Integrating more than 40 years of studies on locus of control (LOC), this meta-analysis investigated whether (a) the magnitude of the relationship between LOC and psychological symptoms differed among cultures with distinct individualist orientations and (b) depression and anxiety symptoms yielded different patterns of cultural findings with LOC. We included studies that examined global self-ratings of LOC and at least 1 of the criterion variables in nonclinical samples (age range: 18-80 years). Data were analyzed on the basis of 152 independent samples, representing the testing of 33,224 adults across 18 cultural regions. Results revealed moderately strong relationships for external LOC with depression symptoms (k = 123, N = 28,490, r = .30, 95% confidence interval [CI] [.27, .32]) and anxiety symptoms (k = 65, N = 13,208, r = .30, 95% CI [.27, .33]). Individualism explained 20% of unique variance only in the external LOC-anxiety relationship: The link between external LOC and anxiety symptoms was weaker for collectivist societies (k = 8, N = 2,297, r = .20, 95% CI [.13, .28]) compared with individualist societies (k = 54, N = 9,887, r = .32, 95% CI [.29, .34]). Such cultural differences were attributed to the reduced emphasis on agentic goals in more collectivist societies. It is noteworthy that external LOC does not carry the same negative connotations across cultures, and members of collectivist societies may be more ready to endorse such items. Culture has been examined at the country level, and the findings may not be applicable to any particular person in a cultural region. Implications for integrating cultural meaning of perceived control into formulation of theories, research design, and intervention programs are discussed.

Cultural meaning of perceived control: A meta-analysis of locus of control and psychological symptoms across 18 cultural regions.

Religion is an important topic to understand in cross-cultural psychology. More theorizing and empirical work has gone into Western religions than Eastern religions. We briefly review work on cultural differences among Western religious groups, using the framework of individualism and collectivism. Such work raises questions on how religions and cultures affect each other, how diverse cultural groups are, and how confounded country and religious identities are. We then ask some of the same questions about Eastern religions and propose new questions for a cross-cultural psychology of religion, such as what counts as a religion, and whether there are nonreligious parallels of religious constructs that serve similar functions (e.g., belief in a just world [BJW], or social axiom of reward for human application). In all, we propose that a greater attention to both Western and Eastern religions in cross-cultural psychology can be illuminating regarding religion and culture.

Religion and Culture Individualism and Collectivism in the East and West

Belief in free will is the general belief that human behavior is free from internal and external constraints across situations for both self and others. In the last decade, scholars in social-cognitive psychology and experimental philosophy have made progress in defining free will terms, exploring how laypersons think of free will, discovering related cognitive processes and biases, and examining the behavioral outcomes of believing in free will. The growing interest in this construct raises the need for a discussion of what is new about free will beliefs, and how this construct differs from and relates to other well-known agency constructs in the literature. In this review, we integrate conceptual discussions and empirical findings in the existing literature to highlight the belief in free will as a separate and important construct, different from existing constructs in the literature, and capturing unique aspects of agency. We conclude by calling researchers to recognize these differences and to leverage the potential in the construct of the belief in free will as a predictor of cognition and behavior.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/spc3.12293

Making sense of agency: Belief in free will as a unique and important construct

The potential role of local faith communities (LFCs) in promoting resilience in contexts of humanitarian crisis has, despite recent policy interest, been a neglected area of study. This article reports on a structured review of evidence regarding such contributions based on an analysis of 302 publications and reports, supplemented by 11 written submissions from humanitarian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and 10 stakeholder interviews. Analysis is structured with respect to three major humanitarian processes—disaster risk reduction; emergency response; and facilitating transitional and durable solutions—relevant to the promotion of resilience in populations that are displaced, at risk of displacement or refugee-impacted. Major themes emerging from the analysis concern: the diversity of stakeholder perspectives on the presence and influence of LFCs on local humanitarian response; the resources—material and non-material—potentially made available through LFCs to crisis-affected communities; and the opportunities—and substantive challenges—for greater LFC partnership with humanitarian organizations.

Local Faith Communities and the Promotion of Resilience in Contexts of Humanitarian Crisis

Individuals can negotiate with fate for control through exercising personal agency within the limits that fate has determined, a belief that is referred to as negotiable fate. The current study examined: (a) the social ecological factors that contribute to the prevalence of this belief in negotiable fate and; (b) the psychological functions it serves. The results from a cross-cultural study suggested that negotiable fate is more prevalent in contexts where individuals face many constraints in the pursuit of their goals (i.e., in Mainland China versus the United States), and it promotes active coping and positive self-views in those contexts. The importance of understanding how fate beliefs are linked to sociocultural contexts was discussed in reference to the psychological control literature and cultural psychology.

Negotiable Fate Social Ecological Foundation and Psychological Functions

Negotiable fate refers to the idea that one can negotiate with fate for control, and that people can exercise personal agency within the limits that fate has determined. Research on negotiable fate has found greater prevalence of related beliefs in Southeast Asia, East Asia, and Eastern Europe than in Western Europe and English-speaking countries. The present research extends previous findings by exploring the cognitive consequences of the belief in negotiable fate. It was hypothesized that this belief enables individuals to maintain faith in the potency of their personal actions and to remain optimistic in their goal pursuits despite the immutable constraints. The belief in negotiable fate was predicted to (a) facilitate sense-making of surprising outcomes; (b) increase persistence in goal pursuits despite early unfavorable outcomes; and (c) increase risky choices when individuals have confidence in their luck. Using multiple methods (e.g., crosscultural comparisons, culture priming, experimental induction of fate beliefs), we found supporting evidence for our hypotheses in three studies. Furthermore, as expected, the cognitive effects of negotiable fate are observed only in cultural contexts where the fate belief is relatively prevalent. Implications of these findings are discussed in relation to the intersubjective approach to understanding the influence of culture on cognitive processes (e.g., Chiu, Gelfand, Yamagishi, Shteynberg, & Wan, 2010), the sociocultural foundations that foster the development of a belief in negotiable fate, and an alternative perspective for understanding the nature of agency in contexts where constraints are severe. Future research avenues are also discussed.

https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2366&context=soss_research

Lee Ann Mallorie

Papers

Negotiable Fate Social Ecological Foundation and Psychological Functions

Maintaining faith in agency under immutable constraints: Cognitive consequences of believing in negotiable fate