Slide 1Main ObjectivesRecap: defining culture…Challenges and New Directions for Cross-Cultural ResearchChallenges and New Directions for Cross-Cultural ResearchThe Origins of Cultural DifferencesThe Environment: A Layered EcologyExample: “Types” of American Individualism/Independence ?from Macrocontext to individual psychological functionsSlide 10Macrocontext Example: “Social class” (Socioeconomic status)Slide 12Slide 13Slide 14From Kraus et al. 2011Slide 16Slide 17Slide 18Becoming Socialized:Microcontext of low SES WorkMicrocontext of High-SES workVariation in entrepreneurship-prone personality profile…Slide 23Slide 24Slide 25Thinking about “Environments” 3: It gets in your head…Slide 27Slide 28Intro to PsychoanalysisFreud HimselfSlide 31Slide 32The Key Ideas of Psychoanalysis: 1. Psychic DeterminismMany things to Interpret:Many things to Interpret:Ended here 4/6/16Slide 37The Key Ideas of Psychoanalysis: 2. Internal StructureSlide 39Slide 40Slide 41The Key Ideas of Psychoanalysis: 4. Mental Energy2 Main Goals of Psychoanalytic InterpretationControversyPsychoanalysis: Life, and DeathPsychoanalysis, Life, and DeathPsychosexual Development© 2013 W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.The Personality PuzzleSixth Editionby David C. Funder Psychology of PersonalityLecture 19: 4/6/16Culture & Personality: Social Class example Intro to Basics of PsychoanalysisStephanie Federspiel, Ph.D.1Main Objectives•Final topics related to cultural contexts and (more broadly the social environment)–Multiculturalism and identity integration–Social class as a macrocontextual influence•Intro to basics of psychoanalysis (Freud)–Freud and some central ideasRecap: defining culture…….an organized body of rules (explicit and implicit) concerning the ways in which individuals in a population should communicate with one another, think about themselves and their environments, and behave toward one another and toward objects in their environments. The rules are not universally or constantly obeyed, but they are recognized by all and they ordinarily operate to limit the range of variation in patterns of communication, belief, value, and social behavior. 3Challenges and New Directions for Cross-Cultural Research•Beware exaggeration of cultural differences –The focus of research has been on differences–Large sample sizes lead to statistically significant results even when differences are small–Outgroup homogeneity bias!!•Beware Ethnocentrism–Observations of other cultures will be influenced by the observer’s own cultural backgroundChallenges and New Directions for Cross-Cultural Research•Subcultures and multiculturalism–It is difficult to define culture!!!!–Important subgroups exist within large cultures–People often belong to more than one culture•Bicultural identity integration (BII)–Member of combined joint culture (integration of both)–Very uncertain identification  Conflict/stressThe Origins of Cultural Differences•The ecological approach•Older model (Triandis) Ecology → Culture → Socialization → Personality → Behavior•Newer model (Oishi & Graham) Ecology Culture Mind and BehaviorThe Environment: A Layered Ecology Macrocontexts: social structure, resourcesHistorical EraCulture and SubcultureGenderSocioeconomic statusMicrocontexts: subjective/objective situationsFamily/HomeWork placeSchool/EducationRecreation and Social activities8Example: “Types” of American Individualism/Independence ?•Interacting macrocontexts can influence how cultural values are prioritized and expressed. •Example: How are cultural values of individualism prioritized and expressed?–(Bowman & Kitayama, 2009) •2 viable routes of expressing values depend on SES:–Importance of extreme self-reliance –Importance of personal choice as Self-expressionfrom Macrocontext toindividual psychological functionsMacrocontexts: Historical Era (challenges, opportunities, tools)Culture and Subculture (values, “rules”, tools)Gender (expectations, roles, models) Socioeconomic status (power/rank, resources) (Some) Microcontexts of face-to-face interaction:Family/Home (parent-child interaction, socialization)Work place (climate, hierarchy & control, mobility)School/Education (formal practices, climate)Individual Psychological functionsRelative Social orientation/perceptiveness (Hegemony?? Entitled?)Expected style of goal pursuit (e.g. in work contexts)?Social class is shaped by an individual’s material resources as well as perceptions of rank vis-a`-vis others in society… Diminished resources and lower rank create contexts that constrain social outcomes for lower-class individuals and enhance contextualist tendencies—that is, a focus on external, uncontrollable social forces and other individuals who influence one’s life outcomes.10In contrast, abundant resources and elevated rank create contexts that enhance the personal freedoms of upper-class individuals and give rise to solipsistic social cognitive tendencies—that is, an individualistic focus on one’s own internal states, goals, motivations, and emotions.Macrocontext Example: “Social class” (Socioeconomic status)•Wealth, Education and occupational “prestige”–Objective or Subjective?–Both seem to matter & aren’t exactly = !•Affects microcontexts, and in turn thoughts, emotions, behaviors.Attend to context/constraints?Sense of relative rank?Orientation to others vs. separation/disengaged?- Self regulated, self-assertive?- Entitlement & Endorsement of “Greed”© 2016 W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.12© 2016 W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.13© 2016 W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.14From Kraus et al. 20111516SubjectiveSocial Class?From Kraus et al. 2011; Piff et al. 2012(Objective & Subjective influence!)17•Cognition (explanations for behavior):Low Status: Contextual (e.g., ext. LOC)High Status: Dispositional •Emotion (attunement, responsiveness):Low: Other-Oriented (empathy + vigilance)High: Self-Oriented, less responsive•Behavior (nonverbal social, cooperation):Low Status: Engaged, Prosocial, less unethical High Status: Disengaged, Selfish, Unethical (entitled)18Other Potential Correlates of Socioeconomic Standing or Social class? Socialization for different work contexts/goals!(Kohn & Schooler, 1983; Kagan, 1984; Miechs, 2003). parental standards/expectations matter a lot!•Differences in expected style of goal pursuit+ Heteronomy: others control your