|
== Relaciones con otras ramas de la psicología ==
A menudo se confunde la psicología de la cultura con la [[psicología intercultural]]. Sin embargo, la psicología de la cultura se diferencia de la psicología intercultural en cuanto a que los psicólogos interculturales por lo general utilizan la cultura como un medio de probar la universalidad de los procesos psicológicos en vez de determinar como las prácticas culturales locales modelas los procesos psicológicos.<ref>{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Heine | first1nombre1 = S. | last2apellido2 = Ruby | first2nombre2 = M. B. | yearaño = 2010 | titletítulo = Cultural Psychology | url = | journalpublicación = Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science | volumevolumen = 1 | issuenúmero = | page = 2 | doi = 10.1002/wcs.7 }}</ref> Por lo que mientras que un psicólogo intercultural se puede preguntar si las etapas de desarrollo de [[Jean Piaget]] son universales a través de las diversas culturas, un psicólogo de la cultura se interesará por saber como es que las prácticas sociales de un conjunto específico de culturas modelan de diferentes maneras el desarrollo de los procesos cognitivos.<ref>{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Markus | first1nombre1 = H.R. | last2apellido2 = Kitayama | first2nombre2 = S. | yearaño = 2003 | titletítulo = Culture, Self, and the Reality of the Social | url = | journalpublicación = Psychological Inquiry | volumevolumen = 14 | issuenúmero = 3| pages = 277–83 | doi = 10.1207/S15327965PLI1403&4_17 }}</ref>
Las investigaciones en psicología de la cultura proveen información a varios otros campos dentro de la psicología, incluidos la [[psicología social]], la [[psicología histórico-cultural]], la [[psicología del desarrollo]], y la [[psicología cognitiva]]. Sin embargo, la perspectiva relativa de la psicología de la cultura, mediante la cual los psicólogos de la cultura comparan patrones y comportamientos dentro y a través de culturas, suele chocar con las perspectivas universales comunes a la mayoría de los campos de la psicología, que buscan determinar verdades psicológicas fundamentales que son consistentes en toda la humanidad.
=== Necesidad de expandir las investigaciones culturales ===
Según [[Richard Shweder]], ha habido una falla en replicar los hallazgos de laboratorio de la psicología occidental en entornos no occidentales.<ref name=":2" />
Por lo tanto, uno de los principales objetivos de la psicología de la cultura es conseguir que numerosas y variadas culturas contribuyan a las teorías psicológicas básicas para corregir dichas teorías de forma tal que las mismas se tornen más apropiadas para predecir, describir, y explicar todos los comportamientos humanos, no solo los comportamientos de los seres humanos occidentales.<ref name="schweder84">{{citecita booklibro|editor=Shweder, R.A.|editor2=Levine, R.A.|lastauthoramp=y|yearaño=1984|titletítulo=Culture theory: Essays on mind, self, and emotion|locationubicación=New York|publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]}}</ref> Este objetivo es compartido por numerosos estudiosos que promueven un enfoque mediante [[psicología autóctona]]. En un intento de mostrar los intereses interrelacionados de la psicología cultural y autóctona, el psicólogo de la cultura Pradeep Chakkarath enfatiza la idea que la vertiente principal de la psicología internacional, tal como ha sido exportada a la gran mayoría de las regiones del mundo por occidente, es solo una de las numerosas psicologías autóctonas y que por lo tanto puede que no incorpore un conocimiento intercultural suficiente como para afirmar, como frecuentemente se hace, que sus teorías tienen validez universal.<ref name="Chakkarath">{{citecita booklibro|authorautor=Chakkarath, P.|yearaño=2012|chapter-url=http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396430.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780195396430-e-5|chapter=The role of indigenous psychologies in the building of basic cultural psychology|editor=J. Valsiner|titletítulo=The Oxford Handbook of Culture and Psychology|pages=71–95|locationubicación=New York|publisher=[[Oxford University Press]]}}</ref>
El acrónimo (en idioma inglés) W.E.I.R.D. (en inglés: ''raro'') describe aquellas poblaciones que son Occidentales, Educadas, Industrializadas, Ricas y Democráticas (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic). A la fecha se considera que las poblaciones, W.E.I.R.D. han estado consideradas en exceso en las investigaciones sobre psicología.<ref name="Arnett">{{citecita journalpublicación|authorautor=Arnett, J. J.|yearaño=2008|url=http://facweb.northseattle.edu/kkuwada/Psyc%20200:Fall%202012/article16-1.pdf|titletítulo=The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs to become less American|journalpublicación=American Psychologist|volumevolumen=63|issuenúmero=7|pages=602–614|pmid=18855491|doi=10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.602}}</ref><ref name="weirdest" /> Las conclusiones alcanzadas mediante investigaciones en psicología utilizando en gran medida poblaciones de tipo W.E.I.R.D. a menudo son etiquetadas como teorías universales que se aplican en forma inexacta a otras culturas.<ref name=":most people are not weird">{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Henrich | first1nombre1 = Joseph | yearaño = 2010 | titletítulo = Most people are not WEIRD | url = http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/jvt002/BrainMind/Readings/Henrich_2010.pdf | formatformato = PDF | journalpublicación = Nature | volumevolumen = 466 | issuenúmero = 5| page = 29 | doi = 10.1038/466029a }}</ref>
Investigaciones recientes indican que las culturas se diferencian en numerosas áreas, tales como razonamiento lógico y valores sociales.<ref name="weirdest">{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Henrich | first1nombre1 = J. | last2apellido2 = Heine | first2nombre2 = S. J. | last3apellido3 = Norenzayan | first3nombre3 = A. | yearaño = 2010 | titletítulo = The weirdest people in the world? | url = | journalpublicación = Behavioral and Brain Sciences | volumevolumen = 33 | issuenúmero = | pages = 61–135 | doi = 10.1017/S0140525X0999152X }}</ref><ref name=":most people are not weird" /> Cada vez es más difícil ignorar la evidencia que indica que los procesos básicos cognitivos y motivacionales varían de una población a otra. Por ejemplo, muchos estudios indican que los norteamericanos, canadienses y europeos occidentales dependen de estrategias de razonamiento analíticas, en las que se separa a los objetos de sus contextos para explicar y predecir el comportamiento. Los psicólogos sociales se refieren al "[[error fundamental de atribución]]" o la tendencia para explicar el comportamiento de las personas en función de características internas, inherentes de la personalidad en vez de consideraciones externas o situacionales (por ejemplo atribuir la ocurrencia de un comportamiento enojado a una personalidad susceptible). Sin embargo, fuera de las culturas W.E.I.R.D., este fenómeno es menos prominente, ya que muchas poblaciones no-W.E.I.R.D. tienden a poner más atención al contexto en el cual ocurre el comportamiento. Los asiáticos tienden a razonar en forma holística, por ejemplo al considerar el comportamiento de las personas considerando su situación; el enojo de alguien puede deberse simplemente a que tiene un mal día.<ref name="science">{{citecita journalpublicación|authorautor=Jones, D.|yearaño=2010|url=http://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~ara/media/WEIRDinScience.pdf|titletítulo=A WEIRD View of Human Nature|journalpublicación=Science |volumevolumen=328|issuenúmero=25|page=1627}}</ref><ref name="nisbettmiyamoto">{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Nisbett | first1nombre1 = R. | last2apellido2 = Miyamoto | first2nombre2 = Y. | yearaño = 2005 | titletítulo = The influence of culture: holistic versus analytic perception | citeseerx=10.1.1.87.43 | journalpublicación = Trends in Cognitive Sciences | volumevolumen = 9 | issuenúmero = 10 | pages = 467–473 | doi=10.1016/j.tics.2005.08.004 | pmid=16129648}}</ref> Pero numerosas teorías largamente aceptadas sobre como piensan los humanos se basan en la preeminencia del pensamiento analítico.<ref name=":most people are not weird" />
Al estudiar únicamente poblaciones W.E.I.R.D. los psicólogos no han tenido en cuenta la amplia diversidad existente en la población global. Aplicar los hallazgos deducidos a partir de poblaciones W.E.I.R.D. a otras poblaciones puede llevar a prever consecuencias erróneas a partir de las teorías psicológicas y puede complicar la habilidad de los psicólogos para aislar características culturales fundamentales.
=== Esterotipos ===
Uno de los temas más importantes debatidos a finales del siglo XX ha sido las diferencias culturales entre las personas del este de Asia y los norteamericanos en cuanto a la [[atención]],<ref name="masuda01">{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Masuda | first1nombre1 = T. | last2apellido2 = Nisbett | first2nombre2 = R.A. | yearaño = 2001 | titletítulo = Attending holistically versus analytically: Comparing the context sensitivity of Japanese and Americans | url = http://gsct3237.kaist.ac.kr/e-lib/Culture/Journal/Attending%20holistically%20versus%20analytically.pdf | formatformato = PDF | journalpublicación = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | volumevolumen = 81 | issuenúmero = 5| pages = 922–34 | doi = 10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.922 | pmid=11708567}}</ref> [[percepción]],<ref>{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Kitayama | first1nombre1 = S. | last2apellido2 = Duffy | first2nombre2 = S. | last3apellido3 = Kawamura | first3nombre3 = T. | last4 = Larsen | first4 = J.T. | yearaño = 2003 | titletítulo = Perceiving an object and its context in different cultures: A cultural look at new look | url = http://psy.haifa.ac.il/~ep/Students_Post/Slides/kitayama.pdf | formatformato = PDF | journalpublicación = Psychological Science | volumevolumen = 14 | issuenúmero = 3| pages = 201–06 | doi = 10.1111/1467-9280.02432 | pmid = 12741741 }}</ref> [[cognición]],<ref name="cole">Cole, M. (1998). Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.</ref> y fenómenos psicológicos sociales tales como el del [[self (sociology)|self]].<ref name="nisbett96">Nisbett, R.E.; & Cohen, D. (1996). Culture of Honor: The Psychology of Violence in the South. Denver, CO: Westview Press.</ref> Algunos psicólogos, como por ejemplo Turiel, han indicado que esta investigación se basa en un estereotipo cultural.<ref>Turiel, Elliott (2002). The Culture of Morality: Social Development, Context, and Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</ref> El psicólogo Per Gjerde afirma que la psicología de la cultura tiende a "generalizar el desarrollo humano entre las naciones y continentes" y a asignar características a una cultura promueve una indiferencia por la heterogeneidad y minimiza el rol del individuo.<ref name="uc">McNulty, Jennifer (2004, July 26). "[http://news.ucsc.edu/2004/07/531.html Emphasis on 'culture' in psychology fuels stereotypes, scholar says.]" University of California: Santa Cruz.</ref> Gjerde sostiene que los individuos desarrollan múltiples perspectivas sobre su cultura, a veces actúan de acuerdo a su cultura sin compartir las creencias culturales, y a veces se oponen por completo a su cultura. El uso de estereotipos por lo tanto conduce a considerar a los individuos como productos homogéneos de la cultura.<ref name="wainryb">{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Wainryb | first1nombre1 = C | yearaño = 2004 | titletítulo = The Study of Diversity in Human Development: Culture, Urgencies, and Perils | url = https://psych.utah.edu/people/files/wainryb83r13.pdf | formatformato = PDF | journalpublicación = Human Development | volumevolumen = 47 | issuenúmero = | pages = 131–137 | doi = 10.1159/000077986 }}</ref>
===Metodología defectuosa===
La información que reportan las propias personas sobre sus circunstancias es uno de los métodos más fáciles y económicos de recolectar grandes cantidades de información, especialmente en cuanto a psicología de la cultura.<ref name="masuda01" /><ref name=":20">{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Kitayama | first1nombre1 = S. | display-authors = etal | yearaño = 2002 | titletítulo = Culture and basic psychological processes—Toward a system view of culture: Comment on Oyserman et al | url = http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/n/x/nxy906/COMPS/indivdualismandcollectivism/culture%20lit/to%20print/Kitayama2002commentsonOyserman.pdf | formatformato = PDF | journalpublicación = Psychological Bulletin | volumevolumen = 128 | issuenúmero = 1| pages = 89–96 | doi = 10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.89 | pmid = 11843550 }}</ref> Sin embargo, enfatizar en exceso las comparaciones de actitudes y valores interculturales auto informados puede conducir a información relativamente inestable y falaz.<ref>{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Heine | first1nombre1 = S.J. | last2apellido2 = Lehman | first2nombre2 = D.R. | last3apellido3 = Peng | first3nombre3 = K. | last4 = Greenholtz | first4 = J. | yearaño = 2002 | titletítulo = What's wrong with cross-cultural comparisons of subjective Likert scales: The reference-group problem | url = http://culcog.berkeley.edu/Publications/2002JPSP_referencegroup.pdf | formatformato = PDF | journalpublicación = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | volumevolumen = 82 | issuenúmero = 6| pages = 903–18 | doi = 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.903 }}</ref><ref>{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Peng | first1nombre1 = K. | last2apellido2 = Nisbett | first2nombre2 = R.E. | last3apellido3 = Wong | first3nombre3 = N. | yearaño = 1997 | titletítulo = Validity problems of cross-cultural value comparison and possible solutions | url = http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/92164/ValidityProblemsComparingValues.pdf?sequence=1 | journalpublicación = Psychological Methods | volumevolumen = 2 | issuenúmero = 4| pages = 329–41 | doi = 10.1037/1082-989X.2.4.329 }}</ref>
<!--
== Métodos ==
Cultural psychologist, Richard Shweder sostiene que that the psyche y la cultura se construyen mutuamente y son inseparables.<ref name=":2" /> The failure of replicating many psychology findings in other regions of the world supported the idea that mind and environment are interdependent, and different throughout the world. Algunas criticas indican que el uso de self-report may be a relatively unreliable method, and could be misleading especially in different cultural context. Regardless that self-report is an important way to obtain mass data, it is not the only way.
In fact, cultural psychologists utilized multiple measurements and resources no different from other scientific researches – observation, experiment, data analysis etc. Por ejemplo, Nisbett & Cohen (1996) investigaron la relación entre historical cultural background and regional aggression difference in the U.S.A. En este estudio, los investigadores diseñaron un experimento de laboratorio para observar participants' aggression, and crime rate, demographic statistics were analyzed. Los resultados de los experimentos supported the [[Culture of honor (Southern United States)|culture of honor]] theory that the aggression is a defense mechanism which is rooted in the herding cultural origin for most the southerners.<ref name="nisbett96" /> In laboratory observations, Heine and his colleagues found that Japanese students spend more time than American students on tasks that they did poorly on, and the finding presents a self-improvement motivation often seen in East Asian that failure and success is interconvertible with effort.<ref>{{Citecita booklibro|titletítulo = Cultural psychology|last apellido= Heine|first nombre= Steven|publisher = W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.|yearaño = 2012|isbn = 978-0-393-91283-8|locationubicación = 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y.10110|pages = 253–254}}</ref> In terms of cognition styles, los chinos tienden a percibir la imagen utilizando a holistic view compared to American.<ref>{{Citecita journalpublicación|titletítulo = Cultural differences in the lateral occipital complex while viewing incongruent scenes|url = http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/content/5/2-3/236|journalpublicación = Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience|datefecha = 1 de junio de 2010|issn = 1749-5016|pmc = 2894688|pmid = 20083532|pages = 236–241|volumevolumen = 5|issuenúmero = 2–3|doi = 10.1093/scan/nsp056|first nombre= Lucas J.|last apellido= Jenkins|first2nombre2 = Yung-Jui|last2apellido2 = Yang|first3nombre3 = Joshua|last3apellido3 = Goh|first4 = Ying-Yi|last4 = Hong|first5 = Denise C.|last5 = Park}}</ref>
Quantitative statistics of cultural products revealed that public media in western countries promote more individualistic components than East-Asian countries.<ref>{{Citecita journalpublicación|titletítulo = Measuring Culture Outside the Head: A Meta-Analysis of Individualism—Collectivism in Cultural Products|url = http://psr.sagepub.com/content/12/3/199|journalpublicación = Personality and Social Psychology Review|datefecha = 1 de agosto de 2008|issn = 1088-8683|pmid = 18544712|pages = 199–221|volumevolumen = 12|issuenúmero = 3|doi = 10.1177/1088868308318260|first nombre= Beth|last apellido= Morling|first2nombre2 = Marika|last2apellido2 = Lamoreaux}}</ref> These statistics are objective because it does not involve having people fill out questionnaire, instead, psychologists use physical measurements to quantitatively collect data about culture products, such as painting and photos. These statistics data can also be national records, for example, Chiao & Blizinsky (2010) revealed that cultures of high collectivism is associated with lower prevalence of mood/anxiety disorders in study involving 29 countries.<ref>{{Citecita journalpublicación|titletítulo = Culture–gene coevolution of individualism–collectivism and the serotonin transporter gene|url = http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/277/1681/529|journalpublicación = Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences|datefecha = 22 de febrero de 2010|issn = 0962-8452|pmc = 2842692|pmid = 19864286|pages = 529–537|volumevolumen = 277|issuenúmero = 1681|doi = 10.1098/rspb.2009.1650|first nombre= Joan Y.|last apellido= Chiao|first2nombre2 = Katherine D.|last2apellido2 = Blizinsky}}</ref> In addition to the experimental and statistics data, evidence from neuro-imaging studies, also help strengthen the reliability of cultural psychology research. For example, when thinking of mother, the brain region related to self-concept showed significant activation in Chinese, whereas no activation observed in Westerners.<ref>{{Citecita journalpublicación|titletítulo = Neural basis of cultural influence on self-representation|url = http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811906009189|journalpublicación = NeuroImage|datefecha = 1 de febrero de 2007|pages = 1310–1316|volumevolumen = 34|issuenúmero = 3|doi = 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.08.047|first nombre= Ying|last apellido= Zhu|first2nombre2 = Li|last2apellido2 = Zhang|first3nombre3 = Jin|last3apellido3 = Fan|first4 = Shihui|last4 = Han|pmid=17134915}}</ref>
==Modelos culturales==
"Una forma de organizar y entender nuestro entorno social is through the use of cultural models or culturally shaped mental maps. These consist of culturally derived ideas and practices that are embodied, enacted, or instituted in everyday life." Cultural psychologists develop models to categorize cultural phenomena.<ref name="Fryberg">{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Fryberg | first1nombre1 = S.A. | last2apellido2 = Markus | first2nombre2 = H.R. | yearaño = 2007 | titletítulo = Cultural models of education in American Indian, Asian America, and European American contexts | url = | journalpublicación = Social Psychology of Education | volumevolumen = 10 | issuenúmero = | pages = 1381–2890 | doi = 10.1007/s11218-007-9017-z }}</ref>
===El ciclo cultural de las cuatros Ies===
===Modelo de Whiting===
John y Beatrice Whiting, along with their research students at [[Universidad de Harvard]], desarrollaron el denominado "modelo de Whiting" for child development during the 1970s and 1980s, which specifically focused on how culture influences development.<ref name="Worthman">{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Worthman | first1nombre1 = C. M. | yearaño = 2010 | titletítulo = The Ecology of Human Development: Evolving Models for Cultural Psychology | url = | journalpublicación = Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology | volumevolumen = 41 | issuenúmero = | pages = 546–562 | doi = 10.1177/0022022110362627 }}</ref>
Los Whitings acuñaron la expresión "cultural learning environment", to describe the surroundings that influence a child during development.<ref name="edwards">Edwards, Carolyn P. and Bloch, M. (2010). "[http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1500&context=psychfacpub The Whitings' Concepts of Culture and How They Have Fared in Contemporary Psychology and Anthropology]." Faculty Publications, Department of Psychology.Paper 501.</ref> Beatrice Whiting defined a child's environmental contexts as being "characterized by an activity in progress, a physically defined space, a characteristic group of people, and norms of behavior".<ref name="edwards" /> This environment is composed of several layers. A child's geographical context influences the history/anthropology of their greater community. This results in maintenance systems (i.e., sociological characteristics) that form a cultural learning environment. These factors inform learned behavior, or progressive expressive systems that take the form of religion, magic beliefs, ritual and ceremony, art, recreation, games and play, or crime rates.<ref>John W. Berry, Ype H. Poortinga, Marshall H. Segall, Pierre R. Dasen, Cambridge University Press , 1992,Cross-Cultural Psychology: Research and Applications: Second Edition</ref>
Many researchers have expanded upon the Whiting model,<ref name="Worthman" /> and the Whiting model's influence is clear in both modern psychology and anthropology. According to an article by Thomas Weisner in the ''[[Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology]]'', "All these [more recent] approaches share a common intellectual project: to take culture and context deeply and seriously into account in studies of human development."<ref>{{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Weisner | first1nombre1 = T.S. | yearaño = 2010 | titletítulo = John and Beatrice Whiting's Contributions to the Cross-Cultural Study of Human Development: Their Values, Goals, Norms, and Practices | url = http://jcc.sagepub.com/content/41/4/499.full.pdf+html | journalpublicación = Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology | volumevolumen = 41 | issuenúmero = | pages = 499–509 | doi = 10.1177/0022022110362720 }}</ref>
==Cultura y empatía==
===Cultural orientation: colectivista e individualista ===
A main distinction to understand when looking at psychology and culture is the difference between [[Individualism|individualistic]] and [[Collectivism|collectivistic]] cultures. People from an individualistic culture typically demonstrate an independent view of the self; the focus is usually on personal achievement.<ref>{{citecita journalpublicación|last1apellido1=Prooijen|first1nombre1=J.|titletítulo=Individualistic and social motives for justice judgments|journalpublicación=Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences|datefecha=2013|volumevolumen=1299|issuenúmero=1|pages=60–67|doi=10.1111/nyas.12143|pmid=25708080}}</ref> Members of a collectivistic society have more of a focus on the group (interdependent view of self), usually focusing on things that will benefit the group.<ref name="Hui (1988)">{{citecita journalpublicación|last1apellido1=Hui|first1nombre1=C.H.|titletítulo=Measurement of individualism-collectivism|journalpublicación=Journal of Research in Personality|datefecha=1988|volumevolumen=22|issuenúmero=1|pages=17–36|doi=10.1016/0092-6566(88)90022-0}}</ref> Research has shown such differences of the self when comparing collectivistic and individualistic cultures: The [[Fundamental attribution error|Fundamental Attribution Error]] has been shown to be more common in America (individualistic) as compared to in India (collectivistic).<ref name="Ross (1977)">{{citecita booklibro|author1autor1=Ross|authorlink1enlaceautor1=L.|editor1apellido-lasteditor1=Berkowitz|editor1nombre-firsteditor1=L.|titletítulo=Advances in Experimental Social Psychology|datefecha=1977|publisher=Academic Press|locationubicación=New York|editionedición=4th|chapter=The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process}}</ref> Along these same lines, the self-serving bias was again shown as more common among Americans than Japanese individuals.<ref>{{citecita journalpublicación|last1apellido1=Kashima|first1nombre1=Y.|last2apellido2=Triandis|first2nombre2=H.C.|titletítulo=The self-serving bias in attributions as a coping strategy: A cross-cultural study|journalpublicación=Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology|datefecha=1986|volumevolumen=17|issuenúmero=1|pages=83–97|doi=10.1177/0022002186017001006}}</ref> This is not to imply that collectivism and individualism are completely dichotomous, but these two cultural orientations are to be understood more so as a spectrum. Each representation is at either end; thus, some members of individualistic cultures may hold collectivistic values, and some collectivistic individual may hold some individualist values. The concepts of collectivism and individualism show a general idea of the values of a specific ethnic culture but should not be juxtaposed in competition.<ref>{{citecita booklibro|last1apellido1=Hofstede|first1nombre1=G.|titletítulo=Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values|datefecha=1980|publisher=Sage|locationubicación=Beverly Hills, CA}}</ref>
===Empatía entre culturas===
These differences in values across cultures suggests that understanding and expressing empathy may be manifested differently throughout varying cultures. Duan and Hill<ref name="Duan & Hill (1996)">{{citecita journalpublicación|last1apellido1=Duan|first1nombre1=C.|last2apellido2=Hill|first2nombre2=C.E.|titletítulo=The current state of empathy research|journalpublicación=Journal of Counseling Psychology|datefecha=1996|volumevolumen=15|issuenúmero=1|pages=57–81}}</ref> first discussed empathy in subcategories of intellectual empathy: taking on someone's thoughts/perspective, also known as cognitive empathy<ref name="Soto & Levenson (2009)">{{citecita journalpublicación|last1apellido1=Soto|first1nombre1=J.A.|last2apellido2=Levenson|first2nombre2=R.W.|titletítulo=Emotion recognition across culture: The influence of ethnicity on empathic accuracy and physiological linkage|journalpublicación=Emotion|datefecha=2009|volumevolumen=9|issuenúmero=6|doi=10.1037/a0017399|pages=874–884}}</ref> and emotional empathy: taking on someone's feeling/experience. Duan, Wei, and Wang<ref name="Duan, Wei, & Wang (2008)">{{citecita journalpublicación|last1apellido1=Duan|first1nombre1=C.|last2apellido2=Wei|first2nombre2=M.|last3apellido3=Wang|first3nombre3=L.|titletítulo=The role of individualism-collectivism|journalpublicación=Asian Journal of Counseling|datefecha=2008|volumevolumen=29|issuenúmero=3|pages=57–81}}</ref> furthered this idea to include empathy in terms of being either dispositional (capacity for noticing/understanding empathy) or experiential (specific to a certain context or situation, observing the person and empathizing). This created four types of empathy to further examine: 1) dispositional intellectual empathy; 2) dispositional empathic emotion; 3) experienced intellectual empathy; and 4) experienced empathic emotion. These four branches allowed researchers to examine empathic proclivities among individuals of different cultures. While individualism was not shown to correlate with either types of dispositional empathy, collectivism was shown to have a direct correlation with both types of dispositional empathy, possibly suggesting that by having less focus on the self, there is more capacity towards noticing the needs of others. More so, individualism predicted experienced intellectual empathy, and collectivism predicted experienced empathic emotion. These results are congruent with the values of collectivistic and individualistic societies. The self-centered identity and egoistic motives prevalent in individualistic cultures, perhaps acts as a hindrance in being open to (fully) experiencing empathy.<ref name="Kitayama & Markus (1994)">{{citecita booklibro|last1apellido1=Kitayama|first1nombre1=S.|last2apellido2=Markus|first2nombre2=H.R.|titletítulo=Emotion and culture: Empirical studies of mutual influence|datefecha=1994|publisher=American Psychological Association|locationubicación=Washington, DC}}</ref>
===Intercultural and ethnocultural empathy===
Cultural empathy became broadly understood as concurrent understanding and acceptance of a culture different from one's own.<ref name="Ridley & Lingle (1996)">{{citecita booklibro|author1autor1=Ridely, C.R.|author2autor2=Lingle, D.W.|editor1apellido-lasteditor1=Pedersen|editor1nombre-firsteditor1=P.B.|editor2apellido-lasteditor2=Draguns|editor2nombre-firsteditor2=J.G.|titletítulo=Counseling Across Culture|datefecha=1996|publisher=Sage|locationubicación=Thousands Oaks: CA|chapter=Cultural empathy in multicultural counseling: A multidimensional process model.}}</ref> This idea has been further developed with the concept of [[ethnocultural empathy]].<ref name="Wang et al. (2003)">{{citecita journalpublicación|last1apellido1=Wang|first1nombre1=Y.W.|last2apellido2=Blier|first2nombre2=J.|last3apellido3=Davidson|first3nombre3=M.|last4=Savoy|first4=H.|last5=Tan|first5=J.|last6=Tan|first6=J.|last7=Yakushka|first7=O.|titletítulo=The scale of ethnocultural empathy: Development, validation, and reliability|journalpublicación=Journal of Counseling Psychology|datefecha=2003|volumevolumen=2|pages=221–234|doi=10.1037/0022-0167.50.2.221}}</ref> This moves beyond merely accepting and understanding another culture, and also includes acknowledging how the values of a culture may affect empathy. This idea is meant to foster cultural empathy as well as engender cultural competence.<ref name="Wang et al. (2003)" /><ref name="Dyche & Zayas (2001)">{{citecita journalpublicación|last1apellido1=Dyche|first1nombre1=L.|last2apellido2=Zayas|first2nombre2=L.H.|titletítulo=Cross-cultural empathy and training the contemporary psychotherapist|journalpublicación=Clinical Social Work Journal|datefecha=2001|volumevolumen=29|issuenúmero=3|pages=245–258|doi=10.1023/A:1010407728614}}</ref>
One of the greatest barriers of empathy between cultures is people's tendency to operate from an ethnocentric point of view. Eysneck<ref name="Eysenck (2000)">{{citecita booklibro|last1apellido1=Eysenck|first1nombre1=M.|titletítulo=Psychology: A student's handbook|datefecha=2000|publisher=Psychology Press LTD}}</ref> conceptualized ethnocentrism as using one's own culture to understand the rest of the world, while holding one's own values as correct. Concomitant with this barrier to intercultural empathy, Rasoal, Eklund, and Hansen<ref name="Raosal, Eklund, & Hansen (2011)">{{citecita journalpublicación|last1apellido1=Raosal|first1nombre1=C.|last2apellido2=Eklund|first2nombre2=J.|last3apellido3=Hansen|first3nombre3=E.M.|titletítulo=Toward a conceptualization of ethnocultural empathy|journalpublicación=Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology|datefecha=2011|volumevolumen=5|issuenúmero=1|pages=1–13|doi=10.1037/h0099278}}</ref> posit five hindrances of intercultural empathy; these include:
Paucity of:
These five points elucidate lack of both depth and breadth as hindrances in developing and practicing intercultural empathy.
Another barrier to intercultural empathy is that there is often a power dynamic between different cultures. Bridging an oppressed culture with their (upper-echelon) oppressor is a goal of intercultural empathy. One approach to this barrier is to attempt to acknowledge one's personal oppression.<ref name="DeTurk (2001)">{{citecita journalpublicación|last1apellido1=DeTurk|first1nombre1=S.|titletítulo=Intercultural empathy: Myth, competency, or possibility for alliance building?|journalpublicación=Communication Building|datefecha=2001|volumevolumen=50|issuenúmero=4|pages=374–384|doi=10.1080/03634520109379262}}</ref> While this may be minimal in comparison to other people's oppression, it will still help with realizing that other people have been oppressed.<ref name="DeTurk (2001)"/> The goal of bridging the gap should focus on building an alliance by finding the core commonalities of the human experience; this shows empathy to be a relational experience, not an independent one. Through this, the goal is that intercultural empathy can lend toward broader intercultural understanding across cultures and societies.
Four important facets of cultural empathy are:<ref name="Wang et al. (2003)" />
*Accepting differences in cultural choices regarding language, clothing preference, food choice, etc.
These four aspects may be especially helpful for practicing cultural competence in a clinical setting. Given that most psychological practices were founded on the parochial ideals of Euro-American psychologists, cultural competence was not considered much of a necessity until said psychologists increasingly began seeing clients with different ethnic backgrounds.<ref name="Dyche & Zayas (2001)"/> Many of the problems that contribute to therapy not being beneficial for people of color include: therapy having an individual focus, an emphasis on expressiveness, and an emphasis on openness.<ref name="Sue & Sue (1977)">{{citecita journalpublicación|last1apellido1=Sue|first1nombre1=D.W.|last2apellido2=Sue|first2nombre2=D.|titletítulo=Barriers to effective cross-cultural counseling|journalpublicación=Journal of Counseling Psychology|datefecha=1977|volumevolumen=24|issuenúmero=5|pages=420–429|doi=10.1037/0022-0167.24.5.420}}</ref> For more on intercultural competence, see [[intercultural competence]].
-->
* Matsumoto, D (Ed) (2001). ''The Handbook of Culture & Psychology''. Oxford University Press: New York.
* Shweder, R.A.; & Levine, R.A. (Eds., 1984). Culture theory: Essays on mind, self, and emotion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
* {{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Triandis | first1nombre1 = H.C. | yearaño = 1989 | titletítulo = The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts | url = http://bern.library.nenu.edu.cn/upload/soft/TheSelf.pdf | formatformato = PDF | journalpublicación = Psychological Review | volumevolumen = 96 | issuenúmero = 3| pages = 506–20 | doi = 10.1037/0033-295X.96.3.506 }}
* Bruner, Jerome (1990). Acts of Meaning. Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-00360-8.
* {{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Markus | first1nombre1 = H.R. | last2apellido2 = Kitayama | first2nombre2 = S. | yearaño = 1991 | titletítulo = Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation | url = http://faculty.washington.edu/mdj3/MGMT580/Readings/Week%205/Markus.pdf | formatformato = PDF | journalpublicación = Psychological Review | volumevolumen = 98 | issuenúmero = 2| pages = 224–53 | doi = 10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224 }}
* Shore, B. (1996). Culture in mind: Cognition, culture and the problem of meaning. New York: Oxford University Press.
* {{citecita journalpublicación | last1apellido1 = Nisbett | first1nombre1 = R.E. | last2apellido2 = Peng | first2nombre2 = K. | last3apellido3 = Choi | first3nombre3 = I. | last4 = Norenzayan | first4 = A. | yearaño = 2001 | titletítulo = Culture and systems of thought: Holistic vs. analytic cognition | url = http://culcog.berkeley.edu/Publications/2001PsyRev_Nisbettetal.pdf | formatformato = PDF | journalpublicación = Psychological Review | volumevolumen = 108 | issuenúmero = 2| pages = 291–310 | doi = 10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.291 | pmid=11381831}}
* Nisbett, R.E. (2003). The Geography of Thought. New York: Free Press.
|
