychology of culture, and the role of language in the development of modern culture.
Abstract: About the Authors. Preface. Chapter 1 What Is Culture? Culture in the News. The Concept of Culture in Historical Context. Categories of Culture. Definition of Culture. Organization of the Book. What is Social about Social Psychology of Culture? Chapter 2 Strategies for Describing Culture. Culture in the News ! and Fairy Tales. Describing Cultural Variations. The Global Approach. The Focal Approach. Summary and Conclusion. Chapter 3 Psychological Foundation of Human Culture. Culture in the News. Ape Cultures. Human Cultures. Cognitive Foundation of Human Cultures. Social Psychological Foundation of Human Culture. Nature, Culture, and Mind. Chapter 4 What is Culture For? Fact or Hoax? Biological and Cultural Evolution. What Does Culture Do for the Survival of the Species? What Does Culture Do for a Society? What Does Culture Do for the Individual? Conclusion . Chapter 5 Culture as Mental Habits: Shared Unintended Thoughts. Culture Travelers' Journal. Taxonomy of Knowledge. Interpretive Cautions. Mental Habits as Procedural Knowledge. The Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis. Conclusion. Chapter 6 Culture, Self, and Others: Who Am I and Who Are They? Culture and Architecture. Person Representations. Representations of Other People. Representations of the Self . Representations of Groups. Conclusion. Chapter 7 Events and Norms: How Events Unfold and What We Should Do. Cultural Psychology in Public Bathrooms. Event Representations. Norm Representations. Conclusion. Chapter 8 Organization and Application of Cultural Knowledge. Cultural Icons. Organization of Cultural Knowledge: Is Culture a Coherent Meaning System? Multiple Determinants of Cultural Behavior. Relative Influence of Different Determinants. The Context of Cultural Knowledge. Conclusion. Chapter 9 Reproduction of Culture and Cultural Change. Cultural Change across the Globe. Media of Cultural Transmission. How are Shared Representations Constructed and Reproduced? Cultural Change. Conclusion. Chapter 10 Intercultural Contacts: Implications for Cultural Competence. The Rice Storm and the Butterfly Effect. Nature of Cultural Competence. Psychological Benefits of Intercultural Contacts. Psychological Costs of Intercultural Contacts. Conclusion. Chapter 11 Globalization and Multicultural Identities. Tsunami and Globalization. Migration and Globalization. Will Globalization Lead to Homogenization of Cultures? Globalization and Cultural Diversity. Migration and Management of Multicultural. Identities. Colonization and Identity Negotiation. Conclusion. Chapter 12 Scientific Study of Cultural Processes. Studying Culture in Coffee Shops. Beyond Description of Cultural Differences. Explaining Cultures. Psychic Unity and Cultural Relativity. What is Social about Social Psychology of Culture? References. Author Index . Subject Index

232 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors propose to view cultures as dynamic open systems that spread across geographical boundaries and evolve through time, and connect cultural differences in social cognition to cultures' axiomatic assumptions in the relevant domains, and specify the social cognitive principles that govern the activation and application of such cultural theories in specific contexts.
Abstract: Cultural psychologists have often sought to explain cross-cultural differences in social cognition as differences rooted in the cultures' positions on a small collection of pan-cultural dimensions (e.g., individualism-collectivism). In this paper, we argue for a paradigm shift in cultural psychology. Drawing on the arguments and data presented in the papers of this special issue, we propose to view cultures as dynamic open systems that spread across geographical boundaries and evolve through time. This alternative view links cultural differences in social cognition to cultures' axiomatic assumptions (or cultural theories) in the relevant domains, and specifies the social cognitive principles that govern the activation and application of such cultural theories in specific contexts. This new approach captures the complexity of cultural processes, paves the way for an exciting agenda for future investigations, and provides a common language for psychologists to describe how culture affects social co...

213 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors integrate social norm constructs from different disciplines into an integrated model and propose a theory of how perceived descriptive and injunctive norms function as two distinct navigational devices that guide thoughts and behavior in different ways.

211 citations

Book ChapterDOI
01 Jan 2001
TL;DR: The influence of culture and context on student learning and motivation has long been documented by empirical research as mentioned in this paper, however, the topic has received special attention by education researchers, partly because of the much publicized superior achievement of Asian students compared to their Western counterparts in standardized achievement tests.
Abstract: The influence of culture and context on student learning and motivation has long been documented by empirical research. In recent years, however, the topic has received special attention by education researchers. This is partly because of the much publicized superior achievement of Asian students compared to their Western counterparts in standardized achievement tests. Among many reasons, proposed differences in cultural values (Stevenson et al., 1990), beliefs (Hess, Chang, & McDevitt, 1987; Holloway & Hess, 1990), and practices (Hess & Azuma, 1991; Salili, 1995; Stevenson & Stigler, 1992) have been the foci of many studies. These cultural values and practices are assumed to influence student motivation and subsequent achievement.

207 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, it is shown that perceived behavioral 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.
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.

6,544 citations

Book
08 Sep 2020
TL;DR: A 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.
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.

6,370 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: European Americans were found to be both more individualistic-valuing personal independence more-and less collectivistic-feeling duty to in-groups less-than others, and among Asians, only Chinese showed large effects, being both less individualistic and more collectivist.
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.

5,113 citations