Theory of basic human values

Last updated
Circle chart of values in the theory of basic human values Theory of Basic Human Values Graphic.jpg
Circle chart of values in the theory of basic human values

The theory of basic human values is a theory of cross-cultural psychology and universal values developed by Shalom H. Schwartz. The theory extends previous cross-cultural communication frameworks such as Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory. Schwartz identifies ten basic human values, distinguished by their underlying motivation or goals, and explains how people in all cultures recognize them. There are two major methods for measuring these ten basic values: the Schwartz Value Survey [2] and the Portrait Values Questionnaire. [3]

Contents

In value theory, individual values may align with, or conflict against one another, often visualised in a circular diagram where opposing poles indicate values that are in conflict.

In a 2012 publication, Schwartz and colleagues expanded upon the theory of basic values, introducing an extended framework of 19 distinct values. These values are conceptualized as "guiding principles" that influence the behaviors and decisions of individuals or groups. [4]

Motivational types of values

The theory of basic human values recognizes eleven universal values, which can be organized in four higher-order groups. Each of the eleven universal values has a central goal that is the underlying motivator. [1] [5]

Openness to change

Self-enhancement

Conservation

Self-transcendence

Other

The structure of value relations

The theory of basic values not only identifies ten core values but also examines their interrelationships. Pursuing certain values can either align with or conflict against others.

For instance, conformity and security align, while benevolence and power often conflict. Tradition and conformity share similar motivational goals and thus are grouped within the same category.

The values are arranged in a circular model along two main bipolar dimensions. The first dimension, openness to change versus conservation, contrasts values of independence with those centered on obedience. The second dimension, self-enhancement versus self-transcendence, contrasts self-focused interests with values oriented toward the welfare of others. [1]

Although the theory distinguishes ten values, the borders between the motivators are artificial and one value flows into the next, which can be seen by the following shared motivational emphases:

  1. Power and Achievement social superiority and esteem
  2. Achievement and Hedonism self-centered satisfaction
  3. Hedonism and Stimulation a desire for affectively pleasant arousal
  4. Stimulation and Self-direction intrinsic interest in novelty and mastery
  5. Self-direction and Universalism reliance upon one's own judgement and comfort with the diversity of existence
  6. Universalism and Benevolence enhancement of others and transcendence of selfish interests
  7. Benevolence and Tradition devotion to one's in-group
  8. Benevolence and Conformity normative behavior that promotes close relationships
  9. Conformity and Tradition subordination of self in favor of socially imposed expectations
  10. Tradition and Security preserving existing social arrangements that give certainty to life
  11. Conformity and Security protection of order and harmony in relations
  12. Security and Power avoiding or overcoming threats by controlling relationships and resources

Furthermore, people are still able to follow opposing values through acting differently in different settings or at different times. The structure of Schwartz's 10-value type model (see graph above) has been supported across over 80 countries, [1] [6] [7] gender, [8] various methods such as importance ratings of values (using the surveys listed below), direct similarity judgment tasks, pile sorting, and spatial arrangement, [9] and even for how the values of other people, such as family members, are perceived. [10] [11]

Measurement methods

Several models have been developed to measure the basic values to ensure that the values theory is valid independent of the methodology employed. The main differentiator between the Schwartz Value Survey and the Portrait Values Questionnaire is that the former is explicit, while the latter is implicit.

Schwartz Value Survey

The Schwartz Value Survey (SVS) reports values of participants explicitly, by asking them to conduct a self-assessment. The survey entails 57 questions with two lists of value items. The first list consist of 30 nouns, while the second list contains 26 or 27 items in an adjective form. Each item is followed by a brief description for clarification. Out of the 57 questions, 45 are used to compute the 10 different value types the number of items to measure a certain value varies according to the conceptual breadth. The remaining 12 items are used to allow better standardization in calculation of an individual's value. The importance of each of value item is measured on a non-symmetrical scale in order to encourage the respondents to think about each of the questions.

The survey has been conducted so far on more than 60,000 individuals in 64 nations. [12]

Portrait Values Questionnaire

The Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ) has been developed as an alternative to the SVS. The PVQ has been created primarily for children from 11–14, however, it has also shown to produce coherent results when given to adults. In comparison to the SVS the PVQ relies on indirect reporting. Hereby, the respondent is asked to compare himself/herself (gender-matched) with short verbal portraits of 40 different people. After each portrait the responded has to state how similar he or she is to the portrait person ranging from "very much like me" to "not like me at all". This way of research allows to how the individual actually acts rather than research what values are important to an individual. Similar to the SVS the portraits for each value varies according to the conceptual breath.

Ordering and group differences

The order of Schwartz's traits are substantially stable amongst adults over time. Migrant's values tend to change when they move to a new country, but the order of preferences is still quite stable. Parenthood often causes women to shift their values towards stability and away from openness-to-change, but this change does not typically occur in fathers. [13] :528

In general, men are found to value achievement, self-direction, hedonism, and stimulation more than women, while women value benevolence, universality and tradition higher. [14] :1012

Relationship to personality

Personality traits using the big 5 measure correlate with Schwartz's value construct. Openness and extraversion correlates with the values related to openness-to-change (openness especially with self-direction, extraversion especially with stimulation); agreeableness correlates with self-transcendence values (especially benevolence); extraversion is correlated with self-enhancement and negatively with traditional values. Conscientiousness correlates with achievement, conformity and security. [13] :530

Limitations

One of the main limitations of this theory lies in the methodology of the research. The SVS is comparatively difficult to answer, because respondents have to first read the set of 30 value items and give one value the highest as well as the lowest ranking (0 or −1, depending on whether an item is opposed to their values). As completing one questionnaire takes approximately 12 minutes, a significant number of forms are submitted incomplete. [15]

Furthermore, many respondents have a tendency to give the majority of the values a high score, resulting in a skewed responses to the upper end. [16] However, this issue can be mitigated by providing respondents with an additional filter to evaluate the items they marked with high scores. When administering the Schwartz Value Survey in a coaching setting, respondents are coached to distinguish between a "must-have" value and a "meaningful" value. A "must-have" value is a value you have acted on or thought about in the previous 24 hours (this value item would receive a score of 6 or 7 on the Schwartz scale). A "meaningful" value is something you have acted on or thought about recently, but not in the previous 24 hours (this value item would receive a score of 5 or less). [17]

Another methodological limitation are the resulting ordinal, ipsatised scores that limit the type of useful analyses researchers can perform. [18]

Practical applications

Recent studies advocate that values can influence the audience's reaction to advertising appeals. [19] Moreover, in the case that a choice and a value are intervened, people tend to pick the choice that aligns more with their own values. Therefore, models such as the theory of basic human values could be seen as increasingly important for international marketing campaigns, as they can help to understand values and how values vary between cultures. This is shown to be especially true when taken in conjunction with studies that prove moral values to be one of the most powerful explanations of consumer behaviour. [20] Understanding the different values and underlying, defining goals can also help organizations to better motivate staff in an rapidly changing work environment and create an effective organizational structure.

Schwartz's work—and that of Geert Hofstede—has been applied to economics research. Specifically, the performance of the economies as it relates to entrepreneurship and business (firm) creation. This has significant implications to economic growth and might help explain why some countries are lagging behind others when labor, natural resources, and governing institutions are equal. This is a relatively new field of study in economics; however the recent empirical results suggest that culture plays a significant role in the success of entrepreneurial efforts across countries—even ones with largely similar governmental structures. Francisco Liñán and José Fernandez-Serrano found that these cultural attributes accounted for 60% of the difference in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) variance per capita in countries within the European Union (EU). [21]

See also

Related Research Articles

Social psychology is the scientific study of how thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are influenced by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of others. Social psychologists typically explain human behavior as a result of the relationship between mental states and social situations, studying the social conditions under which thoughts, feelings, and behaviors occur, and how these variables influence social interactions.

Personality is any person's collection of interrelated behavioral, cognitive, and emotional patterns that comprise a person’s unique adjustment to life. These interrelated patterns are relatively stable, but can change over long time periods.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Personality test</span> Method of assessing human personality constructs

A personality test is a method of assessing human personality constructs. Most personality assessment instruments are in fact introspective self-report questionnaire measures or reports from life records (L-data) such as rating scales. Attempts to construct actual performance tests of personality have been very limited even though Raymond Cattell with his colleague Frank Warburton compiled a list of over 2000 separate objective tests that could be used in constructing objective personality tests. One exception, however, was the Objective-Analytic Test Battery, a performance test designed to quantitatively measure 10 factor-analytically discerned personality trait dimensions. A major problem with both L-data and Q-data methods is that because of item transparency, rating scales, and self-report questionnaires are highly susceptible to motivational and response distortion ranging from lack of adequate self-insight to downright dissimulation depending on the reason/motivation for the assessment being undertaken.

In-group favoritism, sometimes known as in-group–out-group bias, in-group bias, intergroup bias, or in-group preference, is a pattern of favoring members of one's in-group over out-group members. This can be expressed in evaluation of others, in allocation of resources, and in many other ways.

Moral Psychology is the study of human thought and behavior in ethical contexts. Historically, the term "moral psychology" was used relatively narrowly to refer to the study of moral development. This field of study is interdisciplinary between the application of philosophy and psychology. Moral psychology eventually came to refer more broadly to various topics at the intersection of ethics, psychology, and philosophy of mind. Some of the main topics of the field are moral judgment, moral reasoning, moral satisficing, moral sensitivity, moral responsibility, moral motivation, moral identity, moral action, moral development, moral diversity, moral character, altruism, psychological egoism, moral luck, moral forecasting, moral emotion, affective forecasting, and moral disagreement.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Big Five personality traits</span> Personality model consisting of five broad dimensions

In trait theory, the Big Five personality traits are a group of five characteristics used to study personality:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Semantic differential</span>

The semantic differential (SD) is a measurement scale designed to measure a person's subjective perception of, and affective reactions to, the properties of concepts, objects, and events by making use of a set of bipolar scales. The SD is used to assess one's opinions, attitudes, and values regarding these concepts, objects, and events in a controlled and valid way. Respondents are asked to choose where their position lies, on a set of scales with polar adjectives. Compared to other measurement scaling techniques such as Likert scaling, the SD can be assumed to be relatively reliable, valid, and robust.

Cultural psychology is the study of how cultures reflect and shape their members' psychological processes.

In social science research, social-desirability bias is a type of response bias that is the tendency of survey respondents to answer questions in a manner that will be viewed favorably by others. It can take the form of over-reporting "good behavior" or under-reporting "bad", or undesirable behavior. The tendency poses a serious problem with conducting research with self-reports. This bias interferes with the interpretation of average tendencies as well as individual differences.

A value is a universal value if it has the same value or worth for all, or almost all, people. Spheres of human value encompass morality, aesthetic preference, traits, human endeavour, and social order. Whether universal values exist is an unproven conjecture of moral philosophy and cultural anthropology, though it is clear that certain values are found across a great diversity of human cultures, such as primary attributes of physical attractiveness whereas other attributes are subject to aesthetic relativism as governed by cultural norms. This objection is not limited to aesthetics. Relativism concerning morals is known as moral relativism, a philosophical stance opposed to the existence of universal moral values.

In ethics and social sciences, value denotes the degree of importance of some thing or action, with the aim of determining which actions are best to do or what way is best to live, or to describe the significance of different actions. Value systems are proscriptive and prescriptive beliefs; they affect the ethical behavior of a person or are the basis of their intentional activities. Often primary values are strong and secondary values are suitable for changes. What makes an action valuable may in turn depend on the ethical values of the objects it increases, decreases, or alters. An object with "ethic value" may be termed an "ethic or philosophic good".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shalom H. Schwartz</span> Israeli psychologist

Shalom H. Schwartz is a social psychologist, cross-cultural researcher and creator of the Theory of Basic Human Values. He also contributed to the formulation of the values scale in the context of social learning theory and social cognitive theory.

Cross-cultural psychology is the scientific study of human behavior and mental processes, including both their variability and invariance, under diverse cultural conditions. Through expanding research methodologies to recognize cultural variance in behavior, language, and meaning it seeks to extend and develop psychology. Since psychology as an academic discipline was developed largely in North America and Europe, some psychologists became concerned that constructs and phenomena accepted as universal were not as invariant as previously assumed, especially since many attempts to replicate notable experiments in other cultures had varying success. Since there are questions as to whether theories dealing with central themes, such as affect, cognition, conceptions of the self, and issues such as psychopathology, anxiety, and depression, may lack external validity when "exported" to other cultural contexts, cross-cultural psychology re-examines them. It does so using methodologies designed to factor in cultural differences so as to account for cultural variance. Some critics have pointed to methodological flaws in cross-cultural psychological research, and claim that serious shortcomings in the theoretical and methodological bases used impede, rather than help, the scientific search for universal principles in psychology. Cross-cultural psychologists are turning more to the study of how differences (variance) occur, rather than searching for universals in the style of physics or chemistry.

Emotions are biocultural phenomena, meaning they are shaped by both evolution and culture. They are "internal phenomena that can, but do not always, make themselves observable through expression and behavior". While emotions themselves are universal, they are always influenced by culture. How they are experienced, expressed, perceived, and regulated varies according to cultural norms. Therefore, it can be said that culture is a necessary framework for researchers to understand variations in emotions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Emotion classification</span> Contrast of one emotion from another

Emotion classification, the means by which one may distinguish or contrast one emotion from another, is a contested issue in emotion research and in affective science. Researchers have approached the classification of emotions from one of two fundamental viewpoints:

  1. that emotions are discrete and fundamentally different constructs
  2. that emotions can be characterized on a dimensional basis in groupings

Conformity is the act of matching attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors to group norms, politics or being like-minded. Norms are implicit, specific rules, guidance shared by a group of individuals, that guide their interactions with others. People often choose to conform to society rather than to pursue personal desires – because it is often easier to follow the path others have made already, rather than forging a new one. Thus, conformity is sometimes a product of group communication. This tendency to conform occurs in small groups and/or in society as a whole and may result from subtle unconscious influences, or from direct and overt social pressure. Conformity can occur in the presence of others, or when an individual is alone. For example, people tend to follow social norms when eating or when watching television, even if alone.

Values scales are psychological inventories used to determine the values that people endorse in their lives. They facilitate the understanding of both work and general values that individuals uphold. In addition, they assess the importance of each value in people's lives and how the individual strives toward fulfillment through work and other life roles, such as parenting. Most scales have been normalized and can therefore be used cross-culturally for vocational, marketing, and counseling purposes, yielding unbiased results. Psychologists, political scientists, economists, and others interested in defining values, use values scales to determine what people value, and to evaluate the ultimate function or purpose of values.

Moral foundations theory is a social psychological theory intended to explain the origins of and variation in human moral reasoning on the basis of innate, modular foundations. It was first proposed by the psychologists Jonathan Haidt, Craig Joseph, and Jesse Graham, building on the work of cultural anthropologist Richard Shweder. More recently, Mohammad Atari, Jesse Graham, and Jonathan Haidt have revised some aspects of the theory and developed new measurement tools. The theory has been developed by a diverse group of collaborators and popularized in Haidt's book The Righteous Mind. The theory proposes that morality is "more than one thing", first arguing for five foundations, and later expanding for six foundations :

Cultural differences can interact with positive psychology to create great variation, potentially impacting positive psychology interventions. Culture differences have an impact on the interventions of positive psychology. Culture influences how people seek psychological help, their definitions of social structure, and coping strategies. Cross cultural positive psychology is the application of the main themes of positive psychology from cross-cultural or multicultural perspectives.

The Inglehart–Welzel cultural map of the world is a scatter plot created by political scientists Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel based on the World Values Survey and European Values Survey. It depicts closely linked cultural values that vary between societies in two predominant dimensions: traditional versus secular-rational values on the vertical y-axis and survival versus self-expression values on the horizontal x-axis. Moving upward on this map reflects the shift from traditional values to secular-rational ones and moving rightward reflects the shift from survival values to self-expression values.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Schwartz, Shalom H. (1992), "Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries", Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Volume 25, vol. 25, Elsevier, pp. 1–65, CiteSeerX   10.1.1.220.3674 , doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6, ISBN   9780120152254
  2. Schwartz, Shalom H. (1992). "Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries". In Zanna, Mark P. (ed.). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Volume 25. Vol. 25. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. pp. 1–65. doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6. ISBN   9780120152254.
  3. Schwartz, Shalom (2005). "Robustness and fruitfulness of a theory of universals in individual values". Valores e Trabalho: 56–85.
  4. Schwartz, Shalom H.; Cieciuch, Jan; Vecchione, Michele; et al. (October 2012). "Refining the theory of basic individual values" (PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 103 (4): 663–688. doi:10.1037/a0029393. hdl:11573/482295. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   22823292.
  5. Schwartz, Shalom H. (2012). "An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values". Online Readings in Psychology and Culture. 2 (1). doi: 10.9707/2307-0919.1116 .
  6. Bilsky, Wolfgang; Janik, Michael; Schwartz, Shalom H. (20 July 2010). "The Structural Organization of Human Values-Evidence from Three Rounds of the European Social Survey (ESS)". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 42 (5): 759–776. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.1013.6256 . doi:10.1177/0022022110362757. ISSN   0022-0221. S2CID   145072790.
  7. Schwartz, Shalom H.; Sagiv, Lilach (1 January 1995). "Identifying Culture-Specifics in the Content and Structure of Values". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 26 (1): 92–116. doi:10.1177/0022022195261007. ISSN   0022-0221. S2CID   145086189.
  8. Struch, Naomi; Schwartz, Shalom H.; van der Kloot, Willem A. (1 January 2002). "Meanings of Basic Values for Women and Men: A Cross-Cultural Analysis". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 28 (1): 16–28. doi:10.1177/0146167202281002. ISSN   0146-1672. S2CID   145761157.
  9. Coelho, Gabriel Lins de Holanda; Hanel, Paul H.P.; Johansen, Mark K.; Maio, Gregory R. (30 August 2018). "Mapping the Structure of Human Values through Conceptual Representations". European Journal of Personality. 33: 34–51. doi: 10.1002/per.2170 . ISSN   0890-2070.
  10. Skimina, Ewa; Cieciuch, Jan (2015). "Value structure and priorities: Other-report account". Current Issues in Personality Psychology. 6 (3): 252–259. doi: 10.5114/cipp.2018.72259 . ISSN   2353-4192.
  11. Hanel, Paul H. P.; Wolfradt, Uwe; Lins de Holanda Coelho, Gabriel; et al. (13 April 2018). "The Perception of Family, City, and Country Values Is Often Biased" (PDF). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 49 (5): 831–850. doi:10.1177/0022022118767574. ISSN   0022-0221. S2CID   150126465.
  12. Fischer, Ronald; Schwartz, Shalom H. (2011). "Whence Differences in Value Priorities?: Individual, Cultural, or Artifactual Sources". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 42 (7): 1127–1145. doi:10.1177/0022022110381429. S2CID   145812328.
  13. 1 2 Sagiv, Lilach; Schwartz, Shalom H. (2022-01-04). "Personal Values Across Cultures". Annual Review of Psychology. 73: 517–546. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-125100. ISSN   1545-2085. PMID   34665670. S2CID   239034063.
  14. Schwartz, Shalom H.; Rubel, Tammy (2005). "Sex differences in value priorities: Cross-cultural and multimethod studies". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 89 (6): 1010–1028. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.1010. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   16393031.
  15. Lindeman, Marjaana; Verkasalo, Markku (2005). "Measuring Values With the Short Schwartz's Value Survey". Journal of Personality Assessment. 85 (2): 170–178. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8502_09. PMID   16171417. S2CID   29726564.
  16. Hood, Jacqueline (2003). "The Relationship of Leadership Style and CEO Values to Ethical Practices in Organizations". Journal of Business Ethics. 43 (4): 263–273. doi:10.1023/A:1023085713600. S2CID   141390192.
  17. Morris, Jacob J. (2 October 2018). Personal Values Assessment: Explore the 57 Values Fundamental to Human Motivation. Independently published. p. 8. ISBN   978-1791346959.
  18. Lee, Julie A.; Soutar, Geoffrey N.; Louviere, Jordan J. (2005). "An Alternative Approach to Measuring Schwartz's Values: The Best-Worst Scaling Approach". Journal of Personality Assessment. 90 (4): 335–347. doi:10.1080/00223890802107925. PMID   18584442. S2CID   205438768.
  19. Piirto, Jane (2005). "I Live in My Own Bubble: The Values of Talented Adolescents". The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education. 16 (2–3): 106–118. doi:10.4219/jsge-2005-472. S2CID   122703601.
  20. Beatty, Sharon E. (2005). "Alternative Measurement Approaches to Consumer Values: The List of Values and the Rokeach Value Survey". Psychology and Marketing: 181–200.
  21. Liñán, Francisco (2014). "National culture, entrepreneurship and economic development: different patterns across the European Union". Small Business Economics. 42 (4): 685–701. doi:10.1007/s11187-013-9520-x. hdl: 11441/69584 . S2CID   154020317.