Cross-cultural dimensions of meaning in the evaluation of events in world history? Perceptions of historical calamities and progress in cross-cultural data from 30 societies

Liu, J.H. and Paez, D. and Hanke, K. and Rosa, A. and Hilton, D.J. and Sibley, C.G. and Cabecinhas, R. and Zaromb, F. and Garber, I.E. and Leong, C.H. and Moloney, G. and Valchev, V. and Gastardo-Conaco, C. and Huang, L.L. and Quek, A.H. and Techio, E. and Sen, R. and van Osch, Y. and Muluk, H. and Wagner, W. and Wang, F. and Khan, S. and Atsumi, T.L. and Licata, K.O. and László, J. and Fulop, M. and Cheung, J.C. and Yue, X. and Youssef, S.B. and Kim, U. and Park, Y. and Puch-Bouwman, Jen and Hassall, Katayoun S. and Adair, J. and Unik, L. and Spini, D. and Henchoz, K. and Böhm, G. and Selart, M. and Erb, H.P. and Thoben, D.F. and Leone, G. and Mastrovito, T. and Suwa, K.I. (2012) Cross-cultural dimensions of meaning in the evaluation of events in world history? Perceptions of historical calamities and progress in cross-cultural data from 30 societies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43 (2). pp. 251-272. ISSN 0022-0221

PDF - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (796kB)

Abstract

The universality versus culture specificity of quantitative evaluations (negative-positive) of 40 events in world history was addressed using World History Survey data collected from 5,800 university students in 30 countries/societies. Multidimensional scaling using generalized procrustean analysis indicated poor fit of data from the 30 countries to an overall mean configuration, indicating lack of universal agreement as to the associational meaning of events in world history. Hierarchical cluster analysis identified one Western and two non-Western country clusters for which adequate multidimensional fit was obtained after item deletions. A two-dimensional solution for the three country clusters was identified, where the primary dimension was historical calamities versus progress and a weak second dimension was modernity versus resistance to modernity. Factor analysis further reduced the item inventory to identify a single concept with structural equivalence across cultures, Historical Calamities, which included man-made and natural, intentional and unintentional, predominantly violent but also nonviolent calamities. Less robust factors were tentatively named as Historical Progress and Historical Resistance to Oppression. Historical Calamities and Historical Progress were at the individual level both significant and independent predictors of willingness to fight for one’s country in a hierarchical linear model that also identified significant country-level variation in these relationships. Consensus around calamity but disagreement as to what constitutes historical progress is discussed in relation to the political culture of nations and lay perceptions of history as catastrophe.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology
Divisions:	Faculty of Arts, Law and Education (FALE) > School of Social Sciences
Depositing User:	Ms Shalni Sanjana
Date Deposited:	22 Jan 2013 20:07
Last Modified:	03 Aug 2016 05:30
URI:	https://repository.usp.ac.fj/id/eprint/5334

Actions (login required)

View Item